Common sense knife control?

[not2sharp]

.....Want them to live on with hatred in their hearts .....

No, I don't; if you are going to act out in criminal anti-social ways you should expect to be permanently excised from the community. Especially if you have already demonstrated recidivism.

n2s

 

[DMG]

Love anyone? They love you back? Want them to live on with hatred in their hearts after your death by mutual combat? Rhetorical "you", not you DMG.

I understand. I was being too literal. I am not advocating for more violence than we have currently. I am looking for ways to put less people in prison.

 

[mwhich50]

im not for restrictions, if someone has evil intentions then is a knife any more dangerous than a screwdriver, a hammer, or a car

We are talking about public carry, not ownership?
I would be ok with a 4 inch blade limit, with no limitation on the type of knife (double-edged, auto, butterfly, etc).
Of course my CCL would allow me to go beyond those limitations if I chose. I'm ok with jumping through a few hoops to be able to legally carry a 4" auto, or an xl folder when I am in the mood.

 

[David Mary]

No, I don't; if you are going to act out in criminal anti-social ways you should expect to be permanently excised from the community. Especially if you have already demonstrated recidivism.

n2s

Thank you for quoting me on this. As I realize my position needs to be clarified. It is not every instance of criminality or anti-sociality for which I would advocate the death penalty as I indicated above that I do. It is for the most ruthless disregard for human life, and actions that are so intrinsically dangerous to others that only true insanity and lack of reason should entail exempting it, and even then not necessarily. Rape and armed robbery are such. White collar crimes that do real and actual damage to people and ruin or end many lives as well. Dueling, as well, is inherently anti-social as it views one's own needs - or ego/reputation - as superior in importance to human life. The perfect representation of the mentality we hope laws and their enforcement will dissuade people from having the audacity put into practice. As much as I don't like the thought of anyone dying, I think a death penalty would not only satisfy justice (and the people's desire for justice), but prevent many more deaths by would be criminals not willing to take the risk.

And of course this all presupposes a society where people are not driven to the point of madness and desperation by disparate ideologies clanging in their ears while socio-economic policy drowns them in debt and kicks them to the curb. Because someone like that might be utterly confused and angry, and think he or she has nothing left to lose. Love that person, even with just a smile. Before it goes that far. It's not "us" and "them" because if the Stanford prison experiment suggested anything, it's that we have a darkness inside ourselves that just needs the right circumstances to unleash.

We can start early by practicing the mentality that we want to be known for and leave as our legacy in the world when we are gone. The more practice we have, hopefully the closer we can stay to it when and if the circumstances ever threaten to drive us mad or desperate. A world with personal liberty, responsibility, and the public practice of and affection and honor towards (such as in the media) traits like patience, humility, modesty, courtesy, etc. Such a world stands a chance at meeting the goals of low to no violent crime, in my estimation, with no need of a death penalty. But it I think it could not be faulted for having a humane one that gave convicts time and assistance to ponder their errors and take responsibility for their fate before the end. That is a society built on unconditional love and justice.

 

[not2sharp]

.....I'm ok with jumping through a few hoops to be able to legally carry a 4" auto, or an xl folder when I am in the mood.

Then you are willing to have your rights taxed out of existence, and what would you accomplish other than funding a few additional jobs in the bureaucracy?

n2s

 

[Danke42]

My common sense is tingling.

Anyhoo I'd I'd like to see a few things. First no laws that just further regulate the law abiding. I know that's an easy score since if they're already following the rules you can tighten the chain and call it a win. Second, fewer laws that regulate scary "things". Yes things can be scary but they're mostly inert objects that are immobile till human beings become involved.

 

[The_Iron_Joe]

Yes but the problem is its available to all and mandatory for some. Those who want to go through the program and fix their lives will do it, but there are far more that use the system solely as a means to get out of jail. How do you tell the difference, and what sort of prerequisite qualifications could you possible apply without immediate legal challenge? What is made available to one must be made available to all. Best solution is you go to jail and serve your time. Do the programs after when there is no longer any incentive to abuse the system. If the court sentenced you to 5 years, serve 5 years, not 6 months then go home because some shrink thinks you are "fixed" or because the politicians say that prisons are too expensive.


Problem is the social programs available to all actually promote the environment and up-bringing that you refer to....

Yes, I do agree that it would be a monumental task, and far beyond what I could possibly foresee in terms of technical and structural requirements to implement the changes necessary. Although, I'm hoping that in this idealistic future there would be fewer people in prison in the first place due to aforementioned effort, and I'm in favor of providing the means for people to better themselves, even if some choose to abuse those means. We should be preventing people from falling into such a mindset in the first place. Which yes, would require a paradigm shift so intense it would likely border on the impossible for many, even with their own best efforts. It is unrealistic to believe that as a society we can save everyone who needs saving. That doesn't mean we shouldn't strive to give people the best chances of improvement possible.

Problem is the social programs available to all actually promote the environment and up-bringing that you refer to....

And this is why I think there needs to be such drastic change on a societal level. How exactly that change would appear over time and what exactly what form it might take, I don't have a clear idea. The only thing that appears clear is that whatever is happening now, isn't working.

I don't think there is any kind of a one-size-fits-all type of solution, but the end goal remains the same.

 

[David Mary]

And empower people so they don't need saving.

 

[Triton]

Yeah, the Wild West was just so polite and civilized.

Been watching a few too many Westerns? Figure there was a shootout on main street every day at noon?

 

[not2sharp]

Been watching a few too many Westerns? Figure there was a shootout on main street every day at noon?

I would like to see a western spoof where the town has built grandstand complete with concessions and ticketing, so that everyone can come in to see the noon shootout every day. As a through fan of the western genre, I often wondered how these town kept from going broke from having to continuously replace all of that plate glass.

n2s

 

[PMQ]

Ahh yes, the age-old philosophical question "does harsh punishment decrease crime, or is it just a justified-torture"

 

[DocJD]

I know that I'm in the tiniest minority here...
I do think that the laws are far too restrictive here in New York State.
But I'm am not in favor of removing ALL restrictions...
Law-abiding citizens should not have their rights taken away...
But keeping knives out of the hands of those who have proven to not follow the laws, or who have proven to be a danger to themselves and those around them: need to have much more serious guidelines imposed.

These are the very ones that are the least likely to conform to laws .

 

[DocJD]

Honestly, I'm a little surprised how many people are in favor of allowing knives in schools, airports, government buildings, etc. with absolutely no restrictions.

If you can't trust a person to carry a knife anywhere , why would you want that person entrusted with your child's education or be in their environment , etc. ?

Anyway , special security zones weapons restrictions might have some validity but should not be extended to the entire public space .

A whole nation should not be treated like a prison or criminally insane facility .

 

[DocJD]

We are talking about public carry, not ownership?
I would be ok with a 4 inch blade limit, with no limitation on the type of knife (double-edged, auto, butterfly, etc).
Of course my CCL would allow me to go beyond those limitations if I chose. I'm ok with jumping through a few hoops to be able to legally carry a 4" auto, or an xl folder when I am in the mood.

How about a gallon of gasoline , or thousands of other dangerous products , easily available ?

 

[killgar]

American society, and it's people, are quite different today than when I was a kid.

For example, it used to be that violence on airplanes was unheard of (other than terrorist hijackings). Now, it's becoming more and more frequent. I don't fly, but if I did I would feel safer knowing that everyone else went through a metal detector and didn't have any knives on them. When's the last time you heard of a person being stabbed on a plane?

Also, when I was a kid in school the worst a student might do in class is talk or throw a balled up piece of paper at another kid. No one ever heard of a kid bringing a gun to school and shooting their fellow students, teachers, etc.

I have two teachers in my family, and I've head many horror stories of just how bad some kids are today. They have no discipline in their lives, they have no self-control, and they act out violently against other students and staff.

Throughout all my years in school I never heard of one student stabbing another, but that was a different time. Today, with what I know about what goes on in US schools, I don't disagree with prohibitions on kids having knives at school. Your kid might be responsible, but what about the little sociopath who sits behind him/her. Sure it's possible for kids to bring weapons to school regardless of rules or laws prohibiting it, but that doesn't mean the schools, or the laws, have to permit it.

I know this is a knife forum, and some, or many here might be of the opinion that people should be able to carry any knife they want anywhere they want, but things have gotten pretty crazy out there.

And I have no issue with laws prohibiting knives in courthouses or on the grounds of correctional institutions.

With the exceptions of schools, airplanes, courthouses and correctional institutions, I think people should be permitted to carry any knife they want, openly or concealed, anywhere in public. But I also believe that owners of private property (like sports venues or amusement parks, etc) should have the right to enact and enforce policies against possessing knives on their property. I'm a big believer in the rights of private property owners.

 

[OrangeBlueOrangeBlue]

You have to understand that when I was in grade school, knives were allowed and even encourage. I remember teachers telling us to bring a sharp knife tomorrow because we are going to be working on an arts and craft project. It was the same for many of us; the "Zero Tolerance" (zero sense) garbage is very a recent development. Back then, I remember people bringing firearms into elementary schools to teach 5th graders about basic gun safety, or for show and tell. Even so, no one got hurt; these items are benign unless someone with criminal intent acts on them. We didn't have many of those, because when someone acted up they were labelled juvenile delinquents and transferred to a reform school.

I’ve seen enough gory knife pictures on social media to know you don’t need criminal intent for someone to get hurt. As someone who dislikes overregulation, I’d love for you to explain why anyone should be okay with this scenario: “sorry, Mrs. Jones. We’ve gotten a lot of calls about little Timmy’s PE teacher carrying a comically large claymore on his back like he’s Mel Gibson, but there’s nothing that says he can’t have it, so we have to let him carry it at all times.”

Pointy things and edged weapons are already in all those places. In spite of the law.

Should every law that’s commonly broken be abolished?

If you can't trust a person to carry a knife anywhere , why would you want that person entrusted with your child's education or be in their environment , etc. ?

Anyway , special security zones weapons restrictions might have some validity but should not be extended to the entire public space .

A whole nation should not be treated like a prison or criminally insane facility .

If my kid’s kindergarten teacher wants to carry a pocket knife, I’m fine with that. If the kindergarten teacher thinks it’s a good idea to carry a machete at all times, I’m questioning why this person is allowed around kids at all. “Absolutely no restrictions” means everybody who walks into the school can carry any blade they want. I cannot fathom why it should be okay to bring your katana to parent-teacher night.

 

[not2sharp]

….. I cannot fathom why it should be okay to bring your katana to parent-teacher night.

You can fret as much as you want about the environment. But, I find that unproductive and would focus Instead on the people allowed within that space. If little Johnny has a drug or anger management issues, then he shouldn’t be allowed to be anywhere near other kids; whether he is armed or unarmed is irrelevant; the guy is dangerous and may act up and cause damage with just about any object. Not to mention he is likely a constant distraction, and a barrier to effective learning.

As for the sword in the classroom thing, once you have weeded out the problems, you can rack them on a wall so the entire class can enjoy them.

n2s

 

[DangerZone98]

“wont somebody think of the children”



Yes, thay can have knives too.

This is another excellent point. I would argue that good parenting is another factor which may help keep us safe. A well-raised 15 year old could be more reliable with an edged instrument than an adult who isn’t particularly interested in cutting tools. If the teenager has been taught to respect the blade and value human life, then I don’t see the problem.

Of course, this is not the perfect nor end-all solution. Transforming this into law or policy is tricky at best. How do you make a law about good parenting?

 

[Hickory n steel]

Criminals don't care, and most knife related crimes seem to be committed with cheap kitchen knives anyways.

Further more it seems most knives get banned because on paper they're very deadly and scary to politicians who don't know any better, yet where's the evidence of said knives actually being a problem ?

 

[Bob Denman]

We all seem to be forgetting that employers can make rules for the workplace to keep the machetes at home. You don't need a law to cover this scenario.