Knife Maker gives customer list to police.

I have to agree with brad1407. I have done hundreds of consent searches. There is nothing illegal about them. I have also taken tape, recipts, ect... for evidence without a warrant. And again, there is nothing illegal about it. It comes down to "consent". The police in this case asked for the records and they were given. I have no problem with the maker's actions. I would do the exact same thing, IN THIS SITUATION. I would not agree if the police were just tring to get a list of the knife owners just to have it. BUT THAT IS NOT WHAT HAPPENED! They were following a lead in a MURDER case. So I am fine with their actions.

just to make it absolutely clear: THE POLICE DID NOT VIOLATE ANY LAWS!!!

If you can find a law that says the police can not ask a knife maker for names, you are a better researcher than I am, and my hat is off to you.

Don't try to say it is a 4th ammendment case, because it is not. The maker gave CONSENT. The police did not break down the door and take the records, they simply asked for them. And the maker CONSENTED to give them.

Rich
 
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by RJ:
just to make it absolutely clear: THE POLICE DID NOT VIOLATE ANY LAWS!!!
</font>
Click to expand...

We are all in agreement on that point. No laws were violated.
But the Manufacturer who gave up his customer list without first demanding a court order violated his customers privacy rights.
 
What you said is very true AR15fan the dealer did in some peoples eyes violate a trust between himself and the people who bought knives from him. So what it really comes down to is who you want to do business with. I would rather deal with people who would be up front and honest with the police. I don't think forcing the police to get a warrant when you don't have to is being cooperative. I think the police would have had no problem getting a court order to get the list so why should it matter if the maker delayed the inevitable.
 
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by AR15fan:
But the Manufacturer who gave up his customer list without first demanding a court order violated his customers privacy rights.</font>
Click to expand...

Privacy in internet (or any) purchasing is far from guaranteed, let alone being a constitutionally protected "right".

Do you know for fact that this particular manufacturer even had an internet privacy policy? Many sites will sell information just from the people who browse their sites, gathereed involuntarily through cookies and such, without them even needing to purchase anything, or register at the site. You may not like it, but that doesn't make it unconstitutional.
 
It also may be good to look at this through the eyes of the sheeple. If the maker would have refused to give up the list then you read a headline like. KNIFE MAKER WITHHOLDS EVIDENCE FROM POLICE AND DELAYS KILLERS CAPTURE. I think that would get more people interested in putting more regulations on the knife industry than the makers cooperation.
 
It is not so simple as just obtaining consent. I work at a hospital and I have access to the info of hundreds of people. If a LEO ask for info and I consent I am still violating the right's of patients. I'm not saying the police did violate the law, but I am saying that things are not so simple.
 
attorney/client
doctor/psychiatrist/patient or Dr/Psych employee - records and patient
priest/confessee
A priviledge of privacy in law exists for these relationships. Not a merchant/consumer one though.
J
 
allenC- It is a little different with a hospital. The knife maker has has the right to give the information away. They are his/her records. A hospital has to deal with the doctor/patience issues. As stated before the law does not view the merchant/consumer the same way.

Rich
 
The ABC show "Primetime" just reported that the knives were SOGs.

If anyone wants to call for a boycott of SOG now, I'd hope that they at least wait for all of the facts to come in. Police are releasing hardly any info about this case and we've already seen a lot of bad reporting.

SOG has a forum here and you could post a question about the situation there, although they may not respond for understandable legal reasons.

------------------
Cerulean

"My good reason to carry a knife is that God gave me rather weak teeth and rudimentary claws in an evolutionary trade-off." - J.K.M.


[This message has been edited by cerulean (edited 02-22-2001).]
 
SOG sells direct? That I did not know!

Wait a second. I just checked their site and they don't sell direct. Hmmmm. But they did have a nifty little section entitled "SOG in the Press".
rolleyes.gif




[This message has been edited by alexoleary@prodigy.net (edited 02-23-2001).]
 
ABC just released the complete transcript of the "Primetime" show here.

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">JOHN MILLER (VO) Officials had released very little information about the brutal stabbings. One of the things investigators did not reveal was an important piece of evidence. Sources say an empty knife sheath was found at the murder scene. The sheath was made for a commando knife sold under the name SOG. New Hampshire investigators asked the company for sales and shipping records. Sources say investigators began checking records of sales closest to the scene of the murder and worked their way out. Sources tell PrimeTime soon they came across a money order for $200 from a boy named Jimmy Parker in Chelsea, Vermont. He paid for two knives, which were shipped to his home about 40 miles from the murder scene. They learned he was 16 years old and inseparable from his best friend, Robert Tulloch.
(OC) After questioning both boys, investigators asked them if they would, along with their parents, come voluntarily here to the office of the Orange County Sheriff. They asked the boys if they would both submit a full set of fingerprints, fingerprints that investigators wanted to compare to latent prints found at the scene of the double murder. Within hours, they had a match.</font>
Click to expand...

Some more info... An article in the Boston Globe today just says:

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">According to the source, investigators have found evidence suggesting the teenagers were involved in the crime. That includes a footprint inside the Zantop home that they believe matches a boot worn by Tulloch, and what they believe is a partial fingerprint of Parker's on one of two knife sheaths found at the crime scene, the source said.

The investigators began focusing on the pair after they traced a knife to an Internet purchase made from a company called Fox Firearms, the source said.</font>
Click to expand...



------------------
Cerulean

"My good reason to carry a knife is that God gave me rather weak teeth and rudimentary claws in an evolutionary trade-off." - J.K.M.
 
Cerulean, nice research. Many questions answered!

I decided to check into this Fox Firearms. I was kind of curious about the place. Here's what I found.

The physical location of the store is in Grants Pass OREGON!!! The only way I found their website on altavista was to go to http://outdoor-resources.com/Hunting/hunting-weapons.html

On that page, I found the link for Fox Firearms. Fox Firearms Inc. - "We are an online firearms retailer."

It doesn't take but a minute to discover why the two boys probably chose this vendor to purchase their knives. According to many reports, they had recently developed an interest in rock climbing. Thus, the very nature of the links page suggests they probably stumbled onto the Fox link. What gets me is that this dealer supposedly sold two knives THROUGH THE MAIL (though it was advertised over the internet) to someone clear across the country with a money order as payment. Very bad judgement.

Just in case you are wondering, their site is down.

However, let's take a minute to re-cap here. THIS WAS NOT AN INTERNET KNIFE PURCHASE. It was a mail order purchase facilitated by advertisements made on an internet site. Had this been an internet purchase, the two youths would have been roadblocked because they would have needed a credit card or some other means of electronic payment which only 18+ year olds are supposed to legally have. So, it appears our wonderful news reporting agencies have done it again! They are trying to blame this incident on Internet knife sales. Heck, I would love to know how many internet knife sites the two kids actually visited in vain when trying to acquire the knives. I wouldn't be surprised if a search of their internet activity shows visits to many well known knife sites whom they couldn't buy from because of a lack of means to prove age. Thus, they resorted to the secrecy of "you can't see me...I can't see you" mail order.

It is obvious that these kids were very determined to get their knives. They found a way to circumvent the age requirements by ordering it through the mail and having it shipped clear across the country!

As much as I hate to admit it, it appears that the mail order knife company might not have had the best policies. However, this certainly goes to show that there are many positive aspects about the internet sales of knives.

A few of these positive aspects are that it is highly traceable and that it requires a credit card to purchase something. Sure kids can steal a credit card from their parents and order the stuff. However, kids can also get a fake ID and go to a Wal-Mart to buy knives. Your parents probably wouldn't know about the fake ID, but they are damn sure going to know about the charges showing up on their bill.



------------------
Stay back! or I'll...OUCH...cut myself.
 
It seems that SOG turned over the information after they received a court order to do so. To have done anything else would have been against the law. Even if they had done so voluntarily I do not think there would have been anything wrong with that.

Keith.
 
Yeah, I think that SOG's press release pretty much puts an end to any controversy. There doesn't seem to be any way you can critisize SOG's actions in this situation. In fact, the company should be commended for their efforts in catching these guys.


------------------
Cerulean

"My good reason to carry a knife is that God gave me rather weak teeth and rudimentary claws in an evolutionary trade-off." - J.K.M.
 
Nice topic, very informative and edifying.

Numerous times in my life I was asked by law enforcement organs to give evidence or to explain what I do now about that or another matter. Please don't get me wrong, I'm not particularly foolish or violent or untrustworthy fellow and I have never being examined as suspect, always as witness. Maybe bad luck caused more than overage frequency of this occurrence in my case or maybe my main occupation - I don't know. Naturally each this occurrence is some kind of my privacy violating - I must interrupt my work or rest, visit the law enforcement office or receive LEO in my home, answer his or her questions, sign a protocol, take a responsibility for all I'm telling etc., etc.

But it was never being a question for me on what side I am - on law enforcement organ's side or on crime's side! If I know something what can help to capture crime - my desire and my citizen's duty is to help LEO's. If I do know nothing what can help - this is LEO's problem, not mine. My duty is to give them info they want me to give and their worry is can it be useful for them or not. No court decision is required in this case, for me at least.

Of course each of us can start to pet with his or her or another person's privacy and ask for court decision to say LEO's did he or she see the murder on not. But I strongly recommend such person to pray other persons to do not share the same approach if they will need someone's help.
We are living in community, don't forget it!
 
After lurking through this mess I think I'll chime in...

AR15fan: If you are an LEO then you know all about consent. Do you think that the FBI and the NH agencies are going to screw up such an important case by violating someone's, ANYONE's, rights? No, niether do I. You and I have probably asked thousands of general informational questions to parties who may know something about a crime. Do we violate their right? NO! Since we now know what happened with SOG it becomes a moot point, but if you had a link between a murder suspect and the place where he/she may have bought the tool aren't you going to check up on it? If not, then change professions! If the maker/seller starts screaming about thier rights being violated, then you get a search warrant, which you'll probably need to get in the first place to get it stand up in court. No, I think the outrage here is misplaced. We should think about the victims, because they don't have anyone to speak for them now. We should also do everything legally within our power to investigate, find, charge, prosecute, and out away the perpetrators of this crime. We don't do this by trampling the Constitution or the BG's go free!

I am not a bleeding heart liberal. I am just as concerned about the erosion of the people's rights as any of us here, but we need to be as smart, even smarter, than those who would seek to take our rights away. For a company to cooperate with an active murder investigation is logical. For a company to sign away parts of our 2nd Amemdment rights to save itself from further litigation is improper. I do not, nor will not, support companies that do these things, but will not participate in punishing a company for good citizenship.

Thank you and good night.
 
Charlie Fox, you bring up some good points. I think for the most part we just had some "stuff" stirrers here. It's funny how quiet they are now that it comes out they were ranting and raving about something they only knew 1/2 the story of. Even without the court orders, the only ones whose rights were violated, were the butchered victims.
 
Wasn't trying to stir stuff myself (IF I was being referred to). Just wasn't in agreement and tried to politely express my side. Glad who, what, where have been clarified.
And still believe the manufacturer did right. With or without a piece of paper. As Sergiusz Mitin said, let's be clear which side we're on.
John
 
I glad of the outcome and I'm glad of the debate. Such conversations are healthy for America. However, I am surprised at how many here don't see the need for warrants and court orders. The police usually act lawfully but we must always keep a wary eye for those who don't. Obtaining information through legal channels is very important to keep our freedoms. America has become quite the "snitch culture", where anonymous tips can bring the police or social services to your home, where children are encouraged to tell teachers if their parents have guns or "drugs", where a bruise on a child can lead to child-abuse charges, where video cameras watch us in public and private establishments. I am a supporter of the law enforcement community but I believe that government and law-enforcement are really too deep in our private lives. Does this make us safer? Yes. But a bird in a cage is also safe, just not free. Show me a nation with no crime and I'll show you a nation with no freedoms.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top