Total knife ban, totally rational or not?

This is an article I was requested to write and was published the 12. September 2008, I have added a few comments as a lot has changed since it was written, some sentences have been changed as it can’t be translated completely to match the exact words to English.

Total knife ban, totally rational or not?

Kim H writes on weapons legislation in general and knife ban in particular. Is it useful?

I will touch briefly on why bans on more knife design are not well thought out. Afterwards, I will explain why I consider the knife as a suitable self defence weapon, and why it is sometimes better than a firearm. This is not an appeal to carry a knife for self defence, but a critique of the existing laws regarding the design of knives, and why the liberalization of the Firearms Act necessarily must include knives as self defence weapons.

Regarding why weapons should be legal from a libertarian perspective, I recommend reading the article Weapon! written by Daniel Beattie. Carrying a weapons will not make criminals weapons disappear, but it makes the odds more even than if you had nothing. Rape criminals usually goes after the weak victim, if the victim pulls a gun, he would rather find another victim that he can tackle. Generally criminal human predators search for prey they consider they can handle, as other predators in the wild.

The right to live must also include the right to defend that right. Laws can not defend ourselves when we are victims of violent crimes: It does not stop crimes, it only punishes the guilty, when the deed is done. Criminals who commit violent armed robbery, murder, robberies and rapes do not think about that they break the Arms Act, and what the consequences which might ensue. They commit the crimes that are worse than the violations of the Arms Act. The less their victims have to defend themselves, the greater power and leeway criminals have, the police can not be everywhere all the time. Cameras and increased monitoring does not have a magical ability to get criminals to disappear. They can only assist investigation to catch and convict them. There is a huge amount with surveillance videos of knife attacks on the Internet, and the victims of these videos were not magically rescued by fear of the camera surveillance.

The increasing media focus on the use of knives for violent crimes has caused an outcry without equal among politicians and the media with demands for more restrictive legal requirements for the type of knife that can be purchased. Some will even have a total ban, and there is competition for who would impose people the highest penalties for possession of knives among politicians to get more votes.

The website knivfri.dk(knife free.dk) says:

"With the increasing focus on knife crime, it is understandable that some may be nervous. But statistics show that the risk for the individual is still very small in Denmark. There is less persons that carry a knife, than you might think, and even fewer who would dream of using it.

Despite the violent incidents there is statistically no increase in knife crime - the problem has risen in the media and public awareness. "

On the Crime Prevention Council website on the study of violence in Denmark 1995-2005 from the Ministry of Justice, University of Copenhagen, the National Police and the Crime Prevention Council:

"In recent years, the use of the knife often been discussed. In 1995 it was 2.1% of the victims who faced an offender with a knife. This figure rose slightly to 2.9% in 2005. So it is still relatively rare to meet knife armed perpetrators. You should be aware that these figures do not tell anything about the chance in the number of threats with a knife, but only for cases where the knife has been used. "

Norway, a good example

"In Norway, five years ago a total knife ban was introduced. Since then, the number of stabbings fell by 40 percent, and the number of confiscated knives has also fallen significantly. "

There have been many statements by politicians and in the media with the claim that a total ban in Norway had a positive effect.

I tried for a very long time to investigate the case, but it was veritable impossible to determine whether it had a positive effect, since the Statistisk Sentralbyrå, which is the Norwegian Institute of Statistics, shows no statistics of stabbing or knife-related crime, such as illegal possession and confiscation.

I could find statistics on all crimes and categories, but not with knives. I abandoned finding statistics as I could not find anything where weapons were generally involved, such as confiscation or crimes committed with weapons.

I contacted a Norwegian friend who has friends in the Norwegian police, and asked if he or the police could find some statistical studies, but even the police had no idea about it because they did not collect data and could not create statistics without it. I later found one who had family working for the institution who takes care of releasing prisoners from jails, and he claimed that there has been a decrease in knife attacks, but I could not get any data than hearsay.

However, I found out that the later adopted total ban restrictive regulation for combat knives did not have the desired political effect. There was a lot of new stabbing despite of the regulations. How they will define combat knives will be interesting, as folders and butterfly knives are already illegal.

It is doing it wonderfully easy for politicians to say that a law helped when you can not measure the effect of it, but have to rely on a subjective assessment of how a few high ranking police officers think it is. Norwegian police are not armed with guns, so their resistance to knives understandable, since they do not have a slim chance if they are attacked with a knife. So also in Norway are restrictive law regulations performed on the basis of individual cases.

How the Norwegians know that crimes committed with a knife has fallen, I do not know. Perhaps from reports of stabbings from hospitals, but confiscated knives is not something that hospitals do. I can not come up with concrete numbers, and the data underlying the claim I would like to know more about. I anyone has any please inform me.

The Danish total ban

Parliament passed before the summer recess a restriction of the law relating to knives. The Ministry of Justice justifies the restrictive regulation that it will have a preventative effect, but the National Association of appointed lawyers publicly stated and recommended another solution:

"There is no prospect that fewer will take illegal knives in the city when the penalty is increased from a fine of US$500 to minimum seven days' imprisonment". (The maximum imprisonment has been changed to potentially a year but it will be very unlikely.)

"It would, instead of the usual requirement for raised penalties be desirable to take initiatives for an attitude change of particularly young people."

In connection with the restriction from the Ministry of Justice had not provided any concrete numbers for the spread of illegal knives in the nightlife. Also the defence lawyers points out that there is missing information about the use of illegal knives that had been used to violent crimes.

Symbolic political messages do not change the criminal's behaviour. It only sends a message to young people that it is socially unacceptable. We can not just leave it up to the state to regulate children's criminal violent behaviour: It is the parents who have the primary responsibility and should educate them to be responsible citizens with respect for others' property, liberty and life.

Seized knives in Copenhagen from 2002 to 2008, according to the Copenhagen police:

2002: 1841

2003: 1732

2004: 1936

2005: 2507

2006: 3113

2007: 2553

2008 to August month: 1291st the total figure for 2008 is guesswork, we will have to wait and see.

The first restriction of the Arms Act was the first April 2004 as a political response to a specific case: The murder of 19-year-old Italian tourist Antonio Curra, portrayed as an act of random gang related violence in the media, but very few know it was a quarrel about the price for a bag of cocaine he tried to purchase that turned into a deadly fight. One can see that there has been an increase in seizures, so either have the political signal not had the desired effect, or the increased focus by the police with such visitation zones only led to more seizures.

Earlier in Denmark, the chief police inspector Per Larsen said he hoped the increased penalties for possession of knives would have a deterrent effect. January this year he told Ritzau: "It is of course only one hunch, but I can not imagine anything other than that it would rumour that there is a much higher risk."

Svend Foldager, police inspector Copenhagen Police, has stated to the media that "those who from their home plan that they will have a to use a knife because they are planning to get into situations where they need it, you can not deter with seven days prison sentence.”

Alan Gordon, vice-chairman of the Police Federation in Britain, has made a similar statement to BBC News about the latest restriction of the Arms Act due to a specific case where a boy of 14 years was murdered: “People that seem to have such a scant regard for human life, I don’t think are going to be dissuaded in their actions by new legislation. […] It is a very difficult tightrope for the home secretary to walk – as to whether he should introduce new legislation to try and show toughness. […] But actually, how effective it is going to be is debatable.”

Responsible citizens who carries and know how to use a pocket knife in a responsible manner, must not be punished for an act that does not infringe the freedom of others. Hunters, anglers, scouts, kayakers and divers have always used them responsibly, but now the restrictions negatively affect them. Some sports and recreational activities would be downright dangerous to do without access to the knife as a tool.

The knife, which is perhaps the oldest tool man has used, has the primary function as a vital tool, in addition to use in the kitchen, at many outdoor activities and crafts. It can be used as a weapon to be compared to how much it is used for legitimate and practical purposes. To kill or harm people with a knife was already illegal before the knife ban, and thus there was no need for further regulation or prohibition of knives. Compared to how much they are used for legitimate purposes in relation to crimes, they make to put it mildly a very small percentage.

Total ban has even been criticized by Flemming Steen Munch, information officer at the police because he did not think we should make policy on the basis of individual cases, because we should not criminalize law-abiding citizens who responsibly carry a small pocket knife.

The recent ban which dictates that even the police should not be carrying a knife, is mildly grotesque. How should they cut a rope over if a person is bound, a man to be cut free by a belt in a burning car after an accident or other scenario? By shooting it into pieces with their service gun or bite it with their teeth? They have now been issued a Leatherman with no lock on the knife, they can carry a gun but must risk loosing a finger when using the knife.

All Danish citizens can acquire an illegal knife in many of our neighbouring countries such as Estonia, Poland and Sweden, so if you want to buy an illegal knife is very easy.

A knife is a knife. Most kitchen knives, especially filet knives are just as well suited for murder as a so-called combat knife. And then they are cheaper, easy to acquire, legal to buy and better to commit murder with than folding knives. Fillet knife are very sharp, very thin and do not jam between the ribs if it is inserted in the torso, and can easily puncture the lungs and heart.

Locks, blade length and the Law

With the new knife law, which has been implemented, it is legal to carry a folding knife of max. 7 cm, which can not be locked. Locks on the knives are there to protect the users from harming themselves, so the blade does not fold over the knuckles by accident. Apparently consumer safety was not given a second thought when the new knife law was adopted. For all other products there will be an outcry if someone made a product that could create damage due to lack of security, which could easily be built into the product. In this case, the choice is to have products that are dangerous to the consumer by law.

The locking mechanism does not make it easier to kill others with knife: It takes just as long to get a folder deployed out as a knife in a sheath. I could see the point that the maximum blade length should be 7 cm long, but actually don’t agree with that point, as the problem is how deep the blade penetrates the body and affects vital organs. Nevertheless, even 4cm is enough to be able to hit vital organs, as 2 doctors interviewed on the news stated. You can also still buy boy scout daggers and kitchen knives, which have often been used to assault and murder, so the ban will not change anything for people who intend to use them for criminal purposes. They can always buy a kitchen knife in the supermarket. You can not stop the production of dangerous pointy sharp knives, unless we ban all larger than dull vegetable knives less than 4 cm without tip, or only have pre carved and cut all vegetables and meat we buy in supermarkets, so we do not need kitchen knives.

Folders

The ban on them was originally implemented because they were used frequently to assault, but that has not stopped the use of knives to attack. Many legitimate folding knives can still be opened with one hand: It requires very little training, and the fact is that they can be opened almost as fast with two hands. It may be easier to hide a folder, but a knife can be concealed easily under all circumstances. Even the most secure maximum security prisons in all countries can’t stop the use of homemade knives. A scout knife or kitchen knife is just as easy to hide as a folder, folding knifes or neck knife down the pants or under a sweater. Folders have the advantage that they can be used in emergency situations where one hand is injured or entangled in something that you need to cut free from.

Throwing Knives

Throwing Knives belong in a circus. It is almost impossible to hit a moving target with a throwing knife. The rotation of the blade makes it impossible to always hit with the tip. One can, after many years of training learn how to throw a knife against a target at a fixed distance. It is foolish to throw a knife against an opponent: If it does not penetrate the target, then you have given him a weapon. There is no one who throws a loaded gun to the head of his opponent in a battle for life and death. That they are illegal surprised me a lot, because many are not sharp. All throwing knives used by professionals entertainers are pointy but have a dull edge. However, you can buy a few models that have a sharp blade, for hunting.s

The knife in self defence weapons

Many people might think that the knife is bad as self defence weapon in relation to a gun, but this is not entirely true. In certain situations, the blade is better than the gun.

It takes no training to use the knife to fend off attacks by threatening to use it because all are instinctively afraid of knives. It has a very strong psychological deterrent effect: All have tried to cut themselves and know how it hurts.

The first self defence use is to cut the assailant on the wrist or hand, which he will not die from. If the situation requires more damage to stop the robber or assailant, one can resort to muscle destruction of arms with the possibility that he might survive, if he is being treated by a doctor, so he does not bleed to death. In extreme cases, you can stab and slash repeatedly the assailant until he doesn’t move, resulting in a high probability of death due to organ damage and bleeding.

In short, you can escalate the degree of how much you want to use the knife, from threat to small or serious injuries and finally a defence with fatal outcome. However, serious knife injuries can be harder to treat than gunshot wounds.

It does not require a high IQ or training to use a knife. That is why so many idiots and persons with no training can use it successfully.

To shoot someone just a little bit is difficult as the bullet has a fixed velocity. You can shoot for the legs, but it can also kill if it hits a vein and innocent passers-by. With firearms can not escalate the degree of damage very well, as it is hard to aim at a moving target and choose a safe place to shoot.

Firearms also run out of ammunition, knives don’t. All violent confrontations at close range and at less than 6 meters the knife is considered being more dangerous than a gun by many self defence instructors. Therefore, it is ridiculous when the media accused the police of going too far when they shoot someone who is armed with a knife. When you consider how short their batons are, it is almost suicide to use them against the blade.

Firearms are expensive, they must be maintained constant so as not to cause it to malfunction and stored properly and safely. Knives are cheap and everyone has them in their kitchen without being very concerned that children have access to them. Most of us do not have a problem with those children learn to use a dagger and an axe responsibly as boy scouts, but the media and politicians would probably freak out in outrage if they learned how to use guns.

Many will say that the danger is that the knife might be used against them. But the same applies to guns, tear gas and other weapons.

Recap of the main arguments

What would you rather prefer to have in the hand against a gang of criminals who will attack you: Nothing or a weapon? What would you rather have, your daughter, girlfriend, mother or wife had if she faced a rapist?

To hope that others come and help, if there are any present, is not very likely. Many women have been raped and have called for help when no one came or helped by calling the police, even when a crowd of people could easily hear the victim. Sadly the Bystander effect has been proven that the odds for being helped decreases when the amount of people passing buy grows.

Training martial arts is no guarantee of safety. Techniques and dirty tricks don’t always defeat a physically superior opponent. Otherwise there would not be weight classes for tournaments. They are not there to protect the big boys against a tiny opponent.

But martial arts organizations are obviously a business like any other, although many are state subsidised non profit associations and a few are private companies in Europe. They also need new members not to become extinct, and besides offering one to get in shape and learn self-discipline, they lure students by promising them security against bigger and stronger opponents. They could have a higher chance to defeat an untrained person who is the least dangerous of all categories opponent, but larger, physically stronger, armed, martial arts trained individuals or more opponents is far more difficult to tackle without weapons. Yes it is almost impossible unless you have trained for countless hours every week for many years with realism as a starting guideline. A lot of very skilled martial artists have been killed with a knife, as it was not a big part of their training. But many women with no training have defeated a rapist armed with a knife, this shows clearly that martial arts training does not guarantee safety.

In addition, many young violent thugs train martial arts and test their skills on the street. Recently, we have seen hooligans from White Pride practicing martial arts in municipally-premises. Some clubs and social projects funded from the municipality teach maladjusted young men martial arts, which is quite silly as they might save a few of trouble, but has trained the rest to become more effective criminals.

There are many who have used and are using knives responsible for leisure activities. They should not be punished because a few abuse them. Compared to how many legitimate and essential purpose they used to, so is the abuse of them a tiny portion.

Criminals, who use knives, are indifferent to tougher penalties for illegal possession of a knife, because the crimes they commit with them are far worse than violation of the Arms Act.

Laws do not stop criminals beyond educational reach, they can only punish them.

To make policy based on individual cases is not wise, even police people have been against it and when even the police can not carry a knife now is decidedly idiotic.

A ban on certain design of knives is unimportant: A knife is a knife, kitchen knives is just as dangerous and is used very often for crimes.

The prohibition folders have no deterrent against their use for criminal purposes, criminals can buy a kitchen knife, fixed blade legally or illegal folders in our neighbouring countries.

Locks are there to protect the user. It can not be right that we knives have an inverse relationship to consumer safety.

Knives are suitable for self defence, they are cheap, available everywhere, easy to use even without training, it is possible to escalate the degree of damage, whereas with firearms is difficult to control the degree of injury and can hit innocent bystanders. So if you are in favour of liberalization of the Firearms Act, knives must also be included.

Many violent criminals trains martial arts and most likely more skilled as they have real life experience and not only friendly dojo training, so it's not always enough just to train self defence, which many also requires a long time before you can use it. A weapon, like a knife, can scare a potential assailant to go away.

The right to live must also include the right to defend this. The law can not defend ourselves when we are victims of violent crimes, it does not stop crime, and it punishes only the guilty, when the deed is done. The police can not be everywhere all the time and have recently shown that they do not always respond when you call and need them.

Appendix

Example

An example of a knife, which has been used for self defence in Denmark without prosecution, the victim would not have had a chance without. Four young people, three men and a woman, chose Friday night to set after a 24-year-old and his girlfriend and start a regular orgy of violence started:

"Should I pull the ring out of his nose at you," cried one of the four to the man. The mood was rampant, and the man's girlfriend ran into a nearby apartment and called police. Meanwhile the group were in a frenzy of violence. First with kicks,  then slap to the face. Finally, when the man lying on the ground with his head pressed down against the asphalt, a kick in the head. A so violent kick, the imprint of the shoe could still be seen on the forehead following day. The victim manages finally to fish one four centimetres knife-like object back and put it in the thigh of one of the perpetrators. The police arrive, the four are accused of violent assault, while the 24-year-old is off the hook.

"It could have happened to you and me. The 24-year-old has defended himself by reasonable means, so he will not be charged, "said Copenhagen police central security manager, Niels Book-Grarup.

Excerpts from the Danish knife law

Act to amend the Arms Act

(Prohibition of carrying a knife, etc. as well as stricter penalties for illegal possession of knives, etc.)

First § 4, paragraph. 1 is replaced by the following:

"In public places, colleges, youth clubs, leisure facilities and the like, it is prohibited to carry a knife or dagger, except as part of a profession, for hunting, fishing or sport or another similar creditable purpose. The ban does not include folding knives with blades of more than 7 cm, which can not be locked in the unfolded position. "

Second § 4, paragraph. 3 is replaced by the following:

"Subsection. 3rd Justice may issue rules prohibiting the introduction, by transfer to acquire, to possess, carry or use, to transfer or to leave other possession of:

1) Sharp or pointed weapons with a blade exceeding 12 cm, knives with transverse grip designed to shock, folders, jumping stilettos, case knives, stilettos, folders, which are designed so that in normal condition can be expanded by using one hand , folding knives with two-piece butt if the blade folds out using one hand knives designed to hang around the neck or shoulder, and from this location can be pulled using one hand, throwing stars, throwing knives and swordsticks and other similar weapons, which presents itself as an object.

NOTE

§ 14 PARAGRAPH. 3:

Daggers and knives with a blade exceeding 12 cm, regardless paragraph 1, point 1, WITHOUT PERMISSION, used in business. Household or by hunting, fishing, scuba diving etc., if they are designed to do so.

Those weapons can be acquired, held and carried to such use.

2) Other sharp or pointed weapons, which can not be assumed to have no creditable purpose.

"Subsection. 3rd Violation of § 4, paragraph. 1 or 2, punishable by a fine. The penalty may increase to imprisonment for 2 years, when the former is punished for violation of § 4, paragraph. 1 or 2 Penal Code § 81 paragraph. 1 shall not apply. "