law that negates in anyway outlawing of a balisong

[taspankya]

Notice: THIS THREAD WAS BRANCHED OUT FROM ITS ORIGNAL PLACEMENT BY THE MODERATOR. SO DONT FLAME ME.

Does anyone have any input related to their state laws that are vague when it comes to possession/carry of a balisong?

For the state of CT:
Law that negates in anyway outlawing of a balisong (by putting it in a dangerous weapons category) as long as it meets the above link's criteria of having a cutting edge of less than 4" .

law on knives: http://www.ct.gov/bfpe/cwp/view.asp?a=1251&q=254204#53-206d
penal code: http://www.cga.ct.gov/2008/sup/chap950.htm#Sec53a-3.htm

i am pretty confident in that interpretation/loophole in the law which allows for my balisong < 4".

 

[just10minreader]

Please clarify, where in that link is mention of length?
I searched for knife, blade, length, inch and I can't find it.


The title of your post should probably included "Connecticut" and "balisong"
Also, I'd steer clear of terms like "loophole", it has a negative connotation

 

[mp510]

i have no info on open vs concealed carry.

As I told you in the other thread, there is no differentiation between open and concealed carry. The element of the crime in 53-206 and 29-38 is posession, not concealment.

 

[taspankya]

relax fellas, i didnt start the thread, the moderator branched it out on his own. look at who edited that first post.

but shootist16 is right, it is a good thread on its own. state laws on balisongs are very unclear. and the websites that state that they have an answer, are often wrong and/or outdated.

this thread could help clearing things up. as the conversation between mp510 did in the thread this was pulled from.

here is the other link that states length for the state of CT: http://www.cga.ct.gov/2005/pub/Chap943.htm#Sec53-206.htm

 

[shootist16]

Sorry for the confusion guys, It just seemed like it had merit on its own and not lost in another thread.

 

[glistam]

Could someone recap what this is about? I still don't understand.

 

[taspankya]

Could someone recap what this is about? I still don't understand.

ok i am editing the first post to what the original was. its not that hard.. we are just talking about state laws and balisongs. they arent usually specified in the law, so its hard to classify them.
i will pull some posts from the original forum. to put things into context, so there will be some double posting by me. if people have an issue with that they can get over that too. too much negativity. :grumpy:

 

[taspankya]

I'm a Connecticut resident. Our laws here in Connecticut make no differentiation between open carry and concealed carry- regardless of the implement in question. However, if you open carry a pistol in most towns, the likliehood is that you will be arrested for breach of peace or disorderly conduct, your permit will be revoked and your gun will be siezed. I have never had anybody question a folder clipped to my front pocket, or even a small fixed blade on my belt, the couple times that I have had one there around town. You'll notice that caselaw included with the statute on the CGA site states that indicates that a knife not specifically defined as a dangerous weapon is not one for the purposes of the statute. Thus, sub-4" butterfly knives should be legal; to carry. However, there are still arrests made for 53-206 and 29-38 on people carrying butterfly knives- even if they are dismissed later. We do have an undefined "gravity knife" term in the statute, however I have always considered it to be in line with the traditional/ technical meaning since it hasn't been defined in statute or by case law.

please take notice of my second link which is penal code that defines a dangerous weapon (the only citing of anything that could be related to a a balisong - "the gravity knife" reference) is negating the actual 53-206 definition of a dangerous weapon. thus your cant even apply that penal code definition to the carrying of dangerous weapons because it specifically says that it doesnt apply to 53-206 at the end.. just curious if you noticed that, i didnt for a while... then when i revisited the law specifically for balisongs and caught it.

do you by chance have remember the case that you are referring to? i would like read it. thanks for your feedback. ct weapons laws are hard to understand alone. lol

The penal code definition [53a-3(6)] is for a 'deadly weapon'. That definition is supposed to be for chargeing situations where a weapon was used in a violent crime or the like. In that definition, you'll notice that the last line says that dfinition of a 'deadly weapon' in inapplicable to 53-206 and 29-38. The reason for that is, because beyond the enumerated list list of dangerous weapons, there is a catch-all clause at the end of 53-206 that covers any other dangerous or deadly weapon. That penal code dfinition of deadly weapon encompasses (in addition to other items that are duly enumerated as dangerus weapons) EVERY firearm. If you think that you can get away with carrying a switchblade becaue of the penal code definition of a deadly weapon, your horribly mistaken- There is quite a few folks who are busted each year on that.

Here is the cite that I was refferring to:
Quote:
Cited. 5 Conn. Cir. Ct. 313. Knife not coming within description of statute cannot be included as "any other dangerous or deadly weapon" and is not with prohibition of this section. Id., 551.

I don't carry a switchblade ("any knife having an automatic spring release device by which a blade is released from the handle"). I am carrying a balisong, concealed, that has a cutting edge of less than 4".

Based on 53-206 I should be good with that carry. The only way they could argue that the balisong is illegal is by calling it a gravity knife and referring to the penal code def. of a deadly weapon (which as you stated as well as I did) does not even apply to 53-206.

If i am understanding what you cited, it is only helping my case that I can carry a balisong. Correct?

Also, keeping with the topic, would you consider open carry (of a legally described knife by 52-206) in the state of CT to be a "no-no"? Do you think a LEO would rather not see it at all or come across it concealed? .. slippery slope lol

You are taking 53a-3(6) out of context. The line your referring to reads:
Quote:
The definition of "deadly weapon" in this subdivision shall be deemed not to apply to section 29-38 or 53-206.
. The only place in 53-206 where the term deadly weapon can be found is in the catch-all clause. This serves to limit application of that (a little bit, potentially). How much is a question up for some debate (maybe). However, it most CERTAINLY does not encumber enforcement against persons carrying enumerated dangerous weapons.

The legislative history and that case support balisong carry. However, there is other cases that could have a negative effect. I need to get those later.

I have never been admonished by an LEO (or anybody else) for carrying a folder clipped to my pocket or any other knife. We have no laws mandating concealment. Of course, if your being immature or making a spectacle of yourself, it's not only in your best interest that the knife isn't visible- it's in your best interest not to carry the knife at all.

There was a case last spring in which an individual was arrested for carrying a butterfly knife and was charged with 29-38. I don't know whether the officer arrested him because he thought it was a gravity knife or because he thought butterfly knives were specifically prohibited. That case was eventually dismissed (within a few months).

53-206 only prohibits carrying switchblades with 1.5"+ blades. I have one in my collection that has a carry legal blade. However, I choose NOT to carry it. Aside from showing it off, there is no purpose in my doing so. Carrying that particular knife could, even though it is legal, only cause problems- because in all likliehood, most folks (LEOs included) don't know that it is not illegal to carry a sub-1.5" switchblade.

that should get people up to speed... if you are confused, dont respond.

if you have some valid input on your state or more on CT. my self and im sure others would love to read it.

 

[glistam]

Thanks, makes sense now.

In Maryland, we also do not distinguish between open and concealed carry, and we have no gravity knife ban, just a switchblade ban that cannot be applied to balisongs because it specifies a spring action w/button on the handle etc.

In addition we have a special exception to weapon carry laws for non-switchblade "penknives." What's a penknife? Doesn't say in law, nor does it specify length. However, the supreme court has ruled that it is any knife that folds into the handle, no matter how large (Mackall), and the state carries to burden to prove any knife is NOT a penknife, rather than placing the burden on the defendant (Anderson). Because balisongs are technically folders, they are considered penknives. I have yet to find an "carrying dangerous weapon" case for a balisong.

Now, that being said, MD LEOs have been known to screw the pooch on occasion by making arrests for even regular folders. Of course, the charge gets thrown out immediately after arrest. After a series of successful federal lawsuits arising from such actions (McGuigan) this has really started to wane in recent years.