Prosecuted for having a Swiss Army Knife

[Neil]

In Ireland, such respect seems to have dwindled long ago. It may have had something to to with the police being caught framing a pub owner for murder, burying explosives themselves and then 'finding' IRA caches to make themselves look good, and removing their number badges before beating the hell out of peaceful demonstators.........and everybody has their own story......

After a break-in at home, I went to the station to get my insurance form signed - it wasn't even entered on their system - I said, "that's one way to get your crime stats down, isn't it?"

 

[Humblebee]

Good article on knife carrying law here

http://www.bushcraftuk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=8233
I'll keep carrying my swiss army knife!

 

[snowleopard]

Either way, the cops really don't help themselves with cases like this - a bit like the cop that charged someone with blowing their nose at the lights.

Every time a high-profile case like this gets into the news the police lose a few more formerly supportive citizens. In the long run that's going to make their jobs harder. Next time the police ask for information from the public a lot of us are going to think back to cases like this and decide not to get involved.

 

[nonitoo]

Every time a high-profile case like this gets into the news the police lose a few more formerly supportive citizens. In the long run that's going to make their jobs harder. Next time the police ask for information from the public a lot of us are going to think back to cases like this and decide not to get involved.

A bit like being 'asked' to assist by giving a DNA sample voluntarily "to exclude yourself among many others from a crime scene" and than finding that the police will retain your sample indefinitely. Before you say anything this is NOT an urban myth.

No way would I ever offer to assist any police investigation voluntarily.

Tom

 

[cliffordpope]

Are we suggesting he intended to use the knife against the Police?

No, of course not. But if someone is trying to argue that he has an apparently offensive weapon entirely for peaceful reasons, or as necessary to his trade or hobby, he isn't helping that impression if he adopts an aggressive or argumentative stance.

I'm not expressing an opinion on this particular case, just making an observation on such cases in general, and the perfectly reasonable right of the police to take the questioned person's attitude and manner into account in deciding whether there is likely to have been an offence committed.

If I'm stopped in a dark street at midnight carrying a large wrench, and I explain that I'm a plumber on my way to turn off a burst water main, that's reasonable.
But if I start getting aggressive and argue about my rights, the policeman might reasonably start to have grounds for doubting my explanation.

Or if I am found to be carrying a baseball bat in the car, and launch into a tirade about immigration and violence on the streets, it begins to look like an offensive weapon. But if I explain politely that I am the trainer for a baseball team, that's different.

I have no problem with the questioning policeman forming a sensible judgement based on many factors, including the attitude of the person being questioned. What I object to is the stupid way someone else further up the line seems increasingly to pursue some of these examples, without any regard for commonsense or proportion.
Meanwhile, public respect for the whole process drains away, and real criminals go scot-free.

 

[johnabbott893]

Actually, the law is that you are allowed to carry a folding knife with a blade of less than 3 inches which is not capable of being locked.

Exactly! You don't need an excuse to carry such a knife. In fact if asked by Mr Plod for a reason you could quite reasonably answer "because I am legally allowed to carry it". If he asks to confiscate it, then give it to him and take him to court to get it back; it won't get that far because it puts a tick in the wrong box.

 

[timbartlett]

No, of course not. But if someone is trying to argue that he has an apparently offensive weapon entirely for peaceful reasons, or as necessary to his trade or hobby, he isn't helping that impression if he adopts an aggressive or argumentative stance.

If a policeman stops someone for some bogus reason, then he is the aggressor.
Not his victim.
Same goes for civil servants who issue bogus demands for "penalty charges": they are the criminals, not their victims.
If any party were to guarantee to clamp down on these legalised thugs and con-men, they would certainly get my vote.

Exactly! You don't need an excuse to carry such a knife. In fact if asked by Mr Plod for a reason you could quite reasonably answer "because I am legally allowed to carry it". If he asks to confiscate it, then give it to him and take him to court to get it back; it won't get that far because it puts a tick in the wrong box.

(a) according to Cliffordpope, that would be "aggressive", so he would be justified in arresting you -- a rather circular argument!
(b) if he confiscates it, I would hope that his colleagues would arrest him, because what he has done is theft! But I wouldn't hold my breath!
(c) The problem is that non-locking knives are dangerous (my other half cannot straighten one of her fingers because a tiny non-locking "penknife" folded up on her.) In this Elf'n'Safety-blighted age, you would have thought that the non-lockable knives would be illegal, not vice versa.

 

[bmwonder]

Am I legal?

I have a favourite general purpose knife that I use when sailing (it is not specifically a sailing knife). It has a 3in folding blade that locks in the open position (I happen to think that it is safer). If I am going to, or from, the boat and I have the knife in my sailing bag with the rest of the kit then I am legal as I have a genuine reason for carrying it. Is that right, am I understanding this correctly?