Knives / weapons - My concern as a knifemaker...

[dialex]

My question is - is it reasonable for a maker / company to make and sell knives / edged tools that are primarily designed as weapons / anti-personnel devices, and then expect to NOT attract criticism from the many "folks" out there who inherently dislike this sort of stuff.

An axe can be both a tool and a weapon. So a knife. It's not about the company that makes the knives but rather an education issue of people (commonly described by the term "sheeple"). I find perfectly normal that a person in a military career should have the best equipment. Why should a knife be an exception? Could we talk about "unfair advantage" in this case?

I think a maker / company that makes weapons should be aware of criticism, but more from its unsatisfied customers.

A factory can make tractors and tanks (and many actually do) but I don't hear people whining about this that much. Not to mention a weaponry factory. Take Glock, it's in the business for a couple of years and their products have a specific destination (IMHO). People may like or dislike them, but they get to live with.
Seems to me that when the sheeple knows exactly what a thing is made for, they tend to cool down; "oh, it's an M16 for the military, thank God it's not an AK-47 for drug dealers"

 

[Esav Benyamin]

Some of us just decide to take our kitchen knives with us in a different form.

Ironically, that's just what most of our fighting knives began as. The "bowie" knife that Jim Bowie made famous was probably shaped more like a butcher knife than like the fantasy bowies we see so much of. The most famous combat knives, like the "Ka-Bar" or the Israeli equivalent, were copied from Marbles' hunting knives, complete with the wide fuller.

 

[Gollnick]

Please keep in mind that in the very first response I made in this thread, I stated my clear view that there are legitmate needs and applications for weapons. That means that those products need to be made or manufactured. And the craftsmen and manufacturers that do that certainly should advertise those products to customers who need them.

But, there is a difference between advertising and sensationalizing.

I've seen, for example, Benchmade's Military and Law Enforcement catalog. It advertises but it doesn't go on about stratigically-placed blood groves to direct blood spray. Why? Because that's not the way to market to knowledgable professionals which shows you who is and who is not targeted by ads that do use that sort of come-on. And that's why I say that it's insulting to the knife community to be addressed that way.

And, again, I will also assert that it creates a negative impression for other people who are not knife-savvy but who may, for some reason, look into the knife community. Often those people come with pre-conceived stereotype notions and seeing ads like those in question just reinforce those stereotypes.

 

[Gollnick]

Premise #1 Knives are necessary to society as we know it for preparation of food, preparation of living quarters, preparation of clothing, and so on and so on, in short knives in some form are used in all aspects of our lives.

Many of the tools we use in life a modified knives. I installed a new electrical outlet in my house the other day. I started by drilling into the drywall. A drill bit is a modified knife. Then, I used a keyhole saw to cut out the rectangular opening for the new box. A saw is a modified knife. I pulled the wire through the wall and then cut the wire to length using a wire cutter. But a wire cutter is just a modified knife, actually a pair of modified knives. I used my knife to strip off the outter jacket of the wire. Then, I used wire strippers to strip off the inner insulation to avoid nicking the wire. But wire strippers are just modified knives. I used a screw driver to fasten everything together, but that was the only tool I used that was not a form of a knife. Five of the six tools used are modified knives. And, really, I could have done all of those five operations with just a good knife. It's just more expedient when you use the specially adapted knives.

 

[Keith Montgomery]

The problem is that knives have been demonized by the news media and knife control advocates. These groups have engineered a mass hysteria amongst the percentage of the population that is easily brainwashed. That is why makers and manufacturers can expect to attract criticism for making knives that are designed primarily as weapons/antipersonnel devices. Too many people have given up thinking for themselves and prefer to have others do it for them.

People would rather vilify knives and the people that make them than the people that use them in a criminal manner. It is a very sad state of affairs.

 

[Boink]

As tactical knives have gotten popular, makers jumped on the bandwagon. To me, it turns out that the design, naming and promotion of the tactical knives, searching for a good dollar share of the market, creates some of the perception problems some might see. One of the most over-board is a production maker referred to in an earlier post.

People either need the peace of mind a tactical tool gives, admire the design aesthetics or fabrication aspect, seek association with fabled military or police units or truly need the tool by their job description. For most, it’s some of the above.

 

[Trout Tamer]

fedaykincmndr - you said it very well. Good post.

You touched on another issue in American society, that of killing. I was recently reading a book called "Rogue Warrior" by Richard Marcinko. He started? and led for many years SEAL Team 6, the Navy's counter-terrorist unit. In one section, he talks about America's sterilyzed, emotionally inflamed, unrealistic attitude towards killing. He points out that Israel, as a nation and as a government, has a much more healthy and realistic view on the topic. He gives examples, which I don't currently have time to mention, that iluustrate his point very well. Sometimes in life, killing is necessary. Fortunately, I have never been brought to such a pass, and I hope never to have to. However, there are people, decent, upstanding people, who have killed, out of necessity. This is not a bad thing. Ugly? Yes. Traumatic for the person who had to undertake the action? Odds are, yes. But, necessary. That is a hard fact of life that Americans have been pre-conditioned to not understand or accept.

 

[scdub]

One last thought, I'm getting really tired of these "world peace, free love, tree hugging" hippy activists telling me I can't carry a blade cause it makes them think that I'm a bad guy and want to go on a blood crazed rampage. QUOTE]

You had me until that line. What exactly do these people look like? Can you spot one on a street corner? I guess my problem with this statement is that you are falling into the same trap - stereotyping - as those you are angry with.

I'd like world peace but don't expect it, would have enjoyed more free love growing up than I got, and am very much concerned with the environment (I assume this makes me a "tree hugger"). My hair does actually fall below my collar although I've never protested anything publicly. What does this make me? An individual.

Do I think there should be some limit to the types of weapons available to the general public? Yes. I've got a 2 year old son, and I would feel distinctly uncomfortable if Joe Fellon could walk into Walgreens and buy C4.

Assault rifles? Well - if you have a clean record, wait a bit, and keep them secure, then buy 'em.

Knives as weapons? Hell yes. I think most if not all of the restrictions against owning, carrying and conceiling knives are ridiculous. Why? Because the guy with a knife can't take out a building full of people like the guy with C4 can. I think that it's somewhat disturbing that some of the responses to this thread and elsewhere seem to shy away from the simple fact that LOTS of knives are MADE TO BE WEAPONS. They work extremely well in this regard. I generally carry more than one knife (as do many others) and generally one of them is there SPECIFICALLY for use as a weapon. This doesn't make me a maniac, but it sure does help to make me dangerous. And you know what? I like to be dangerous. I enjoy being able to walk alone at night without fear. Am I fearless? No - I'm realistic, and I know I've got to die sometime - I just don't want to go down with a whimper. Am I dangerous to an innocent person? No - it's highly unlikely that I will hit an innocent bystander with my knife while fending off an attack. Again - I have a really cute 2 year old son. I want to be able to protect him - for real.

Should knife makers advertize their knives as weapons. Well, I guess that depends upon if they make weapons or not. I hope to make knives someday soon, and several of my designs are pure weapons. Sure, they could whittle a toothpick, but that's not the intended purpose. So will I market these weapons to criminals? Of course I will! Criminals read both magazines and bladeforums. While I won't target criminals, and I believe that it's probably true that few violent criminals appreciate fine knives, it's very possible that at some future date a criminal might buy one of my knives and use it to murder someone. Is this my fault? (Last rhetorical question I swear ) NO! Because, as fedaykincmndr points out "If someone wants to harm another human being they will do so, REGARDLESS of their weapon of choice."

Last bit: I know that our rights are precarious. I think the above mentioned blood groovy, quartz imbedded, deanimatrix body choppers add is stupid, demeaning, and bad for knife rights. That being said, if you make weapons - admit it!

SCDUB

 

[JDBLADE]

That's me! And where I come from they are my best knife customers.

 

[BlindedByTheLite]

what i wish everyone would realize, is just how many things can be used as weapons. but it's NEVER taken into context.

this does not go thru a judge's mind anymore than it goes thru a politicians' mind and anymore than it goes thru a criminal's mind.

if two men are having a heated argument, and one snaps and crosses the point where he's actually willing to kill this other man, and there is, oh, say, a pry-bar sitting on the table in front of him, is he going to change his mind about killing the person 'cause it's not a knife? no, he's going to pick up that pry-bar and thwack this other guy in the head with it.

yet, pry-bars are readily available in stores to ppl of all ages. same with baseball bats. metal and wooden bats are readily available to ppl of all ages. you could walk in a store, purchase one, exit the store and immediately wind back and swing @ someone's face and kill them.

but hey, i don't recall ever hearing a discussion on a pry-bar ban or a baseball bat ban. not even in a localized incident. and y'know, i'd go out on a limb to say bats and pry-bars are more dangerous than knives in the hands of a criminal, due to their longer reach, and the force with which each can be swung.

but again, they're still readily available. whether you're 5 years old or 105 years old, you can walk in a store and walk out with a bat or a pry-bar with no question, no suspicion, no guilty-conscience, in under 5 minutes.

but a knife. sheesh. you've got thousands of stipulations floating around you, every second, that you have to follow in order to carry one. it's illegal if the blade is over 3 inches. it's illegal if you carry it under your jacket where noone can see it. it's illegal if it opens in less than 2 seconds. it's illegal if you walk into certain buildings carrying it. and hey, those are just the legality issues. we wont even touch on the LEO-hate of knives or the "sheeple"-hate of knives or the localized hate of knives.

so what i'm trying to get @ with all of this, is if a knife maker, company, or even distributor (in unfortunate cases) markets a blade or blades as weapons, then no, it is NOT reasonable for them to expect noone to give them negative vibes over it.

if someone makes a knife called "the Decapitator", and then some crazy bastard buys it and then goes out and decapitates some ppl with it, well then hey, you're going to get grief over it. and personally, i don't care to agree or disagree with the prosecution. i wouldn't buy, nor would i want to own a knife @ all with some of those violent names. in my opinion, that's just asking for trouble. so in my opinion, for a knife maker or manufacturer, that's not positively, but quite possibly, just making trouble for themselves.

do i feel that's how it should be? no, i don't. but that's the reality of it @ this point, in homosapien sapien history.

i would luv to own a blade like Blinker's "Death Merchant" or Mr. House's "Recluse". but i wouldn't. i don't trust the society i live in to trust me. the first thing my fellow human being/prosecuting lawyer would do is say, "Your Honor, when young Ryan was pulled over and his car was searched, this knife, no this sword was found... and do you know what this sword is called, Your Honor? THE DEATH MERCHANT. Yes, ladies and gentleman, the Death Merchant."

so i'll leave those blades to the brave knife-enthusiasts and the men and women in the armed forces.

so summed up, for the ppl who didn't want to read all that gibberish i just typed up @ 5:30AM, i think knife makers and manufacturers should take certain cautions. like in naming their blades. and what they say in their advertisements. so they should always be prepared for some back-lash, and i assume, the makers here on BF are prepared for such incidents.
but, it is not the seller's responsibility to give the buyer a background check, and give them an interview to find out if their intentions with the blade are pure and true. it's all in the hands of the person with the blade. these knife makers are trying to earn a living, mostly. just like any other person or company who makes something potentially harmful. certain negative events don't dictate their intentions.

and now i have typed entirely too much! sorry, i've got a million different things to say streaming thru my mind right now, that all sorta relate to this subject, but none of which quite stay on the actual subject. errrrrr. :footinmou

 

[george tichbourne]

I think that the only part that bothers me is when some "person" walks by my booth at a show and says out loud "knives are so unfriendly"

The giving of human attributes to inanimate objects really ticks me off. A remark like that is on the par with "my stupid car ran out of gas"...the car may have run out of gas but was IT stupid?

 

[brownshoe]

As a knifemaker, if you create a working tool that gets used as a weapon, that's a shame, but it's not the knifemaker's responsibility for its use as a weapon. As a knifemaker, if you create a slashing devil blade, a true highly optimized killing tool, designed to kill humans, you share in whatever blood it spills. For many knifemaker's that's not a problem. I'd bet that Strider, TOPs, and Coldsteel take great pleasure in knowing that their blades are efficient killing tools. Whether or not to make killing blades is a personal ethical decision that most knifemakers have to face. Most choose not to make human killing tools.

Knifemakers and sellers should beware that civil society takes a dim view of tools designed to kill humans. Too much promotion of those kinds of blades can, will and have led to their restriction.

 

[numberthree]

I find society's distate for weapons hypocritical. Our legislators can send cruise missiles into civilian neighborhoods and sleep at night, but they can't handle someone carrying a pocket knife that 'might hurt someone'. I know I have no illegal intent, which is the real factor of importance when it comes to weapons, so therefore I choose whether or not to respect knife laws. If a law is BS, I think disobeying it is actually one's civic duty, because otherwise, there's no real indication to the lawmakers that people really care how stupid the law is.....The only other alternative is to let them keep restricting knives until we can't be trusted with metal at all....

And the decision to kill is the killer's, not the knifemakers. Even if one were to make a specifically designed human killing blade, he can't be blamed for the actions of someone crazy enough to use it... I think they're trying this form of logic by suing gunmakers for murders. OF COURSE a gun is made to kill people, it's a specialized tool for the purpose, and as much as we like to try and ignore the fact, sometimes people have to kill other people for many different reasons. If not, the police don't need guns either...or the army....

 

[Moondrop]

Okay, on the subject of how anything can be used as a weapon, I heard a report on the evening news today (9-7) about a man who walked into a bank in South Carolina with a pitchfork and robbed it. Then ran out and disappeared into the woods. He didn't use a knife, didn't use a gun, he used a farm/garden tool. Go figure. If I find a link to the ridiculous story, I'll post it.
Ah. Found it.

Pitchfork Bank Robbery

Text of (short) article:

AIKEN, South Carolina (AP) -- A robber who used a rusty pitchfork to stick up a bank got away -- and so far, finding him has been like looking for a needle in a haystack.

The man, wearing sunglasses and a mask, entered Security Federal Bank Tuesday morning and threatened employees with the 4-foot-long pitchfork. The man took an undisclosed amount of money.

The robber dropped the farm tool as he ran from the bank through a wooded area to a golf course behind the bank, police said.

Bloodhounds tracked the robber to a fast food restaurant parking lot, where police say the man got into a white van driven by a woman.

No customers were in the bank during the holdup, and no one was injured.

 

[Gollnick]

I think that the only part that bothers me is when some "person" walks by my booth at a show and says out loud "knives are so unfriendly"

This person is forgetting the knife that enhances a person's life in an operating room. Is that knife "unfriendly?"

What about the knife that slits the buns at a BBQ cookout? It that knife unfriendly?

What about the knife that cuts away the hanging thread on the bride's dress? Is it "unfriendly?"* Or that which celebrates a couple's love at a wedding by cutting the cake? Is it "unfriendly?"

What of the knife that the oboeist uses to trim his reed before a beautiful symphony performance? "Unfriendly?"

The knife a carpenter uses when building a house? "Unfriendly?"

How about the quintessentially evil of knives, the balisong butterfly, that Benchmade 35 that's on my bar that has removed the foil from many a bottle of wine for family and friends? It is "unfriendly?"

Several of my pocket knives have helped open Christmas gifts? Are they "unfriendly?"

And what of the fireman's knife that free's the woman caught in the car accident? It it unfriendly?

No. The vast majority of knives are friendly helpers who help us enjoy life.





* Somewhere, I have a wonderful picture I took of the Best Man's (me) Benchmade AFCK being used for just that purpose. And I don't have a picture, but the Best Man's (me) Leatherman PST fixed the bride's dress at another wedding too.

 

[fedaykincmndr]

Alright, let me defend my statement about the whole "hippy" thing; I have a very, very conservative view on not only our country, but it's laws and citizens. I do not care, personally, for the liberal and "feel good" attitude our country has taken on about weapons, the right to own and bear them, etc. By "feel good" I don't mean a good feeling about weapons, I mean those of whom I am speaking want to feel better and "safer" by banning them or restricting them further. I have served this country and am very proud that I did and hate to see what has become of the orignal idea that this country was founded on and what I swore to defend. Personally, I think George Washington and our Forefathers are turning in their graves at what is being said by some of our officials and the citizen activists that speak out against "the all encompassing evil" of weapons, but for the sake of argument let's not get into politics. It may have been a bit over-zealous of me to say hippie, tree-hugger, etc. Thus I apologize if I may have hurt anyone's feelings with that remark. But, know this; I was speaking to those who have a biased and misled opinion of knives, guns, and weapons. There is no stereotypical "look" to that sort, only the stereotypical idea some have contrary to what our constitution has clearly stated.



NOTE: These are MY opinions and I accept full responsibility for them. If anyone has a problem with them, let me know and I'll be glad to hear what it is that you have to say as long as you can speak, or rather write, in a civilized manner. I apologize ahead of time if I stepped on anyone's toes. I only calls 'em like I sees 'em.

 

[kesparate]

i strongly agree with numberthree it is ones civic duty to NOT obey bad or un-constitutional laws. unfortunatly like every free man in this country i lack the strength of my convictions.


Henry David Thoreau, noted author and social philosopher, was one of those that said it best;
"The government itself, which is only the mode which the people have chosen to execute their will, is equally liable to be abused and perverted before the people can act through it….
For government is an expedient, by which men would fain succeed in letting one another alone; and, as has been said, when it is most expedient, the governed are most let alone by it…..
Let every man make known what kind of government would command his respect, and that will be one step toward obtaining it…….
Can there not be a government in which the majorities do not virtually decide right and wrong, but conscience?--in which majorities decide only those questions to which the rule of expediency is applicable? Must the citizen ever for a moment, or in the least degree, resign his conscience to the legislator?........
It is not desirable to cultivate a respect for the law, so much as for the right....
The only obligation which I have a right to assume is to do at any time what I think right……
I think that we should be men first, and subjects afterward…….."

any one who has ever obeyed a law they felt was wrong or unjust has fallen down in their duty to the American Ideal. i don't think there is a man or women alive who can legitimatly claim that they have not done this, unless they are violently ignorant. we all look at our lives and decide for ourselves how much we will give, how much we will Sacrifice to persue our rights, and our consciences; then we do the best we can

as to the advertising issue Thoreau had some views on the relationship between the gov. and commerce as well...


"Trade and commerce, if they were not made of india-rubber, would never manage to bounce over obstacles which legislators are continually putting in their way; and if one were to judge these men wholly by the effects of their actions and not partly by their intentions, they would deserve to be classed and punished with those mischievious persons who put obstructions on the railroads………."


excerpts taken form "civil disobediance" by Henry David Thoreau
http://www.cs.indiana.edu/statecraft/civ.dis.html