Teen Girl Opens Knife Store?!?!?!!

[chandlerm]

Hmm that's interesting. Thanks for the info.

 

[Tsujigiri]

Would you mind explaining further please?

The law doesn't specify that you can't possess switchblades. Cops don't seem to know this, however, and will try to confiscate them anyway. And there would be some difficulties for you as a dealer, so you might want to look into that.

On a side note, some of the knives you have look good. But you might want to go a little less mall ninja and a little more user. The earlier suggestion about stocking ESEE knives was a good idea. ESEE requires some time as a heads up from dealers before they can get their orders. As a result of that, a lot of dealers haven't ordered enough, and now that there's been a run on ESEE's, barely anyone has them in stock. If you pay more attention to that kind of thing, it could give you an advantage as a dealer. Emerson also seems to have supply problems.

 

[Tsujigiri]

I'm not a CA attorney so I'm not up to date on the current statutes or case law regarding so-called switchblades, which apparently the CA legislature decided that basically all knives are switchblades. It also doesn't appear to mention some sort of retail sales exception.

I think you mean New York? They're the ones with the nutcase DA who thinks that any one handed opening knife is a switchblade. CA laws are ridiculous in some ways, but reasonable in others. For an example, the Kershaw assisted opener design is mentioned specifically as not a switchblade.

 

[Artfully Martial]

The law doesn't specify that you can't possess switchblades. Cops don't seem to know this, however, and will try to confiscate them anyway. And there would be some difficulties for you as a dealer, so you might want to look into that.

Tsujigiri is technically correct--the statute appears to allow you to own a switchblade but not carry it.

It's a pretty sloppily written statute, as it seems to imply you can own a switchblade in your own home, but even there you're not allowed to carry it:

"Every person who possesses in the passenger's or driver's
area of any motor vehicle in any public place or place open to the
public, carries upon his or her person..."

So according to the statute, the possession of the switchblade in a "motor vehicle" (does that include boats? Maybe motor vehicle is defined elsewhere) in a public place (I guess they're giving you a niche to carry your knife in your car in your driveway. Very thoughtful) is illegal. But then it goes on to say, after the public place clause, "carries upon his or her person." What does that mean? Carry it in the public? Why not put that line BEFORE the public place clause?

But the real concern here is the latter half of the statute:

"every person who sells,
offers for sale, exposes for sale, loans, transfers, or gives to any
other person a switchblade knife having a blade two or more inches in
length is guilty of a misdemeanor..."

There MAY be a corporate exception in there depending on how CA law defines personhood--when they say person, do they mean a literal, breathing individual, or do they mean a LEGAL person, like a corporation (as in federal law).

 

[neuron]

I think you mean New York? They're the ones with the nutcase DA who thinks that any one handed opening knife is a switchblade. CA laws are ridiculous in some ways, but reasonable in others. For an example, the Kershaw assisted opener design is mentioned specifically as not a switchblade.

+1 on this -- AM, sounds like you were thinking of NY. CA's knife laws are actually pretty well-written when it comes to defining what constitutes an automatic/gravity knife and what doesn't.

 

[Artfully Martial]

I think you mean New York? They're the ones with the nutcase DA who thinks that any one handed opening knife is a switchblade. CA laws are ridiculous in some ways, but reasonable in others. For an example, the Kershaw assisted opener design is mentioned specifically as not a switchblade.

AO knives clearly fall within the CA definition of switchblades:

""switchblade knife" means a knife having the appearance of a pocketknife, and includes a spring-blade knife, snap-blade knife, gravity knife or any other similar type knife, the blade or blades of which are two or more inches in length and which can be released automatically by a flick of a button, pressure on the handle, flip of the wrist or other mechanical device, or is released by the weight of the blade or by any type of mechanism whatsoever."

More specifically "which can be released automatically by...mechanical device."

It's a classic catchall, in case they forgot of something.

But statutes are moderately irrelevant on these issues anyway, particularly in California state courts. The court system is free to (and utilizes this freedom with some frequency) simply make up their own new laws through case law through the time-honored art of statutory interpretation (sic: disfiguration).

In many states, including CA, although balisongs aren't covered by any statute, in any way, shape or form, the court simply decides that what legislators must have meant by spring-loaded out-the-front switchblade knife was a knife that had no springs and the blade didn't come out of the front. That is to say, if your court doesn't like your kind of knife, they'll simply make it up ad hoc and you'll be screwed either way.

Again, citing the Attorney General of CA:
http://ag.ca.gov/firearms/dwcl/244.php

 

[Artfully Martial]

Well, at any rate, there you go, a few hundies worth of legal advice for free. I do what I can.

But a CA attorney would definitely be more knowledgeable regarding the case law. There might be cases where the court decided specifically that the statute didn't apply to certain kinds of retailers, or perhaps the CA court decided that the statute didn't apply to AOs (improbable, as the statute definitely applies to AOs, but crazier things have happened in courts).

 

[spyken]

I'm no expert on US knife or business laws, but if you are really a teen running a knife business, then kudos to you. Best of luck with the venture. Who knows what lies ahead, when the facebook guys started that site, people probably laughed at them.

 

[Artfully Martial]

" "Switchblade knife" does not include a knife that opens with one hand utilizing thumb pressure applied solely to the blade of the knife or a thumb stud attached to the blade, provided that the knife has a detent or other mechanism that provides resistance that must be overcome in opening the blade, or that biases the blade back toward its closed position."

It's unclear how this would apply to AOs. It seems totally certain that in the first section of the statute, they intend to exclude AOs. In the second part they are extremely ambiguous.

You might be able to defeat the statute, regarding AOs, on the void for vagueness doctrine.

 

[Tsujigiri]

" "Switchblade knife" does not include a knife that opens with one hand utilizing thumb pressure applied solely to the blade of the knife or a thumb stud attached to the blade, provided that the knife has a detent or other mechanism that provides resistance that must be overcome in opening the blade, or that biases the blade back toward its closed position."

It's unclear how this would apply to AOs. It seems totally certain that in the first section of the statute, they intend to exclude AOs. In the second part they are extremely ambiguous.

You might be able to defeat the statute, regarding AOs, on the void for vagueness doctrine.

Some A/O's may not fit this definition as well as Speedsafe's, but Kershaw's A/O provides the detent that resists opening when the blade is closed. The torsion bar applies pressure that stiffens the action out to a certain angle. Supposedly this addendum was made with the Speedsafe in mind.

 

[Artfully Martial]

Some A/O's may not fit this definition as well as Speedsafe's, but Kershaw's A/O provides the detent that resists opening when the blade is closed. The torsion bar applies pressure that stiffens the action out to a certain angle. Supposedly this addendum was made with the Speedsafe in mind.

I'm looking into the case law now. I've got a very good case on switchblades-qua-switchblades,
Supreme Court of California.
PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, Plaintiff and Respondent,
v.
Johnny CORDOVA, Defendant and Petitioner.
No. S075751.

It cites a lot of other apparently important CA switchblade cases, but it's in 1999, before the common rise of AOs. I don't know if it's still good law yet.

"The Quattrone case arose from a civil suit the Napa County District Attorney filed against the seller of butterfly and sheath-retracting knives. The court of appeal reversed the trial court's decision that the knives sold were not switchblades. Id. at 1399. The appeal court reviewed the statute “...to give effect to the intent of the Legislature so as to effectuate the purpose of the law”. Id. at 1395. It held that the words of the statute must be examined to determine the intent of the law. Second, “The words must be read in light of the legislative objective sought to be achieved, as well as the evil sought to be averted”. Third, the court concluded that “If after such review the statute is susceptible to two reasonable constructions, the one most favorable to the defendant will be adopted”. Id.

*10 The court held that “The legislature [since 1957] intended to broaden the scope of the statute to include within its provision all those types of knives which operate in a similar manner to the ones listed.” Id. at 1396. It found that successive changes broadened the scope of the statute. Originally, the statute prohibited possession of switchblades with blades three inches or longer if carried concealed on a person. “In successive drafts, the bill was broadened to bar switchblades with two inch blades...and to also prohibit the sale, offer for sale, and transfer of transfer of such a knife.” Id."

Here's the case I was referring to regarding the butterfly knives. The court admitted that the statute didn't cover them, but simply reasoned that the legislature MUST have meant to ban butterfly knives because they're so similar to switchblades (????) so the seller lost.

 

[Artfully Martial]

I spent a good 30 minutes reading CA case law and I can't find any reference to assisted opening, speedsafe, or so on.

The statute is hugely ambiguous: "Switchblade knife" does not include a knife that opens with one hand utilizing thumb pressure applied solely to the blade of the knife or a thumb stud attached to the blade..."

I'm pretty sure that, if there is no case law on what that means, a prosecutor who wanted to could defeat the AO friendly interpretation because assisted opening knives arguably don't open "utilizing thumb pressure..." because they, in fact, open with thumb pressure AND spring tension. So it's up to the court to decide, if it hasn't already (and even if it has, it can just overrule itself later) whether or not "utilizing thumb pressure" excludes all other forms of pressure other than the thumb (what if the knife was strangely designed to open with your pinky finger? Illegal then?) or whether the statute was intended that, so long as it did utilize thumb pressure "applied solely to the blade of the knife or a thumb stud attached to the blade," no matter what else occurred, you're in the clear.

But it's actually more ambiguous than even that. What about flippers? Are they part of the blade? Is the blade only the area above the tang? Is there case law regarding if the blade includes the tang? If so, since the flipper is attached to the tang, does it automatically include the flipper?

And it's even worse than that. Flippers are usually accessed by your index finger. So even if we assume that the "thumbstud clause" excludes assisted openers, AND we assume that pressure applied to the blade includes flippers, the statute is pretty clear that it must be pressure applied by your THUMB and no other finger.

Sloppy.

 

[Artfully Martial]

Worse yet, the statute appears to include non-spring assisted knives, like the scarily undefined and probably nonexistent "gravity knife" or knives that can be opened by a wrist flick. " flip of the wrist..."

So that's basically all modern knives anyway. And I can wrist flick an assisted too. On the plus side, most people can't wrist flick an AO, so unless their expert testimony includes some sort of tactical knife collector who has a penchant for knife tricks, oddly, the minigrip might be illegal under this statute and the blur might not.

 

[Esav Benyamin]

I reviewed all state laws and regulations before opening and everything is clear. I live in California, and you are correct it's not legal to own switchblades, however as a retailer I can possess them to sell to customers out of state. Thanks!

Federal law says you cannot ship automatic knives out of state, with very few exceptions.

Bladeforums rules says you cannot advertise a business here as a Registered User. You do need a Dealer membership.

 

[Mad_Maxx]

good luck girl!
Maxx

 

[DrOpPoInT1110]

I can't wait to see how this turns out...

 

[risen]

Chandler,

You've gotten a lot of law-related information. Please don't let all this overwhelm you. Since it's Sunday, I'd suggest, for now, you surf the Web and check out other established CA knife-related web stores. If they've got autos, you'll probably be fine.

I agree with Artfully Martial, get some legal advice, from an actual attorney. I also agree with Esav, about there being exceptions for autos. There are exceptions.

I haven't done any research on these issues, myself (it was loo late last night, and I'm still drinking my coffee this morning).

From my non-lawyer perspective, some of the information you've gotten here is not only vague, it's incomplete, some may be inaccurate and/or not even apply. If you decide to do some of your own research today (until you meet with an attorney), you may need to look to Business & Professions Codes (B&P), as well, not just PC.

What I do suggest you do right away, while looking at other CA knife-related web stores, is check out all their disclaimers. I noticed you did state "NOT CA LEGAL" for the auto, which shows some effort/desire to be within guidelines. However, I do believe you need more disclaimer information in several areas. Don't just copy/paste what other stores already have, then you'd be dealing with copyright issues.

Again, don't let all this overwhelm you. And, certainly, don't let it burst your bubble. You've got a business. You'll have to make adjustments. Simple as that.

See what other CA knife/web stores are doing, for now. That's the quickest way to make adjustments until you get with an attorney.

Hope this helps.

risen

 

[Apec]

You can carry a 2" blade automatic in CA, unless that's changed recently. In other words, SD fanatics might want to find something else.

 

[chandlerm]

Worse yet, the statute appears to include non-spring assisted knives, like the scarily undefined and probably nonexistent "gravity knife" or knives that can be opened by a wrist flick. " flip of the wrist..."

So that's basically all modern knives anyway. And I can wrist flick an assisted too. On the plus side, most people can't wrist flick an AO, so unless their expert testimony includes some sort of tactical knife collector who has a penchant for knife tricks, oddly, the minigrip might be illegal under this statute and the blur might not.

Maybe it would be good to start a separate thread about california switchblade laws. It seems interesting to lots of people.

 

[Esav Benyamin]

Here's the place: Knife Laws.