Ivory and 'knife rights'?

Norcaldude

Norcaldude

Feedback: +64 / =0 / -0
Joined
Dec 19, 2014
Messages
1,983
I want to support this knife rights organization that posts here sometimes but I don't understand what fighting against an ivory ban has to do with knife rights. This seems like a minor issue that only affects a small group of knife makers. Most knives these days don't have any parts made with ivory so why is such a minor matter that only indirectly has anything to do with knives a part of this group's agenda?
 
Because there a ton of incredibly expensive custom made knives over the last several hundred years that would be rendered valueless by virtue of not being able to sell them?
Because it won't save any elephants? Because it makes hippies cry?
 
It's because there is no real way to control it, or at least not a good one that's been proposed yet.

Nobody is advocating that we should be buying fresh ivory that came from recently killed elephants.

The argument is regarding previously produced things from elephant ivory and anything made previously or recently of mammoth ivory. The bans would make all of the previously produced goods either illegal to own or illegal to sell. And it'd be impossible to regulate.

Personally, I think elephant ivory (new or old) is tasteless. I wouldn't buy any of it. But I can see the argument for not banning it. It's just not right to retroactively make things illegal that people bought legally, and with so much ivory already out there, it'd be impossible to enforce a ban on ivory unless all of it (old and new) is illegal.
 
Since ivory handled knives are a subset of all knives, knife rights groups have decided to take up that fight. It is similar to gun rights people defending certain types of banned ammunition.

The primary problem with ivory is that so many knife people agree with the ban because of the elephant extinction problem. If there wasn't an ecological crisis related to ivory, probably no knife person would have much of an opinion about their inclusion in knife rights efforts.
 
My understanding is that the ban would include all elephant ivory, even that which was used for knife handles 100 or more years ago. As a collector of vintage Traditional style folding knives, i have many vintage knives with ivory handles. These knives would be illegal to sell, trade, or give to anyone else if the ivory ban comes into effect. Some of the vintage Sheffield knives with ivory are superb both technically and artistically and it would be a huge loss if these became illegal in USA.
kj
 
Norcaldude said:
I want to support this knife rights organization that posts here sometimes but I don't understand what fighting against an ivory ban has to do with knife rights. This seems like a minor issue that only affects a small group of knife makers. Most knives these days don't have any parts made with ivory so why is such a minor matter that only indirectly has anything to do with knives a part of this group's agenda?
Click to expand...
If you want to know why Kniferights opposes the ivory bans, why don't you contact them directly and ask them at Kniferights.org.

There have already been several epic-long threads regarding this topic. But I guess it's up to the membership here, and the mods, to decide the longevity of this one.
 
Thanks for the answers. I don't really care to discuss the pros or cons of an ivory ban, I was just curious why it was such a big deal to a knife rights group.
 
Why would you not support a knife rights group just because you don't understand the appeal of ivory?
What does one have to do with the other? Are you actively opposed to ivory? If not, why do you care what the group does over *there* if you're mostly interested in what they do over *here*?
 
Norcaldude said:
Thanks for the answers. I don't really care to discuss the pros or cons of an ivory ban, I was just curious why it was such a big deal to a knife rights group.
Click to expand...

It seems to be just one issue they go after.
People tend to fixate on it, but I've seen more updates on switchblade laws and carry restrictions than the ivory issue.
 
Rasco said:
Why would you not support a knife rights group just because you don't understand the appeal of ivory?
What does one have to do with the other? Are you actively opposed to ivory? If not, why do you care what the group does over *there* if you're mostly interested in what they do over *here*?
Click to expand...

Because by 'support' I mean give them money and I want that money to be used to lobby for cleaning up knife laws that I care about, not to lobby for something else entirely. If you are going to raise money by claiming to be lobbying for knife rights then use that money you raise to fight stupid knife laws, not some niche law that only affects a few people.
 
Norcaldude said:
Because by 'support' I mean give them money and I want that money to be used to lobby for cleaning up knife laws that I care about, not to lobby for something else entirely. If you are going to raise money by claiming to be lobbying for knife rights then use that money you raise to fight stupid knife laws, not some niche law that only affects a few people.
Click to expand...

You'll find a similar conundrum with most lobby groups. I have to wonder how many AARP members are aware of AARP's anti-gun lobbying, and would approve.
 
Norcaldude said:
Because by 'support' I mean give them money and I want that money to be used to lobby for cleaning up knife laws that I care about, not to lobby for something else entirely. If you are going to raise money by claiming to be lobbying for knife rights then use that money you raise to fight stupid knife laws, not some niche law that only affects a few people.
Click to expand...

So you're not gonna support them with your time or money because they don't focus *exclusively* on the issues you're most interested in??

A group called "Knife Rights" defending people's rights to buy / sell knives with a certain kind of handle material seems like a legitimate use of the group's lobbying abilities to me.
I guess all I can say is, Where is this "other knife law advocacy group" that is more like what you want (i.e. ONLY focusing on knife laws you care about)??
If there isn't one, then that would mean KnifeRights is pretty much your best bet, so while you may be spending a small portion of your donation to fight for ivory legalization, another large portion of it is going towards fighting for reasonable knife laws in general, so I still think you're doing more good than harm by supporting them.

Or just withhold your support completely until a more perfect advocacy group comes along, I don't care :rolleyes:
 
Once again, this is not a "General Knife Discussion." This is about ivory and politics.

I have outlined this before in other threads. This is actually a very simple issue.

The greatest threat to elephants is poaching. Poachers kill elephants and sell the tusks to the global illegal ivory industry.

The US is the #2 market for the trade in ivory. Intermixed with the “legal trade” is a significant market for illegal ivory. This is documented by multiple sources and the USFW agrees with this.

It is extremely difficult to differentiate legally acquired ivory from ivory derived from elephant poaching. (Again, this is the position of the USFW.) The creation of loopholes for "pre ban", mammoth, ivory from legal hunts, etc., makes it easier for the illegal ivory industry to operate.

EVERY major group (without a financial interest in the ivory trade) working to protect the elephants recommends a total ban on the sale and trade of ivory. Knife Rights and the rest of the pro-ivory lobby do not.

Eradicating the second largest market for ivory in the world (the US) WILL NOT increase demand for ivory. Instead, it will decrease demand and increase the cost for the illegal ivory trade to do business.

Continuing the trade of ivory and ownership of knives are not the same issue. Knife ownership has zero negative externalizes. Continuing the ivory trade contibutes to the killing of the few remaining elephants. It is readily apparent that Knife Rights values the continued sale of ivory in the US higher than the slaughter of elephants. To me and many other knife owners, this is abhorrent. That is the reason I will not give knife rights another penny.

I have tried to have a fact based conversation about these issues with some of the pro-ivory folks in other threads. Unfortunately, with an absence of data and facts to support their position, the pro-ivory posters simply ignore the facts and resort to ad hominem attacks, emotion and fallacy to justify their position. With that in mind, debate about this topic is a waste of time. I would encourage those that are interested in learning more about this to do your own research and not blindly accept Knife Rights and the posters making a living working with ivory as a source of factual information.
 
ncrockclimb said:
Once again, this is not a "General Knife Discussion." This is about ivory and politics.

I have outlined this before in other threads. This is actually a very simple issue.

The greatest threat to elephants is poaching. Poachers kill elephants and sell the tusks to the global illegal ivory industry.

The US is the #2 market for the trade in ivory. Intermixed with the “legal trade” is a significant market for illegal ivory. This is documented by multiple sources and the USFW agrees with this.

It is extremely difficult to differentiate legally acquired ivory from ivory derived from elephant poaching. (Again, this is the position of the USFW.) The creation of loopholes for "pre ban", mammoth, ivory from legal hunts, etc., makes it easier for the illegal ivory industry to operate.

EVERY major group (without a financial interest in the ivory trade) working to protect the elephants recommends a total ban on the sale and trade of ivory. Knife Rights and the rest of the pro-ivory lobby do not.

Eradicating the second largest market for ivory in the world (the US) WILL NOT increase demand for ivory. Instead, it will decrease demand and increase the cost for the illegal ivory trade to do business.

Continuing the trade of ivory and ownership of knives are not the same issue. Knife ownership has zero negative externalizes. Continuing the ivory trade contibutes to the killing of the few remaining elephants. It is readily apparent that Knife Rights values the continued sale of ivory in the US higher than the slaughter of elephants. To me and many other knife owners, this is abhorrent. That is the reason I will not give knife rights another penny.

I have tried to have a fact based conversation about these issues with some of the pro-ivory folks in other threads. Unfortunately, with an absence of data and facts to support their position, the pro-ivory posters simply ignore the facts and resort to ad hominem attacks, emotion and fallacy to justify their position. With that in mind, debate about this topic is a waste of time. I would encourage those that are interested in learning more about this to do your own research and not blindly accept Knife Rights and the posters making a living working with ivory as a source of factual information.
Click to expand...

You really cut & paste your own posts from other threads?
If you want to stop illegal trade in ivory, and make sure there are lots of elephants maybe you should start an elephant ranch & raise them for ivory.

Banning the trade of old ivory will not stop poaching, the Chinese simply don't give a s@#t no matter what they say, and making it illegal to sell objects made of old ivory is ridiculous. And ex post facto style unconstitutional.
And making mammoth ivory illegal to trade in is literally moronic.

Banning anything never does anything but screw people who aren't the bad actors anyhow. Except with drugs. It worked with drugs. Ever since we banned drugs nobody can get them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top