California's SB274 - Anything being done about it?

Hmmm. Let's see if I have this right. Jim March is going to run up to Sacramento and offer up a bunch of sacrificials to the demons in the legislature in the hope that they will keep devouring them and leave all us "good folks" alone and allow us to keep our precious "tactical folders" so that we may continue to roam the mean streets at will amongst all the scumbags and gangbanger slime until the justice boys & girls manage to scarf them all up which this new law will enable them to do. Lessee, do I have it about right? We'll keep them from taking OUR knives by letting them take THEIR knives because WE'RE the good guys and THEY'RE the bad guys. Right? Sure. Why not?

OK, I know I'm coming across as a bit sarcastic here and I guess I should apologize but, haven't we learned ANYTHING from the gun control wars?

Save the whole by sacrificing a small part here and a little bit there? Where has that gotten us in the Great Gunfight? As a knife & gun dealer in Kalifornia, I can tell you it's way down the road we don't want to go. Gun laws that are rapidly surpassing draconian and restrictions on almost every facet of any sporting or recreational activity having to do with firearms. Anyone try to buy a used handgun from a dealer around here lately? Is that what we want for the knife business too?

Jim, I applaud your effort but it appears to by generated out of panic more than anything else. Think about what you are doing. I'll lay it out for you:

1. You are telling the legislators that it is ok, in concept, to ban the street carry of a knife with a blade longer than 2". Period.

2. You are telling the legislators that it is ok to make knife laws the same as gun laws. (Great! Just what we need. We have 20,000+ gun laws to deal with, now we can have a similar number of knife laws. That ought to keep the legal profession employed for the next couple of centuries.)

3. Finally, you are advocating exceptions for the "right people". Who would the "right people" be BTW. Who decides who qualifies as a "right person"? What criteria would be used? Blond hair and blue eyes? Maybe if they have the "right job", whatever that is...you choose.

I know...sarcasm again. I can't help it. This sort of mentality is no different than that which got us into the mess we have with guns and energy and taxes and...you name it. The idea that we can save ourselves or our rights by offering up someone else's is absolutely offensive to me. And creating a new crime and a new class of criminal isn't going to go one inch in the direction of preventing our rights from being compromised. It will only give them more avenues into our activities. All they need to do is make jaywalking and speeding felonies and it wouldn't matter which knives were legal, we couldn't carry them anyway.

You want to fight this thing? Stand your ground. Oppose the bill. Hammer home the point that mere possession of something isn't what causes a crime it is the action of an individual. It won't do any good, as I believe, that AKTI's "help" here has sealed the deal and we will have a new law to contend with 1n 2002 but it won't hurt to try.

Offering your "alternative" will only reinforce their opinion that they are on the right track and encourage them to do more. I mean, "Look! Even knife enthusiasts are in favor of more knife laws! They want sensible knife control". In fact, I wouldn't be surprized to see it show up later as a separate bill, in a slightly altered form, of course, that would cast a larger net and make many more people than you ever envisioned "ineligable" to own or carry a knife.

Oh, and BTW, you will also be expressing your support for the gun control laws, as well, since you want to use them as a model for your new law. Think about it.

I do not support AKTI's actions, BTW, but I understand their motives. They can always change their manufacturing process to comply with any new restrictions and requirements. Heck, they can make "detent balls" that are so big that it takes two hands to open the knife if they want. That should give them a boost in sales when all of the old knives are outlawed. They will have a whole new market when all of the newly illegal knives have to be replaced with the new politically correct models. I can hardly wait.
frown.gif


As for Johnny-whats-his-name, who started this thread. I'm sure his credentials are as reported but, personally, I have a credibility problem with anyone who is reluctant, or afraid, to be identified with any cause or endeavor that is so significant as this one. Hoods, Masks, Balaclavas, or annonymous declarations do nothing to gain my respect or attention, except as a target.

------------------
Dennis Wright
Wright Knife & Sporting Goods
La Mesa, CA
1-800-400-1980
wrightknife@ixpres.com
("Have a knife day!")
www.wrightknife.com
 
Hi Dennis,

I chose to use a handle on Bladeforums, as many participants do, rather than my first and last name because I wanted to enjoy participating without bringing my professional life into it. Nothing covert or underhanded, just tired of how easy it is for anyone to search the Net and link up all the parts of ones life. I am professionally neutral with respect to firearms laws, and don't want to appear biased when someone looks up my name and sees Bladeforum posts criticizing proposed legislation.

I can understand that you would not want to take my word on something important when I don't disclose my full name, however. So I would ask you to look at the parts of my posts where I quote or cite information which can be independently verified, and then decide for yourself whether you agree with my conclusions.
smile.gif


Best regards,

Johnny

[This message has been edited by JohnnyLightOn (edited 06-04-2001).]

[This message has been edited by JohnnyLightOn (edited 06-04-2001).]
 
Dennis,

Your post was the epitome of eloquence. My writing drifts towards the sarcastic and vitriolic side of eloquence.

I believe it was the intention of Congress to ban knives capable of being opened with one hand. Yes, back in 1958. I think that was one District Court's interpretation of the Taylor Lawsuit over Balisong Knives.

So, basically, everyone that has been milling holes in blades, attaching thumb studs and discs, all with the purpose of opening a Folder with one hand...well, it has taken all of these years for the Government to start to wake up to it.

I believe it is their intention to make any folding knife that is capable of being opened with one hand utterly extinct.

Nail nicks only, then...hey, we can be like Britain where even those are illegal to carry in public.

California, the trendsetter. I hear its' a beautiful State, too bad legally it is a cesspool where every political maniac can make a name for themselves setting legal precedents that infect the rest of the country with this nonsense.

If someone cannot go before well-meaning people [Legislators] and say, "Most crimes involving edged weapons are committed by common kitchen knives, screwdrivers, boxcutters and carpet knives...so what difference does a spring in a pocket knife make?" Then, those people [Legislators] are not well-meaning at all.

Gravity Knife= Depress a button and drop the hand. The knife opens.

Switchblade= Depress a button or flip a lever or any other device and the spring opens it.

Everything else= Your muscle in the thumb pushes the thumb pad against some device and the immediate effect is...the blade is open, instantly ready for use.

And that is what they wish to ban. Isn't it?

All of this nonsense about "gravity" is just that, nonsense, smoke & mirrors.

They do not want people to own this type of device.

Perhaps the morons in Sacremento should be better serving the People of California and their upcoming rolling blackouts instead of concentrating on this nonsense, but then they would be doing their job, handling a real crisis, we can't have that, now can we?

------------------
Usual Suspect, Electromagnet for Trolls and Manipulator of Sharp Things... Some of my Knives and other neat things
 
Comments in this thread would be so much more helpful if they included suggestions rather than just criticism. If the proposals we're discussing are less than ideal, what would work better? I don't think it's possible to kill the bill. That means let it pass as is, or alter it somehow. It doesn't look good as is, so how should we try to change it? Help us out here. If you have a better idea we'd all like to hear it.

------------------
Jason aka medusaoblongata
-----------------------
"Is not giving a need? Is not receiving mercy?" - Thus Spoke Zarathustra
"Cutting his throat is only a momentary pleasure and is bound to get you talked about." - Lazarus Long
"Knowledge is not made for understanding; it is made for cutting." - Michel Foucault
 
Hello BladeForums Participants:

One ongoing challenge of AKTI is to communicate with members and potential members. This current discussion certainly indicates there are several and conflicting views on what the California law means and whether AKTI is taking the right approach.
The May 2001 AKTI Newsletter just came back from the printer and will be available at the Blade Show this week. The following story from the newsletter attempts to provide background and update on SB274 as of April 3, 2001.
I have received the following update from Chris Micheli since then …
"SB 274 (Karnette) will likely be heard by the Assembly Public Safety Committee on June 12 at 9 a.m. Please send your letters of support to the committee as soon as possible. Address them to Senator Betty Karnette and forward them to me at the following address. Thank you."

Chris Micheli, Esq.
Carpenter Snodgrass & Associates
1201 K Street, Suite 710
Sacramento, CA 95814
(916) 447-2251
FAX: (916) 445-5624
EMAIL: cmicheli@carpentersnodgrass.com


Is the AKTI strategy the perfect strategy? The AKTI Board believed it was a workable, achievable and ultimately effective strategy. Dealing with legislative bodies typically involves compromise and making assessments of what is politically possible. That reality is clearly affected by what lawmakers sense as the mood of the electorate.
Ultimately, the AKTI Board believes it will be judged by how effective it has been during this process. Our stated goals clearly express our concern about protecting knife rights as well as working with law enforcement.
Chris Micheli, AKTI's lobbyist, still sees this complex legislative process moving forward as the article outlines.
Now here's the original article from the newsletter.

David Kowalski
AKTI Communications Coordinator

AKTI's "One-Hander" Bill (SB 274) Passes California Senate Policy Committee; Appears Headed to Governor's Desk

The American Knife and Tool Institute retained Chris Micheli of the California lobbying group, Carpenter Snodgrass & Associates, to spearhead our efforts to save the exemption for one-hand opening knives in the current California law that bans the sale of switchblades longer than two inches. He filed this report on April 3, 2001.
"I am pleased to tell everyone that AKTI's bill in California, SB 274 (Karnette), passed the Senate policy committee (which I consider to be our toughest challenge for the bill) this morning. Appearing in support of the bill were CJ Buck of Buck Knives (representing AKTI), Dave LaBahn of the California District Attorney's Association (CDAA), and the Riverside County Sheriff's Dept. After brief testimony from the supporters, the bill was passed unanimously from committee and next heads to the Finance Committee, before the full Senate will vote on it probably in May.
"We are off to an important start and I am pleased with the reception that we got from this first committee. In meeting with the senators last week and yesterday about the bill, they were generally supportive of the knife industry and were happy that we had been able to work cooperatively with law enforcement to craft a measure that both parties were agreeable to."
CJ Buck, when asked about the general tone of the hearing, described the committee members as "supportive and obviously impressed that we had the clear support of the law enforcement community. My presentation probably lasted only five minutes before the committee chair moved to pass our bill out of committee. The vote was unanimous."
The AKTI strategy of introducing the bill in the Senate proved to be successful. The Senate was generally considered by the AKTI lobbyist to be the tougher forum (compared to the Assembly) for this issue. Based on this scenario, it is believed the bill will now pass quickly through the Senate Finance Committee; then move through committees in the California Assembly. From there it goes to the Governor for expected signature in August or September.
Buck adds that "this revised law ultimately touches virtually every responsible company in the knife and tool industry. One-hand opening knives are big sellers in one of the largest markets in this country and AKTI had to move forward to save them. Without the AKTI initiative, the District Attorney's Association would have moved aggressively forward to ban all one-handers in the state."


* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

"This revised law ultimately touches virtually every responsible company in the knife and tool industry.
One-hand opening knives are big sellers in one of the largest markets in this country and AKTI had to move forward to save them."

CJ Buck
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *


AKTI's Proposed New Amendments to California Penal Code Section 653K

Here is the current California anti- switchblade statute (653k) with the AKTI-proposed revised and/or new language inserted next to it as detailed in SB 274....

Every person who possesses in the passenger’s or driver’s area of any motor vehicle in any public place or place open to the public, carries upon his or her person, and every person who sells, offers for sale, exposes for sale, loans, transfers, or gives to any other person a switchblade knife having a blade two or more inches in length is guilty of a misdemeanor.
For the purposes of this section, “switchblade knife” means a knife having the appearance of a pocketknife and includes a spring-blade knife, snap-blade knife, gravity knife or any other similar type knife, the blade or blades of which are two or more inches long [add new]in length and which can be released automatically by a flick of a button, pressure on the handle, flip of the wrist or other mechanical device, or is released by the weight of the blade or by any type of mechanism whatsoever.
“Switchblade knife” does not include a knife that is designed to [add new] opens with one hand utilizing thumb pressure applied solely to the blade of the knife or a thumb stud attached to the blade, [add new] provided that the knife utilizes a detent or other mechanism that (a) provides resistance that must be overcome in opening the blade, or (b) biases the blade back toward its closed position.
For purposes of this section, “passenger’s or driver’s area” means that part of a motor vehicle which is designed to carry the driver and passengers, including any interior compartment or space therein.

 
Dennis Wright: I'll answer you in some detail here.

First off, I agree that this isn't something I'd choose if any other alternative were available. As Jason said, "you got any better ideas?". I've only known about this mess for four days now.

Second, the fact is, the laws that eliminate felons and those who commit specified misdemeanors from firearms purchase and ownership HAVE had some positive impacts on our rights. Example: after Columbine, the Feds tried to pass all kinds of draconian gun control. It was all stopped dead in the water. Do you understand how that happened?

Our side in DC pointed to the fact that it was already illegal for crooks to try and buy guns. The Clinton administration crowed about how "hundreds of thousands of gun sales to crooks had been stopped by the Brady background check law". Our side countered with "OK morons, so where's the prosecutions? In order to get to that point of being denied during the background check, they had to commit perjury on the Federal gun sales forms - where's the convictions!?".

Truth was, there was less than a dozen. This obvious failure to enforce existing laws turned into a giant embarassment and was a key reason for Bush polling better on the gun issue than Gore.

Why do you think the NRA pushes Project Exile, and talks about "enforcing existing laws"? Because if they enforce existing laws against armed felons and such, they won't be able to convince anybody that there's reason to screw with us!

Let's talk practicalities: if you have a punk 15 year old gangbanger with priors for assault, vandalism and burglary, do you really want the fool running around with a Buck110? Or is stripping him of that (or more properly, his ability to carry legally), just slightly possibly not a half bad idea?

Fairness: there is an explicit list of various criminal violations, by penal code number, that get your firearms rights restricted for five years, ten, or life per state law. It's not subject to interpretation. It for damn sure isn't tied to eye color - you're doing a classic "straw man argument" saying that race will factor in - that's a lie.

Remember who you're talking to here. Currently in this screwed up state, whether or not you get a gun carry permit is up to the "total discretion" of PD Chiefs and Sheriffs, and IS being handled on the basis of race, connections, campaign contributions and outright bribery. I'm lead plaintiff in a Federal lawsuit fighting that! I've proven that all that and more is happening in my county, and all over the damn state. I have the state's most extensive website on the subject.

DO NOT try and tell me that the alternative PC653k I'm supporting will foster racism and abuse. That's a lie. You're talking about an area of law I'm an expert in, and believe me, if there was discriminatory elements in it, I wouldn't touch it with a 10 foot halberd.

Christ. Do you know where I just spent my morning? At the Oakland Calif HQ of the Alameda County Sheriff's Office. I had an interview with a Lt. name of "Nice", who provided information on CCW permit issuance records based on a Public Records Act Request I filed on the subject. In the process, I learned that State Senator Don Perata, the biggest gun-grabber arsehole in the state, is now RENEWING his CCW permit after having let it lapse years ago. That rat barsterd wants to take everybody else's guns, but gets elite access to a carry permit for HIS. In a county of 1.6 million in population, there's 140 or so permits.

(I filed a request for Perata's "good cause for issuance" data and that of 10 other "suspected cronies". It oughta be a hoot!)

Are you seriously suggesting that I couldn't spot elitism if I saw it!?

What was YOUR contribution to freedom today, other than whining!?

Which national-level gun control orgs have YOU gotten thrown out of their offices on their asses for fraud?

The current version of SB274 is what will encourage discrimination of every type. Cops will have total discretion over whether to view any folder they come across as a switchblade. We'll be right back to the bad old days of "I hope they don't realize how valuable your Sebenza is" and want it for their collection, or "I hope they don't take offense at your idea of fashion sense". Or your race.

Your idea of discourse, full of outright lies and distortions, is downright offensive.

Jim March
Equal Rights for CCW Home Page
http://www.ninehundred.com/~equalccw
 
Well, one entire lunch hour and a splitting headache later, I have completed the journey this thread has become.

As I did in another thread I apologize for my absentee moderator status.

Let me start by saying that AKTI was never designed to perform an "NRA" function. Guns are weapons. Knives are tools that can also be used or misused as weapons. I believe that weapons should not be illegal to possess however, right now, as people celebrate reductions in crime rates, no politician wants to be associated with any step backward.

AKTI has therefore purposely positioned itself in a partnership mode with LE. (law enforcement)

AB 3314 allowed knives designed to be opened with one hand as exempt from 653k. The key word there was "exempt". It worked so well that resistanceless folders, true gravity knives "designed to be opened with one hand" became the weapon of choice in the Ventura County youth gangs. According to the DA there, most kids were getting their knives back on their releases based on judge interpretation of the law.

That perceived abuse of our hard won exemption is what really started this whole struggle. This DA thought he had enough of a case to get the one handed exemption stricken.

Because of internal contacts AKTI learned of this before any bill was filed.

We decided we could not allow the exemption to be stricken and spent many hours reviewing and rewriting proposals to get around this ending in a meeting in Sacramento.

The bias toward closure was the first real valid and objective field test for determining if a knife is a gravity knife.(and i know this is a misnomer because all knives will open if enough centrifugal force is applied)

Our assumption was that this rule would be enforced as the first exemption was. That anything that fit this criteria would be exempt. This satisfied most members.

The DA knew this would not catch all but felt comfortable it would tighten the regs enough to make a real difference.

Jim, you voiced concern last year and I am sorry I did not follow up more.

I am going to be testifying before the assembly committee for public safety right now scheduled for June 12th.

I will work with you on that meeting.

Lastly, as AKTI, and as individual members of the board of regents, AG, Les and I can handle a good thrashing now and then. It was very responsible of this forum group not to let that get senselessly abusive. I know a response from AKTI in there somewhere would have really refocused the dialogue.

------------------
CJ Buck
Buck Knives, Inc.
AKTI Member #PR00003


 
CJ, I appreciate your stopping by, but we're still left with three questions:

1) During the various negotiations on the wording, did anybody consider a "criminal control versus hardware control" version of the bill? In other words, strip cutlery carry rights based on past criminal history?

(I have to say, if you didn't, then...well, you may say you're not "equivelent to the NRA" and that's fine, but you need to be more aware of their playbook and borrow from it now and again
smile.gif
. Wayne LaPierre has more raw political cunning in his pinkie finger than most state capitol buildings ever see. He's the sneakiest SOB alive, and I mean that as high praise!)

2) Did AKTI consider the implications of "legislative intent", and the possibility that the courts may interpret this thing in a whole different fashion regarding snapopens? (Put another way: were you aware of the importance of legislative intent in the process even after the bill had passed?) See also the Calif Supreme Court citations mentioned by Johnny, who I can assure you is a published legal author and attorney.

3) Did you think about what happens when the lock release on an Axis, Rolling or whatever is tripped and the knife's "detent" goes away completely? I'd have a hard time believing BM enjoys that idea!

Jim
 
If anyone wants to go for "option #2" (switchblade-specific ban) --
another distinction we can make is between self-openers where the tip/edge comes out with force (e.g. HALO), as opposed to having the back of the blade come out first (like most autos). The second category is really no different from a regular one-hander.
Easy demonstration: can you push the button and hold the knife closed with your hand?
Keep up the great work Jim! Do you have a list of knives that you want on-hand for demo?
 
I can't speak for Jim and I don't know what he and CJ have been discussing, but if we want to explain that whatever hardware restrictions are passed, new developments to circumvent them will arise, then I'd recommend bringing a Camillus Lev-R-Lok, Camillus CUDA, CRKT M16 w/Carson Flipper, Kershaw Spedsafe or similar, Spyderco Mariner, and an Axis or Rolling lock. Or, if we can just alter the legislative intent to ban knives that have no resistance to snapopens whatsoever, and say that those which do have resistance but can still be snapopened are kosher, then that might do the trick on its own, as there are very few good knives that have no resistance whatsoever.

------------------
Jason aka medusaoblongata
-----------------------
"Is not giving a need? Is not receiving mercy?" - Thus Spoke Zarathustra
"Cutting his throat is only a momentary pleasure and is bound to get you talked about." - Lazarus Long
"Knowledge is not made for understanding; it is made for cutting." - Michel Foucault
 
Switchblade definitions:

Hmmm...problem here is, we shouldn't go too far astray from the FED definition, otherwise we'll have Feds chasing dealers all over the state.

I think our options are "keep the current switchblade standards" or "abandon switchblade control and go to criminal control only"?

That latter can actually be supported by saying "hey look, the punk gangbanger brats can kill somebody just as easily with a Buck 110 as they can a HALO or whatever". With the "criminal control" version, if cops roll up on a thug with priors for armed robbery, assault, etc and he's got a Buck 110 on him, he's toast...but with SB274 in it's current proposed form, it would be purely "catch and release".

I swear to God, guys, we really could sell this to the DAs and cops. Even with all switchblade controls junked, maybe.

List of demo knives:

Yes, I've given that some thought.

1) Sebenza, large, plain.

2) Some sort of Kershaw Speedsafe or a Ken Onion original. Smaller the better, non-serrated, as "non-threatening" a model as possible.

3) My roommate's Spydie Goddard Light, I'm pretty sure he'll loan it to me considering I bought it for him
smile.gif
. I'll loan him my AlMar for the day
biggrin.gif
.

4) An AXIS - smaller the better. Somebody said they had a Mel Pardue available.

5) A REKAT Roller, again, small is good. A Carnivore would do, Carnie Cub is better.

6) Some genuine loose-as-a-goose cheap crap. Jason says he's got a bit of that laying around, from before he got edukated I guess
biggrin.gif
.

7) A Buck 110, moderately stiff if possible but barely able to be snapped with a HARD snap. Jason has a 112, which will help, but I'd like a classic 110 along too.

8) Maybe a few high-end customs.

9) Heh. I just thought of something. I want a "secret switchblade" of some sort, one of the kind where the bolster slides sideways to trigger the spring, otherwise it's just a thumbstud linerlock. I'll get written permission from CDAA to bring a switchblade to their offices in a locked container for demo purposes, that way we don't get anything confiscated. If a cop or DA can't spot a switchblade if we HAND 'EM ONE, what does THAT say about the law?
biggrin.gif


Jim
 
Plus Jason's suggestions on the M16, Cuda and Lev-r-lock!

Esp. that latter.

Jim

[This message has been edited by Jim March (edited 06-04-2001).]
 
I posted this to the other thread in this forum, it may help clarify some thoughts:

-------

I agree completely that AKTI took the RIGHT tack in working as a friend and ally of law enforcement.

That's not where the problem is here. The problem is in the suggested cure.

OK, I want you folks from ATKI to think about this scenario for a sec:

Cops find an obvious gangbanger hanging out in someplace odd. They think he's a lookout for the drug dealers down the street, but they ain't sure.

So they run his rap sheet. Priors for assault, robbery, drugs and spitting on sidewalk.

And he's got a Buck 110 on him.

Under SB274 in the format worked out by the CDAA, AKTI, etc, he's clean...there's nothing they can do.

Under the "criminal control" version that I've been talking about, where knife carry rights are based on prior criminal misconduct, THEY CAN BUST HIM.

Now, my question to AKTI is, do you really think the "Bladeforums Origin" version of SB274 with "criminal control" features is an impossible sell to law enforcement, given that sort of scenario?

Hell no it's not an impossible sell! Even in the format that allows the law-abiding to carry switchblades, it will have more impact on street crime than even an outright ban on one-handed folders because the reality is, it hurts just as much to get stabbed with a Buck 110 than it does a HALO.

Guys, we can sell the "criminal control" version, especially if we all pull together on this! And we can do it WITHOUT switching to an NRA-style "adversarial relationship" with law enforcement!

Jim
 
Jim, My clip point BM Pardue is at your service. I can also forward a sample of the cheap Fury that's the Rip-off of the Kershaw speed safe.

email the shipping details and I'll get on it.

Seth

roberson@fresnobee.com
 
I'm a newcomer to this forum. Just surfing about and saw it. Interesting topic. My first question is why is the time for the posting off so much. My time here in the SF Bay Area is 7:30 PM. Jim, you're from Calif. and your posts show 8:59pm!

Any waw, Jim, I read your 5/31/01 03:31 post where you said,

"OK, I see three major problems here:

1) Interpretation. In the case of my Sifu with Rolling Lock, there's a detent all right, and if you pull the blade open with about 1/2" of tip movement, it'll get sucked back in. BUT if I trip the release lever, the detent and "suction effect" go away. Does that make Sifu carry a felony? You'd think I'd be clear because "those features are on the knife" and there's no wording about disabling it. But what's a crooked cop or "anti-weapon" DA going to do here? The BM Axis lock, SOG's ArcLock and God knows how many others work the same way...for that matter, many lockbacks such as the entire Cold Steel Zytel lockback line and a lot of Spydercos are no different. And remember, there's NO charge below felony possible here!

2) Low-cost knives. Some people just buy junk, as work/carry knives. Should that get them declared felons?

3) ENTROPY! What happens when my pivot screw loosens up in my pocket? What happens when my "detent" wears out, or the spring breaks in my pocket and it turns dangerously loose. I just became a felon?"

FYI Jim, a violation of 653k PC is a misdemeanor, not a felony. Now a violation of 12020 PC (possession of a dirk or dagger) is a felony. However, to have this apply, your locked blade folder would need to have the blade opened in the locked postion (not the usual carry mode you would agree.)

I personally don't feel that 653k should remain a law at all. With knives such as the Emerson Commander that can open by just pulling it out of your pocket...what's the sense?

Yes, by now you may have suspected that I am a Calif. law enforcement officer. I will say that in my 29 years as such, I have yet to find a suspect armed with a switchblade! Many, many Buck 110's lots of other cheap stuff, but no swtchblades.

In reality, most gang members in my area that we encounter are usually on some sort of probation which, as a condition of probation, may not possess any weapons anyway.

So, do what you can to get rid of 653K PC, but realize, it is a misdemeanor not a felony.


 
Firearms are tools also unless they are used against a person then they are weapons. This applies to common objects like kitchen knife, screwdrive, base ball bat & so on. Demonizing an inanimate object right off the bat does not make sense. The person breaking the laws should be held responsible. The rights of the law abiding citizens are being suppressed by some of these draconian laws.

------------------
Ed Woo
fulltang3v@yahoo.com
 
FrankDL: the felony isn't in PC653k, granted: it's in 12020, CONNECTED to 653k.

Here's the part that that matters from PC12020:

--------------
12020. (a) Any person in this state who does any of the following is punishable by imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding one year or in the state prison:
-snippage-
(4) Carries concealed upon his or her person any dirk or dagger.
-snippage-
(24) As used in this section, a "dirk" or "dagger" means a knife or other instrument with or without a handguard that is capable of ready use as a stabbing weapon that may inflict great bodily injury or death. A nonlocking folding knife, a folding knife that is not prohibited by Section 653k, or a pocketknife is capable of ready use as a stabbing weapon that may inflict great bodily injury or death only if the blade of the knife is exposed and locked into position.
--------------

In other words, if you conceal a folding knife that isn't legal under PC653k, PC12020 stacks a felony concealed carry bust on top of your problems in PC653k.

This IS indeed a potential felony issue.

(Why are people assuming I'm incompetent all of a sudden?)

Jim
 
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Jim March:
(Why are people assuming I'm incompetent all of a sudden?)

Jim</font>
Click to expand...

Well, I don't, I just don't think anything short of legitimizing ALL folding knives, again, taking away the stigma of a pocketknife, is going to stop this.

Basically, we are seeing in this push, an attempt at making California into Britain.

And, I don't think anything is going to stop it really...
 
I think that some well meaning folks are being rather unfair to the AKTI and what they have accomplished.

The fact is that without their intervention this law would have been far, far worse than it reads now.

I understand that after all is said and done and that law is passed there will be less freedom of knife ownership in California but thats not AKTI's fault. Its the fault of the citizens of California.

I strongly suspect that if someone was able to organize a movement and get this law defeated and the switchblade law tossed off the books entirely nobody would cheer more loudly than the AKTI.

AKTI can only make a difference within their sphere of influence. An association like AKTI can only be effective if it makes itself a part of the process like they did in this case. Unfortunately killing the bill entirely was not an option...at least not one that AKTI could excercise.

Killing the bill was only an option for the citizens of California who could have...had they wanted to...stood up and said "NO".

However...even amoung "knife nuts" most people were silent. I dare say that most of us on this forum didn't even know about this law until this or a similar thread appeared.

AKTI doesn't elect the politicians of California or any other state. We the citizens do. Senator Betty Karnette or some other politician of her ilk is only in office in California or any other state because good people sit at home on their backsides instead of getting involved (especially on election day).

You don't want laws like this then throw the SOB's that write and sponsor them the **** out of office next time you get a chance and elect some people who will do what you want.

The fact is....we are outraged because we care. The question is how much do you care and what have you done to make your neighbor care?

[This message has been edited by Roj Avon (edited 06-05-2001).]
 
Roj-I really think you missed the point of what was being said, but I have taken a vow a silence on this issue, until Jim and the state of California gets this straighened out. If you`d like to discuss this further, I`d be happy to have you email me.

Now let me zip the lip back up.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top