Proof Videos and The Law

[The Whip]

Spartan00 raised the issue of testing/advertising having an adverse effect on brand perception in the eyes of the law.

The fact that cold steel also does all these tests on ballistic human skulls etc. So if I want to carry a cold steel and they publish these knives or these tests stabbing through humans what are the police likely to say if they've seen the video and I have say a CS xl folder on me ? Their marketing could be used against me the user as bad intentions for carrying that knife .

I understand your point, but I'm not sure this is a viable argument against buying Cold Steel. Cold Steel's demonstrations of a knife's capabilities on a human analog, while graphic and sobering, are not unique and certainly didn't originate with Cold Steel. Blade testing for combat effectiveness has been conducted for millennia on every medium imaginable, from dead and living animals to dead and living people. That TV show "Deadliest Warrior" was the first place I remember seeing a knife (a Cold Steel knife, appropriately enough) being used on a ballistic dummy. Cold Steel added the tests to the Proof videos after that kind of graphic display became commonplace (they even address the point in the recent Proof introductions). If I recall correctly, the first modern video demonstration of a knife's effectiveness on a piece of meat was performed in Marc MacYoung's "Surviving a Street Knife Attack."

Plenty of companies and makers advertise their knives as combat knives. I doubt that the brand name on the knife is going to mean anything to a police officer. If it's at the point where he's examining your knife, he's not going to arrest you if you're carrying a Cold Steel or an Emerson and let you go if you're carrying a Spyderco or a Kershaw--that just isn't going to happen. If it's a case of a Spyderco Ladybug versus a Cold Steel XL Espada, that's a completely different issue.

In court...well, one never knows what might happen when lawyers get involved! Might a prosecutor use a scene from a Proof video against you? I guess anything is possible. But I recently read a thread in which a lawyer chimed in to say that he'd never witnessed a single instance in which the knife's name had even been mentioned in court, and he'd tried many cases involving knives used in crimes.

If you're more comfortable carrying something other than a Cold Steel on the streets, that's fine. But I think it's unfair to say that the Proof videos are swaying John Law's perception of knives.

These are the types of videos that influence how police feel about knives. Think this officer cares what kind of knife that is?

-Steve

 

[Spartan00]

I said they could be used against you . The people I know who aren't knife people per say know cold steel because of the videos .

At my job non knife people will talk about the knife that went through the car hood, or the knife the seal cut up the ballistic dummy with .

It's not a deal breaker for me I'm just saying people I know associate cold steel with those videos . Now In the videos they are showing the effectiveness of their products on ballistic torsos .

I was just pointing out in my situation non knife people know cold steel from the videos .

Why else would cold steel use human torsos in ballistic gel if they aren't marketing their knives for use as weapons on people?

To my knowledge other companies don't video this and put that out there . Anybody with a tad of common sense can see a knife can be used as a weapon.

 

[Spartan00]

The post you quoted of mine was not really the point of the rest of the post you quoted that from. My issue is not really that aspect of the marketing , it's the fact an aus8 knife was marketed as the be all end all of folding knives.I like cold steel I'm not one of these people that think they produce cheap junk I've used their knives and still own a few . I just think the way they market their knives is a little silly .

 

[dano]

Legally, those videos would not be admissible in a court of law.

 

[sharp_edge]

OP you typed a lot but your argument is weak. Those videos do make a differnce and certainly will have an influwnce on people (judges and juries included) perception on knives. Personally I think most CS marketing vids are stupid.

 

[UCPOPO]

I've spent a lot of time in a lot of court rooms and don't see those videos ever finding their way into a courtroom unless some idiot says they learned from the Cold Steel videos.

 

[jlauffer]

If there were a case high-profile enough, I would be willing to bet they would look for things like the Proof videos and Deadliest Warrior knife segments to try to sway people...similar to the whole heavy metal music and/or violent video games made them do it BS.

 

[DShiflet]

If there were a case high-profile enough, I would be willing to bet they would look for things like the Proof videos and Deadliest Warrior knife segments to try to sway people...similar to the whole heavy metal music and/or violent video games made them do it BS.

Even then, the videos would not be admitted in most cases. Most of those cases where someone was trying to blame heavy metal and violent video games? They weren't blasting metal in the courtroom, or firing up the Playstation 2 for some GTA. There was the case where subliminal messages in metal songs were responsible, so they played the ONE segment of the song that supposedly contained the hidden messages to back up their case, but in that situation there was a specific accusation, against specific songs, and so they were allowed to present those specific songs as evidence.