Fixed Blade carry in Clinton, CT.

[SuzukiGS750EZ]

Is it legal for me to carry my 4" bladed JK in sheath around town? Will i get heckled by police? Is there a limit on how many blades you carry on you? I will carry a Victorinox Swisstool & Swisschamp and either my griptilian, caly 3 cf or my Custom JK. The overall length is under 9" and the blade is 4" edge is a bit under that.

 

[Chris Meyer]

The Police generally don't "heckle" people, although that might be fun to watch. I assume you wanted to know if the Police would hassle you, and that, unfortunately, sometimes happens...

There is no limit on the number of knives you can carry, assuming they are all of legal length/configuration. However, if you are wearing a bandoleer full of knives, you may indeed find yourself being questioned by the Police.

As for the other parts of your question, I'll just paste in some of my replies to previous questions. I don't know what knife you are referring to when you mention a "JK", but if it's a custom knife and the length is questionable (I'll explain ways to measure below), I'd leave it home. No sense risking a nice knife if it you don't have to.


....................

There have been no recent changes to Connecticut's statutes dealing with knives; Sec. 53-206. Carrying of dangerous weapons prohibited, and Sec. 29-38. Weapons in vehicles.

Both statutes generally prohibit the carrying of "...any knife the edged portion of the blade of which is four inches or over in length..." However, both statutes also say;

The provisions of this section shall not apply to... ...(F) any person holding a valid hunting, fishing or trapping license issued pursuant to chapter 490 or any salt water fisherman carrying such knife for lawful hunting, fishing or trapping activities...

Therefore, the short answer is Yes, you can carry your Cold Steel Recon Tanto while fishing if you possess a valid fishing license. (I would recommend carrying the license with you.) Whether or not your knife is concealed is irrelevant as far as the CT General Statutes go.

As far as the blade on your Leatherman, it depends on the length of its edged portion. If it is under 4 inches in length, you are all set. Leatherman's website lists the Wave itself as being 4" long. I would assume that means the edged portion of the blade is less than that, but you should measure it if you aren't sure.


.........................


Quote:
Originally Posted by svolk View Post
Does each town have there own laws? Illinios you can be legal in one town and ilegal in the next?

Town and cities in CT may pass ordinances that have the weight of law, but the ordinances can only govern activites or areas set out in Connecticut General Statute 7-148; Scope of Municiple Powers. Town ordinances dealing with the carrying or knives or firearms are not among the areas listed by 7-148, although a town might be able to get away with prohibiting someone from manufacturing these items in their town. The actual statute is pretty lengthy, so I won't post it here. Just click on the link if you want to see all of the areas that towns may regulate.


In short, you can carry a single edged knife which has an edged portion of the blade that is under 4 inches. I would like to add that the laws were changed in 1999 to allow people to carry knives with blades exceeding 4 inches if they have a valid hunting or fishing license. 53-206, Sub-section (b), sub-paragraph (F) reads that the under four inch rule does not apply to "any person holding a valid hunting, fishing or trapping license issued pursuant to chapter 490 or any salt water fisherman carrying such knife for lawful hunting, fishing or trapping activities". I maintain that because of the way this sentence was written, it is not required that you be actually engaged in hunting, fishing or trapping activities if you have the proper permit. However, I should point out that mine seems to be the minority view among Police Officers. There are a few other exceptions listed under that section, but they are less common situations.

Another CT question that usual comes up is whether CT allows people to carry butterfly knives. The answer is "Yes", provided the knife is not double edged and the "edged portion of the blade" is under 4 inches long.


................................
You can carry whatever you like on private property owned by you, or by your employer (with their permission). Your only real problem might lie in transporting the machete or Khukri to the job. While the statutes don't expressly authorize you to carry such items, I would say that a machete is a tool, not a knife. As long as you can demonstrate that you aren't intending to use them as a weapon, I don't see you having a problem. If possible, keep them in your trunk and don't mention them. If you get stopped and the Police ask for permission to search your car, just say "No".

Where you might run into a problem is if you get stopped for some suspicious activity in the middle of the night and the police see a large blade in your car. Then you might have a hard time convincing the Police that you don't have the blade for nefarious purposes. Just avoid situations like that and you should be fine.



..........................
Actually, Connecticut's knife laws are quite reasonable in comparison to some other states. While the state does list some specific items that it prohibits, the focus is actually on the intent of the user. For example, anyone can carry a pencil around, but if you intend to stab someone in the eye with it, it becomes a "dangerous weapon" and is treated accordingly. (See definitions of "Deadly" and "Dangerous" weapons below.)

(I)f you look near the bottom of 53-206 you will find "Cited. 5 Conn. Cir. Ct. 313. Knife not coming within description of statute cannot be included as 'any other dangerous or deadly weapon' and is not with prohibition of this section. Id., 551." So, any knives under 4" and not double edged (other than switchblades over 1.5" long) are automatically okay (as long as you aren't using them as offensive weapons). For any knives specifically allowed, the Police still need to have probable cause to make an arrest, and the prosecutors need to prove criminal liability to convict you.

No reasonable Police Officer (and yes, some aren't) is going to bother you if you are transporting a set of kitchen knives and he finds out that you are a chef on your way to work. However, if you are a gang member and have a box cutting razor in your pocket and tell the Police you use it to cut up opposing gang members, then you can expect to get arrested.

Probable cause means; "Facts or circumstances which would lead a reasonable, prudent, person to believe that a crime has been, is being, or is about to be committed."

Criminal liability requires a combination of "Mens rea" (mental intent) and "Actus rea" (a physical act).

Criminal intent; Black's Law Dictionary defines "mens rea" as "an element of criminal responsibility: a guilty mind; a guilty or wrongful purpose; a criminal intent."

Mental intent; Black's Law Dictionary defines "actus reus" as '[t]he `guilty act.' A wrongful deed which renders the actor criminally liable if combined with mens rea."

**************

From CGS 53a-3 (Definitions):

(6) "Deadly weapon" means any weapon, whether loaded or unloaded, from which a shot may be discharged, or a switchblade knife, gravity knife, billy, blackjack, bludgeon, or metal knuckles. The definition of "deadly weapon" in this subdivision shall be deemed not to apply to section 29-38 or 53-206;

(7) "Dangerous instrument" means any instrument, article or substance which, under the circumstances in which it is used or attempted or threatened to be used, is capable of causing death or serious physical injury, and includes a "vehicle" as that term is defined in this section and includes a dog that has been commanded to attack, except a dog owned by a law enforcement agency of the state or any political subdivision thereof or of the federal government when such dog is in the performance of its duties under the direct supervision, care and control of an assigned law enforcement officer




....................................
In CT the weapons statutes refer to the length of the knife's cutting edges. (I don't know how knife companies measure their blades.) I would venture to say that most Officers measure the edge by holding a ruler alongside the blade and measuring the distance from the point to the end of the cutting edge, wherever that may be. However, the ball busters in the PD I work for have taken to measuring the actual cutting edge of the blade. Unless it's a recurve, they put the ruler on a table, put the point at one end of the ruler, and rock the blade along the curve of the blade. This does, in fact, give them the actual length of the cutting edge, although it seems a little unsporting to me.

As for whether or not you would get to slide if your blade was slightly over the legal length, the reality is that it would probably depend mostly on what you were doing with the knife and what your attitude was. For example, if you were in the park having a picnic and seemed like a decent guy, you probably would have no problem. However, if you were skulking around a high crime area, flicking your knife open, and gave the cops a ration of B.S., you would probably end up in jail.

............................

About the only real change in CT since I made these other posts is that they legislature has made 16 year olds juveniles, under certain circumstances. In typical fashion, they passed a law without giving a darn as to how their stupid scheme could possibly be implemented. It's now crime dependent to determine whether to treat them as juveniles or adults. The prosecutors had to come up with a 48 page list of things kids could be arrested for, and you have to check it to determine how you will handle the crime/offense/violation you are dealing with. Multiple crimes make it even more complicated.

The US Supreme Court made a ruling not to long ago that deals with when a vehicle may be searched incident to arrest. Without getting into great detail, it's easiest just to say that the Police can no longer automatically search a car incident to the arrest of one of it's occupants. I know lots of Police Officers who think this was a bad decision, but the court actually showed some common sense by overturning the old precedent.

 

[Joben]

Chris, I'm curious to know your current opinion of the "any person holding a valid hunting, fishing or trapping license issued pursuant to chapter 490 or any salt water fisherman carrying such knife for lawful hunting, fishing or trapping activities" clause.

I have been uncertain of the meaning of that sentence for some time, both grammatically and actual intent.
I was searching some old posts and you seem to have altered your interpretation of that bit over the years.

Do you currently believe that a knife 4 inches or longer is allowed for someone simply holding a fishing/hunting licence, or that they must be actually engaged in such activity in order to carry the knife?

Are you aware of any case law, legal opinions or arrest records that might relate to this?

Thank you.

 

[Chris Meyer]

Joben,

I still think that I am reading the statute correctly, although the legislature probably intended it only for people actively engaged in hunting or fishing (and, presumably going to and from those activities).

Even though I think I read the statute, I DO NOT recommend that anyone carry around an otherwise illegal knife and rely on their hunting or fishing permit to keep them out of trouble. Most of the cops I've asked do not share my broad reading of the statute, and it is their opinion that is going to be the deciding factor if you get stopped, not mine.

You pointed out that my opinion seems to have changed over time and I would have to agree. In the last few years my positions have given me more direct contact with the court, and I have to say that I am quite disappointed. Without getting into enough details to get me into trouble; I have discovered that a suspect's guilt or innocence is not the major concern at court, the real question is whether they think they can get a conviction, preferably by plea bargain. I have seen this work for people who deserved to get arrested, and against some who shouldn't have been. To me, it's far worse to see somebody getting steamrolled by the judicial machine for something they may not even have done, then it is to see a hardened criminal getting away with proverbial murder. I'd better stop my rant at this point...

I'm not aware of any recent updates on case law regarding knives, but I can't say that I really look for them. The State hires an attorney whose opinion I respect to give us yearly updates on changes of consequence. So far, we have not received any recent updates regarding knives.

Because you asked, I took a look at the State Judicial website. You can search cases and look through them, but it takes a while. I did find a case that has some disturbing things (under the Commentary heading) to say about what counts as a "Place of Business" and when the burden is on the defense.

If you look at the "fine print" that's posted after many statutes (like 53-206) you will see a bunch of case citations that deal with the statute. I've never bothered trying to look up the ones after 53-206, but doing so might answer some of your questions. I don't know how often they update the citations but, hopefully, they do it at least each time they update the statutes.

Here's the current list from 53-206:

Cited. 138 C. 485. Cited. 153 C. 584. Burden on prosecution to prove defendant did not possess a written permit. 179 C. 516. Cited. 195 C. 668. Cited. 208 C. 689. Cited. 209 C. 322. Cited. 210 C. 110; Id., 199. Cited. 211 C. 672. Cited. 217 C. 73. Cited. 226 C. 497. Offense of carrying a dangerous weapon is not constitutionally overbroad in violation of the first and fourteenth amendments to the United States Constitution. 287 C. 237. The circumstances surrounding an alleged threat are critical in determining if the threat is a true threat. The trial court should have instructed jury to consider the particular factual context in which the allegedly threatening conduct occurred, including the victim's reaction to the defendant's actions before and after the allegedly threatening conduct. Id. Defendant's threatened use of a table leg to inflict serious bodily injury against victim, in the event that victim continued to bother him, constitutes a violation of this section and Sec. 53a-3 if the threat is found to be a true threat not protected by the first amendment to the United States Constitution. Id.

 

[Joben]

Thank you Chris, that was very helpful.