Open Carry

[Vagrant0]

You say impractical... I question if you saw such a person, would you really want to find out?

 

As for the other bit... Currently, it is illegal in most places to carry any bladed weapon with a blade longer than 4 inches, either concealed or out in the open within any municipal area. And that includes cooking utensils.

 

Other illegal items include hammers and other tools, both on your person or in your vehicle. One of the times I went to court for a traffic offense there was a contractor who had over $2000 of tools and equipment seized and placed as evidence because it was in his truck when he went through a stop sign (he committed no other crime, and was charged with both failure to yield and possession of a deadly weapon). This doesn't mean to imply that nobody in my area/state is allowed to cook or do repair work, but instead suggests that such laws already exist, even if they are not actively enforced. The part which does not make sense is where people only care about, and talk about legally carrying guns, but nearly everything else which could be used to defend oneself (this includes mace, tasers, stunguns, pepperspray, and other non-lethal weapons) are illegal.

 

One would suggest that whole bit about registration being the reason, but pro-gun activists don't seem to like that whole bit of registration limiting their second amendment rights either. If I choose to arm myself with a 12 inch bowie knife on my back, a 6 inch boot knife, a pair of brass knuckles, and a dozen throwing knives, and attend the local middle-school's performance of Annie... Why can't I without being hassled by police who wish to infringe on my freedom of speech and right to defend myself?

[ginnyfizz]

Most people posing with even a normal sized claymore wouldn't have the first idea what to do with it and anything that big and heavy would take a helluva lot to swing. You could have had it away on your toes a long time before they lifted it off their back. The types who would know what to do with it (people who take part in re enactments) wouldn't be going around the supermart with it, as they keep their weapons securely and are usually pretty level headed.

 

And I have never yet been nicked on my way back from the Professional Cookware Shop even when I purchased my meat cleaver and boning knives. The danger is that if you make a case for licensed carry of bladed weapons, all it takes for a lazy PC Plod to get his nicking quota up is to loiter outside any ironmongers or cookshop and feel the collar of hapless housewives/househusbands who had no idea that it applied to them..

 

Vagrant, you seem to have missed the point that the likes of Aurelius, Syco21, Kendo and myself have argued for LICENSED open carry. And it makes perfect sense to me that people prefer the potentially lethal devil they know in the form of a firearm, to these supposedly safer alternatives that you mention. You don't think a stungun can be lethal? How do you account for the captive bolt gun used to make large holes in the skulls of livestock before (let's not describe the full process here)...that is a damned big stun gun, and a deadly one.

 

And as for "If I choose to arm myself with a 12 inch bowie knife on my back, a 6 inch boot knife, a pair of brass knuckles, and a dozen throwing knives, and attend the local middle-school's performance of Annie... Why can't I without being hassled by police who wish to infringe on my freedom of speech and right to defend myself?" With respect, that is RIDICULOUS. Not one of us would wish to do that or has advocated such behaviour. Once more, you are attempting to portray the pro-gun lobby as swivel-eyed fanatics, but THAT really is a step too far.

[Vagrant0]

And as for "If I choose to arm myself with a 12 inch bowie knife on my back, a 6 inch boot knife, a pair of brass knuckles, and a dozen throwing knives, and attend the local middle-school's performance of Annie... Why can't I without being hassled by police who wish to infringe on my freedom of speech and right to defend myself?" With respect, that is RIDICULOUS. Not one of us would wish to do that or has advocated such behaviour. Once more, you are attempting to portray the pro-gun lobby as swivel-eyed fanatics, but THAT really is a step too far.

And yet, under an "any time, anywhere, it's my right and my freedom" approach, there would be nothing to restrict this, reasonable persons and crazies alike. It also grants those who might be thinking of committing a crime an excuse to be where they are, armed how they are.

 

The discussion of knives and other non-ballistic weapons is actually of personal interest to me since I myself was armed with a weapon when going to highschool for "personal defense". Not only was I armed and capable with what I had on me at all times, but most of those around me knew it. I only had call to pull it out once in my four years, and thankfully never had to hurt anyone with it. Looking back, I acknowledge that it might have acted as a deterrent, but also see just how stupid and irresponsible it was. If I had used it, even in defense, my life, and that of the self-obsessed snot I would have used it on, would have taken a totally different route. So sure, it might make you feel safe when you have it, but it also burdens you with a constant "what if" of someone being dead who probably didn't deserve it. Despite the fact that these days I'm almost daily entering into places which are far more dangerous than highschool hallways, I don't see reason to arm myself, and generally feel safer than I did back then. The difference is not what weapon you are or are not carrying, but that you don't walk around with a glowing neon sign that reads "easy prey" above your head 24/7. Sure, even tomorrow I could be mugged, stabbed, or shot, but I don't let fear of this prevent me from doing what I need to do, or force me to walk around with a deadly weapon to feel safe. Now while this is just me, even if I'm now the sort of person who screams "not worth it", I wasn't always so, and if it wasn't for me adapting to an unarmed lifestyle, I wouldn't have learned to cultivate myself physically (5 years martial arts training) and mentally (study of sociology, body language, and a healthy dose of confidence) to where I was no longer a victim. I'm not saying that some people might not be in circumstances where being armed is a good idea, but that most people would only use a gun as a means of compensation and ultimately never learn those skills.

 

If a man gets into a knife fight without having a knife, they either learn real quick how to talk and think fast, or learn real quick how fast they bleed.

[roquefort]

"You could have had it away on your toes a long time before they lifted it off their back."

 

So it would be an effective deterrent, if I understand correctly what you're saying (i.e. that an attacker would run off before you could ready your claymore).

 

"The danger is that if you make a case for licensed carry of bladed weapons, all it takes for a lazy PC Plod to get his nicking quota up is to loiter outside any ironmongers or cookshop and feel the collar of hapless housewives/househusbands who had no idea that it applied to them.."

 

I'm not following you on this: blades are already illegal to carry, so your lazy PC Plod could put you to great inconvenience as things stand now if he wanted to, even if the CPS subsequently declined to prosecute on the grounds that you had a good reason (kitchen tool, still in package).

 

'License to carry' would presumably apply only to bare or scabbarded blades, so you still wouldn't be hassled coming out of Choppers 'R' Us with your package (I should add that in my view 'licence to carry' in the UK is equally daft whether blades or guns, but that's just me).

 

Here, if it's of interest, is the CPS view regarding blades in public:

 

http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/l_to_o/offensive_weapons_knives_bladed_and_pointed_articles/#a09

 

 

Possession of Blades/Points

 

Section 139 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988 prohibits the possession in a public place of any article which has a blade or is sharply pointed, (including a folding pocket knife if the cutting edge of its blade exceeds 7.62cm/3 inches) (Archbold, 24 -125)

 

 

Defence

 

The defendant is entitled to be acquitted if he shows on the balance of probabilities that:

 

* he had "good reason or lawful authority" for having the bladed or pointed article; or

* he had the article for use at work; or

* he had the article for religious reasons; or

* he had the article as part of a national costume; (Archbold 24-125).

[ginnyfizz]

 

"The danger is that if you make a case for licensed carry of bladed weapons, all it takes for a lazy PC Plod to get his nicking quota up is to loiter outside any ironmongers or cookshop and feel the collar of hapless housewives/househusbands who had no idea that it applied to them.."

 

I'm not following you on this: blades are already illegal to carry, so your lazy PC Plod could put you to great inconvenience as things stand now if he wanted to, even if the CPS subsequently declined to prosecute on the grounds that you had a good reason (kitchen tool, still in package).

 

'License to carry' would presumably apply only to bare or scabbarded blades, so you still wouldn't be hassled coming out of Choppers 'R' Us with your package (I should add that in my view 'licence to carry' in the UK is equally daft whether blades or guns, but that's just me).

 

Here, if it's of interest, is the CPS view regarding blades in public:

 

http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/l_to_o/offensive_weapons_knives_bladed_and_pointed_articles/#a09

 

 

Possession of Blades/Points

 

Section 139 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988 prohibits the possession in a public place of any article which has a blade or is sharply pointed, (including a folding pocket knife if the cutting edge of its blade exceeds 7.62cm/3 inches) (Archbold, 24 -125)

 

 

Defence

 

The defendant is entitled to be acquitted if he shows on the balance of probabilities that:

 

* he had "good reason or lawful authority" for having the bladed or pointed article; or

* he had the article for use at work; or

* he had the article for religious reasons; or

* he had the article as part of a national costume; (Archbold 24-125).

 

I think you just proved my point. Incidentally I am well aware of the Criminal Justice Act Act 1988, Archbold and all that jazz, I have a degree in Law, so this is not exactly blinding me with science. That particular section of the act is especially asinine by any standards and a typical example of Government deciding that they are going to do something about knife crime as a knee jerk response and vote catcher, wiser heads reminding them "but what about butchers/chefs/housewifes and house husbands...." and some bright spark coming up with what they think is a clever compromise. Namely that the defendant is entitled to be acquitted if...etc...etc... In practice PC Plod knows that the CPS are going to say "Don't make me larf..." if they tail me all the way to the cookshop up at the local designer outlet, observe me purchasing a set of Sabatiers which are in all likelihood going to be in a carefully wrapped case, and then pounce. (It would be an especially bad move doing it to me as it would result in a bad case of earache for the Chief Constable too.) So in practice, they are not going to do it.

 

Now adding a licensing requirement for bladed weapons gives them an extra layer of officiousness to play with. They could then not only pounce on me en route from the cookshop and demand to see my license, they could have arrested me earlier for assaulting an onion with that wicked looking French cooks knife in my own kitchen, had I not been able to produce my license. Licensing offences (or not being in possession of the proper license for something that requires one) are always strict liability and there is no defence to not having one. Hence, another way for them to tick their boxes and complete their statistics, rather like how they stop you randomly and ask you to produce your car documents now.

[MeNoChinese]

I know I am jumping into this debate. But, the way I see it, Open carry should be licensed in Municipal areas, rural or low population areas should have free open carry. I think with carrying concealed that there shouldn't be a license, but there should be like a personality check and all carriers should be registered, (i.e like a license without so much of the difficulty to obtain it.

[roquefort]

"..typical example of Government deciding that they are going to do something about knife crime as a knee jerk response and vote catcher.."

 

We can at least agree on that, since 'carrying an offensive weapon' already existed as a catch-all offence. But with that I'm withdrawing from this debate, since I've nothing more to add to what I've already said.

[grannywils]

Seven foot claymore? I was under the impression that claymores tend to total well under five feet in length including blade and grip. I will verify this with a friend of mine at the Royal Armouries. Anything that big would not be a very practical form of self defence, now would it? (I can certainly speak to that, since among the many things I have done in the course of my horsey pursuits is wield a cavalry sabre during a Charge Of The Light Brigade re-enactment.) It would certainly be too cumbersome to carry around Walmart or any other supermarket. Believe me, they aren't easy to twirl around.

 

That's why a handgun would be the practical choice. Roquefort, this thread is about hand guns. It is irrelevant and impractical to drag razors and flick knives into the argument. The system of gun licensing is already in place. Arguing for the right to carry bladed weapons as personal protection would bring in the awful prospect that some bright spark in the Elf and Safety Department ivory tower would decide to bring in laws to restrict the ability of chefs, butchers, fishmongers and the average housewife or house husband to potter along to their local catering supplier or cookshop and buy themselves a nice set of Sabatier knives, all the better to produce fresh food that didn't come out of a packet.

 

*Grabs huge French cooks knife and lays about some hapless root vegetables, all the better to make a yummy beef stew....*

 

Ginny, I thought your post was amusing. But the last time I said someone's post was amusing I got into all sorts of trouble, so I am a little hesitant to say so. But I've done it now, so I'll let it be. Loved the part about the root veggies and the beef stew. :biggrin:

[TheCalliton]

lets face it, my name is GUNnar

im pretty much going to like guns and swords and knives and fists and blood

if you deny the public guns, you are doing several things (in america)

1. defying the constitution, which according to mill, warrents revolution (not specificly the constitution)

2. Taking away a freedom of the people

3. removing self defence of the people

4. being a total *profuse swearing*

 

all in all, guns are a good thing for the public to have, because the criminals dont care about the laws

[MeNoChinese]

Political rallies are the best to bring guns to. That way everyone can see my baby (when I get it of course).