Question on legal knife length in Canada

[ballz]

No need for most people to carry a knife daily.

I don't need a spare tire on a daily basis but I keep it in my car anyway, along with a few other "just in case" items in an emergency kit. People that carry first-aid kits don't need them on a daily basis (hopefully).

Whether a law-abiding free man in a free country wants a knife on his belt or not should ultimately be up to him. Your feelings on whether he "needs" it or not shouldn't be imposed on him.

In 2006, 18% of violent crimes had a weapon used in the commision of the offence.  The highest % was with knives, 6.2% compared to guns at 2.4%.  34.5% of homicides used a knife compared to 31.4 - Robbery was 18.9% knife compared to 13.9 gun.  Sexual assault 1.1% compared to .3%.  Some of those figures seem small, but theh are important.

You can say that again, those are some of the most unconvincing statistics I've ever seen.

If the crowns case on the robbery is weak, at least the person will be charged with the possesion of a prohibited weapon etc.

You're arguing it should exists so that if the crown doesn't have proof beyond a reasonable doubt that someone committed an offence, they can throw an otherwise potentially innocent person in jail for something else? That's a rather scary argument.

I wouldn't carry a knife If I didn't need one and generally don't outside of work.  21 Foot rule for police is a big thing and a knife is a good way to get a gun drawn on you.

I have more faith than our LEOs aren't complete wing-nuts than that.

 

[lawandorder]

"You're arguing it should exists so that if the crown doesn't have proof beyond a reasonable doubt that someone committed an offence, they can throw an otherwise potentially innocent person in jail for something else? That's a rather scary argument."

Sorry thats not my argument.  A person unlawfully carrying a prohibited weapon is not innocent. They are in possesion of a prohibited weapon and is a crime in Canada. Maybe you disagree with that law, write your Member of Parliment and lobby them to change it.

You're also saying that its unconvincing that almost half the murders in Canada are commited by Knives?

"I wouldn't carry a knife If I didn't need one and generally don't outside of work.  21 Foot rule for police is a big thing and a knife is a good way to get a gun drawn on you.

I have more faith than our LEOs aren't complete wing-nuts than that."

Sorry I didn't outlined all the steps an LEO would take prior to drawing their gun.  You jumped to conclusion that that is the first option, maybe my statement made it seem that way.  But there are steps to be taken first. Its not 0-10, sorry you made that assumption.

 

[ballz]

Sorry thats not my argument.  A person unlawfully carrying a prohibited weapon is not innocent. They are in possesion of a prohibited weapon and is a crime in Canada. Maybe you disagree with that law, write your Member of Parliment and lobby them to change it.

Your argument for having the weapon prohibited is so that you can put a person who you couldn't prove committed a crime in jail for a completely unrelated reason.

He would be innocent if not for the law prohibiting the weapon, and your saying the weapon should be prohibited for the purpose of putting him in jail.

What you're advocating is pure injustice, it is quite scary, and your mindset as an LEO of finding a reason to put someone behind bars because you *think* they did something wrong is retarded. How would you like to be investigated for a crime, acquitted, and then thrown in jail for having a prohibited pencil.

You're also saying that its unconvincing that almost half the murders in Canada are commited by Knives?

It is quite unconvincing. What do you want to do? Start a knife registry? Even if you could use legislation to stop knives from being used (and I'm not saying you can, the UK is proof you can't), people would just use a hammer or something instead.

Firearm legislation in this country has already proven that targeting the tool instead of the criminal yields absolutely no results.

Sorry I didn't outlined all the steps an LEO would take prior to drawing their gun.  You jumped to conclusion that that is the first option, maybe my statement made it seem that way.  But there are steps to be taken first. Its not 0-10, sorry you made that assumption.

I did not make any assumptions. You are trying use the scare tactic of someone getting a gun drawn on them to convince people they ought not to carry a knife.

The only way I would ever get a gun drawn on me is if it were 0 to 10, because I'm pretty cooperative with police so I wouldn't have to worry about ever getting to 10 if it went 0,1,2,3... And given that I have faith in our LEOs using the 0,1,2,...10 scale, I am not going to be scared into believing that carrying a knife is a "good way to get a gun drawn" on me.

 

[krustyrl]

I am finding this particularly interesting.....      op:

 

[Jarnhamar]

So I'll probably have to return these;

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BdkemsRmvCA

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EPozBOEdUsM&feature=fvwrel

You're right Recceguy, just like firearms and hand guns. No logic behind some of these decisions.


That whole innocent until proven guilty lasts all of 2 seconds when dealing with a lot of cops I'm starting to notice, unfortunately.

Ballz, hammers would be okay unless they are black or an aggressive colour

 

[Container]

Your knife statistics are already skewed- murders in the home during domestic violence dont use knives off belts. They use what available. Domestic violence is a huge portion of violent crime. The absolute lowest of my concerns are knives on belts- a person carrying for the purpose of shanking someone at the bar is different that the person this thread is aimed at- they've already been advised to keep them off the belt if they are going out boozing.

You introduced the idea of police officers pointing guns at folks first- Im saying that my mouth would be agape if I saw a fellow cop point his gun at someone with a sheathed knife.

Perhaps im used to it now policing first nations for 10 years. Who knows? I also dont think anyone has suggested carrying a 7 inch rambo knife at all times. So we're coming at this from opposite ends. Im of the opinion that a scrote carries a knife no matter what the law- he'll prove to me in the first 30 seconds of contact whether he wants to go to the hospital or his house.  Regular folks carry knives for real reasons and by the same token they prove their intentions as well.

I've had guys tell me I start talking to them that they have a knife on their belt. Thats good. I had a guy with no belt knife jump off a balcony with a hatchet and try and bury it in my skull. I can tell you which one got a gun pointed at them. I, and most cops I know, are fine with knives on belts- and everyone in this thread would more than likely never find themselves in that position. And for the cops I've met who are slightly jumpy- saying to the police officer, "I have a knife in my right pocket would you like it while we talk?" or if you are a witness not even bringing it up (always mention it before you are pat down searched if that comes up) is a good rule of thumb.

 

[Jarnhamar]

I was thinking about that Container. 
Container, Law&Order, What would an average patrol cop's reaction be if within the first exchange I were so say 'Just to make you aware I have a knife in my pocket do you want to hold on to it while we speak?'.
Most of us would (may) logically assume that it would be a smart enough thing to do, you're just letting the cop know you have a knife more I'd say to show respect to the officer than to actually appraise him of danger.

However on the same note I've been pulled over buy the police. It was late at night so I rolled down my window turned my car off turned the interior logs on and rested my hands at 10& 3. The cop was a little more aggressive with me than was called for in my opinion so I actually called him on it. Afterwards (and having played the name game) he said that my actions were very suspicious and he and his partner expected me to try something.  I've also had a cop say the same thing (expected me to try something) when I was very compliant and polite in a conversation.

Could "I have a knife on my belt, just so you know" be taken as a sort of threat? I'd imagine the context could possibly get mistaken pretty easily?

 

[jollyjacktar]

Could "I have a knife on my belt, just so you know" be taken as a sort of threat? I'd imagine the context could possibly get mistaken pretty easily?

As your Mum said, "it's not what you say but how you say it".  When I was active in LE, I was not on the whole worried I might face a gun.  A knife, however, was always in the back of my mind as more of a possibility when dealing with a member of the public.  That being said, I never had a bad experience from a member of the public in that regard either.

 

[lawandorder]

Your argument for having the weapon prohibited is so that you can put a person who you couldn't prove committed a crime in jail for a completely unrelated reason.

He would be innocent if not for the law prohibiting the weapon, and your saying the weapon should be prohibited for the purpose of putting him in jail.

What you're advocating is pure injustice, it is quite scary, and your mindset as an LEO of finding a reason to put someone behind bars because you *think* they did something wrong is retarded. How would you like to be investigated for a crime, acquitted, and then thrown in jail for having a prohibited pencil.

It is quite unconvincing. What do you want to do? Start a knife registry? Even if you could use legislation to stop knives from being used (and I'm not saying you can, the UK is proof you can't), people would just use a hammer or something instead.

Firearm legislation in this country has already proven that targeting the tool instead of the criminal yields absolutely no results.

I did not make any assumptions. You are trying use the scare tactic of someone getting a gun drawn on them to convince people they ought not to carry a knife.

The only way I would ever get a gun drawn on me is if it were 0 to 10, because I'm pretty cooperative with police so I wouldn't have to worry about ever getting to 10 if it went 0,1,2,3... And given that I have faith in our LEOs using the 0,1,2,...10 scale, I am not going to be scared into believing that carrying a knife is a "good way to get a gun drawn" on me.

Learn to read Ballz.  You do make assumptions. 

Nowhere did I say I arrest people because I *THINK* someone committed and offense.  My post mentioned a hypothetical situation where someone is found to be in possession of a prohibited weapon during the commission of an offense. Therefore, the arrest was made based on the commission of the offense.  The weapon was discovered in their possession on the search incident to arrest, which brings additional charges. That weapon only brings the additional charges if it is not legal.  I'm not talking about legal knives on belts, or steak knives, or Gerbers. I am talking about a prohibited knife. Not a pencil.  No where did I say all knives should be prohibited, or that a "knife registry" should be implemented.  Your lack of reading and comprehension skills scare me.  In all my posts I state my concern is with people unlawfully carrying, unlawful items, while in the commission of the offense.  Also, its how the law works now.  You commit an offense, you'll be charged with multiple items in order for a plea bargain, or if the crown can't proceed with certain charges, at least minor ones will stick.

I am not advocating injustice, I stated what I would do. I even state in one of my replies that you can carry a knife and most people won't find themselves having an issue with it.  Again, I guess your reading and comprehension skills are lacking.

I also clarified what I defined in my posts as carrying, as in, in a persons hand, and not in a sheath. I even apologized for making an assumption about it. If you were carrying a knife in your hand, and were doing something that caused the police to respond, IE committing a crime, there is no doubt in my mind a gun, or a taser, would be drawn.  Also note my note towards Journeyman.  I said he belong to a subculture with a professional courtesy toward police an other emergency services. He is/was a member of the Canadian Forces.  As are you presumably.  I never said you "Ballz are a criminal because you have a knife and wouldn't drop it blah blah"  No.  That never happened.  Lowest common denominator.  People getting dealt with by police are generally not "doing nothing" and just going about their business.  I can't speak for others, but I don't stop or talk to people that are going lawfully about their business.

"Your argument for having the weapon prohibited is so that you can put a person who you couldn't prove committed a crime in jail for a completely unrelated reason. "  Again not my argument.  You can't get basic facts right.  If the crown's case is not strong enough, it does not mean a person is innocent.  He may be found not guilty due to reasonable doubt, but that does not prove innocence. There are plenty of disgusting dirt bags that are found not guilty, or the crown doesn't proceed with certain charges because the cases are weak, but that does not mean those people are innocent, and it does not mean they didn't commit the offense.

I

 

[lawandorder]

You introduced the idea of police officers pointing guns at folks first- Im saying that my mouth would be agape if I saw a fellow cop point his gun at someone with a sheathed knife.

I've had guys tell me I start talking to them that they have a knife on their belt. That's good. I had a guy with no belt knife jump off a balcony with a hatchet and try and bury it in my skull. I can tell you which one got a gun pointed at them. I, and most cops I know, are fine with knives on belts- and everyone in this thread would more than likely never find themselves in that position. And for the cops I've met who are slightly jumpy- saying to the police officer, "I have a knife in my right pocket would you like it while we talk?" or if you are a witness not even bringing it up (always mention it before you are pat down searched if that comes up) is a good rule of thumb.

You're right.  I would also be very surprised.  I mentioned "carrying knife"  I was under the impression the person was carrying it, as in hand.  Not sheathed.  We were saying the same thing but the definitions were different.  For that I truly apologize. When I was painting the picture in my head of someone carrying a knife, it was of a guy walking around with a knife in hand.  Not a dude walking down the street with a sheath attached to belt.  That's probably my fault, but that's sometimes the problem with written communication I guess.

 

[ballz]

I also clarified what I defined in my posts as carrying, as in, in a persons hand, and not in a sheath. I even apologized for making an assumption about it. If you were carrying a knife in your hand, and were doing something that caused the police to respond, IE committing a crime, there is no doubt in my mind a gun, or a taser, would be drawn.

Of course it would, that's as certain as your comment is irrelevant. Several times the context in which you used the word "carry" and "carrying" indicated that you weren't talking about carrying it in your hand. Such as "no need to carry a knife daily." That clearly wasn't referring to carrying it your hand. We were all also clearly talking about knives in sheaths and in pockets and whatnot. My reading comprehension is more than sufficient for this conversation, your communication skills are insufficient.

As for the rest of your post, you can try and spin your argument or re-word it however you please, I don't need it explained, I understand exactly what you are saying. Perhaps you should advocate making "prohibited" pens, so that you can catch white-collar criminals... I mean, I'd bet 100% of white-collar criminals use a pen during the offense, and then when you can't prove he's committed a white-collar crime, you can toss him in the slammer for 5 years anyway, because he was using a prohibited pen. Now that would be injustice justice.

 

[lawandorder]

Of course it would, that's as certain as your comment is irrelevant. Several times the context in which you used the word "carry" and "carrying" indicated that you weren't talking about carrying it in your hand. Such as "no need to carry a knife daily." That clearly wasn't referring to carrying it your hand. We were all also clearly talking about knives in sheaths and in pockets and whatnot. My reading comprehension is more than sufficient for this conversation, your communication skills are insufficient.

As for the rest of your post, you can try and spin your argument or re-word it however you please, I don't need it explained, I understand exactly what you are saying. Perhaps you should advocate making "prohibited" pens, so that you can catch white-collar criminals... I mean, I'd bet 100% of white-collar criminals use a pen during the offense, and then when you can't prove he's committed a white-collar crime, you can toss him in the slammer for 5 years anyway, because he was using a prohibited pen. Now that would be injustice justice.

You're not even making sense anymore, nor do you have a grasp of the CCJS. You fail to realize I wasn't advocating anything that isn't prohibited should be.  But this again comes down to your reading and comprehension skills.

 

[ballz]

You fail to realize I wasn't advocating anything that isn't prohibited should be.

I have not failed to realize this. You are advocating that certain knives should be prohibited, because you will be able to catch criminals who choose to use them during a crime.

I am simply drawing a parallel to your example to outline how senseless that argument is. I'm glad you agree that it would make no sense to make certain pens, but not others, prohibited.

You can blame my reading comprehension all you want, everyone on this site knows I'm quite capable with the English language.

 

[lawandorder]

No.  I am stating that some knives already already are prohibited, and is another tool in the tool box to put bad guys away. Just like when an illegal firearm is used in an offense, the slew of firearms charges gets added on.  Or if controlled substances are found, those charges get added on.  Its a matter of fact. 

 

[ballz]

You stated

The restriction on knives is well warranted. 

and then you went on to support that opinion with a variety of weak statistics and this whole "another way to put a criminal in jail" argument.

That's quite different from stating the fact that there are already knives prohibited.

I am stating that the "another tool in the tool box" argument is a weak one to support prohibiting certain knives. It leads to injustice, and it doesn't prevent crime... much like prohibiting blue pens wouldn't prevent white-collar crime, but it would put a few people behind bars for a stupid reason.

 

[bcbarman]

The resrtiction of the prohibited knives in Canada comes down to knee-jerk reaction, but why do you want a swithblade or push knife that is prohibited in the first place? My manual opening knife is faster and more eficient then a switchblade.  It the LCF, and we all have barrack boxes full of junk kit we bought for the LCF, I know I do. 

It gets down to intent, and I take away stuff due to intent.  May be cool and legal in the Philippines, but its lame and illegal here. 

And Ballz, if our judges had enough of your name to actually throw anyone in jail, I would be amazed. Arrested for posession of a restricted knife, sure, happens as incidental to the real reason for arrest.  Conviction for that crime, with jail time! HA! community service with a dash of probation.

 

[Journeyman]

It's rhetorical.

Journeyman: You're also....

Sorry if four syllables overwhelmed you.

Learn to read Ballz. 

Perhaps he's not alone in that need.

Since my initial response obviously baffled you, I've made it easier for you -- you're set to <ignore>  :

(If it makes you feel special, of the site's 31,149 members, I have only four on ignore)

 

[PJGary]

Seems silly a 3 inch knife can be prohibited but a 7 inch knife wouldn't.  I guess switch blades and butterfly knives etc.. are scary and gang related dating back to the 50's or something.

I'm going to email the RCMP and ask for a prohibited license to possess auto-folders- they might get a good chuckle out of it.

I couldn't help but have this come to mind
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m8R9GiLImSw

IMHO there is some merit behind the argument that occasionally carrying certain items can display intent. For example: I worked for a while as a bouncer and one of my jobs was doing pat-downs at the door. I caught one certain gentleman who had a set of spiked brass knuckles in his back pocket. After staring at them in confusion for a couple seconds I simply asked him; "Man...why do you even HAVE these? And WHY are you trying to bring them into my bar?!".

 

[wisnoskij]

there is no restriction as long as it isnt concealed and you are carrying it for a lawful purpose. Self defense isnt a lawful purpose- so a sword to cut seat belts would be confiscated.

I have this in black I believe and carry it in my kit. I know several others with this style and size.

So what about backpacks or bags? Is that considered concealed? Or is that transporting instead of carrying and allowed?

As an aside, how is cutting seat belts considered self defence? And when you say self defene, you mean against anything that could harm you (animals, seat belts, etc)?

Also does that mean that it is very illigal to use a knife for defence? Or is it just premeditated defence (carrying it around in-case something happens)?

 

[Bluebulldog]

So what about backpacks or bags? Is that considered concealed? Or is that transporting instead of carrying and allowed?

As an aside, how is cutting seat belts considered self defence? And when you say self defene, you mean against anything that could harm you (animals, seat belts, etc)?

Also does that mean that it is very illigal to use a knife for defence? Or is it just premeditated defence (carrying it around in-case something happens)?

....and the award for resurrecting a long dead thread simply for purposes of being a drop in A$$ goes to this guy......