Congress is fighting over an administrative proposal to expand the definition of switchblades so as to ban certain currently-legal pocketknives:
Opponents of the Obama administration’s plan to expand the definition of “switchblades” and block the importing of many common pocketknives suffered an early setback in Congress this week, but they vow the Capitol Hill knife fight isn’t over.
“Everyone from our first responders, law enforcement officials, Boy Scouts and hunters will be affected by this regulation,” said Rep. Bob Latta, Ohio Republican, after the House Rules Committee rejected his bill to block the change. “It is unacceptable to think that we as citizens cannot carry a pocketknife for work or recreation purposes.” . . .
Critics of the regulation – including U.S. knife manufacturers and collectors, the National Rifle Association, sportsmen’s groups and a bipartisan group of at least 79 House members – say it would rewrite U.S. law defining what constitutes a switchblade and potentially make de facto criminals of the estimated 35 million Americans who use folding knives. . . .
The new knife rules proposed by U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) would affect the interpretation of the Switchblade Knife Act of 1958 to include any spring-assisted or one-handed-opening knife.
The law defines a “switchblade” as any knife having a blade that opens automatically by hand pressure applied to a button or other device in the handle, or by operation of inertia or gravity.
Customs officials dismiss fears that the new language will outlaw ordinary pocketknives, saying the change was issued to clear up conflicting guidelines for border agents about what constitutes an illegal switchblade that cannot be imported into the United States. The rule could be imposed within 30 days if not blocked.
A review of case law “in consideration of the health and public safety concerns raised by such importations” prompted the agency to revoke the ruling that allowed the importing of knives with spring- and release-assisted opening mechanisms, CBP spokeswoman Jenny L. Burke said.
Customs officials argue the rule deals only with imported merchandise, and does not affect knives already in the country or that are manufactured domestically.
Beyond these specific knives in question–do any of you have one?–and the merits of these new regulations is another issue. The Second Amendment protects the right to “keep and bear arms.” Firearms aren’t the only kind of “arms,” so should it protect the right even to bear a switchblade?
{ 25 comments… read them below or add one }
If I am determined to do harm to someone I will find a way. This notion that the weapons hurt and kill rather than the person is naive at best, a thin excuse to remove our rights more likely.
Obama would do better to dress us all up in bubble wrap, buy everyone an American hybrid car, and give us laughing gas. This is a total joke. It will not make society safer (“if it saves ONE child”), it will rather make for a lucrative trade in the black knife market. Not to mentioned all the peeved anglers and hunters who have a legitimate need to eat.
CL
I always keep a pocketknife on me – it really comes in handy. I don’t think any of my blades are spring assisted, though. If this actually curtailed ordinary knives like swiss army knives and the like – the reaction the Congress and the President would get would be funny. A lot of the reaction now may be exactly that sort of fear, much along the lines of Crypto-Lutherans comments above, which I agree with. We’ve always known that Obama and Pelosi are in bed with the gun control people.
The inherent treacherous malevolence of the 0bama kakistocracy becomes more evident in every evil action they pursue.
Being a collector of knives, I have several that would fall under this definition. Incidentally, they are the ones that I carry most frequently. I tend to rotate which one I carry purely for enjoyment’s sake, because I like the feel of a quality knife.
Simply put, these knives are more convenient. I can be involved in a task which occupies one hand (holding the rope, string, box, or wood that I want to cut) and open my knife easily with only the other hand. Hardly any more dangerous than having to put down the object to open my knife.
None of the blades on these knives is more than about three inches. In terms of danger, they don’t compare to a perfectly legal butcher knife.
This regulation is absolutely ridiculous. It is not about safety or crime. If that were the true concern, outlaw blades based on length, or outlaw knives based on how easy they are to conceal. The number of hands that it takes to open has nothing to do with its ability to cut or pierce.
The idea that the government would waste money to even debate this angers me. The idea that the government would curtail my freedom in this manner angers me. This legislation is either a social/political agenda, or it is a favor to a portion of the industry that will profit at the expense of another.
Guys, guys… knives are not the endgame here. They’re actually trying to keep people from whittling pointy sticks and running with them. I mean, seriously, you could put someone’s eye out with that kind of careless behavior.
I have a handful of knives, most of which would be considered pocket knives or swiss army knives. I’ve got a couple handmade ones that are pretty nice (if I do say so myself) but a bit too large for casually carrying around. I am working on figuring out what sort of large hunting/”survival” knife I want to get.
My pocket knives have gotten a lot less action since I’ve been working in places they don’t let you bring in a knife, but I used to regularly carry them around.
Baby steps . . . baby steps . . .
This is a GROSS violation of the second amendment, as was the banning of switchblades in the first place.
Eric R. is right. A Knife Law is not the endgame. Tangentially, I recently brought 12 cornish hens to the local abbatoir. Before I had left the loading bay, the slaughterer had already pulled out a long, very sharp and very dangerous knife to slit the hens’ throats. With the new knife law he will need an exemption of course. There’s one bureaucratic job. Then, one day, a chicken slaughterer will kill one of his co-workers in an act of rage. The frenetic liberals will then demand a yearly psychological test for all slaughterers. There’s a few more unionised government jobs. And so it will go, on and on. Exemption piled on exemption, and a whole network of psychologists and civil servants will be established to deal with human idiocy.
This problem was predicted with precision by fellows like de Tocqueville and Foucault: as our focus drifts from physcial punishment of perpetrators of violence, it will more and more focus on the pysochological state of the delinquent. A few brilliant men have theorised with tonnes of evidence and citations in history that this switch from “punishment” to “rehabilitation” would lead to an increase in crime and claims of “mental instability” as a pretense to committing crime. A knife law, or a gun law, or whatever behaviour law you name, will lead to an increase in crime.
God have mercy.
CL
Of course I have knives like that. Doesn’t everyone?
To this day I fail to see why switchblades are illegal. I have owned them. Had a real nice one I bought while living in Itally, handmade. Bought it just to say I had one. Thing is I would rather take my buck knife into a knife fight, it holds an edge better, and could actually do some damage without breaking.
But seriously banning folding knives? Does congress need a job? How about Obama? I mean I thought he had enough to do with wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, political unrest in Iran, and coups in Honduras. But evidently none of that stuff matters, what matters is knives.
I am appalled.
But this just the first step. What’s next? Butter knives? Then how will I butter my toast? With a fork? Give me a break.
And what about those cheap plastic knives you find in fast food restaurants? You cannot spread jam with a spoon, people. Doesn’t Obama know that?
These are indeed times that try men’s souls.
The key to one of my cars is spring loaded and pops out of the side of the remote/fob when a button is pushed, much like a switchblade. Will my car be confiscated as a dangerous weapon?
I have several of these types of knives. My 6 year old son has one, too. They are not any more dangerous then any other knife.
When my son was assigned to a combat engineer battalion, I bought him a leatherman multi-tool for his birthday. You know, one of those things that unfolds into a pliers, wire cutter, wire stripper, 2 screw drivers, can opener, file, saw blade, and (yes) a knife blade. The thing is, both the saw blade and knife blade have that feature that enables the owner to open the blade one handed by pushing it out with his thumb.
Like Bror said, most pocket knives are like that now. They are intended to be tools that a working person can open with one hand and still, for example, hold onto the ladder he is standing on with the other hand. The idea is to allow somebody to keep working safely. This kind of stupid regulation would cause more injuries than it would prevent.
In the Boy Scouts a folding knife is practically required, since we have to cut ropes, fishing lines, wood, etc, etc. Almost all of our Scouts and leaders have both pocket-knives (of the swiss-army type) and a folding knife with a larger blade.
I see something more sinister.
If they can get us all worked up about a possible ban on jack knives, then when it doesn’t happen, we’ll be relieved that it’s only guns that got banned.
I have a switchblade. It’s already illegal to carry it almost everywhere (maybe I could use it in my own yard), but when they come for it they will have to pry it out of my cold, dead fingers.
Don, I’m afraid that they’ll be only too happy to do that.
Mike,
Then they greatly underestimate the gun owners in this country. They will try to ban guns, and they will try it over again, but they will always find that us gun owners will oppose them all the way. The tide has been swinging on this in any case, despite Obama being elected.
If for somereason congress is so stupidly drunk with delusions so as to pass this knife ban, they will undoubtedly wake up in a few years outside their office with a rude hangover.
I am constantly reminded of the sign posted in the local welding shop I saw frequently when I was little: “If guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns.” I guess it applies to knives too. (The only reason I don’t have a knife is because I’m a super klutz and can injure myself with plain old kitchen knives.)
I believe they’ve outlawed guns in Britain, and are astonished to find a rash of knife crimes. Now they’re thinking of outlawing knives (with exceptions for persons with a chef’s license). I predict an increase in whack-with-a-rock crimes.
My husband reminds me of a recent BBC article all in a dither about “trained dog attacks.” I suppose a dog could be your weapon of choice…
right to bear arms.I want to have a nuclear bomb. it is my constitutional right is it not? any logical arguments against?
it is illegal in brasil to walk around with a knife but to have one at home is ok. the law seems intended as a way to prosecute street thugs and is applied accordingly. they still all have knives (and some guns of course).
is it my constitutional right to bear biological weapons? seriously now.
fws (22):
First of all, look at the verbage in the Amendment. “Arms” is a rather precise military term, actually. It means those weapons which an infantryman bears during routine use: knives, swords, and (more recently) pistols and rifles. Nuclear weapons, along with artillery, are properly “ordnance”. I would include hand-grenades in the latter also.
Secondly, remember the purposes of the 2nd Amendment:
A) To give the government a pool of men to draw upon who are already familiar with the use and care of arms. One of the reasons that we won against the British in the Revolutionary War is that our sharpshooters were better trained than theirs, due to the fact that they had to hunt to provide for their families.
B) To enable men to provide for and protect their families. (Read the Federalist papers)
C) As an ultimate last resort – to enable an armed popular uprising against a tyrannical government.
fws (23):
So long as they are part of your body, yes.