Ban "assisted opening" knives?

[JohnRich 4]

Re: "Admissibility of certain knives with spring-assisted opening mechanisms"

This story is building steam. There is a move by the U.S. Customs & Border Protection (CBP) agency to reverse one of its own long-standing regulations, and suddenly attempt to classify all “assisted opening” folding knives as switchblades, thereby banning them. The concern is that the overly broad new definition of a "switchblade" would also include all one-handed opening knives and many other pocket knives.

Source: http://www.kniferights.org/U%20S%20Customs%20Proposed%20Ruling%20-%20Assisted%20Opening%20Knives.pdf

There's a lot of mumbo-jumbo government legalese in there. But that's the source document for you to review if you are so inclined. Here's a more down-to-earth news story about it:

News story: http://www.cnsnews.com/public/content/article.aspx?RsrcID=49527

The knives affected could be those which include a simple thumb stud that is used to swing the blade open, and in common use today. This redefinition could reclassify these types of actions as "switchblades", rendering them illegal for entry into the U.S.

Personally, I'm against it. I carry a knife that can be opened with one hand on my life vest that I wear while canoeing. There are dangers in whitewater and elsewhere, for example, where you may become entangled in rope or lines, and need to slash your way free in order to avoid drowning. And you may not have the use of both hands to get a knife open. I think these knives should continue to be available to the public, and I don't want the government banning their import or domestic usage.

[skybill 22]

Hi John,
The real question is not about banning or not banning but why the ban and this ban at all??????? Somehow this whole trip smacks of nothing more than a CBP bureaucratic power grab with you and I on the short end of the stick. It's just a nicely worded attempt by the Nanny State to etch away at the 2nd Ammendment. Remember it's the Right to Keep and Bear Arms....Doesn't say what kind of arms, just arms, and knives are arms too!!!!!

PS Already have my protest letter written to CBP and emails to congresspeople.

SCR-2034, SCS-680

III%,
Deli-out

[Belgian_Draft 0]

I own and carry a Buck assisted opening knife. The only time it is not on my person is when I fly commercial.
Though AO is handy and makes it easier for most people to open a knife quickly, it is by no means the only way. I was taught by a family friend how to open most pocket knives by pinching the blade and using a motion similar to snapping your fingers. I practiced and practiced the technique until i could open a knife with either hand literally in a snap. Due to the safety feature on my Buck I cannot open it nearly as quickly.
So I ask why even bother with a ban? It would do nothing except add more paperwork to an already overworked police force.

HAMMER:
Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a
kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the
object we are trying to hit.

[TomAiello 26]

I was actually wondering if banning assisted opening knives might not be illegally discriminatory under the Americans with Disabilities Act.

Some disabled people need the assistance in order to use a knife at all. Eliminating them would unfairly penalize those least able to compensate in other ways.

-- Tom Aiello

Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com
SnakeRiverBASE.com

[councilman24 37]

In Michigan true switchblades are legal to own as a collector but illegal to carry unless you have essentially one arm or are a cop. Then they are legel.

But I can open my gerber thumb stud knife fast than I can my switch blade.

And 'assisted opening', which I define as the Ken Onion Knives where the spring takes over after you start it with your thumb, are in a grey area. Some places have classified them as switchblades and illegal, other places have let them go. I think there was some state action, eitherattorney general opinion or court decision but I don't remember.

I didn't know that switchblades were illegal to come into the country. Assumed it was a state thing. Are the going to call a 'hole' an assist device? Many of my one hand knives don't have a stud but have a slot in the blade.

I'm old for my age.
Terry Urban
D-8631
FAA DPRE

[millertime24 8]

Thats kind of a perk about being military. Not only are we 'allowed' to have them, but they actually give them to us (mine is a Benchmade auto).

Muff #5048

[JohnRich 4]

Quote

Thats kind of a perk about being military. Not only are we 'allowed' to have them, but they actually give them to us (mine is a Benchmade auto).

Nice. Darned handy feature to have too. If you're holding a rifle with one hand, and need to cut something, you need to open that knife with the other hand alone. If you put your rifle down to open the knife, the bad guys might get the drop on you.

Same principle applies to many utilitarian knife users. A fisherman, for example, might need to cut the line on his pole to free a fish. He's holding the pole with one hand, and needs an open knife in the other hand. These knives do the trick.

I would hope that the government would not decide that any knife that can be opened with one hand is too dangerous for the public to own. That's just plain ridiculous.

And they should especially not be taking them away from veterans returning home from the war, after having given them those knives in the first place.

[warpedskydiver 0]

Probably the fastest knife to draw and open is a Spyderco.

Other knives need to be either dug out of a pocket or sheath, many have the clip on it.

Spyderco knives have a clip that can be reversed depending on how you carry it or which hand you use.

As soon as you can detach it from the top of your pants pocket it is open, the thumb hole is probably the fastest opening mechanism, it is ergonomically correct and works with gloves on.

[AggieDave 6]

Quote

Probably the fastest knife to draw and open is a Spyderco.

Just about every quality folder has a clip. I carried a Spyderco for a decade before I finally broke down and bought an Emerson CQC7-Wave. That knife is faster then a switch blade (I carried one of those for a couple of years, a Benchmade auto).

Whats ironic is that people are worried about assisted opening knives, when I carry a Ka-Bar TDI LDK that can easily be hidden anywhere. Like a Hideaway knife.

https://www.kabar.com/product_detail.jsp?productNumber=1478BP&mode=category&categoryId=1,7,9&categoryName=Law%20Enforcement

Seems like that could be more deadly and quicker (it is quicker). If someone is trained with a knife and with in 30ft of you, how they get it open is less of a concern of what they do with it once its out/open.

--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline."

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

If someone is trained with a knife and with in 30ft of you, how they get it open is less of a concern of what they do with it once its out/open.

Tueller drill, anyone?

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[AggieDave 6]

Quote

Tueller drill, anyone?

PPCT knife defense anyone?

--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline."

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

Tueller drill, anyone?

PPCT knife defense anyone?

Does it involve judo flips?

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[Ron 10]

Id like to hear for the 7 that say to ban them....

Why? What reason?

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[Andrewwhyte 1]

Why is the current ban on switchblades not considered a constitutional violation? The right to bear arms is not limited to fire-arms is it?

[JohnRich 4]

Quote

Id like to hear for the 7 that say to ban them.... Why? What reason?

Folks that vote like this are usually too cowardly to actually come out and express their opinions. They like to hide in the shadows while they bid others to take weapons away from good citizens.

[wolfriverjoe 1,523]

Quote

Why is the current ban on switchblades not considered a constitutional violation? The right to bear arms is not limited to fire-arms is it?

It depends on what you consider "milita arms" and what you consider a milita.

The SC upheld the 1934NFA (highly regulating machine guns, silencers and "short-barreled" rifles and shotguns) because they weren't weapons the military would use, therefore not protected by the 2nd. Known as the Miller decision. Of course, since then most armies have adopted all of those.

And as stated above, police and military are often allowed to possess switchblades.

Oddly enough, switchblades are not illegal in South Dakota.
No joke, they have them for sale in the truckstops alongside the other knives.

Butterfly knives OTOH are illegal in Wisconsin.

And in Tennessee, any knife with a blade over 4" (I think) can be considered a "concealed weapon" if not carried openly. A carry permit would make having it in your pocket legal.

Go figure.

Edit to add: Also because there is no "NKA" (National Knife Associaton).

"There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy

"~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

[Ron 10]

Quote

The SC upheld the 1934NFA (highly regulating machine guns, silencers and "short-barreled" rifles and shotguns) because they weren't weapons the military would use, therefore not protected by the 2nd. Known as the Miller decision. Of course, since then most armies have adopted all of those

Actually, SBR's, SBS's, and MG's were already in use in most military's at the time. The SC decision was won simply because the defense did not even bother to show up.

Miller was a poor farmer... He had won his case at the district court and walked away. The DA took the case to the SC and Miller was nowhere to be seen. Why would he show and risk being thrown in jail? He walked away and AFAIK was never heard from again (pretty easy to do in 1939).

His lawyer was paid less than 100 bucks to defend Miller in the first case (I want to say it was 60 bucks?).... Miller was not around and the lawyer was not about to pay out of his own pocket to go argue a case in front of the SC. Besides, he thought it was a pretty open and shut case. He filed a brief and called it a day.

However, FDR wanted this gun control measure put into place... He had even mentioned increasing the size of the SC to fill it with judges that would rule in his favor.

So basically.... firearms that were affected by the NFA 1934 law WERE in use in the military and the SC simply either didn't know that (and the prosecution was not about to tell them, and the defense didn't show), or they took the opportunity to pass what FDR wanted.

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[TomAiello 26]

Quote

Quote

The SC upheld the 1934NFA (highly regulating machine guns, silencers and "short-barreled" rifles and shotguns) because they weren't weapons the military would use, therefore not protected by the 2nd. Known as the Miller decision. Of course, since then most armies have adopted all of those

Actually, SBR's, SBS's, and MG's were already in use in most military's at the time. The SC decision was won simply because the defense did not even bother to show up.

Reportedly, this was because the local public defender who had been assigned the case wasn't even informed it was being heard by the SCOTUS, and only learned about it two days before oral arguments, leaving him insufficient time to prepare and travel, even if (a) it had been in his budget to do so, and (b) he had wanted to.

Quote

...firearms that were affected by the NFA 1934 law WERE in use in the military and the SC simply either didn't know that...

They did know it, individually. It's just that because it wasn't presented in arguments, they weren't allowed to "know" it in their decision.

Interestingly, that leaves open an pretty good avenue for either reversing or just ignoring Miller. You could either claim that the SCOTUS made a clear error of fact (by not realizing that the weapons were in military use), or you could argue that they meant the ruling only to apply to non-military weapons (as they stated) and that therefore machine guns (for example) ought to be exempted. In fact, the issue of whether the NFA is constitutional when applied to machine guns has never been litigated. Realistically, I can't see the court doing the right thing there, but it sure would be interesting to see the case.


I'm also very interested to see what happens when the ATF starts busting people in Montana under the NFA in the fall. I'm hoping that someone there has been smart enough to requisition a bunch of "made in Montana" exempted firearms for the state patrol, so that original jurisdiction will lie in the SCOTUS.

-- Tom Aiello

Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com
SnakeRiverBASE.com

[Ron 10]

Quote

In fact, the issue of whether the NFA is constitutional when applied to machine guns has never been litigated.

I remember reading a case years ago after the Hughes Amendment about a guy in GA (I think) that tried to send in a Form 1 to make a MG. It was pretty much dropped IIRC.

Still, it would be great for some rich guy with time on his hands to send in a Form 1 today and sue over it... Although, I guess he would have to get arrested and then hope the SC would hear it.

The arguments in the lower court in the Miller case were pretty cut and dry... The 2nd is more about civilians having "military" weapons than Joe-Bob having a deer rifle, or Dr. Snooty having a Clay gun.

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[Ron 10]

Found some info on the GA case:

After passage of the FOPA, a law-abiding Georgian named Farmer applied for the registration of a fully-automatic firearm manufactured after May 19, 1986, but his application was rejected by BATF. Farmer contended that BATF`s interpretation of the measure as a prohibition on possession of fully-automatic firearms manufactured after May 19, 1986 was incorrect, since the law exempted fully-automatic firearms newly-manufactured under the authority of the United States, thus it would exempt firearms approved for registration by BATF. Farmer also questioned whether Congress had the power, under the Constitution, to ban the mere possession of a type of firearm and whether the exercise of any such power would violate the Second Amendment to the Constitution. The U.S. District Court of the Northern District of Georgia ruled in Farmer`s favor. On appeal by the federal government, the Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit reversed the decision with respect to BATF`s interpretation, but did not rule on the constitutional issues raised. The NRA`s Firearms Civil Rights Legal Defense Fund asked the Supreme Court of the United States to review the case. The Court declined, as it does the vast majority of cases. Thus the decision stands in the Eleventh Circuit, which encompasses Alabama, Florida and Georgia.

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[warpedskydiver 0]

Quote

Quote

Probably the fastest knife to draw and open is a Spyderco.

Just about every quality folder has a clip. I carried a Spyderco for a decade before I finally broke down and bought an Emerson CQC7-Wave. That knife is faster then a switch blade (I carried one of those for a couple of years, a Benchmade auto).

Whats ironic is that people are worried about assisted opening knives, when I carry a Ka-Bar TDI LDK that can easily be hidden anywhere. Like a Hideaway knife.

https://www.kabar.com/product_detail.jsp?productNumber=1478BP&mode=category&categoryId=1,7,9&categoryName=Law%20Enforcement

Seems like that could be more deadly and quicker (it is quicker). If someone is trained with a knife and with in 30ft of you, how they get it open is less of a concern of what they do with it once its out/open.

A Katana is a real bitch if you get close enough.

Just the shock that sets in is intense if the intended vistim has not drawn and aimed already.

If they are within 30 feet and have been able to conceal it from view the results would be horrific.

I have a friend who is a sword fighter and also a GMC SEAL if he had that weapon on him without it being detected, somebody would be in a word of hurt if they were not completely prepared.

I remember one occasion where he had to go through a metal detector, there were quite a few knives on him and a carbon fiber letter opener as well.


My all time favorite is the 100lb Fireline Garrot, used with carbon end rings it cannot be found by a metal detector and is damned hard to find in a search, you have to strip the person naked in hopes that he doesn't have it.

It will lop a head off so fast it is sick.

[mnealtx 0]

re: garrotte - once you crush the cricoid cartilage, it's not really going to matter how much MORE damage you do, except for the psychological impact pour les autres.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[warpedskydiver 0]

Correct monsieur.

all the world is a stage, the people must be entertained

[JohnRich 4]

News:

Ohio Congressman Bob Latta imposes "nuclear" option to oppose knife ban

A pair of Congressmen have decided to apply the nuclear option - restrictive amendments to their budgets, to let the Department of Homeland Security know they don't like the proposed Customs and Border Patrol measure designed to change the definition of a switchblade knife. The new CBP definition, if adopted, would basically cut the modern knife industry to the quick as approximately eighty percent of knives currently in production would fall into the definition of switchblade because of their assisted-opening feature.

Representatives Bob Latta (R-Ohio) and Walt Minnick (D-Idaho) have co-sponsored an amendment to the Department of Homeland Security appropriations bill to restrict funds to the proposed CBP rule on switchblades...

Source: http://www.buckeyefirearms.org/node/6747

[JohnRich 4]

News update: http://www.ammoland.com/2009/10/26/congress-passes-legislation-protecting-pocketknives/

Damn the NRA for putting switchblade knives in the hands of dangerous criminals!