How public are you with your knives?

[b yond]

No one is talking about censorship, the discussion is about common courtesy and situational understanding, something so many people lack this day in age. You can be a decent human being and carry a knife with dignity, respect, and common courtesy, or you can be a tool and act like you can do what you feel, cuz' 'Merica. All that does is lead to more people afraid of knifes. A complete lack of feeling the need to follow a social order is the biggest reason we have so many issues in this country.

Again I disagree. From my vantage point it appears you're insisting we "knife people" should censor our actions in public to avoid offending or scaring people who disapprove of our possession and/or use of knives. That would be in post #166. You made derogatory remarks about those contributing to this page because you don't approve of their use of the word "sheeple" or their comments about the people they've described with that word. Sounds like you're asking for censorship not only of our actions but also our words, because they either offend you or someone else. The irony (hypocrisy?) is that you've chosen to ask for this censorship in an offensive way, and in a forum where I suspect most members are pro-freedom and will respect your attempt to voice your opinion, even though the majority of us probably disagree with you whole-heartedly. You've probably even offended some of us.

If you want to make it about common courtesy and situational understanding, again there's a lot of hypocrisy here. You're in a knife forum telling people they should not use their knives in public, and doing so rather rudely (post #166, 171).

Situational understanding goes both ways. If I use my pocket knife in public to open a package or something and someone gets scared, they're lacking situational awareness and understanding that knives are tools first, and only become weapons when used as weapons, just like the hammers and axes you referenced in your previous post.

I think with more exposure to knives being used correctly, we can start to break down those fears. If the sheeple only see knives in movies, video games, and television shows where they're used exclusively as weapons, then their irrational fears are going to get worse and will lead us down a path that many other countries have already gone down. It ends with our everyday tools becoming illegal and our rights being chipped away.

Using the right tool for the job is not something I should be ashamed of. Using a legal knife in a legal manner in public is not something I should have to censor.

Using the word "sheeple" to describe people who adhere to a herd mentality and are easily spooked and often incapable of defending themselves is not something I need to apologize for, even if they are easily offended too. We're all entitled to our opinions, just like you.

Besides, I like that word. I think it's funny. There's nothing wrong with using it and I don't feel baaaaaaad about it.

 

[trevitrace]

22RF,

I really like the hog hunting example.

Cutting to the chase, I advocate that high capacity magazines for semi-auto rifles and pistols be placed in the same Federally regulated category as explosives and machine guns and by the same reasoning, I'm fine with local municipalities and states regulating knife blade lengths. I'll explain.

I actually think it would be a blast, literally, to hunt/exterminate hogs with a full-auto machine gun. I mean, seriously. That would be fun, right?

We can't do that because society balances my desire to blow away hogs with a machine gun against the desires of bad guys to blow away innocent people with machine guns.

People on both side of the gun (and knife) regulation debate agree on this. Guns don't kill people. People do. But this is not the full and complete story here.

As one criminologist I read noted, gun regulations don't stop the number of violent crimes. But they do limit the lethality of those violent crimes. The same is true for regulations on explosives and knives.

You and I could both legally own explosives like land mines and RPGs and machine guns. But to do so, we would have to qualify for and be granted very difficult to achieve and maintain Federal licenses. As fun as it would be to blast hogs with a machine gun, we both accept this strict regulation of machine guns as a reasonable response to public safety and crime concerns.

The Federal regulation of fully automatic weapons and explosives also destroys (IMO) the argument that if you regulate guns, only bad guys will have guns. As a rule, bad guys don't use machine guns or explosives because a) they are less available because they are so tightly regulated and b) the penalties for having or using them are so high (as they should be). That is, Federal regulation of this class of weapon appears to effectively limit or hugely reduce the ability of bad guys to have ready and easy access to them.

I would have (almost) zero problem with somebody hunting for deer with a semi-auto AR-15 just so long as high capacity magazines were regulated in the same class as machine guns and explosives (essentially banned). IMO, there is no justification for high capacity magazines other than killing humans more effectively. That's what military-oriented engineers designed them for, after all. And like hunting hogs with machine guns, any justification for high capacity mags like hunting hogs or not needing to reload as often at the range or whatever, don't pass the credibility test when weighed against the massive tactical advantage they give to bad guys intent on killing large numbers of people quickly.

The same basic principle applies to knives, imo. Chuck Buck relayed a story in an interview about how the Buck 112 Ranger came to be. The USS Ranger was in port and drunken sailors got in to fight and a sailor was badly hurt after being stabbed with a Buck 110. The CO issued a ship ban on all knives with blades longer than 3" and in response, Buck made the 112, naming it the Ranger.

I regularly carry a Buck 110 in my right rear pocket. The city of Boston has a local ordinance limiting blades to 3". There's a good argument to be made that knives with blades above 3" are more lethal due their increased ability to penetrate to vital organs. This ordinance doesn't stop knife related crime, but I accept that it helps make knife related crime less deadly. Any BPD officer worth their salt can easily recognize the tell-tale imprint of my rear pocket carry. I just swap my 110 (or Opinel) for a 112 and 500 when traveling to Boston. (Usually) The ordinance isn't unreasonable and doesn't impose an undue restriction on civilians like me. Neither would a Federal ban on high capacity magazines.

I knew you'd squeeze Opinel in there eventually.

 

[22-rimfire]

I can't imagine there is so much difference... However, and if you're interested, as I speak from France, I can tell that NO private person is allowed to carry ANY cutting/bludgeoning/stabbing object of any kind in any public circumstances. The law leaves it open to the LEOs to assess any offensive intention from the bearer. As far as I'm concerned, this is as cool as it gets. Is Italy that much cooler ?

There probably isn't much difference between the different EU countries. I am interested in general.

If the law does not allow for ANY knife to be carried, what does it matter if law enforcement has the authority to assess intention in a given circumstance other than to assign more charges to that person? In Tennessee (USA), our knife law changed last year where all knives are legal to carry (concealed or unconcealed) and it is up to the officer to determine intention at a potential crime scene as to whether the knife was carried or used as a weapon.

 

[colubrid]

No one is talking about censorship, the discussion is about common courtesy and situational understanding, something so many people lack this day in age. You can be a decent human being and carry a knife with dignity, respect, and common courtesy, or you can be a tool and act like you can do what you feel, cuz' 'Merica. All that does is lead to more people afraid of knifes. A complete lack of feeling the need to follow a social order is the biggest reason we have so many issues in this country.

This kind of thinking is exactly why we have the immoral agendas we have in todays "merica". Equal rights for gays ect.. So people like you are so worried about everyones "feelings" rather than stand up for what is right.

One first has to define what "civil" means and how what context you use it in. Personally a lot of stuff people consider civil or "social order " used to be an out right attack on our freedoms and what "merica" is all about.

 

[trevitrace]

This kind of thinking is exactly why we have the immoral agendas we have in todays "merica". Equal rights for gays ect.. So people like you are so worried about everyones "feelings" rather than stand up for what is right.

One first has to define what "civil" means and how what context you use it in. Personally a lot of stuff people consider "civil" used to be an out right attack on our freedoms and what "merica" is all about.

Wow .

 

[herisson]

There probably isn't much difference between the different EU countries. I am interested in general.

If the law does not allow for ANY knife to be carried, what does it matter if law enforcement has the authority to assess intention in a given circumstance other than to assign more charges to that person? In Tennessee (USA), our knife law changed last year where all knives are legal to carry (concealed or unconcealed) and it is up to the officer to determine intention at a potential crime scene as to whether the knife was carried or used as a weapon.

You are exactly at the point I was making : you can carry whatever blade you NEED for your trade but it is up to the LEO to determine if you are actually in a situation where you need said blade... Ha, Ha... This said, most of LEOs have enough common sense to check out if you are a potential offender or not. To make it short : what matters is that LEOs have the say in the matter.

 

[Wolverine666]

I have no problem pulling out my EDC folders like my Yo2 , 710 and Nirvana (my most commonly carried folders lately).

But for some reason I hesitate to whip out a fixed blade like my TOPS SXB. Not sure why

 

[b yond]

22RF,

I really like the hog hunting example.

Cutting to the chase, I advocate that high capacity magazines for semi-auto rifles and pistols be placed in the same Federally regulated category as explosives and machine guns and by the same reasoning, I'm fine with local municipalities and states regulating knife blade lengths. I'll explain.

I actually think it would be a blast, literally, to hunt/exterminate hogs with a full-auto machine gun. I mean, seriously. That would be fun, right?

We can't do that because society balances my desire to blow away hogs with a machine gun against the desires of bad guys to blow away innocent people with machine guns.

People on both side of the gun (and knife) regulation debate agree on this. Guns don't kill people. People do. But this is not the full and complete story here.

As one criminologist I read noted, gun regulations don't stop the number of violent crimes. But they do limit the lethality of those violent crimes. The same is true for regulations on explosives and knives.

You and I could both legally own explosives like land mines and RPGs and machine guns. But to do so, we would have to qualify for and be granted very difficult to achieve and maintain Federal licenses. As fun as it would be to blast hogs with a machine gun, we both accept this strict regulation of machine guns as a reasonable response to public safety and crime concerns.

The Federal regulation of fully automatic weapons and explosives also destroys (IMO) the argument that if you regulate guns, only bad guys will have guns. As a rule, bad guys don't use machine guns or explosives because a) they are less available because they are so tightly regulated and b) the penalties for having or using them are so high (as they should be). That is, Federal regulation of this class of weapon appears to effectively limit or hugely reduce the ability of bad guys to have ready and easy access to them.

I would have (almost) zero problem with somebody hunting for deer with a semi-auto AR-15 just so long as high capacity magazines were regulated in the same class as machine guns and explosives (essentially banned). IMO, there is no justification for high capacity magazines other than killing humans more effectively. That's what military-oriented engineers designed them for, after all. And like hunting hogs with machine guns, any justification for high capacity mags like hunting hogs or not needing to reload as often at the range or whatever, don't pass the credibility test when weighed against the massive tactical advantage they give to bad guys intent on killing large numbers of people quickly.

The same basic principle applies to knives, imo. Chuck Buck relayed a story in an interview about how the Buck 112 Ranger came to be. The USS Ranger was in port and drunken sailors got in to fight and a sailor was badly hurt after being stabbed with a Buck 110. The CO issued a ship ban on all knives with blades longer than 3" and in response, Buck made the 112, naming it the Ranger.

I regularly carry a Buck 110 in my right rear pocket. The city of Boston has a local ordinance limiting blades to 3". There's a good argument to be made that knives with blades above 3" are more lethal due their increased ability to penetrate to vital organs. This ordinance doesn't stop knife related crime, but I accept that it helps make knife related crime less deadly. Any BPD officer worth their salt can easily recognize the tell-tale imprint of my rear pocket carry. I just swap my 110 (or Opinel) for a 112 and 500 when traveling to Boston. (Usually) The ordinance isn't unreasonable and doesn't impose an undue restriction on civilians like me. Neither would a Federal ban on high capacity magazines.

Just pointing this out: There are already laws against murder. The people who don't care about those laws and are going to murder anyway probably don't care about how many rounds are in their magazine or whether or not their weapon is an "assault rifle."

Laws, by their very nature, only regulate the law-abiding.

 

[willard0341]

Very interesting read. Clipped I carry iwb, tradional I carry in pocket of course. A lady asked me if I had anything to open up a juice drink in a box for her grand daughter. When i puntctured the box with my small regular feeling rather chivalrous she exclaimed "what are you doing carrying a hunting knife?!"

One of the definitions of deviant. Departing from usual or accepted standards in social circumstances.

I looked up sociopath about the part on not caring what other people think and I do believe it would be a stretch in this context.

Excuse me while I paint my mohawk orange and head out to town in Paducah ky

 

[herisson]

And just to add to the fun, the Opinel (a totally peasantly, all day-roundy, innocuous garden tool) will be an absolute NO - NO as an EDC in some given circumstances (e.g civil uproar about an unwanted airport)... because it has a lock ! Understand : it is a potentially lethal weapon. Shrug....

 

[metsfan]

I live in NYC and I am not discreet at all. Whilst I do not really wear knife paraphernalia aside for what I score at Bladeshow in terms of swag, I do not hesitate using my knife in public. I do not discuss knives with anyone because no one really cares around here. If anyone does comment about a particular knife, I tell them about it and try to get them to consider the brand when they want to purchase a knife. It is always Kershaw or ZT, especially a piece like the Kershaw Link.

I'm not worried about legality here either, because if any NYPD officer wanted to give me a hard time about a knife, they would regardless of what knife it was. As a family member in the NYPD told me once, I'll give you the ticket/summons/arrest you and let the judge figure it out.

 

[b yond]

Everything is a potentially lethal weapon.

 

[RevDevil]

Let's steer away from the political implications and foundations for answering what should be a simple ,yes or no question. If we continue talking about agendas and the like, we only going to end uo with yet another closed thread. Politics is off limits, as is religeon as far as this is concerned.

My answer to the original question is not very public at all. I don't hide, but at the same tike I don't go out of my way to draw unneeded attention to myself whenI cut something. The less attantion I get from uninformed people regarsing my cutting tools of choice Inget, the better.

 

[22-rimfire]

You are exactly at the point I was making : you can carry whatever blade you NEED for your trade but it is up to the LEO to determine if you are actually in a situation where you need said blade... Ha, Ha... This said, most of LEOs have enough common sense to check out if you are a potential offender or not. To make it short : what matters is that LEOs have the say in the matter.

It goes beyond "Trade" in Tennessee. All knives are legal including evil switch blades that were banned to carry most places during the James Dean era and biker gang use or suspected use. Pinnah mentioned the Buck 110. I believe in Texas, the 110 was actually listed as forbidden to carry. The funny thing there is back in the 70's when I lived there, I carried a Schrade 250T (essentially the same knife, just not a lock back) all the time in rural areas or as you referred to "my trade".

I won't bring up examples about LEO's making bad choices sometimes since I don't want to stir that kettle here. But it happens. They're people and we all make mistakes.

Pinnah, I think I pretty much totally disagree with you on the AR and full auto thing. Full autos are regulated but not commonly used in crimes in the USA. Most military folks know that shooting full auto is not an effective way to kill other than for suppress fire. Sure it would kill people and in the case of say the night club in FL where the shooter was indiscriminately killing, it might have been useful. But that is not typical. Nor is use of AR's in crimes "typical". It seems to be becoming more common, but it is still a small percentage of the crimes. As you said, rifles are commonly not used in crimes and ARs are rifles (detachable magazines or not). IF you regulate magazine capacity (10 rounds), you just carry more loaded magazines and it only takes a couple of seconds to change out. It is all designed to make the SHEEPLE comfortable in their little world that they believe the police are there to PROTECT them. They aren't. They are there to enforce laws. The same thing is applicable to knives and use as weapons. TN had the sense to pass a law making all knives legal to carry which I agree with. But some common sense is in order as I wouldn't carry a machete or sword in downtown Memphis or Nashville strapped to my belt regardless of the law.

I think your objection boils down to detachable magazines and semi-auto hunting rifles often have detachable magazines. But I do not favor making them essentially Class III weapons like full auto's anywhere. Wait until the next idiot shooter uses a Ruger 10/22 with detachable magazines for their hate filled slaughter attempt. Regulate those too? The handgun (pistol) is the favored weapon by criminals and they usually have detachable magazines.... regulation is a very slippery slope. VERY!

 

[Armadew]

My answer to the original question is not very public at all. I don't hide, but at the same tike I don't go out of my way to draw unneeded attention to myself whenI cut something. The less attantion I get from uninformed people regarsing my cutting tools of choice Inget, the better.

This right here ^

 

[Jens Schuetz]

Everything is a potentially lethal weapon.

Yep. Though I've to admit an assault rifle requires less effort than a fountain pen and thus has a higher potential to be more lethal and that to more potential victims. Most people can see why one would be allowed in schools and not the other. Though in both cases it's the person at the trigger/behind the nib which is the core problem.

 

[iamjethro]

We all talk about a knife being a tool, and as such can be used in positive or negative ways. The attitude of the holder is a tool also , in a broad definition. Most times simply carrying a knife is not going to be a big deal. It is only if it is made a primary point of attention that it would be. At least in this part of the country.

Who will care, or even know, if I have a folder in my pocket or clipped to it. As long as I do not draw attention to it, neither will 99 % of the rest of the people I meet on the street. Obviously wearing a much larger blade such as a machete, or axe, or broadsword would invite much more scrutiny.

I carry my little old knife and use it if a need arises and then do the next thing that the day brings.

 

[22-rimfire]

I think about public perception of a knife I might choose to carry. That consideration has been factored into my general preferences on the size of folder that I carry or choose to carry. I don't go out of my way to make people comfortable with a knife that I might use in a public place, but I do try to do things that do not draw a lot of attention to me or what knives I might choose to carry. It is one of the reasons I favor concealed carry of firearms over unconcealed carry. Where I have carried un-concealed (urban), it was an obvious attempt to demonstrate to some jerk with criminal intent to stay the hell away from me. But I would also have a concealed gun with me as well. I would probably choose the same sort of thing with knives. For example, Charlie Mike's choice of a larger fixed blade for un-concealed carry for me is an obvious attempt to tell people (criminals or would be criminals) to stay the hell away. I doubt he cleans his finger nails with the larger fixed blade.

 

[dozer2025]

This kind of thinking is exactly why we have the immoral agendas we have in todays "merica". Equal rights for gays ect...

As a member of the LGBT community I'd like to remind you that America is supposed to be the land of equal rights. Now please step off your soapbox, extinguish your flaming cross, and kindly stay on topic.

 

[Charlie Mike]

I think about public perception of a knife I might choose to carry. That consideration has been factored into my general preferences on the size of folder that I carry or choose to carry. I don't go out of my way to make people comfortable with a knife that I might use in a public place, but I do try to do things that do not draw a lot of attention to me or what knives I might choose to carry. It is one of the reasons I favor concealed carry of firearms over unconcealed carry. Where I have carried un-concealed (urban), it was an obvious attempt to demonstrate to some jerk with criminal intent to stay the hell away from me. But I would also have a concealed gun with me as well. I would probably choose the same sort of thing with knives. For example, Charlie Mike's choice of a larger fixed blade for un-concealed carry for me is an obvious attempt to tell people (criminals or would be criminals) to stay the hell away. I doubt he cleans his finger nails with the larger fixed blade.

I will give you that (to a degree). Fresno is a place where I don't want to be approachable. See the stickers on my car...



(dysfunctional veteran ... leave me alone)