From Where Do They Set Blade Limits?

K

knifezoid

Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
1,981
I often see and hear that different states have different rules/laws
on how long a blade can be. But I've always wondered from where
do they set these limitations? Are there statistics that show that
in a crime which involves a knife that the knife used was over a certain
length? Is there data to back up that a blade over 3" or 4" is significantly
more dangerous and used more often in more violent crimes than one
which is shorter in length? Really I'm trying to understand it cause
none of these laws make any sense to me.
 
There's no real rhyme or reason to it frankly. Legislators don't use things like "facts" or "data" when they make such laws. They just kind of eyeball it.

A common myth is that a blade over a certain length can pierce the heart during a stabbing. But this isn't true, as there are plenty of other ways to kill with a sharp object.

To some extent there is a practical length for general tasks that a person would be carrying a knife for. The idea is you don't need a blade in your pocket over a certain length for anything other than martial use unless your hunting or fishing (and that you'd keep kitchen knives at home). For some reason "self-defense" never crosses their minds, but that's another very lengthy discussion.

The smallest requirement I've seen is 2". Texas has 5.5" which is bigger than any folder I own beyond a Spanish navaja. Some states like Maryland and Indiana have no length limit at all.
 
So going on that; my thought (logical thought) would be: Is it that in CA the criminals use bigger knives and that's why their limit is smaller, but in TX the criminals use knives bigger than 5.5" and so on...

I mean it makes no sense.

I see what your saying completely in regards to what one would reasonably
need to carry, but it's too bad that is entirely subjective and a cop could
always argue you didn't need a knife at all.

In NJ you have to have a "reason" for carrying a knife, like camping, fishing.

Well what if I was like: "Uh, I just think it's cool." <- ARRESTED!
 
knifezoid said:
So going on that; my thought (logical thought) would be: Is it that in CA the criminals use bigger knives and that's why their limit is smaller, but in TX the criminals use knives bigger than 5.5" and so on...
Click to expand...

There you go again with your "logic" and 'making sense." You'll never make it in politics:D

EDIT: Just a quick follow-up, California state law does NOT have a length limit for regular knives, just switchblades and balisongs. For some strange reason everybody likes to beat around the bush with CA law and not give a straight answer.
 
Last edited:
according to either Sykes, Fairbairn, or Appelgate (don't remember which), the minimum length for a knife blade intended for use on humans is (iirc) 6 inches. so, YES, i believe length can increase the lethality of a knife, but still think most knife laws are stupid. if they wanted to set a length limit, they should consider what the EXPERT stated the minimum was and make that the maximum. right?
 
Every place is different, even when MEASURING "blade length."

Some places measure from hilt to tip. Some places only measure the cutting edge. Some places measure the cutting edge on double-edged knives, thereby doubling their length. And, some places without blade length restrictions will measure the ENTIRE knife from tip to pommel, thus transforming your 4" lockblade folder into a "eight and a half inch knife" which may make no difference under the law but looks damning on paper and sounds bad to a jury envisioning a knife with nearly a 9" blade.
 
knifezoid said:
From Where Do They Set Blade Limits?
Click to expand...
From the depths of their behinds, really...

If you're trying to determine whether or not your folder's length is undeniably legal based on where you start measuring from, then you already have your answer.
 
There's no logic or reason to it. If you think about it, the knife you use to cut your dinner at night most likely has a blade longer than 4 inches. The steak knives at our house are 5 and 6 inches long.
 
Michigan also has no limit on length. :thumbup:

Regarding how they actually determine how long is too long, I agree with the eyeball it statement. There doesn't seem to be any logic in it at all, especially considering the prevalence of handguns instead of knives. Handguns are explicitly stated in the 2nd amendment, while knives are not.
 
That's what I was wondering. If it's the right to bear ARMS then shouldn't
everything fall under that?
 
Josh K said:
Handguns are explicitly stated in the 2nd amendment, while knives are not.
Click to expand...

Really? because the way I see it is that it says "arms" meaning weapons. That includes guns, knives, swords, spears, etc.

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
 
joe-bob said:
Really? because the way I see it is that it says "arms" meaning weapons. That includes guns, knives, swords, spears, etc.

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
Click to expand...

Along with miniguns, grenades, nukes, missiles, etc? :rolleyes:

Feel free to join in the common debate: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution

I take it as in firearms.
 
So, if you take out a bear while "armed" with nothing but a case trapper and set of brass balls...

It's silly, knives sit in limbo, they are THE universal tool / weapon.

What's even sillier is size restrictions and auto/bali restrictions, I could do more damage with a steel pen than a 2" sissy knife.

I say if everyone is armed, justice will be meted out, if no one is armed, there can be no justice.
 
Really, as I've indicated in my other writings, carrying a weapon or a tool that can be used as a weapon is not innately evil. It's a technicality law based on fear. Legislators should ponder the following when making such laws:

I carry a knife.
I carry because it is useful, because I like the design, and I may need it for an unforeseen task.
If I threaten someone with it, arrest me for intimidation.
If I use it to rob someone, arrest me for robbery.
If I hurt someone unjustly, arrest me for assault.
If I kill someone unjustly, arrest me for murder.
Otherwise, leave me the ---- alone.
 
I am totally against any lenght laws myself. A knife is a tool, just like weapons are tools in reality. Think about it. What is a tool in its simplest definition. A implement to complete a task. So weapons are tools, and every tool can become a weapon (hammers, screwdiver, drills). So such laws, to regulate tools are pointless. I agree with Glistam, if I commit a crime with my tool charge me with that crime (murder, assualt, armed robber).
 
superduty truck said:
I am totally against any lenght laws myself. A knife is a tool, just like weapons are tools in reality. Think about it. What is a tool in its simplest definition. A implement to complete a task. So weapons are tools, and every tool can become a weapon (hammers, screwdiver, drills). So such laws, to regulate tools are pointless. I agree with Glistam, if I commit a crime with my tool charge me with that crime (murder, assualt, armed robber).
Click to expand...

exactly and what is a crime but a task that we as society have decided to make illegal?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top