Case won, but Judge chickens out

The LEOs are instructed by thier FTOs that knives that can opened with a flip of the wrist now qualify as switchblades, so they start enforcing it as such. When they are shown that that info was wrong they will change. It sucks but it is also the way the world works.
Click to expand...

One would think that this is where common sense might come into play.....
Although there is a severe lack of that these days in all realms of society.
 
rebeltf said:
One would think that this is where common sense might come into play.....
Although there is a severe lack of that these days in all realms of society.
Click to expand...
Nothing is rarer than 'common' sense. -- Mark Twain, as I recall
 
Good work RW. Hopefully officers being taught knife law by you will help things here in California. I do like CA knife laws as long as they are interpreted reasonably.
 
All i can say is good job RW. Having been involved in a similar type of case, it really sucks to be in that kind of spot. More so if the judge is anti-knife which mine was. It's people like you that get honest people or good people who were at the wrong place at the wrong time with bad people out of trouble. Words cannot describe how much appreciation and respect i have for people who do what you’re doing for people who are wrongfully accused. If I didn’t have a good lawyer and a lawyer who didn’t trust me and didn’t have a passion for that type of case I would probably be rotting in a cell right now. Again, thanks for your help. People don’t really appreciate your type of work until they have been on the spot in that court room and have the rest of their lives on the line.
 
RW thanks for this info. I wonder if you might have so more info regarding carry of a 2" and under fixed blade in a pocket. I have one of your mini mau's that I like to carry once in awhile. I usually carry it well I am working. It seems that this could be a felony. I would think that this would be the same as carrying a 2" and under folder with the blade open in a pocket would also fall into the same category. The law seems pretty explicit about a fixed blade or a folder in lock open postition to be a violation. I see your point of it being considered less dangerous ie. switch, gravity or balisong, however I believe this to be just your opinion. I wish you could have something in writing and if you do please share! We would be most welcome! I love my mini mau with double dragon minukis and that hamon. Outstanding job on this little beauty! I would love it even more if I could carry it without any worries. Thanks and keep up the good work.
 
The 1989 Quattrone case and the Luke case both make referance to fixed blades that require complex motions to expose the blades are counted the same as standard pocket knives.

Basically they are not quickly drawn. Take my MAU for example, unless carried as a neck knife, it really takes two hands to draw it from its' sheath. So you would have to remove the knife from your pocket, crasp the knife with one hand, crasp the sheath with the other and then pull them apart.

It is really some bizzare round about thinking I know, but that's what happens when you get a bunch of judges forming case law and they have to mesh together somehow.:confused:

Thanks for the kind words BTW and enjoy your knife.

Oh and wish me luck I am back in court in the morning.
 
Well, todays case was a hard one. I was on the stand for well over an hour, but we won:thumbup:

We also got a judicial ruling based upon our presented facts and legislative intent. That means that from here on out in that court room our argument stands as case law. That also means that while other courts are not bound by this case, we can use it as leverage in our arguements.

This case was for a single hand opening Buck clone. Defendant (juvenile) was arrested under 653k becuase the knife could be opened with a flick of the wrist. We argued that the facts that it opened with thumb pressure on the blade and that it had bias towards close that it triggered the exemption built into 653K for one handers.

Chalk one up for us knife knuts!
 
Good job. I would think it is clear that a knife with a bias to close is exempt under 653k but apparently it still takes lots of effort to convince someone of that fact.

Keep up the good work.
 
Great info R.W.Clark. I just wanted to have it cleared up regarding the fixed blade under 2". This specifically is regarding a HAK I would like to carry concealed. From the info I have read so far, it seems to be okay to carry a HAK concealed being its blade is under 2".

Would carrying a HAK on the neck be considered illegal. Would setting up the HAK with a ripcord in a pocket, would that be considered legal or illegal.

If they are both illegal, what options of carry would I have to make it legal carry.

Would there be any issues with carrying it on a college campus

Thanks
 
This is my opinion on HAKs.

First, since most have a blade that in under 2". They are legal to carry concealed in CA.

Second, they do not fall under 12020 due to the fact that they are not in the class of knives that fit the diffenition of "dirk or dagger".

As used in this section, a "dirk" or "dagger" means a knife
or other instrument with or without a handguard that is capable of
ready use as a stabbing weapon that may inflict great bodily injury
or death. A nonlocking folding knife, a folding knife that is not
prohibited by Section 653k, or a pocketknife is capable of ready use
as a stabbing weapon that may inflict great bodily injury or death
only if the blade of the knife is exposed and locked into position.
Click to expand...

Having worked with a large number of HAKs, I find that they are not capable of ready use as a stabbing weapon, this is due to the angle of handle/blade and the fact they it uses the thumb placed on top of the spine of the blade.

Per CA penal code.626.10(b)
Any person, except a duly appointed peace officer as defined
in Chapter 4.5 (commencing with Section 830) of Title 3 of Part 2, a
full-time paid peace officer of another state or the federal
government who is carrying out official duties while in this state, a
person summoned by any officer to assist in making arrests or
preserving the peace while the person is actually engaged in
assisting any officer, or a member of the military forces of this
state or the United States who is engaged in the performance of his
or her duties, who brings or possesses any dirk, dagger, ice pick, or
knife having a fixed blade longer than 21/2 inches upon the grounds
of, or within, any private university, the University of California,
the California State University, or the California Community Colleges
is guilty of a public offense, punishable by imprisonment in a
county jail not exceeding one year, or by imprisonment in the state
prison.
Click to expand...

As stated before, the HAK is not a dirk or dagger and its' blade is under 2 1/2". So per CA law it is legal. However, your school may have additional rules that would ban it on campus.
 
Fleshdriver, I think Mr. Clark and I may have to agree to disagree on this issue. I am not saying he's wrong, just that I am more cautious. Lacking any direct case law relating to blade size, I treat almost all fixed blades with a point the same. As discussed earlier, one key issue is how accessible the concealed small fixed blade knife is. (If its not concealed there is no legal problem.) In the SwissCard case the court stated one factor that made the knife a pocketknife was that it took two hands to get the blade out. The two methods of carry you describe (dangling on a chain from your neck, and tethered on a static cord) are designed for quick one-handed access. Further, if you look at the designer's website you will see that she has no problem stabbing with the HAK in a manner that "may inflict great bodily injury." Indeed that was what the knife was designed for:
http://www.hideawayknife.com/testing.php
http://hideawayknife.com//ripredondo.php

Accordingly, I personally would not feel comfortable carrying a HAK concealed on my person in California. Obviously, this is a personal decision, and only you can decide whether the personal safety benefits outweigh any possible legal risk.

Best regards,

Argyll
 
I think we will have to respectfully disagree. Having handled over five hundred HAKs of various configurations I stand by my opinion.

The blade set at nearly 45 degrees to the handle, puts the hand in a very un-natural position for a stabbing movement. After doing quite a bit of testing on a new serrated pattern of HAK, a stab was very painful to the user. The ring handle tends to twist and pull the fingers. A stab would most likely end up causing the user to have damaged if not broken fingers. With the thumb on the spine you can stabilize this rolling effect, but it would turn any stabbing motion into a slice.

This is nothing against the HAKs, I love the little suckers. But I feel that they do not fit the discription of a "dirk or dagger".
 
Thank you all for your help guys.

R.W. I assume you are a lawyer or expert that helps in knife cases. I would like to have your info in the case where it would come handy to me. Please email me at freshdriver@adelphia.net

One more question, would a HAK qualify as metal knuckles? If so wouldnt that create another situation which would make it illegal to carry.
 
I am not a lawyer but I am a court approved expert in knives and knife law for CA. I work mostly for the public defenders office although I have recently been retained by one of the top knife manufacturers in the country to help on several cases where they have a vested interest.

For metal knuckles, here is how they are defined under 12020

As used in this section, "metal knuckles" means any device or
instrument made wholly or partially of metal which is worn for
purposes of offense or defense in or on the hand and which either
protects the wearer's hand while striking a blow or increases the
force of impact from the blow or injury to the individual receiving
the blow. The metal contained in the device may help support the
hand or fist, provide a shield to protect it, or consist of
projections or studs which would contact the individual receiving a
blow.
Click to expand...

Due to the fact that the handle does not increase the force of impact from a punch or blow, nor does it provide any real protection to the hand during such, I don't feel that it would meet the requirements laid out.

WWI trench knives or knives with full "D" hand guards would fit into the requirements however.
 
R.W.Clark said:
Due to the fact that the handle does not increase the force of impact from a punch or blow, nor does it provide any real protection to the hand during such, I don't feel that it would meet the requirements laid out.
Click to expand...

For what its worth, I concur. The definition of metal knuckles is pretty specific, and the handle of a HAK is just that, a handle and not an impact weapon in its own right.

Best regards,

Argyll
 
RW, is there any hope in the near future for being able to legally carry a 2"+ automatic or a balisong in California? Also are there any specific laws regarding carrying box cutters?
 
I really doubt it. 653k has only gotten more restrictive over the years. I don't foresee them rolling it back at all. We had a ban on autos before the federal law came about. Back then it allowed for up to a 3" blade. It was changed to 2" a few years later.

I don't now of anything dealing directly with box cutters, but I would think that they would be treated as a standard pocket knife.
 
R.W.Clark said:
We had a ban on autos before the federal law came about. Back then it allowed for up to a 3" blade. It was changed to 2" a few years later.
Click to expand...

How long ago did it go from 3" to 2"?

Too bad, <3" autos would compliment my knife collection nicely. :(
 
If I am correct it changed to 2" in 1958, three years after the law first took effect.

Had a very good meeting with the D.A. and three Detectives today. We meet for about an hour and a half at the Fullerton Police Dept. The purpose of the meeting was to consult on the possibility of my teaching knifelaw to Fullerton Officers. They wanted to get my thoughts on the laws in question.

It took awhile but, after showing them the actual text of the Senate hearings for SB274, they seemed to agree with my findings.

The D.A. also agreed that California does not consider knives with sub 2" blades to be dangerous weapons and they can therefore be carried in any manner reguardless of configuration.

The D.A. agreed that knives such as the HAK do not meet the standards for a dirk or dagger.

We went over, and I had them handle, about 35 differant knives. Everything from true autos and daggers, to SpeedSafes, butterflies and even slip joint folders. It seems like they agreed with my findings on each type of knife.

The detectives stated that a course devoted to knife laws would be helpful to their officers and that the officers would enjoy the class. The D.A. said he would be considering it and would be in touch with me later. I figure I will follow up with them in about 2 weeks or so.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top