We're not banning knives though, are we? Guns are different, and they're banned for the same reasons that, say, carrying around a bioweapon is banned.

- Their primary purpose is to inflict harm.

- The harm caused is potentially / easily lethal.

- Their existence escalates nearly all situations.

- They're dangerous items that can very easily cause accidental harm.

"we"? In the UK you are not allowed to carry a knife with you, unless you just bought one and are bringing to home or are a certified chief who needs one for work, or are going camping.

Actually, in the UK you are not legally allowed to carry a hard fruit such as for example a squash or miniature pumpkin in a plastic carry bag if you end up using it for self defence when attacked.

Yes, that's right, in UK carrying in public any object that can be or is used as a weapon (including defensively) is considered a crime. This is normally applied to knives, but if the letter of the law was to be adhered to someone who did defend themselves against an attack with a small pumpkin could be arrested for the possession of the said pumpkin... This is the madness of UK law.

I remember few years ago a situation where a dog attacked a small child and wouldn't let go, someone ran home, grabbed a kitchen knife, killed the dog and saved the child. When the police arrived they had to arrest the person who saved the child life because of the knife... Thankfully the person didn't end up being charged as no witness would testify that that person has indeed used a knife as a weapon.

No, this is untrue.

You're not allowed to carry a hard fruit in a bag with the intention of using it as a self defence weapon. But if you go shopping and happen to have it on you when you're attacked you're allowed to use it to defend yourself. (And you don't need to wait for the attacker to land the first blow, you're allowed the first strike if you're genuinely trying to defend yourself).

EDIT: also, you seem to misunderstand the purpose of English arrests. Of course if you stab an animal to death you're going to get arrested. The arrest allows the police to question you, and it _protects your rights_ -- you get a free lawyer for that interview; they have 24 hours to charge or release you etc.

You make it sound like arresting the person is doing them a favor.

That's not actually true, the law states, "Without a reasonable excuse", so any reasonable excuse is fine. The idea you'd need to be "certified" to carry a knife is fiction to drive an agenda.

Ok, by "certified" I just meant that if you say you are a chef, you better be employed as a chef and be able to prove it. I don't mean that you need to produce a diploma from a culinary school. If you get stopped with a knife on the London metro saying you're off to cook some food at someone's place(and you need your own knife for some reason) that's probably not going to be accepted without some brief investigation.

Hmm, how is it actually regulated? So, e.g. if I am going to my friends and carrying a bottle of wine altogether with pocket knife bundled with a corkscrew to be sure I will be able to open it, then I am in a grey zone or even illegal?

As long as it's a small, non-locking pocket knife, you're fine. If it's larger, you're fine as long as you have a good reason (eg. needed for work).

That's dangerous advice in many areas of the United States. In NYC if a police officer finds any kind of folding knife, regardless of how harmless, if he wants to arrest you he probably can under NYPD's absurd perversion of the law by considering it possession of a drop knife. If the officer can open the knife by holding it and flicking it open via inertia then he can arrest the victim for possession of a drop knife. They usually don't hold the handle to try and flick it open either, they'll hold it from the tip of the blade as that makes it very easy to just arrest anyone with a pocket knife.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15372404

The first man mentioned in that article was convicted and sentenced to 6 years in prison on the sole charge of possession of this knife.

https://www.amazon.com/Sheffield-12113-One-Hand-Opening-Lock...

Try with a slightly-stuck Opinell. You're more likely to throw the knive or cut/puncture your finger than you are to flick it open. You can push it open with the thumb while retaining the handle with the ring? finger, but that's not flicking.

If the blade is under 3" and isn't a locking blade you don't need a reason. If the blade is longer than 3" you need a reason. "I'm taking this bottle of wine to my friend's house and they don't have a corkscrew" would be fine.

Many states in the USA are similar once you get above a certain blade length to allow for common pocket knives. Then again the same rules will get you in trouble for having a baseball bat and don't seem to have a good reason.

That's untrue.

If the blade is under 3 inches (and isn't lockable) you're allowed to carry it.

If the blade is longer than 3 inches you need a valid reason to carry it.

It's not automatically legal to carry a blade under 3 inches,

(2)Subject to subsection (3) below, this section applies to any article which has a blade or is sharply pointed except a folding pocketknife.

(3)This section applies to a folding pocketknife if the cutting edge of its blade exceeds 3 inches.

The three inches is clarification around folded pocketknives, it's not blanket authorisation to carry knives less than that length.

Banning guns is philosophically unsound, for the exact reasons this guy just listed. Look at Britian where they are now having unprecedented amounts of stabbings and are actually confiscating things like pliers and forks.

I'm uncertain about this idea that increase in knife crime means gun control is pointless. I'd much rather get stabbed than shot given the differential in mortality. Even if all gun crimes were replaced with knife crimes the per capita homicide will be lower.

Guns are loud even with a silencer. Knife crimes are easier to conceal in urban ambush situations.

If that were such a big factor, then allowing guns wouldn't make a difference, as criminal could still choose to carry a knife for this reason.

Look at Chicago for an example: It's one of the most restrictive states in the union on 'gun control' yet has some of the highest murder rates and death by guns across the board.

Seems to have worked GREAT there!

I read years ago in a book about gangs that knife wounds lead to death far more often than gunshot wounds

If you meant to stay on topic (reads like a tangent), I believe firearm videos are still kosher on Youtube. Look up FPSRussia.

If by kosher, you mean "allowed, without monetisation, and under some arcane, opaque and onerous restrictions that mean you never know if this video will get you a strike or not", then yeah, they are

Yeah, guns are another example.