Boston Ordinance against knives

CJ Buck

CJ Buck

Moderator
Joined
Apr 15, 1999
Messages
898
I was just on the phone with one of our sales reps in the Boston area and he sent me a fax describing an ordinance making any knife with a blade over 2.5 inches illegal unless hunting/fishing or proven use on the job.

I then spoke to one of our dealers, Stoddard's Cutlery, and he was already checking with a few local attys to get back up information on this legislation.

I am hoping to know more on Monday.

AKTI (American Knife and Tool Institute) focuses on national or state statute but I wondered if anyone had any feedback on this boston issue and any knowledge on who to contact to get it dropped or altered.

What other cities already have a 2.5 inch rule? Is that a city legislative standard? It has not occured in the state law I have been monitoring.
 
Our city ordinance mirrors our state law. Any knife with a blade over 4" is illegal.

Such draconian knife ordinances are not surprising considering the terrorist attacks. Unfortunate that we would have such a knee jerk reaction. Limiting our freedoms is giving the terrorists what they want.

Please keep us informed about this situation.
 
Does your ordinance grant a caveat when used in hunting/fishing or job requirements these knives are legal to carry or is 4" just a plain max length?
 
There are exceptions for hunting/fishing and on the job use.
 
I don't know for sure but 2.5" is the limit for a lot of non-DOD Federal buildings. It may have come from that. Does anyone know how they will measure the blade length? If it's from the handle then Victorinox SAK will be illegal....
 
Originally posted by Gadgetman7
I don't know for sure but 2.5" is the limit for a lot of non-DOD Federal buildings. It may have come from that. Does anyone know how they will measure the blade length? If it's from the handle then Victorinox SAK will be illegal....
Click to expand...

Actually, that 2.5" limit for Federal buildings is an exception rather than a limit: 18 USC sec. 930 prohibits carrying dangerous weapons in a Federal facility, but states that pocketknives with blades under 2.5" aren't dangerous weapons. Unfortunately, there's nothing about how blade length is to be measured; neither have I ever been able to find anything searching Federal Court sites (I work in a Federal building).
 
Originally posted by dsvirsky


Actually, that 2.5" limit for Federal buildings is an exception rather than a limit: 18 USC sec. 930 prohibits carrying dangerous weapons in a Federal facility, but states that pocketknives with blades under 2.5" aren't dangerous weapons. Unfortunately, there's nothing about how blade length is to be measured; neither have I ever been able to find anything searching Federal Court sites (I work in a Federal building).
Click to expand...

Now that I re-read the law I have to admit that I didn't catch the difference. Thanks for clearing it up. I work on a military base and the commanders there pretty much define what's legal.
 
Originally posted by anthony cheeseboro
Carlos, according to the latest issue of Knife World (Vol.28, No. 1, Jan. 2002) the law has been passed. Check out www.knifeworld.com to see if they hve further info. The law does provide breaks for people involved in activity that involves knives and provides breaks for people transporting knives to and from knife shops etc.
Click to expand...
 
Perhaps it's time for some legal action. Has anyone contacted Victorinox and Leatherman? (I know that the AKTI was involved but I don't believe either Victorinox or Leatherman is a member.) Depending on how the blade is measured most of their products could become illegal. An argument could be made that this interferes with legal pursuits....

This whole thing is pathetic. It's a shame that private agendas of some elected officials can adversely affect so many people.
:mad:
 
The exact same law (nearly verbatim) has limited blade length to 2.5" in the city of Lynn MA since 1995.



Here is something I previously posted over in the AKTI thread:

Commonwealth v. Raul Inoa

97-1658

SUPERIOR COURT OF MASSACHUSETTS, AT ESSEX

1998 Mass. Super. LEXIS 44

January 29, 1998, Decided


FINDINGS OF FACT

"...After searching for 20 to 30 seconds, Inoa had failed to unearth a license or registration, and Kasle ordered Inoa out of the Honda. Kasle made no observations of the inside of the vehicle at the time Inoa got out. Instead, he ordered Inoa onto a grassy area where he began a pat frisk of Inoa. In the course of the frisk, he felt a hard object in Inoa's pants pocket which he believed was a knife. He removed the object and found it to be a knife as suspected.

The court viewed the knife, which was introduced in evidence at the hearing. The knife is an ordinary-appearing, folding pocket knife. Upon his viewing the knife at the scene, Kasle thought that perhaps the blade was longer than 2-1/2", so he opened the knife and measured it using a scale "ruler" in his pocket diary. The entire length of the open metal blade measures 2-3/4". The length of the cutting portion of the metal, exclusive of the thicker metal which serves as the pivot for the blade to fold into the handle, measures 2-1/4".

Kasle promptly arrested Inoa for possessing a knife with a blade longer than 2-1/2" in violation of Section I of the Lynn City Ordinances of 1995 which provides in pertinent part:

No person . . . shall carry on his person, or carry on his person or under his control in a vehicle . . . any knife having any type of blade in excess of two and one-half (2-1/2") inches, (except when actually engaged in hunting or fishing or in going directly to and/or returning directly from such activities, or any employment which requires the use of any type of knife) . . .

Prior to arresting Inoa, Kasle did not ask whether Inoa was going to or returning from hunting, fishing, or work. Contrary to Kasle's assertion at trial, I do not find that he even asked Inoa what the knife was for. I infer from the thoroughness of Kasle's investigation to determine whether the blade might exceed 2-1/2" and the promptness of his arrest of Inoa for possessing an item which ordinarily might not result in arrest that Kasle possessed a hunch and hoped to find a basis to arrest Inoa and to search him and/or the vehicle further..."
Click to expand...
 
I saw that post, but was that law contested? I'm afraid that this kind of nonsense will spread unless people stand up to it.
 
Originally posted by Gadgetman7
I saw that post, but was that law contested? I'm afraid that this kind of nonsense will spread unless people stand up to it.
Click to expand...

AFAIK it is uncontested.

I think that both Buck and Schrade were involved in trying to prevent this new law from being passed.
 
Anyone know what the penalty is? Not that being arrested for carrying a 3 inch blade isn't ridiculous enough! I think the worst part about laws like this is that they make criminals out of normally law abiding people. It almost has a "gateway" effect in some cases. For instance: some regular guy who always carries his favorite 3" pocket knife is now guilty of possesion of an illegal knife. He may think to himself, "Hell, if I'm going to get arrested either way, why not just get an auto?" I'm certainly not suggesting that anyone start carrying an auto in protest! I simply think that law makers should think a little harder about what they are doing to citizens before they pass these laws. The tighter you make the boundries of the law, the more people will reject the law in general.

We all know why this ordinance was passed. Now, if a cop can't bust a troublemaker on anything else he might be able to bust him for possession of an illegal weapon. But 2.5 inches?! It's too much. I hope this ordinance does not go unchallenged.

Oh, also...I'm new here, I'd just like to say hi to all my fellow Bostonites and Massh*les on the board ;)
 
Originally posted by boston
Anyone know what the penalty is?
Click to expand...

I checked the text of the new legislation in the other forum, and the penalty is *just* a $300 fine :rolleyes: , so not quite as severe as breaking MA law to carry an auto or dagger which nets you 2 or 3 years in prison. :barf:

It does mean that like in that other example, for a puny knife 2 3/4" that they can arrest you and drag you through the legal system, and add it as an additional charge to whatever else. Normally if you get pulled over for speeding say, you get a ticket and go on your way. With this, if you have a pocket knife you get booked, and go to court.
 
Originally posted by CJ Buck


Here is the actual proposed ordinance:

Be it ordained by the City Council of Boston, as follows:

That CBC, Ordinances, Chapter 16 be amended by inserting the following new language:

16-45 PROHIBITING THE CARRYING OF KNIVES OR SIMILAR WEAPONS

16-45.1 Carrying of Weapons Prohibited. No person, except as provided by law, shall carry on his person, or carry under his control in a vehicle, any knife having any type of blade in excess of two and one-half (2 1/2") inches, (except when actually engaged in hunting or fishing or in going directly to and/or returning directly from such activities, or any employment which requires the use of any type of knife), ice picks, dirks or similar weapons that are likely to penetrate through police officer's ballistic vests, or other object or tool so redesigned, fashioned, prepared or treated that the same way may be used to inflict bodily harm or injury to another.

16-45.2 Penalty. Violators of any provision of this ordinance shall be subject to a fine of not more than 300 hundred ($300.00) dollars for each offense.

16-45.3 Severability. The provisions of this section shall be severable and if any section, part, or portion hereof shall be held invalid for any purpose by any court of competent jurisdiction, the decision of such court shall not affect or impair any remaining section, part or portion thereof.

16-45.4 Effective Date. This section shall take effect immediately upon its passage.
Click to expand...

there is another thread on the forum for this same discussion...
http://www.bladeforums.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=1503108#post1503108

as knife owners, we now have to be careful what we carry... i think the government just wants another excuse to stop people. i'll even warn my friends to go measure their multitools. but what about dealers -- can we hear from them?
 
I'm not from Boston so maybe I shouldn't be so vocal. BUT, I have travelled to Boston on business a few times and love the city. I've met several knife people there. Also, most of the people that I worked with loved SAK's.(I'm a Computer Systems Analyst.) I wonder if they know they are illegal?! I think the AKTI should take more of a NRA approach. We are going to have to fight these ordnances rather than try to "reason" with cloed-minded sheeple. If knife people in Boston want to sue, I think we should take up a collection and maybe involve the media and politically acceptable knife and multitool companies. If it's spun so that Boston OUTLAWED SWISS ARMY KNIVES maybe the result will force a change in the law. I don't really know I'm not really that good at that sort of thing but I would think that the AKTI would have legal consultants.....
 
Priot to 9/11, most airlines allowed knives under three inches with a plain edge to be carried aboard. Now imagine if you will a passenger who has to change planes in BOS.

What a crock,

Eric
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top