What happens if you were to ever use an illegal blade for self defense in the US?

C

CheapSteelCollector

Joined
Jan 1, 2015
Messages
1
So I live in Illinois and as many of you know the weapon laws are harsh. I am not yet 21, so I cannot get my carry-concealed license for firearms for a while. I live in the suburbs outside of Chicago if that helps, since Chicago makes laws like it's a separate state. From what I understand, a legal knife to carry here has to be folding, 3.5" blade or under, non-switchblade, non-double edged, etc. I'd like to carry a knife other than one of my pocket knives for self defense because they do not have a quick enough draw nor feel safe enough. I have many other fixed blade karambits, daggers, and combat knives in my collection of several lengths. I would carry one of my shorter fixed-blades for self defense and general utility since it's unlikely I'd be searched, but my concern is that if I ever was in a situation I'd have to defend myself, I'd get into big trouble with an illegal blade.
So my question is, what would happen to somebody in Illinois if they harmed or killed somebody in self defense, although the knife they used was not a legal folding knife, but something like a switchblade or fixed blade?
I'd like to know this because It's not exactly protecting yourself if it lands you in jail or something. I don't want to carry a better, but illegal blade for self defense if that means I could get into big trouble. If you can get into big trouble, then what is the best legal self defense knife to carry?
 
Don't carry an illegal knife. It's not worth the risk when legal is available.

Be aware of your surroundings.
Study unarmed self defence.
Study self defence with knives if you then feel it is doable.
Pick your knife based on your armed self defence training.

Once you know what you're doing, even an ordinary folder will be effective. Consider something like the Spyderco Endura or Delica, very common and not especially aggressive-looking. Trainers are available for them. Practice with a partner.
 
You'd certainly get in trouble. How much would depend on the situation at hand. Might do some jail time probably not more than a year or two provided the self defense part of the case was undoubtedly justified. Not worth the risk at all imo.
 
It the absolute best of circumstances you would be acquitted of assault/murder by reason of self-defense and still found guilty of Unlawful Use of Weapons. And that is assuming a lot of variables magically ending up in your favor. Self-defense under the law is a complex issue because the cops and courts trying you were not there when the event happened, and have to piece it together from evidence other than your testimony. The mere fact that you were carrying an illegal knife at the time of altercation is actually evidence against you that could swing the the opinion of a jury into believing you were not acting in self-defense. I've read lots of court transcripts over the years and there are numerous cases in which the defendant used a knife on another person in seemingly defensive situations and was still convicted of murder or assault, due in most cases to not understanding how Use of Force works. I can count the number of cases where there was an acquittal for self-defense on one hand. It's that rare for a knife to be used justifiably. On the other hand, I rarely ever hear of pepper spray usage resulting in a conviction unless the defendant was acting out of malice or trying to rob someone. Indeed a thread I was participating in recently showed me how great pepper spray is and how many of the things you hear about it on the internet are untrue.
 
NEVER carry anything illegal. Any altercation regarding an illegal weapon will automatically shift the legal spotlight from the aggressor to
yourself. Always remember the criminal has more rights than you do. Why do you think they call it the "criminal justice system"?
 
CARRERA50 said:
NEVER carry anything illegal. Any altercation regarding an illegal weapon will automatically shift the legal spotlight from the aggressor to
yourself. Always remember the criminal has more rights than you do. Why do you think they call it the "criminal justice system"?
Click to expand...

Nonetheless, state law reigns.

We have statute for example such that if you are deemed to be in justifiable self defense of yourself or another, you are immune from any violations within the entire weapons section code.

- OS
 
Glad you live in a state where some common sense applies. Don't know where the OP lives, but here in Kalifornia ANY sort of SD is likely to wind up with a lawsuit, incarceration,
or both.
 
CARRERA50 said:
Glad you live in a state where some common sense applies. Don't know where the OP lives, but here in Kalifornia ANY sort of SD is likely to wind up with a lawsuit, incarceration,
or both.
Click to expand...

Oh, you can still get sued here too, and successfully, for using deadly force even if you weren't charged. Simply not being charged with a crime as a result of the deadly force negates any state weapons charges.

But you have to go through the civil trial nonetheless - only bright side is that if the shooting/knifing/whatever is actually ruled justified there, the suing side has to pay defendant's attorney fees, court costs, various other stuff. Not that half the folks who would file such a suit could cough up a dime, but on the other hand this has cut way down on suits being filed, since lawyers aren't taking frivolous cases on spec just hoping to maybe score.

- OS
 
Last edited:
"He came at me with a switchblade officer, I took it away and he was stabbed/ cut in the process." Seriously, just carry a legal knife and learn self defense with your blade.
 
Another option is to utilize situational awareness. Wherever you go, observe your surroundings, and try to figure out what items are available in that area that might be viable defensive tools.
 
In some jurisdictions carrying an illegal weapon shows evidence on its face of intent of the person to commit other crimes. It's the fruit of the poisonous doctrine - if you start out by planting a poisonous seed when the tree bears fruit it too will be poisonous, i.e. your honor my client would not have been injured, but for, the fact that the defendant was carrying an illegal weapon, clearly showing his intention to do bad things. I am no lawyer! While it seems silly why some in our society can have a permit to carry a firearm but have numerous knife carry restrictions boggles my mind. With the amount of knives available, surly you could find a knife that would both serve your purpose and be legal?
 
It depends almost entirely upon the police department, investigator and prosecutor/solicitor involved.

I've seen felons successfully use guns in self-defense and not get a charge. (they did get the guns forfeited, however)

I've seen people illegally carrying guns (no permit or a prohibited place) use them in self-defense and not get charged.

I've also seen the opposite.

The variables are the whims, prejudices and desires of humans. You can't predict such things.
 
I wouldn't carry anything that is illegal in your jurisdiction.
WhiteTiger said:
In some jurisdictions carrying an illegal weapon shows evidence on its face of intent of the person to commit other crimes. It's the fruit of the poisonous doctrine - if you start out by planting a poisonous seed when the tree bears fruit it too will be poisonous, i.e. your honor my client would not have been injured, but for, the fact that the defendant was carrying an illegal weapon, clearly showing his intention to do bad things. I am no lawyer! While it seems silly why some in our society can have a permit to carry a firearm but have numerous knife carry restrictions boggles my mind. With the amount of knives available, surly you could find a knife that would both serve your purpose and be legal?
Click to expand...
That has NOTHING to do with the 'fruit of the poisonous tree' doctrine.
 
If your in Chicago jurisdiction I think blade length is actually 2 inches or less, hence Spyderco's Chicago knife. IF you have ANY questions regarding what is legal in your area, PLEASE consult local authorities, an attorney or local LEO. Local governments have the authority to make laws stricter than state or national laws. Best to find out ahead of time.
 
If you actually end up having to kill someone in self defense with a knife, I would suggest you'll have some much larger concerns than the length of the knife you used, or any such "practical" issues. But if you want to stick to the practical, legal, pragmatic... though the books are a bit more gun-specific, I'd suggest a read of one or both of Masaad Ayoob's books on the subject, "In the Gravest Extreme," and "Deadly Force: Understanding Your Right to Self Defense."
 
The last time I was in Chicago (7/13), I asked the guys at Northwestern Cutlery if the legal blade limit was 2". They answered in the affirmative.
 
Understanding Illinois Knife Laws, as well as the patchwork quilt of the various municipal laws is difficult and confusing. The first defense is not starting with the intent to harm, or to use (or have) in the commission of a felony, and to avoid those knives that are clearly understood to be banned (switchblades, balisongs,etc.). If you stick to blades under 3 inches (2 inches in Chicago), and retain a good criminal defense attorney, will most likely keep you from wearing scrubs and flip flops. I have an Illinois CCL and find the laws pertaining to carrying much less confusing.
 
A knife only makes a good self defense weapon if you're trying to cut someone off of you, ie someone has cornered you or is on top of you assaulting you. For example, one guy posted on here once about how someone hit him with a tire iron, knocking him down, at that point the man over top of him and attempted to kill him with it, the knife he had ended the altercation quickly because of the close distance. Another guy around where I lived was jumped by a band of people, girl was on top of him punching the hell out of him, again, a knife ended the altercation. If you're walking somewhere, and someone comes up to you with a gun pointed at your gut demanding your wallet, its not gonna do much good. It's a very good short distance escape weapon, and in almost all circumstances useless against a firearm. I'd carry whatever legal size you can carry, and pepper spray. You need to render your attacker useless to continue the attack, a small knife or even a big knife used incorrectly won't do that easily in some circumstances, but its very good for specific scenarios. Pepper spray will stop someone from a distance.
 
Illinois does have a form of the notorious "stand your ground" concept, and it does provide an affirmative defense against criminal prosecution and indemnity against civil liability BUT you have the burden of proving that you were credibly in fear of SBI or death and that is why you chose to use deadly force.

To be honest, a knife for defense in Chicago is laughable. You're more likely to get arrested for the knife and spend time in Cook County making new acquaintances and having your exits turned into entries.
 
CheapSteelCollector said:
So I live in Illinois and as many of you know the weapon laws are harsh. I am not yet 21, so I cannot get my carry-concealed license for firearms for a while. I live in the suburbs outside of Chicago if that helps, since Chicago makes laws like it's a separate state. From what I understand, a legal knife to carry here has to be folding, 3.5" blade or under, non-switchblade, non-double edged, etc. I'd like to carry a knife other than one of my pocket knives for self defense because they do not have a quick enough draw nor feel safe enough. I have many other fixed blade karambits, daggers, and combat knives in my collection of several lengths. I would carry one of my shorter fixed-blades for self defense and general utility since it's unlikely I'd be searched, but my concern is that if I ever was in a situation I'd have to defend myself, I'd get into big trouble with an illegal blade.
So my question is, what would happen to somebody in Illinois if they harmed or killed somebody in self defense, although the knife they used was not a legal folding knife, but something like a switchblade or fixed blade?
I'd like to know this because It's not exactly protecting yourself if it lands you in jail or something. I don't want to carry a better, but illegal blade for self defense if that means I could get into big trouble. If you can get into big trouble, then what is the best legal self defense knife to carry?
Click to expand...

Short side is dont flaunt what you carry. I have ccw's in several states and working permits in others. Always be smart, be safe and be alert and aware of your surroundings.

This being said, as a self defense instructor (armed self defense) your use of force must be what a reasonable person would do if in the exact same situation. (NEVER BRANDISH ZIMPLY TO BRANDISH) review blacks dictionary of legal terms to verify knowledge of definitions.

The following are easy to use legally acceptable approachs in any jurisdiction that utilizes common law.

1. Resort to deadly force only when life and limb are in jeopardy.
2. The attacker must not merely have made a threat but must be in a position to carry out the threat in an obvious and immediate way. (Within 21 feet there is an assumed potential for immediate threat)
3. Never respond to verbal assault and avoid in all situations if possible.
4. Never make statements to the press or other persons regarding your use of defense (no facebook/internet posts) ALWAYS be the one to call police first! (Blame is assumed)

5. When speaking to an officer, the following is the best approach.
A. Tell responding officers “I’m the victim; he is the perpetrator.”
B. Tell responding officers, “I will sign a complaint.”
C. Point out pertinent evidence.
D. Point out any witnesses who saw what happened.
E. If there is any hint that you are a suspect, say “Officer, you will have my full cooperation after I have counsel here.”
6. And here is the fun one. The common law defense that most lawyers will never bring up but will apply if you use an "illegal" weapon to defend yourself or others who are being threatened with imminent bodily harm or death.


Almost all common-law and statutory definitions of the necessity defense include the following elements: (1) the defendant acted to avoid a significant risk of harm; (2) no adequate lawful means could have been used to escape the harm; and (3) the harm avoided was greater than that caused by breaking the law. Some jurisdictions require in addition that the harm must have been imminent and that the action taken must have been reasonably expected to avoid the imminent danger.


I would also agree with an above poster, massad ayoob is the best - "in the gravest extreme"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top