Why not say its for defense?

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.

I disagree. It is better to say nothing. You may draw the officer's "ire" but that is not evidence and officer ire is not an element of a criminal offense. If you speak it can and will be used against you which is the purpose behind the Miranda warning. "Why are you carrying that knife?" Self-defense, tool, etc. Depends on which jurisdiction you are in as to whether your answer may be incriminating. If you refuse to answer it makes no difference which jurisdiction you are in.
 
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 !

Couldn't agree more!
 
I disagree. It is better to say nothing. You may draw the officer's "ire" but that is not evidence and officer ire is not an element of a criminal offense. If you speak it can and will be used against you which is the purpose behind the Miranda warning. "Why are you carrying that knife?" Self-defense, tool, etc. Depends on which jurisdiction you are in as to whether your answer may be incriminating. If you refuse to answer it makes no difference which jurisdiction you are in.

If you are carrying a knife that you can reasonably claim is for utility, even if you really carrying it for self defense, it will be easier to just say you are carrying it for utility. While it is true you don't have to answer any questions, sometimes it is easier to just say it's for utility and keep things moving.

Usually it is not worth it to go the "i don't have to answer nothing without my lawyer" route, unless you have to. It just generally isn't worth being cuffed by the officer, maybe even dragged down to the station. It's true no court would convict you and ultimately you will be in the right. I just don't think it's worth the trouble to prove you knew your rights.

While it is your right sometimes it isn't worth it to excercise that right every time. Especially when you aren't doing anything wrong anyway.

Of course to each their own and you're welcome to do whatever you want. Sitting in the back of a cruiser till the prick rookie cop's supervised shows up and tells him I'm fully within my rights is not my idea of a good time. Especially if you're in a place where "gravity" (centrifugal) knives are illegal. This will give the officer a chance to play with your knife till he figures out how to wrist flick it open and then he will claim you're breaking the law that way. They'll atleast confiscate it in that case.
 
Honestly though we're all adults do as you please. Just be safe.
 
Last edited:
I never consider my knives a self-defense weapon. They are cutting tools.

If I were to carry a knife for SD, I would likely be carrying a karambit.

Using a knife for defense would be a last resort, not unlike using a chair for self defense; at least in my opinion.

best

mqqn
 
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.
But how can you be sure that you aren't incriminating yourself? Honest and innocent responses could still lead you into trouble. Which is why lawyers instruct their clients to not answer any questions without them present. If someone was stabbed with a certain knife at a certain location, for example, and the police find you with that same model of knife and you admit you were at that location you may find yourself spending thousands of dollars on legal fees in the best case scenario. Toss in a statement that can be twisted a little, like my knife is for self defense to a cop that hears something closer to my knife is for stabbing people. Maybe even combine that with an honest mistake such as saying you were there at one time when you were really there a different time and now it looks like you are lying when they find some timestamped video. Yes, it may be easier to waive your rights, but it is never better IMO.

If the law professor in the first part of this video isn't enough to make you never answer any questions without an attorney maybe the police officer in the second part is.

edit: Who really knows all the laws? Driving over an imaginary line can at times change everything. So who knows all their local and state laws, plus the laws of the next town over? What about 2nd town over?
 
Last edited:
I agree completely. Seeking legal advice on a knife forum and relying on comments by well-meaning individuals who are knife aficionados without any expertise in the law can be dangerous to one's liberty; albeit the cost for such advice is nil.
 
Last edited:
Yes talk to a lawyer for the most sound advice. I definitely agree there are many situations where you shouldn't say anything to a cop or try to talk yourself out of anything.

However there are other situations where I have had good luck dealing with police by just being polite to them and giving them the reassurance that I am not up to no good with the knife they see clipped to my pocket.
 
Sorry I still disagree about volunteering any information, but in the interests of figuring out your methodology as it relates to the law, what's your advice as to when to volunteer information versus not saying anything? In those situations where you believe it is best to speak as opposed to being polite but not proffering any information, when and under what conditions would you counsel someone to respond, and if so, what should they say?
 
I fully agree to remain silent if your involved in any sort of defensive encounter period. My original question was more geared toward being approached in a public venue or during a traffic stop where your simply carrying a knife.

I also see the merit in claiming its for utility purposes after seeing just how many laws and statutes are in place regarding the carry of a deadly weapon, and sadly the right to self defense altogether county to county. Basically they don't want anyone defending themselves with anything except a licensed firearm.

So if questioned I think it best to simply say your carrying your knife "in case you have to cut something", which is true, legal, and hardly self incriminating. Its also as vague as the laws they impose on us. Thanks again for all the great replies!
 
So if questioned I think it best to simply say your carrying your knife "in case you have to cut something", which is true, legal, and hardly self incriminating. Its also as vague as the laws they impose on us. Thanks again for all the great replies!

It all depends on where you live. In my state,Connecticut, a legal knife ,per case law, is not a " deadly or dangerous weapon".

So I see no need to BS a cop that my fixed Karambit I carry ,along with my folder, is for " cutting stuff".

I don't really think they would believe it anyway.
 
Things are probably abit different in Canada where I live. Basically it's like this for my methodology.

A cop stops you for a traffoc ticket and in passing notices your knife clipped to your pocket. He proceeds to question you about it but so far the situation is not hostile and he is just asking cause that's what cops seem to do. Now where I live carrying a knife as a utility item is 100% legal, as a weapon for SD 100% illegal. At this point I would tell him "it's nothing officer I open letters and peel apples with it". Upon hearing this he usually ends he line of questioning.

Now imagine same scenario but the cop asks about the knife and I clam up and refuse to say anything other than "lawyer." I'm fully within my legal rights to do so but the cop is going to get suspicious. Likely if he gets suspicious enough he will tell me to step out the car and proceed to hassle me in one way or another, maybe make up some probable cause so he can frisk me search my car etc. Of course upon frisking me he will take the knife out of my pocket and likely put it on the hood of the cruiser. At this point he will find I am up to nothing wrong but will want to justify himself and likely will start trying to prove the knife is illegal one way or another. Most folders can be gravity shaken open if you know how. Or failing that he will try to say that as the knife blade is longer than his palm it is illegal (not even a real law here but so many cops believe it or pretend to believe it) Either way the knife will probably get confiscated or atleast taken down to the station "for now" never to be seen again.

Again I agree there are plenty of times it is better to say nothing. Follow your lawyer's advice though it is probably best.
 
So the cop asks asks about the knife clipped to your pocket. If you simply feel so bad about saying nothing and worrying about what the cop thinks and just feel compelled to say something then ask him "Are you a knife collector too?" or "What kinds of knives do you like or collect?" or something similar. If the cop is a you-know-what and demands to know why I am carrying the knife and I feel somehow compelled to say something I would say, "Why do you ask?" In any event, I would never proffer anything related as to why I am carrying a lawfully possessed knife simply because I don't have to and I would not want to say anything which could possibly be construed in any way, shape or form as some sort of self-incrimination.

If the cop gets suspicious who cares? If he makes up probable cause and proceeds to confiscate your knife then he is a bad cop and needs to be exposed for what he is. There are plenty of good ones but if a cop is a rotten apple he needs to be removed from the apple barrel. As far as taking your knife goes, unless it is unlawfully possessed he has no right to take it other than as incident to an arrest. If the arrest is invalid then he made a false arrest and he is subject to legal action for redress.

As an aside, if your jurisdiction prohibits the possession of a "gravity" knife, especially if that term is defined as it is in New York state, and your knife meets that definition then it is not lawfully possessed anyway so you are hosed.

Do what you want but I still believe in taking advantage of all the rights we have. If we fail to do so then what value are the rights we have if we simply give them up based on intimidation or fear of intimidation for exercising them?
 
Like I said everyone should do as they think is best.

However in Canada intent has everything to do with whether or not the exact same knife is legal in one case and illegal in another. If I say the knife is for utility then it is perfectly legal for me to carry. If I say nothing he may start to think my intentions are for use outside utility. I don't feel the need to prove to the cop or anyone including myself that I can excercise my right to say nothing when simply voulenteering the info that I'm carrying the knife for utility use will mean I am much more likely to go on my way.

To put it simply, if politely saying "it's for nothing special officer, I slice my apples with it" means My encounter with the cop will end faster then that is what I am inclined to do. It's not about being intimidated to exercise my rights. It's about knowing that exercising that right might mean a longer encounter. Also I don't believe just because we have a right means I need to exercise it every time. Especially when I have nothing to gain from doing so. Everyone else can do as they see fit.
 
Last edited:
Like I said everyone should do as they think is best.

However in Canada intent has everything to do with whether or not the exact same knife is legal in one case and illegal in another. If I say the knife is for utility then it is perfectly legal for me to carry. If I say nothing he may start to think my intentions are for use outside utility. I don't feel the need to prove to the cop or anyone including myself that I can excercise my right to say nothing when simply voulenteering the info that I'm carrying the knife for utility use will mean I am much more likely to go on my way.

Implicit in your statement is your intent is incontrovertibly established by your response. If you say nothing what intent can be inferred from that? Do you seriously believe a non-response will result in the court finding you had an unlawful intent because you said nothing? The law doesn't work in this fashion.

In any event, thanks for the response. It appears you have a much different philosophy than I do.
 
No once again if you would read my posts from the begining I do not think a COURT would find you in the wrong.

However the COP might suspect enough to give you a hassle that is not worth it. Because that cop has the power to give me a hassle even if the court would not in any way convict me, hassle me to the point of possibly "confiscating" my knife, it is not worth it for me. Even though the court would rule I did nothing wrong and order my knife returned (I'm sure it would have been "lost") to me why bother dealing with a court or the cop at all.

That is my philosphy anyway. The right to remain silent is, in my opinion, best used to avoid incriminating yourself. If there is a much faster and easier route to the same end why not take it. Especially when all that route entails is saying "my knife is for cutting chores officer."
 
why start out lying to the cops?

I agree.

1 - know the law
2 - comply with the law
3 - don't be afraid of the cops; if you are doing 1 and 2, you got nothing to worry about. At worst, all they can do is falsely arrest you, and that's a small price to pay for having a spine and being a man.
 
Especially when all that route entails is saying "my knife is for cutting chores officer."

Thanks again for your comments. I'm sure the cop will be most illuminated to learn you use your knife "...for cutting chores" as opposed to murdering innocent people.

I'll again leave it with the fact that I disagree with your reasoning and philosophy. Have a great weekend.
 
Hi there! It was a very interesting reading, thanks to all who posted. My final take on this subject is that European and US laws look pretty different. I’m neither a lawyer nor a LEO, but this seems rather evident to me. In Italy, but more generally in Europe, LEOs have two areas where their activities are legit, according to current laws.

One area is within the so called Judicial Police activities (kind of CID). Important to note the Judicial Police activities are repressive and not preventive, because it intervenes when a violation has already occurred. Basically, when operating within this area, every LEO has the mandate and the right to e.g.: take notice of the crimes and work in search of information, also on their own initiative entirely. Until the Public Prosecutor takes over the direction of the investigations, the Judicial Police must continue their activities with the sole obligation to keep the Public Prosecutor informed. They seek out for the perpetrators, collect evidences (through intelligence, targeted searches of people, vehicles, houses and premises, seizures of assets/capitals, photographic surveys, etc.). Judicial police activity must be exercised starting from the very acknowledgment of a crime offense and must also be activated before receiving orders from the Public Prosecutor's Office. In our case, if LEOs are working within this area and they question me, I am already a "suspect" for them and they are obliged to notify me this. If I am in the clear, I think it’s still good to be honest and transparent, so they can tick me off their list and go ahead with their investigations. Sure, if I am not in the clear or the going gets tough, it’s probably a good advice to keep mouth shut and look for a good lawyer.

Second area is the so called Public Security. Officials and public security officers monitor the maintenance of public order, they safeguard the safety and protection of people and their properties, work to prevent offenses/crimes, collect evidence of these and arrest the perpetrators before or during the happening; they survey compliance to the laws and also assist in case of public and private disputes, accidents/incidents, etc. Note the big difference here is the crimes have still to happen or just happening, all these activities are kind of preventive or containment actions, so to say. In our case, if LEOs are working within this area and question me I am not a suspect, just a Citizen. They don't need to notify me anything, it's their right and duty to stop me, question me, ask me to identify myself and even search me on spot. I can become a "suspect" entirely based on my behavior and their findings, though. So, if I am in the clear with nothing to hide and totally aligned with legislation prescriptions, I still think it would be much better for me to answer, tell the truth straight away, show my papers, ID, thank them for their service and walk away. Also note that, while it would be surely my “right” to refuse saying anything, not showing ID, etc. this rarely ends up well. The best I can hope for is to spend three/four hours in the Police Station and have a “forced” identification. Since the officers had to do extra job for this, normally they start searching for other things and it’s not uncommon they would issue a search warrant, just to be sure I'm not a terrorist, drug dealer, etc. So from a small thing, it can soon become a huge hassle. Gun/hunting permit also – if someone has one - can be put on hold, just for the generic “hindrance to the investigation” cause, etc.

So I believe it’s still good to be aware of own specific legislations and laws, our rights and our duties. Normally, from my experience, it’s also very much about how we relate with LEOs and authorities in general. It would be very interesting for me if a real LEO/Policeman could chime in here and say something about this. Take care and stay safe!
 
Last edited:
Back
Top