Just ordered a Ganzo g710

robgmn said:
A response from an attorney in the OIG in my state:

You’re right. 15 U.S.C. § 1542 makes it a crime to:
• make,
• sell, or
• transport,
a switchblade knife in interstate commerce. And the statute is still good law. It hasn’t been repealed or overturned by a court. Indeed, in 1988, a Minnesotan—Douglas John Nelsen—was convicted of violating the Act. See U.S. v. Nelsen, 859 N.W.2d 1381 (8th Cir. 1988).

Importantly, it’s not illegal to possess a switch blade, it’s just illegal to sell one in interstate commerce. Courts have interpreted interstate commerce so broadly, that almost every sale—including sales between a buyer and seller of the same state—will involve interstate commerce.


Privileged and Confidential
The attorney-client privilege protects this email message and any attachments from disclosure. To prevent waiving this privilege unintentionally, only distribute copies to Department employees whose input is necessary. If you are not the intended recipient, or the person responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, please destroy all copies of this message and the attachments, and notify the sender immediately by replying to this message or calling (651) 431-xxx. Privileged communications should not be placed in a public file.


If you Google the case, you can read the brief and the decision.
I have a pdf I can email if you'd prefer not to do the Googlefu.


Excerpt:
Nelsen became interested in switchblade knives at an early age. In 1983 he became convinced that the law prohibiting
such knives was unconstitutional, and he began importing them from foreign countries for distribution through his
mail order business, the Crowley Cutlery Company. The Customs Service was able to document numerous knife
shipments to both Nelsen's home and his post office box. Nelsen was indicted, and raised his constitutional
challenges to the Act during pretrial motions before the magistrate. 1 The magistrate recommended rejection of
the challenges which the district court 2 adopted. Trial was held, and the jury returned a verdict of guilty on the
charges now at issue.
Click to expand...

That actually confirms exactly what Planterz told you, that it restricts interstate commerce. Which is repeated throughout the email.
 
palonej said:
Hey IM......I'm pretty sure that was over Balisongs brother. Cost them a pretty penny!
Joe
Click to expand...

I think it was for importing them as opposed to being shipped state to state.

Legality and patents aside, ganzo and its actions are still scummy. :thumbup:
 
craytab said:
What is silly is trusting a company that actively participates in theft. What is also silly is being part of a community and defending companies that hurt said community.
Click to expand...

Literally boggles the mind Cray.
Joe
 
(quoting sabrecat and Inspid Moniker) I really don't understand you. Here's what I paid for those: (knifecenter was the seller)

KaBar Dozier - $20
Byrd Cara Cara 2- $21
Byrd Robin 2 - $18
KaBar Piggyback - $19

and what I paid for my Ganzos is $13-15 for each one, so I guess I didn't say anything wrong? :confused:
 
Last edited:
Larcivs Lepidvs said:
Silly. have you even used one?
Click to expand...

Why would I, when I can buy a knife from a company not known for ripping off other companies stuff? Especially when I can buy "non theft-based" products for only a bit more money?

I mean, I have heard, that it is a bad idea to stick a knitting needle as far as I can into my ear. Have I done it to check?
 
trevitrace said:
I think it was for importing them as opposed to being shipped state to state.

Legality and patents aside, ganzo and its actions are still scummy. :thumbup:
Click to expand...

[3] Finally, we reject Nelsen's claims that the Act is so vague and overbroad as to violate due process. Nelsen
makes no serious argument that the Act interferes with the exercise of his protected rights, except the right to sell
switchblade knives. We therefore hold that the Act does not suffer from overbreadth.
 
ThePeacent said:
(quoting sabrecat and Inspid Moniker) I really don't understand you. Here's what I paid for those: (knifecenter was the seller)

KaBar Dozier - $20
Byrd Cara Cara 2- $21
Byrd Robin 2 - $18
KaBar Piggyback - $19

and what I paid for my Ganzos is $13-15 for each one, so I guess I didn't say anything wrong? :confused:
Click to expand...

Yup. That's about the price range I found as well and I agree with you completely. I'd much rather spend a few dollars more and have the peace of mind that comes from dealing with reputable companies (note: I'm also not trying to use 'reputable' as a synonym for American. I think quite highly of Real Steel, Kizer and Reate among others.)
 
[emoji106][emoji106][emoji106][emoji106][emoji106][emoji106][emoji106]
 
Pretty sure he refuses to listen Trev!!! He's on some kind of mission!!!
 
robgmn said:
Au contraire mon frère: An Act of Congress is a statute enacted by the United States Congress. It can either be a Public Law, relating to the general public, or a Private Law, relating to specific institutions or individuals.
Statutes, also known as acts, are laws passed by a legislature. Federal statutes are laws enacted by Congress with (and in some circumstances without) the approval of the President. Federal statutes are published in three formats: (1) initially as individual slip laws, (2) in compilations of slip laws known as session laws, and (3) as codified law incorporated into a code.

Act=statute. Statute=law. Therefore, ACT=LAW.
Here's the CURRENT Act (you may also call it a LAW, since it IS a LAW) in it's entiretly: https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/USCODE-2011-title15/html/USCODE-2011-title15-chap29.htm

It's OK if you think it's not real. You have the right to your subjective opinion.
Unfortunately, in this world opinion does not mean fact or proof.

Here's the primary Act some subdivisions referenced as part of this discussion:

15 U.S.C.
United States Code, 2011 Edition
Title 15 - COMMERCE AND TRADE
CHAPTER 29 - MANUFACTURE, TRANSPORTATION, OR DISTRIBUTION OF SWITCHBLADE KNIVES
From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov

§1241. Definitions
As used in this chapter—
(a) The term “interstate commerce” means commerce between any State, Territory, possession of the United States, or the District of Columbia, and any place outside thereof.
(b) The term “switchblade knife” means any knife having a blade which opens automatically—
(1) by hand pressure applied to a button or other device in the handle of the knife, or
(2) by operation of inertia, gravity, or both.
(Pub. L. 85–623, §1, Aug. 12, 1958, 72 Stat. 562.)

§1242. Introduction, manufacture for introduction, transportation or distribution in interstate commerce; penalty
Whoever knowingly introduces, or manufactures for introduction, into interstate commerce, or transports or distributes in interstate commerce, any switchblade knife, shall be fined not more than $2,000 or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.
(Pub. L. 85–623, §2, Aug. 12, 1958, 72 Stat. 562.)
§1243. Manufacture, sale, or possession within specific jurisdictions; penalty
Whoever, within any Territory or possession of the United States, within Indian country (as defined in section 1151 of title 18), or within the special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States (as defined in section 7 of title 18), manufactures, sells, or possesses any switchblade knife, shall be fined not more than $2,000 or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.
(Pub. L. 85–623, §3, Aug. 12, 1958, 72 Stat. 562.)

§1244. Exceptions
Sections 1242 and 1243 of this title shall not apply to—
(1) any common carrier or contract carrier, with respect to any switchblade knife shipped, transported, or delivered for shipment in interstate commerce in the ordinary course of business;
(2) the manufacture, sale, transportation, distribution, possession, or introduction into interstate commerce, of switchblade knives pursuant to contract with the Armed Forces;
(3) the Armed Forces or any member or employee thereof acting in the performance of his duty;
(4) the possession, and transportation upon his person, of any switchblade knife with a blade three inches or less in length by any individual who has only one arm; or
(5) a knife that contains a spring, detent, or other mechanism designed to create a bias toward closure of the blade and that requires exertion applied to the blade by hand, wrist, or arm to overcome the bias toward closure to assist in opening the knife.
(Pub. L. 85–623, §4, Aug. 12, 1958, 72 Stat. 562; Pub. L. 111–83, title V, §562, Oct. 28, 2009, 123 Stat. 2183.)


And my analogy is 100% valid. Two very different things that have some very similar circumstances, especially with respect to this subtopic of the original discussion.
You could substitute ANY two dissimilar items that fall under the same legal boundaries and the analogy would be valid. It's really NOT that difficult.
Click to expand...

This entire "rabbit hole" argument came in an attempt to deflect the original subject of clones and copies and cloud the issue by attempting to implicate Blade Forums and an online store for violation of Federal Law. Please get back on topic or start a new thread, this has absolutely no relevance to the topic at hand. You usually make some valid contribution to these topics but this is just a pile of garbage (in relation to clone knives).

Furthermore, I just purchased a Launch 5 from Blade HQ. By your interpretation, which on surface seems valid, KAI, Blade HQ and myself have all broken Federal Law. I have to think that maybe this law doesn't mean what you think it means...picture Andre the Giant saying that...

In terms of Ganzo using different materials than they claim, I guess that's still out for judgement. I've handled them and I can confirm that the materials are indeed inferior.

If a clone supporter's argument for the G710 is that it'll let them know what a 950 Rift feels like, they are absolutely wrong. The knives feel oddly very different. More than I would have ever expected.
 
16 pages and not shut down yet for battling over ganzo.....new record maybe:)

isn't the patent up on the axis lock now? now i know ganzo was stealing long before that just curious if it is up already or not? i also know they direct copy benchmades and many others..... and that is shameful as they could be making their own designs. maybe even a traditional chinese folder of some kind.

i do have a couple autos from them that i can't say are direct copies or clones, etc of anything in production i know of though, not that it makes the rest any better........some of their autos are direct clones/copies, pick your favorite term, though...........
 
Hackenslash said:
Furthermore, I just purchased a Launch 5 from Blade HQ. By your interpretation, which on surface seems valid, KAI, Blade HQ and myself have all broken Federal Law. I have to think that maybe this law doesn't mean what you think it means...picture Andre the Giant saying that...
Click to expand...

That was Inigo (Mandy Patinkin) that said that. But you make a point I was about to make. If the civilian market for autos (and balisongs) was illegal, distributors wouldn't sell them, and manufacturers wouldn't make them because the market wouldn't exist to support it, outside perhaps of military contracts. robgmn, do you seriously think that companies like Benchmade and Microtech, and sellers like 1sks and BladeHQ would operate outside the law? That they have not employed lawyers to make sure that they don't? Contact your lawyer. He'll tell you the same thing that every frigging one of these companies already have been told by theirs.

And your weed analogy is still apples and oranges.
 
jbmonkey said:
16 pages and not shut down yet for battling over ganzo.....new record maybe:)
Click to expand...

We actually went 400+ posts on the last Ganzo thread. It was a thousand points of light from a kinder, gentler BF!

Although, we did have to derail the thread with the terrifying notion of cloned Gonzo muppets...
c24266eb739fee9b0e90e27e8cefbca5.jpg



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top