You can't bring that in here! That's a WEAPON!!!

This is an area to discuss general issues regarding knives, swords, and other non-firearm weapons.

Re: You can't bring that in here! That's a WEAPON!!!

Postby bumpylight » Fri 01 Jan 2016 2:11 pm

It's a good thing you didn't have a paring knife on you then!

From today’s Washington Supreme Court decision in City of Seattle v. Evans, which also usefully canvasses decisions from other state courts:

We hold that the right to bear arms protects instruments that are designed as weapons traditionally or commonly used by law abiding citizens for the lawful purpose of self-defense. In considering whether a weapon is an arm, we look to the historical origins and use of that weapon, noting that a weapon does not need to be designed for military use to be traditionally or commonly used for self-defense. We will also consider the weapon’s purpose and intended function [....]

[T]he small knife found on Evans’s person is a utility tool, not a weapon [....] Evans does not demonstrate that his paring knife is a constitutionally protected arm. ... ves-arent/

Probably the best comments in the accompanying thread were as follows:

Nick Jihad wrote:This is similar to the Miller decision, in which the Supremes, in a sleazy sleight of jurisprudence, found that sawed-off shotguns did not enjoy 2nd Amendment protection, because they were not commonly used for military purposes. The question whether Thompson submachine guns, which were widely used by the military, should therefore be protected, never came to the court's attention.

Rossami wrote:That's absurd. If it's not a "weapon" for the purposes of Second Amendment analysis, then it can't be a "weapon" for the purposes of the arrest. This gamesmanship with the law is why no one respects lawyers.

Railroad Gin wrote:How is anyone supposed to know where the line is between those knives that are really weapons and those that aren’t? It is like “assault weapons” in reverse. A given knife is not protected because it DIDN’T have a serrated blade, etc. There is an obvious vagueness issue here. [....]

So the Second Amendment now means that some arms are too hot, others are too cold, and SCOTUS keeps denying cert on the ones that are just right.

Arrigetch wrote:[....] The upshot is that you could have a slung Garand, and a concealed SBR Uzi and (with a CPL) a concealed Desert Eagle, and apparently a Ka-Bar and broadsword, but go to jail for a 3.5 inch Swiss army knife.
User avatar
Posts: 215
Joined: Tue 26 Feb 2013 4:08 pm


Return to Knives, Swords, etc.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest