Police seize klingon weaponry in raid

[SirNitram]

A great many leathermans would be quite illegal in the UK given blade length.

A leatherman is a very nice tool. I need to get myself a better one then the fake leatherman I have.

Yet, even the ones with smaller blades will be actual versatile tools. As opposed to the silly, rather desperate argument to call a knife a tool to justify it's presense on normal situations.

[Alyeska]

I've found knives quite useful when I don't have them around at the time. Its not a tool I find a need for frequently, but it has come up often enough that I rather like to be able to carry them on me easily whenever I need. That said, a good leatherman does the job better most of the time. Though a leatherman is still a knife as far as most governments are concerned. Its merely a very nice knife with a lot of added features.

[SirNitram]

I've found knives quite useful when I don't have them around at the time. Its not a tool I find a need for frequently, but it has come up often enough that I rather like to be able to carry them on me easily whenever I need. That said, a good leatherman does the job better most of the time. Though a leatherman is still a knife as far as most governments are concerned. Its merely a very nice knife with a lot of added features.

So if I ever have money to get you a birthday gift, I need to hook you up with a swiss army knife, pocket sized?

Let's be quite serious here. You did not advance that tool argument because you realistically think of it as a tool. You did it because you disagree with weapons control and associate it with 'nanny state' behavior(Though I beleive I've pointed out the absurdity of that as well). It's a silly tangent anyways.

[Lusankya]

Given my skills in knife-fighting, I'd say that there's a fairly good chance that anyone who tried to mug me would be better at it than me, and all me drawing a knife would achieve would be to escalate the violence of the situation and make me more likely to be hurt.

How about being able to cut through absurd amounts of packaging of items you have bought.

I thought people generally waited until they got home to open the things they bought, to decrease the chance of losing bits. It's what I do anyway.

How about being used to cut up an apple you just got.

Plenty of people just bite into the apple without cutting it up.

Or what about using it to cut off a tatered piece of clothing that was created when you ripped your jacket on the side of a doorway.

Scissors are much more handy than a knife in this situation, and are far less weapon-ey. Which is why I have a small fold-up set of scissors attached to my keyring.


ROAR!!!!! says GOJIRA!!!!!

[Plekhanov]

Nobody needs an easily accessible knife? Bullshit. A knife is a simple and highly effective tool. People shouldn't be relegated to keeping the thing in unhandy locations because of nanny state fears.

And just what kinds of jobs to would I need a knife for as I go shopping or go down the pub with my mates?

How about being able to cut through absurd amounts of packaging of items you have bought.

I generally do that when I get home but if I don’t I find my keying swiss army knife to be more than adequate.

How about being used to cut up an apple you just got.

How about you just you know bite it?

Or what about using it to cut off a tatered piece of clothing that was created when you ripped your jacket on the side of a doorway.

Well I’ve never actually done that (maybe you’re clumsier than I) but if I did I’d probably wait till I got home or sort it out with swiss army knife

There are countless possible uses for a knife which are completely legitimate. In places like Montana (the more rural areas) the usefulness of a knife becomes even more apparent. The simple bucknife works wonders.

And this is relevant to urban living how exactly?

Need to cut through cardboard, a rope, plastic ties.

You need to do that often down town do you?

[Alyeska]

I don't see a knife as a weapon. It can certainly be used as one, but thats never how I have used them. I treat a knife as a useful tool that I like to have at my disposal. That is how most people treat knifes. In the home, or on the run. What irritates me is that some people have such a fear of the weapon potential of a knife, they want to restrict the rights and convience of others merely over a potential issue, not a current one. Knife ownership isn't a precursor of crime. So merely restricting knives isn't valid. Restricting knives is like tearing down a house to solve a problem with the wiring. The problem goes away, but its the worst possible way to solve the problem. The loss of liberty without just cause. In my book a significant harm to society must exist before you can severly restrict the rights of people. I can understand limiting certain knives and relegating them to collector status. But to make general carrying of a knife something you have to justify and you have to have it in not readily accessible means. That crosses the line in my book.

[Flagg]

I'm guessing carrying around a screwdriver is just as illegal as a knife in the UK?

[Alyeska]

Hold on a second. Your carrying around a swiss army knife? I thought you needed justification to carry a knife. Or are you allowed certain knives with relative ease?

[Stark]

Isn't street mugging far more common in America than other nations? I mean, all my friends in major American cities has a mugging story about themselves or a friend - I've never been mugged, never seen a mugging, never heard of anyone getting mugged. I don't feel the need for a weapon, even at night in 'bad' parts of Bris-vegas. I'm not saying this is a reason to ban knives, simply trying to understand the (to me) bizarre fear of violent crime Americans seem to have.

[Plekhanov]

I don't see a knife as a weapon. It can certainly be used as one, but thats never how I have used them. I treat a knife as a useful tool that I like to have at my disposal. That is how most people treat knifes. In the home, or on the run. What irritates me is that some people have such a fear of the weapon potential of a knife, they want to restrict the rights and convience of others merely over a potential issue, not a current one. Knife ownership isn't a precursor of crime. So merely restricting knives isn't valid. Restricting knives is like tearing down a house to solve a problem with the wiring. The problem goes away, but its the worst possible way to solve the problem. The loss of liberty without just cause. In my book a significant harm to society must exist before you can severly restrict the rights of people. I can understand limiting certain knives and relegating them to collector status. But to make general carrying of a knife something you have to justify and you have to have it in not readily accessible means. That crosses the line in my book.

How is stopping people getting stabbed not ‘significant harm’? The positive outcomes to people carrying knives are what exactly? The downside is that people get killed and severly injured when they might otherwise have got bruised.

I'm guessing carrying around a screwdriver is just as illegal as a knife in the UK?

If it’s in your pocket yes and you're just hanging around yes, if it’s in a toolbox or you're on a building site or similar obviously not.

Hold on a second. Your carrying around a swiss army knife? I thought you needed justification to carry a knife. Or are you allowed certain knives with relative ease?

I habitually carry a keying swiss army knife with a 4cm blade (about the legal limit though I’m not too sure), scissors & nail file, the scissors are by far the most useful to me. You simply don’t need anything more around town.

[Raxmei]

Hold on a second. Your carrying around a swiss army knife? I thought you needed justification to carry a knife. Or are you allowed certain knives with relative ease?

Manually folding knives less than three inches in length can be carried.

[SirNitram]

Isn't street mugging far more common in America than other nations? I mean, all my friends in major American cities has a mugging story about themselves or a friend - I've never been mugged, never seen a mugging, never heard of anyone getting mugged. I don't feel the need for a weapon, even at night in 'bad' parts of Bris-vegas. I'm not saying this is a reason to ban knives, simply trying to understand the (to me) bizarre fear of violent crime Americans seem to have.

I've luckily never had such troubles, just one home invasion dealt with via 6 foot of oak. And this is from living in the 'bad part' of a state capitol.. And people tell me to move...

Anyways. The strange fact is the American pro-weapon debators all have the delusion they come from action films, and are thus able to defeat an armed attacker without, you know, the huge advantage of being already armed.

[Alyeska]

How is stopping people getting stabbed not ‘significant harm’? The positive outcomes to people carrying knives are what exactly? The downside is that people get killed and severly injured when they might otherwise have got bruised.

First of all, for the most part stabbings occur with criminals, not law abiding citizens. So the relative number of people prevented from being stabbed is actualy quite minor because criminals won't pay the law any heed. Secondly, you have to proof a significant benefit to society in order to justify restricting societies rights. Lets say there are 1,000 preventable knifings in the UK every year. So you heavily restrict knives and that number drops to 500. You have prevented 500 knifings at the expense of others civil liberties.

There is something far more dangerous in the UK. Its called the automobile. You can save 5,000 lives a year by making cars illegal and requiring people to ride mass transit. Sure its going to be a minor inconvience, but think of saving 5,000 lives.

What you are advocating is restricting the rights of people for what they might potentialy do with a net public gain of dubious levels. What I proposed was a significant infringement of the rights of people counter ballanced by a significant savings in lives. From my prospective, both are wrong. Don't try and solve the problem by completely doing away with the elements of the problem. Solve it by finding ways to decrease the danger without taking away peoples rights.

Hold on a second. Your carrying around a swiss army knife? I thought you needed justification to carry a knife. Or are you allowed certain knives with relative ease?

I habitually carry a keying swiss army knife with a 4cm blade (about the legal limit though I’m not too sure), scissors & nail file, the scissors are by far the most useful to me. You simply don’t need anything more around town.

And this means I was debating from a position without knowing all the facts. All knives in public carry are not restricted, only certain knives. I now have much less of a problem with the UK laws and can accept them for the most part.

[Molyneux]

As does any American calling any other country a 'nanny state' when their own government is protecting them from the horrors of breasts, monitoring their phone calls, and working to protect them from the evils of real sex-ed.

I think that that is possibly the most expansive ad hominem attack I have ever read.

The American government is currently full of shitheads, yes. This is a widely acknowledged fact (amongst the smarter set, anyhow).

How the hell does that change the fact that the British government is apparently hell-bent on depriving their populace of the right to self-defense?

[LordShaithis]

I welcome the day when the UK amputates the limbs of all citizens and plunks their torsos into isolation chambers, thus finally freeing them from the terrors of being attacked with screwdrivers, scissors, heavy flashlights, letter openers, golf clubs, cricket bats, large rocks, fists, and socks filled with marbles.

[Plekhanov]

How is stopping people getting stabbed not ‘significant harm’? The positive outcomes to people carrying knives are what exactly? The downside is that people get killed and severly injured when they might otherwise have got bruised.

First of all, for the most part stabbings occur with criminals, not law abiding citizens. So the relative number of people prevented from being stabbed is actualy quite minor because criminals won't pay the law any heed.

The danger of knives is as much from ‘law abiding folk’ who lose their tempers as it is from ‘criminals’.

Secondly, you have to proof a significant benefit to society in order to justify restricting societies rights. Lets say there are 1,000 preventable knifings in the UK every year. So you heavily restrict knives and that number drops to 500. You have prevented 500 knifings at the expense of others civil liberties.

What valuable liberty is being limited here? What’s so important about being able to carry sizable knives about the place?

There is something far more dangerous in the UK. Its called the automobile. You can save 5,000 lives a year by making cars illegal and requiring people to ride mass transit. Sure its going to be a minor inconvience, but think of saving 5,000 lives.

Do you really not understand the rather major point that cars are essential for the functioning of British society whereas the liberty to carrying knives serves no useful purpose whatsoever?

What you are advocating is restricting the rights of people for what they might potentialy do with a net public gain of dubious levels. What I proposed was a significant infringement of the rights of people counter ballanced by a significant savings in lives. From my prospective, both are wrong. Don't try and solve the problem by completely doing away with the elements of the problem. Solve it by finding ways to decrease the danger without taking away peoples rights.

How is saying I can’t carry bladed weapons a ‘a significant infringement of my rights’? What is so important about that particular right? Particularly when granting it will cause the deaths of people?

How the hell does that change the fact that the British government is apparently hell-bent on depriving their populace of the right to self-defense?

Please do explain how restrictions upon knives deprive me in a realistic manner of my right to self-defense.

[LordShaithis]

Oh come the fuck on, nobody is ever going to say "Shit, I really need money for a heroin fix! I should rob someone! But damn, knives are illegal, so I guess I'll turn over a new leaf instead!"

Anyone who decides their best course of action is to rob somebody can find a suitable "weapon" in any ordinary house.

[Plekhanov]

Oh come the fuck on, nobody is ever going to say "Shit, I really need money for a heroin fix! I should rob someone! But damn, knives are illegal, so I guess I'll turn over a new leaf instead!"

Anyone who decides their best course of action is to rob somebody can find a suitable "weapon" in any ordinary house.

Who do you think you're arguing with here?

[Darth Wong]

I welcome the day when the UK amputates the limbs of all citizens and plunks their torsos into isolation chambers, thus finally freeing them from the terrors of being attacked with screwdrivers, scissors, heavy flashlights, letter openers, golf clubs, cricket bats, large rocks, fists, and socks filled with marbles.

I welcome the day when Americans shoot everyone they see on sight, in order to finally free themselves from their terror of being killed by a criminal when they're sleeping and they don't wake up in time to grab the gun they keep under the pillow.

[SirNitram]

Oh come the fuck on, nobody is ever going to say "Shit, I really need money for a heroin fix! I should rob someone! But damn, knives are illegal, so I guess I'll turn over a new leaf instead!"

Anyone who decides their best course of action is to rob somebody can find a suitable "weapon" in any ordinary house.

Who do you think you're arguing with here?

His usual opponents, strawmen and his own delusions.

[LordShaithis]

I'm quite convinced that if you snapped your fingers and made all the knives in the world disappear, you'd accomplish pretty much jack shit in terms of reducing crime.

Seriously, Mike, Plek, whoever. You're a criminal getting ready to go out and stab someone for whatever reason, and you discover your knife has vanished. Do you stay home, or is someone getting poked with a screwdriver that night?

I mean this sort of argument is one thing when it comes to a gun, which has much greater range and lethality than any off-the-cuff weapon, but knives? Really? I can think of a million common items which are just as suitable for gang-fights or bushwhacking passersby in a dark corner of the park.

[SirNitram]

I'm quite convinced that if you snapped your fingers and made all the knives in the world disappear, you'd accomplish pretty much jack shit in terms of reducing crime.

Seriously, Mike, Plek, whoever. You're a criminal getting ready to go out and stab someone for whatever reason, and you discover your knife has vanished. Do you stay home, or is someone getting poked with a screwdriver that night?

I mean this sort of argument is one thing when it comes to a gun, which has much greater range and lethality than any off-the-cuff weapon, but knives? Really? I can think of a million common items which are just as suitable for gang-fights or bushwhacking passersby in a dark corner of the park.

Which would be why knives are not completely banned. As anyone with rudimentary reading comprehension knows. But hey, this is you, we expect failure.

[Darth Wong]

I'm quite convinced that if you snapped your fingers and made all the knives in the world disappear, you'd accomplish pretty much jack shit in terms of reducing crime.

And if you snapped your fingers and put a gun in every single person's hands in the world?

Seriously, Mike, Plek, whoever. You're a criminal getting ready to go out and stab someone for whatever reason, and you discover your knife has vanished. Do you stay home, or is someone getting poked with a screwdriver that night?

Seriously. You're a moron in a bar, in a society where everyone thinks that casually carrying weapons on them at all times is a good idea, and you've had a few, and some other guy has had a few, you insult his girlfriend, and he looks like he's going to tattoo your face with his fist. Does this escalate into a potentially lethal situation?

I mean this sort of argument is one thing when it comes to a gun, which has much greater range and lethality than any off-the-cuff weapon, but knives? Really? I can think of a million common items which are just as suitable for gang-fights or bushwhacking passersby in a dark corner of the park.

To be honest, I don't have much urge to outlaw knives, but the arguments you're using to ridicule the idea rely exclusively upon assumption of a particular scenario to the exclusion of all others, and massive exaggeration. It's not hard to play that game.

[Zero]

I'm quite convinced that if you snapped your fingers and made all the knives in the world disappear, you'd accomplish pretty much jack shit in terms of reducing crime.

Seriously, Mike, Plek, whoever. You're a criminal getting ready to go out and stab someone for whatever reason, and you discover your knife has vanished. Do you stay home, or is someone getting poked with a screwdriver that night?

I mean this sort of argument is one thing when it comes to a gun, which has much greater range and lethality than any off-the-cuff weapon, but knives? Really? I can think of a million common items which are just as suitable for gang-fights or bushwhacking passersby in a dark corner of the park.

Actually, if I didn't have a knife, and I were planning a mugging or two (a situation that, of course, wouldn't ever come up), I'd probably bring a blunt object like a metal bat, but because it isn't as effective as a threatening tool, I'd probably use it and take their shit when they stopped moving. Blunt objects are rather simple to use.

Same is true for guns, but the fact that I'm using something that's less likely to be lethal can be seen as either a good or bad thing. I'm going to be hurting more people, because blunt objects aren't good as threatening thingies, since people generally figure they're competent to take on someone with a bat, but I'm less likely to kill as many people, since it's not as lethal as a gun or knife.

[Plekhanov]

I'm quite convinced that if you snapped your fingers and made all the knives in the world disappear, you'd accomplish pretty much jack shit in terms of reducing crime.

Seriously, Mike, Plek, whoever. You're a criminal getting ready to go out and stab someone for whatever reason, and you discover your knife has vanished. Do you stay home, or is someone getting poked with a screwdriver that night?

I mean this sort of argument is one thing when it comes to a gun, which has much greater range and lethality than any off-the-cuff weapon, but knives? Really? I can think of a million common items which are just as suitable for gang-fights or bushwhacking passersby in a dark corner of the park.

You are so fucking dumb, I have already repeatedly stated that (to quote myself):

The danger of knives is as much from ‘law abiding folk’ who lose their tempers as it is from ‘criminals’.

Nobody is saying that knives should be completely removed from society what I atleast am saying is that you shouldn’t be allowed to carry them on the streets. Of course violent criminals will continue to do so, that can’t be helped but at least this way the police can detain and imprison anybody who intentionally carries a lethal weapon.

The major benefits in limiting weapons are from keeping lethal weapons a good distance from your average ‘law abiding’ jerk so that when he’s out in public, if he gets into a fight it’s less likely to involve a death.