What's Important?

J

JBilleb

Joined
Feb 14, 1999
Messages
67
We're working on putting information together for future meetings with legislators. We'd like input on the main issues that are important to you. What would you like to discuss, explore or debate over the next year?

Jan


------------------
Jan Billeb
Executive Director, AKTI
 
Well, a few concerns spring to mind immediately:

1. Maintaining in all states the legality of "knives designed to open with one hand utilizing thumb pressure applied solely to the blade of the knife or a thumb stud attached to the blade" (Section 653k of CA penal code). Though a rewording of this exception may be necessary in California, I would expect AKTI to continue to protect (in all states) the rights of knife owners who use folders with either thumbholes or thumbstuds.

2. Greater conformity among state laws and city/town laws. Individual counties, cities, and towns can have their own knife ordinances, and many of them do. For instance, Portland, Oregon tried to ban pocketknives, and that ban survived three levels of appeal until being overturned by the State Supreme Court. Such local ordinances make traveling, camping, etc. more risky and uneasy for those of us who carry knives.

3. Greater conformity among state laws regarding legal carrying lengths. Again, the varied laws can make traveling with a blade an anxious enterprise. Some states don't allow blades over 3 inches while others have no limits. Here, I would hope that AKTI would advocate "reasonable" limits. In Tennessee, the limit is a 4 inch blade, which allows me to carry a Spyderco Military or Wegner for camping. In other states, however, these same knives would be illegal to carry.

Well, that's a start...

------------------
Guyon
AKTI Member #A001044

"The hardest knife ill used doth lose his edge."
-William Shakespeare, Sonnet 95

[This message has been edited by Guyon (edited 04-23-2000).]
 
I would like to encourage Legislatures to focus on Actions instead of Objects.

I realize that they are focussing on the objects in an effort to be proactive but they end up punishing innocent people without achieving their goal of reducing violence significantly.

If they feel that there is a compelling need to limit access to objects that can be used as a weapon for certain groups predisposed to violence they should focus on some type of permit system.

I believe that there have been a couple of proposals for an "Authorized to Carry Permit" after a Background Check. This might even be something that we could cooperate with the NRA on.

The permit would basically say that John Q. Public has passed a background check and is authorized to purchase and carry weapons under the 2nd Amendment. The permit could be suspended or revoked under a well defined set of circumstances that would indicate that the person is highly prone to violence.

------------------
AKTI Member No. A000370
Email: DouglasSctt@Netscape.net
 
In response to what Guyon has said, let me state that consistency and conformity may not be what we really want. Any effort to make laws equal in all jurisdictions is likely to result in a reduction of freedom for the citizens residing in the more lenient jurisdictions, rather than an increase of freedom for those who are currently the most restricted. In other words, I don't want to give up my 4" or larger folder in order to be consistent with a neighboring state's more restrictive law.

Blade length restricions are silly. There are simply too many legitimate and totally peaceful uses to which knives can be put. The thicker the sandwich, the bigger the knife.

If I had the opportunity to talk face to face with a lawmaker, I would ask that knives not be considered weapons at all, unless and until they are actually used as such. It's already illegal to hurt people, isn't it?

If I could be king for a day . . .

D.Rock

------------------
AKTI Member # A000846
Stop when you get to bone.
 
David,

You're right, of course. Blade length restrictions are silly. They punish the many for the sins of the few. By no means am I advocating a sweeping, umbrella movement toward equal restrictions everywhere. The effort toward more reasonable limits should be a battle fought on a state-by-state basis.

I think that once length restrictions are in place, they are tough to get off the books. What I'd hope AKTI would support is upping the length requirements in states with ridiculously low restrictions. This is the direction in which I'd hope "conformity" would move. As for the states with no length requirements, AKTI should promote maintaining the status quo.



------------------
Guyon
AKTI Member #A001044

"The hardest knife ill used doth lose his edge."
-William Shakespeare, Sonnet 95

[This message has been edited by Guyon (edited 04-24-2000).]
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top