-
The BladeForums.com 2024 Traditional Knife is ready to order! See this thread for details: https://www.bladeforums.com/threads/bladeforums-2024-traditional-knife.2003187/
Price is$300$250 ea (shipped within CONUS). If you live outside the US, I will contact you after your order for extra shipping charges.
Order here: https://www.bladeforums.com/help/2024-traditional/ - Order as many as you like, we have plenty.
CA legal fixed blade
- Thread starter lamepro
- Start date
It is my understanding that even a 1" Cold Steel Mini Pal fixed blade is unlawful to carry concealed in CA. From what I have read it's the fact that it is readily available to be used as a weapon---not the blade length---that makes it unlawful to carry a fixed blade concealed.
DancesWithKnives
DancesWithKnives
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2007
- Messages
- 1,531
...........No
- Joined
- Mar 16, 2005
- Messages
- 3,652
If I remember case law correctly, there are certain exceptions provided for really small knives (and I mean really small) that fall into "fixed blade" category, like the tiny knife in the Victorinox Swiss Card, which is technically a fixed blade, but has a blade around 1.5" in length. Perhaps MORIMOTOM will see this thread and will chime in, as I've forgotten what that case law states.
As far as the HAK goes, you're much better off not concealing it on your person anywhere in the State of California!
As far as the HAK goes, you're much better off not concealing it on your person anywhere in the State of California!
- Joined
- Mar 16, 2005
- Messages
- 3,652
I'm fairly certain that I've seen case law which stated the above pictured knife, carried concealed in a pocket, was not considered a "dirk or dagger" under 12020 PC, but I haven't been able to find it.
- Joined
- Mar 16, 2005
- Messages
- 3,652
Had to dig a bit, but I knew it was out there!:thumbup:
Here's the link to the case.
I believe this is what Mr. Clark was referring to:
Dirk or Dagger—"Pocketknife"
"Although they may not have folding blades, small knives obviously designed to be carried in a pocket in a closed state, and which cannot be used until there have been several intervening manipulations, comport with the implied legislative intent that such knives do not fall within the definition of proscribed dirks or daggers but are a type of pocketknife excepted from the statutory proscription." (In re Luke W. (2001) 88 Cal.App.4th 650, 655-656 [105 Cal.Rptr.2d 905].)
Here's the link to the case.
I believe this is what Mr. Clark was referring to:
Dirk or Dagger—"Pocketknife"
"Although they may not have folding blades, small knives obviously designed to be carried in a pocket in a closed state, and which cannot be used until there have been several intervening manipulations, comport with the implied legislative intent that such knives do not fall within the definition of proscribed dirks or daggers but are a type of pocketknife excepted from the statutory proscription." (In re Luke W. (2001) 88 Cal.App.4th 650, 655-656 [105 Cal.Rptr.2d 905].)
Last edited:
Good memory and nice find on that case!
The Court of Appeal seemed to focus not only on the blade size but the manner of carry and deployment. That's consistent with my understanding of the significance of whether it's readily capable or available for use as a weapon.
A fellow named Alex in my former martial arts academy had a friend picked up and charged on a copy of a Cold Steel Mini-Pal. It was hanging under his t-shirt in a quick-draw kydex sheath. Even though it was a 1" blade, the Luke case might not help in that situation because of the mode of carry and sheath system (and the knife's configuration).
Thanks for the citation to Luke.
DancesWithKnives
The Court of Appeal seemed to focus not only on the blade size but the manner of carry and deployment. That's consistent with my understanding of the significance of whether it's readily capable or available for use as a weapon.
A fellow named Alex in my former martial arts academy had a friend picked up and charged on a copy of a Cold Steel Mini-Pal. It was hanging under his t-shirt in a quick-draw kydex sheath. Even though it was a 1" blade, the Luke case might not help in that situation because of the mode of carry and sheath system (and the knife's configuration).
Thanks for the citation to Luke.
DancesWithKnives
Last edited:
- Joined
- Mar 16, 2005
- Messages
- 3,652
My pleasure, DWK2, and thanks!:thumbup:
- Joined
- Oct 29, 2005
- Messages
- 19,834
3g, the link isn't working for me. is that a 9th circuit decision?
i would tend to agree (though it makes no difference), that the swiss card is really a stretch as it pertains to 12020.
the verbage is very vague, which is both good and bad, in 12020. the section does not address fixed blades specifically as being prohibited, necessarily. mr. clark argues that the open carry exemption is actually an example of legal carry. generally, my opinion is that personal open carry of a fixed blade must be in this manner to be within the letter of the law. although, i will admit i have gone back and forth over this matter publicly here.
i would also argue that a fixed blade carried on or in a backpack, for example, is not readily available as a weapon.
for these reasons, i make every attempt to err on the side of caution when posting here, and do not offer legal advice, per se.
it is difficult to come up with general carry guidelines (other than simply dont do it), and i prefer to answer specific questions. ultimately, there is no mention of blade length in the penal code other than in refernce to switchblades.
i would tend to agree (though it makes no difference), that the swiss card is really a stretch as it pertains to 12020.
the verbage is very vague, which is both good and bad, in 12020. the section does not address fixed blades specifically as being prohibited, necessarily. mr. clark argues that the open carry exemption is actually an example of legal carry. generally, my opinion is that personal open carry of a fixed blade must be in this manner to be within the letter of the law. although, i will admit i have gone back and forth over this matter publicly here.
i would also argue that a fixed blade carried on or in a backpack, for example, is not readily available as a weapon.
for these reasons, i make every attempt to err on the side of caution when posting here, and do not offer legal advice, per se.
it is difficult to come up with general carry guidelines (other than simply dont do it), and i prefer to answer specific questions. ultimately, there is no mention of blade length in the penal code other than in refernce to switchblades.
Last edited:
The Cal.App.4th citation tips one off that it's from the California Court of Appeal rather than the U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. This decision came from the 1st Appellate District, arising from a Superior Court decision out of Contra Costa County.
The Court of Appeal did seem more concerned about mode of carry and whether the knife was readily capable of being used as a stabbing weapon than it did about blade length.
Your practical LE experience is a huge help on these topics!:thumbup:
DancesWithKnives
The Court of Appeal did seem more concerned about mode of carry and whether the knife was readily capable of being used as a stabbing weapon than it did about blade length.
Your practical LE experience is a huge help on these topics!:thumbup:
DancesWithKnives
- Joined
- Oct 29, 2005
- Messages
- 19,834
missed that part. :foot:
not exactly case law, but citeable i suppose.
funny thing is, i often have to refer back to the text to refresh my memory. sometimes, with so many applicable laws regarding weapon carry in general, i get them all mixed up.
Sorry about the confusion. We're talking about concealed fixed blades that are readily accessible for use as a weapon.
Open carry of a fixed blade is generally permitted under CA state law (with exceptions for courthouses, etc.). If the fixed blade is under 3 inches, open carry is generally OK even under LA County/City ordinances (with the same exceptions).
DancesWithKnives
Open carry of a fixed blade is generally permitted under CA state law (with exceptions for courthouses, etc.). If the fixed blade is under 3 inches, open carry is generally OK even under LA County/City ordinances (with the same exceptions).
DancesWithKnives
- Joined
- Oct 6, 2009
- Messages
- 10,338
phew! you had me nervous about my izula for a minute. yeah i just have it on my belt.
Just make sure a jacket or the bottom of a shirt does not hang over it and cover the knife. As long as the knife is not concealed in any way for any amount of time, it is my understanding that belt carry is probably the least likely to result in legal issues.
DancesWithKnives
DancesWithKnives
so you're saying that if the knife is not exposed on the belt, it is then considered concealed? Does this include the sheath being the exposed portion?
- Joined
- Oct 29, 2005
- Messages
- 19,834
it could be argued both ways.
-if an identifiable portion of the item is clearly visible, it can be considered open carry (ie, sheath, portion of the handle).
-if the entire item is not visible, it is considered concealed, sheath/holster notwithstanding.
my opinion, you're better off wearing the sheath with a tucked in shirt to avoid having to make the first argument. while i may recognize the bottom portion of a sheath for what it is and consider this to be open carry within the letter of the law, this is no guarantee someone else will interpret it the same way.