Linton Killing Claw?????

Ok, I'm not a lawyer. Just a poor insurance guy. So this is just my opinion. But I think that the discussion regarding "motive" is the key to my comment on the name being a big fat legal liability (now please, don't be calling Linton big and fat now! :D )

When you are being considered for either (a) justified self defense or (b) premeditated murder, intent is everything. Were you given no choice but to defend youself with lethal force, or else lose your life yourself? Did you have a chance to disengage but failed to do so? and most importantly: did you have a previously held plan or intention to assault or kill another person?

Let's say you have a Wegner Pro Hunter. It happened to be in your pocket. Its a great all around knife. You never planned to use it like it was never meant to be used: for self defense. Luckily, you happened to have it that day.

Let's say you have a Linton "Killing Claw." Its a claw. That kills. You had it in your pocket. You thereore intended to kill someone before the dead guy ever pulled a knife on you. You had premeditated the act of killing prior to any incident.

That's it: you're hung.

(please, no comments about Linton being well hung! :D :D )
 
Maybe they should then change the name to the "Wounding Hook". How about the "Scratching Fingernail"? Any other PC suggestions? ;)
 
i its a clear case of self defense and ya are justified i would think most district attys (in tx anyway) would either not charge you or no bill you, if its premeditated/etc thats something entirely diff anyway. i stand by my statement that it has no bearing on the case if you are justified, in tx anyway. post a link to a trial in texas(or anywhere) that hinged on what the weapon was named...........i think thats just a story massad ayoob cooked up to sell magazines,
 
hey j.davey check out the busse karambit over on their forum. it isn't skeletonized but i think you will like it ;) i don't know how to link but it is under 1whosnorts ditch the striders
 
i its a clear case of self defense and ya are justified i would think most district attys (in tx anyway) would either not charge you or no bill you,
Click to expand...

Now it's a question of convincing the DA, then. They are also people and they can be swayed by such things as the name of the knife used. They also pick and choose their cases based on what they think they can win. If you give them such a golden nugget as a knife named, "Killing Claw," they might just decide to try this one.
 
SIFU1A said:
i its a clear case of self defense and ya are justified i would think most district attys (in tx anyway) would either not charge you or no bill you, if its premeditated/etc thats something entirely diff anyway. i stand by my statement that it has no bearing on the case if you are justified, in tx anyway. post a link to a trial in texas(or anywhere) that hinged on what the weapon was named...........i think thats just a story massad ayoob cooked up to sell magazines,
Click to expand...

Concur. I have never seen a case cite in which the name of a weapon played any measurable influence on the outcome. There may very well be one or two, but no one every provides a cite or any valid research to support this thesis..........
 
ya' know, there are several knives on the market with names that could be trouble. The Resistor, The Skirmish, The Final Judgement, Battle Rat, Mean Street, etc. These are just some off the top of my head; I'm sure there are many others. Granted, they are not as extreme as Killing Claw, but they all imply use as weapons.
 
There certainly are other such knives and I would have the same response to them: I would not recommend that you carry one. There are plenty of good knives on the market that lack that extra baggage. Consider, for example, the knives supposidly offered by Dark Ops Knives. Can you imagine the field day that a prosecutor could have reading their ads describing blood groves specially designed to control blood splatter, how their knives are strong enough to pentrate body armour, all about "covert deanimation missions," etc. to a jury. When a company markets their knives that way, there's just no way for a civilian to justify carrying them. You can't even justify it as a weapon for self-defense much less as any sort of work-a-day tool.

The Resistor, The Skirmish, The Final Judgement, Battle Rat, Mean Street... yes, these are suggestive and provocative. But "Killing claw?" That leaves absolutely no room for interpretation.

Several years ago, Benchmade officially changed the name of one of its knives to avoid just such problems. The AFCK went from being the Advanced Folding Combat Knife to officially being the Advanced Folding Camping Knife.
 
I do remember the AFCK name change quite well. That was utterly silly to me. They certainly could have come up with something better than calling it a camping knife.
 
Gollnick said:
There certainly are other such knives and I would have the same response to them: I would not recommend that you carry one. There are plenty of good knives on the market that lack that extra baggage. Consider, for example, the knives supposidly offered by Dark Ops Knives. Can you imagine the field day that a prosecutor could have reading their ads describing blood groves specially designed to control blood splatter, how their knives are strong enough to pentrate body armour, all about "covert deanimation missions," etc. to a jury. When a company markets their knives that way, there's just no way for a civilian to justify carrying them. You can't even justify it as a weapon for self-defense much less as any sort of work-a-day tool.

The Resistor, The Skirmish, The Final Judgement, Battle Rat, Mean Street... yes, these are suggestive and provocative. But "Killing claw?" That leaves absolutely no room for interpretation.

Several years ago, Benchmade officially changed the name of one of its knives to avoid just such problems. The AFCK went from being the Advanced Folding Combat Knife to officially being the Advanced Folding Camping Knife.
Click to expand...


I figure it its good enough to scare Benchmade its good enough to scare me.

I actually worried about that before I got my Skirmish, but I just like the knife so much....

I'll prep my attorney with such phrases as:

"He could have carried a Linton Killing Claw, but chose not to..."

or "He could have carried a DarkOps Deanimator, but loves puppies too much for that..."

or "he didn't want a battle. Just a little skirmish would have been ok. And look at the rainbow dots on the handle! And a butterfly! Its a Butterfly Rainbow Knife! Let's talk about our feelings..."
 
again i say either ya are justified or not, if ya are all will probably be ok, if not the name of the thing is gonna be the least of your problems lol. its been my experience most DA's (and LEO's)are happy to see the 'good' guy win one, just be sure YOU are the good guy, if you are,& witnesses collaborate the incident, and you are in the right, no big deal, if not though look out.

sure its better to have a knife/gun w/a PC name, but i would never not buy something i wanted because of the name, nor if my life was in danger would i not use said weapon because of the name.

also would like to see the link to a trail which hinged on the name of the weapon being non PC.

again , imho more ayoob BS.
 
J.Davey said:
If another company made a nice, slim, one piece kerambit, I'd buy it. Unfortunately, I have yet to see one. I stated right off the bat that I know Linton is a knock-off company, and I don't like to endorse that in any way, but if a company puts out a design I like made of good material, I'm gonna' buy it.
Click to expand...
Do either of these look good to you for $65 or $70? -- http://www.kriscutlery.com/other/index.html
 
And look at the rainbow dots on the handle! And a butterfly! Its a Butterfly Rainbow Knife!
Click to expand...


You're right. Benchmade is a good choice. The butterfly logo doesn't imply anything military or violent; contrast it with Microtech's claw logo for example. And the name Benchmade implies quality and craftsmanship but has no violent or military connotations to it; contrast it with MercWorks or Dark Ops for example. And Benchmade has, for the most part, avoided going to overboard on model names.
 
As an attorney and erstwhile prosecutor, I must agree with DRider and Gollnick to the extent that the name of the knife, while it is of limited importance in whether you are charged or not, can be of significant importance to a jury in a trial if you are charged.

First off, if you defend yourself with kerambit rather than a "utility" knife you can bet your claim of self-defense will be subjected to very high scrutiny. You are carrying a knife that is designed specifically to gut people like fish, and unless you open heavy boxes for a living it will be near-impossible to explain as a utility device that you "happened" to have on your person. What this knife says, to law-enforcement and to a jury, goes directly to your state of mind:
(1) you carry a knife
(2) it's not a utility knife
(3) it's designed for killing
(4) you were prepared for, in fact anticipating, killing someone with it
(5) you in fact killed or maimed someone with it

Therefore, when weighing your claim of self-defense, there will be a significant question as to whether you are in fact "a social deviant who is itching to use this sick weapon on someone and did so at the first excuse he got." Since self-defense is a question of reasonableness, you have already engaged in acts which make you appear somewhat unreasonable, and so your judgment will be called into question. So, unless there are witnesses who make it very clear that you were acting in the most pure and justifiable self-defense, you can expect to be hearing the cop explaining to the jury as Gollnick portrayed that you were packing a "killing claw," and leave the rest up to them.

It might be possible to object to the admission of the name in that it is more prejudicial than probative, however (1) that relies on the judge being inclined to grant the objection, which you can't rely on if he thinks you are a psycho, and (2) the evidence would be entirely admissable if there was a reasonable basis to believe that you knew of the name before you purchased the knife, with an inference that the name appealed to you, thus reflecting on your state of mind.

That's the way it is. you can argue about how it SHOULD be, I'm just saying from my experience that the design and name would be significant factors in how events played out.
 
fishface5 said:
As an attorney and erstwhile prosecutor...
Click to expand...
I feel terrible for Fishface 5! Now that he's said he's an attorney and sometime prosecutor, his private email inbox is probably jammed with messages from forum members trying to get free legal advice on their EDC... :(
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top