Why not say its for defense?

T

Timothy 75

Joined
Aug 11, 2011
Messages
73
I always see "If asked by LE why your carrying a knife say its for opening boxes". If the knife is legal to carry in your state, and you have the right to protect yourself from death or grave bodily harm, why start out lying to the cops?
 
Trust me just lie to the cops.


The cops want you to lie to them. They don't want to arrest a good citizen for nothing. I can tell by your question you probably aren't the guy they are looking for.
 
Hi! This is an interesting question. First of all, if you live in a place where carrying a knife for self-defence is allowed, you should have no problem in telling the truth straight away, if asked by any LEO :). I think that trying to fool Policemen, specially in front of manifest evidences, is only annoying them. Around here they are normally under-staffed, working overtime and poorly paid for the risks they take. They have, normally, little tolerance for bullsh!t :D.

So, if I were allowed to carry for SD and I’m stopped and searched (for a reason) and Officers find my “ultimate warrior karambit” :D in the pocket of my Armani suit jacket when walking in the financial district of my city, I’d better not try to convince them it’s to crop my lettuce :). I’d show my blade(s), gun(s), my ID card, my gun permit, etc., politely wait for them to double check, thank them for their service, say goodbye and walk away.

Since here carrying a knife/gun for SD for me is not an option, I never had this problem. I have been stopped and asked to be searched a couple of times on the trails by our Rangers instead, who were looking for poachers. Did exactly the same. They barely looked at my sheathed F1 attached to the molle straps of my slinger – they had instead a good look inside of it - and we all walked happily away on respective business. I also have been stopped and searched once, while driving to the range. Officers were standing for a road block. Did the same. Since my guns were unloaded and correctly packed away from immediate reach, in the trunk of my car, Officers checked me out and just said: “Thank-you Sir, safe shooting”, when handing back my papers. Knowing my rights, abiding the laws and being honest, polite and respectful, always pays off in these situations, in my personal experience :).
 
My last post was not entirely serious. If you are uncomfortable telling an officer that the knife you are infact carrying for self defense you are carrying it for utility then do not.

Most knives people carry for self defensive purposes are also their utility knives pressed into service. The waved Endura is a good knife for this.

There are also dedicated fighting and defensive knives. If you are in an area where carrrying knives defensively is illegal you probably should not be carrying one of these.
 
Thanks for your responses. I figure if your a law abiding citizen and aware of your state and county weapon laws you should be able to stand up for your right to exercise them. People that carry pepper spray arent obligated to come up with an excuse for carrying, when its obviously for defense. Why should knife owners? Its legal or it isnt. What are we ashamed of?
 
Much of the advice that is given (against saying a knife is for self defense) is because many localities have laws against bladed weapons, or simply dangerous weapons. The wording of such laws is often general enough to describe knives routinely carried...or, perhaps worse, leaves much of the interpretation of what is dangerous up to the officer. That creates a situation in which INTENT becomes a huge factor. Using a utility tool in one's defense is acceptable; carrying a dangerous weapon is looking for trouble.
 
But its also how you respond to the questions. yes your words might be "I'm just a citizen exercising my rights" but your tone might be "sir, we both know I'm in the clear, but I appreciate that you take your job seriously" or "My taxes pay your wage buck-o, so lets get this done with because I have far more important things to do, and I can't believe you'd ever assume that I might be doing anything wrong!" Its easy to start seeing the uniform and not the human, if you see the human, you'll probably be just fine, no matter your answer.
 
Much of the advice that is given (against saying a knife is for self defense) is because many localities have laws against bladed weapons, or simply dangerous weapons. The wording of such laws is often general enough to describe knives routinely carried...or, perhaps worse, leaves much of the interpretation of what is dangerous up to the officer. That creates a situation in which INTENT becomes a huge factor. Using a utility tool in one's defense is acceptable; carrying a dangerous weapon is looking for trouble.
Click to expand...

But A high capacity 45acp is a very dangerous weapon you can open carry without sporting justification because of your protection under your 2nd amendment rights? If a gun or knife is legal to own and carry and stays holstered except in a dire emergency, I dont see why you would be in any violation by stating its for protection because your in a bad part of town at night? I supose the officer could think "this guys carrying a dangerous weapon" but wouldnt he know thats your right if done in accordance with the law?
 
This brings up an interesting legal/constitutional point. There is not a lot of case law on the subject, but the few courts that have weighed in on it appear to indicate that the more "weapon" or "arm"-like a knife is, the more likely it is to fall under the Second Amendment's protection of the right to bear arms. The ironic result being that a state or municipality may have more constitutional leeway in banning butter knives that it does in banning daggers.

Here's an article on the subject: http://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart...nives-long-theyre-not-made-cooking-180957718/
 
As an example, in MI it is unlawful to carry a knife with the intent to do harm to another person, even if the reason is self-defense. The idea of self-defense with a knife is to harm another individual to protect your safety and thus unlawful. Ironically, you can carry a gun for self-defense and not a knife here even with a CPL.

The idea behind it, from what I've heard as reasoning, is that a knife is a "thugs" weapon and a gun isn't. I've also heard people with the idea that if you are in a situation where you have to use a knife for self-defense or lose your life, you break the law every time and deal with the least of the two consequences. Where this limits us is for knives like push daggers or that are pretty much only good for self-defense/fighting. There are others but you get the idea, the knife has to be able to be used for something else effectively, by design.

With regards to the 2nd amendment, it makes little sense to me that a gun can be used but a knife can't but I don't make the laws, I just try to follow them and support organizations like Knife rights that try to make the laws more in-line with what I see as correct.
 
Self-defense is unlawful? Self-defense is an affirmative defense available to a defendant to justify the use of force against another. The defendant bears the burden of proving his use of force was reasonable in the circumstances, but it is not inherently unlawful.
 
Alot of the laws which imply that you can carry a knife for self defense but not a gun date back to a time where poorer (read: black) people could not afford guns. This meant that poorer people would not be able to legally defend themselves and wealthier whites would be able to.

However in today's society for some reason the public takes an extremely grim outlook on using knives for self defense. There is something they do not like about it. A jury looking at the pictures of an attacker stopped by a bullet vs cut to ribbons by a knife can have a profound effect on who the jury sympathizes with.
 
I live in Ohio. Carrying a knife for self defense here automatically categorizes the knife as a deadly weapon and makes it illegal under most circumstances. Carrying a knife for utility reasons, however, is perfectly legal.
 
This is a topic I've researched quite a bit and interviewed cops about.

To put it simply, saying a knife is not for defense when questioned is a very vague rule of thumb and not a universal piece of advice. Many variables can affect how you answer so it takes a judgement call.

In the following cases you should tell the truth about your knife if it's indeed for self-defense:
-The law in your specific jurisdiction, including case law, clearly establishes the legality of your knife and leaves no room for interpretation based on intent.
-The knife is very obviously designed to be a weapon or carried in a manner suggesting weapon use (e.g. ankle sheath). The cop is going to know you're lying and just going to be more aggravated at you.

The reason for answering that it's not for self-defense when the knife could be considered utilitarian or when the law contains some sort of intent-based language has a bit to do with cop psychology and sociology. Police officers are a behavioral ingroup and though human, often develop observable patterns in their behavior and views of others as a consequence of their job. One of those patterns is called "collective narcissism," where the job goes to their head a bit and they not only feel morally superior, but consider their legally-sanctioned ability to use violence to be a right only they have. Their job is to "protect and serve" and so a private citizen who shows they can "protect and serve" themselves is a perceived threat to their ego. This becomes apparent if you've ever watched police testimony in front of legislatures on the topics of handgun carry laws or knife laws.

A secondary reason is most people they deal with on a daily basis are legitimate criminals (people with warrants, criminal record, drug history, child abuses, partner battering), and it is all too common for these low-lifes to have a knife and to lamely make the excuse "it's for defense." This can cause a cop to be suspicious of anyone saying a knife is for defense.

A third reason is that most cops I've talked to have specific opinions about knives as defense weapons in general. They are of the opinion that they are not good weapons for defense, and I have to admit they are not alone in that opinion. Knives have very little "stopping power," require you to get too close, and are considered deadly force. One cop called them "the schmuck's defense" because they are so often carried by people who have absolutely no training on how to carry or use a knife as a weapon and think they are going to be effective with it (e.g. those who carry a folder in their purse or backpack, or mall ninjas), with little appreciation for how the use of force continuum works that could get them in serious trouble even if they fend the attacker off (such as fatally stabbing an unarmed assailant).

In jurisdictions where "intent to use as a weapon" is a variable under the law, the above factors can swing that cop's judgement toward illegality if told it is for defense. Even in jurisdictions where there has to be intent for "unlawful" use, most people forget that stabbing people is always unlawful and it takes a court to decide to excuse that unlawful behavior on self-defense grounds.
 
Last edited:
The problem isn't self-defense being unlawful but the idea that you used a knife to kill someone vs getting away. I can't remember who it was of the knife trainer guys (has a few books on the topic) but his input on the topic was basically you could justify a cut or two to deter an attacker or create opportunity to escape but the idea of fighting with a knife, which generally involves many cuts, is near impossible to justify in court because at some point during the fight there is likely to be a point where escaping is possible which negates the self-defense defense because you stayed and fought and didn't flea to save your life. Protecting a home is different as you're trying to repel someone from your domain, so to speak, but if you're out in public where self-defense carry is more often discussed it's can be difficult to explain why you had to stay within striking distance instead of running away from the opponent.

I've come to the conclusion that a knife really isn't that great for self-defense (not for me at least) as it seems like attackers are still able to function after being cut or stabbed. A bludgeoning instrument (at home at least) would seem to do a better job incapacitating an invader as the force causes them to be moved and there's really no craft/skill needed. There's also the added distance it allows.
 
glistam said:
...most people forget that stabbing people is always unlawful and it takes a court to decide to excuse that unlawful behavior on self-defense grounds.
Click to expand...

Using any kind of force (whether knife, gun, baseball bat or a brick) is unlawful unless one is justified in using force for self-defense or in defense of others. The amount of force which may be used to defend oneself or another is based on the facts and the reasonableness of the acts and methods used for defense.

The most effective instrument to be used for defense can be debated, however if one is confronted with deadly force I would assume most victims would use whatever instrument they have available to avoid being killed by an assailant.
 
Excellent post Glistam. You hit the nail right on the head. That is all excellent advice and opinion.
 
glistam said:
In the following cases you should tell the truth about your knife if it's indeed for self-defense:
-The law in your specific jurisdiction, including case law, clearly establishes the legality of your knife and leaves no room for interpretation based on intent.
-The knife is very obviously designed to be a weapon or carried in a manner suggesting weapon use (e.g. ankle sheath). The cop is going to know you're lying and just going to be more aggravated at you.

The reason for answering that it's not for self-defense when the knife could be considered utilitarian or when the law contains some sort of intent-based language has a bit to do with cop psychology and sociology. Police officers are a behavioral ingroup and though human, often develop observable patterns in their behavior and views of others as a consequence of their job. One of those patterns is called "collective narcissism," where the job goes to their head a bit and they not only feel morally superior, but consider their legally-sanctioned ability to use violence to be a right only they have. Their job is to "protect and serve" and so a private citizen who shows they can "protect and serve" themselves is a perceived threat to their ego. This becomes apparent if you've ever watched police testimony in front of legislatures on the topics of handgun carry laws or knife laws.

A secondary reason is most people they deal with on a daily basis are legitimate criminals (people with warrants, criminal record, drug history, child abuses, partner battering), and it is all too common for these low-lifes to have a knife and to lamely make the excuse "it's for defense." This can cause a cop to be suspicious of anyone saying a knife is for defense.
Click to expand...

Very well stated however the better course is to say nothing. In the USA no one is required to answer such a question and the fact that one does not answer is not an offense and cannot be used against him. Again a police officer is a law enforcement officer and is not the prosecutor or judge. The officer may arrest you for not saying anything based on his or her whim however no competent prosecutor will file charges for simply saying nothing. If asked "Why are you carrying that knife?" I would not respond.

The first thing any defense counsel would advise a defendant if arrested is to say nothing, sign nothing and keep your mouth shut. Miranda warnings are given after an arrest however many defendants screw up by making statements. Just don't answer as there is no penalty for failing to answer either before or after an arrest.
 
Last edited:
While I agree no one is obliged to give an officer any information pertaining to anything you are more likely to draw said officer's ire this way. Alot of times if you are not up to anything wrong it is easier tonjust answer the few simple questions as long as you are not incriminating yourself.
 
Vinifera said:
Very well stated however the better course is to say nothing. In the USA no one is required to answer such a question and the fact that one does not answer is not an offense and cannot be used against him. Again a police officer is a law enforcement officer and is not the prosecutor or judge. The officer may arrest you for not saying anything based on his or her whim however no competent prosecutor will file charges for simply saying nothing. If asked "Why are you carrying that knife?" I would not respond.

The first thing any defense counsel would advise a defendant if arrested is to say nothing, sign nothing and keep your mouth shut. Miranda warnings are given after an arrest however many defendants screw up by making statements. Just don't answer as there is no penalty for failing to answer either before or after an arrest.
Click to expand...

Was also going to give the same advice, but you beat me to it. The reason you carry a knife is quite literally moot. The real issue at hand is in the laws pertaining to the knife you are carrying. If it is legal to carry, you are fine, if it is not, you will be arrested and charged accordingly. If asked by a police officer why you carry the knife, simply tell him/her that you that you politely decline to answer questions without an attorney present. They may try and press you by raising their voice or getting in your face, they may even handcuff you and claim you can face charges for not speaking to them. Just know that it is the constitutional right of every American to refuse answering questions, be it all together, or only with legal representation. Simply put, you have a 5th Amendment right to not incriminate yourself when being questioned by police, TAKE FULL ADVANTAGE OF IT !
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top