Where should you NOT carry A KNIFE?

[jscalia]

I got my spyderco confiscated at Smithsonian Museum last weekend while in DC. I forgot that I had it in my back pocket when I noticed that the entrance doors to the museum had a picture of a gun and a knife inside a circle with a line through it and a caption "guns and knives prohibited". So instead of taking the chance of walking through the metal detector and getting in trouble I told the guard about the "pocket knife" in my pocket. They looked at it and told me I had the choice to put it in the "amnesty" box where it would be destroyed or to put it back in my hotel (which would have been a 45 minute trek on the metro). So I gave it up. In retrospect should have cached it somewhere, although would have been risky in the part of DC with the security being what it is etc.

In the future I will have to be more conscious about what I have in my pocket, backpack, or car and where I am going.

Interestingly enough, my camelback HAWG Extreme backpack went through the xray scanner with my SOG multitool in an exterior pouch without any problem. Not sure if my knife would have set off the alarm or not.

*****It was the Air and Space Museum and the knife was a 10 year old Endura (recently repaired by Spyderco)******

 

[Bufford]

In a situation such as yours I would have left and tell the staff that this kind of rule is unsatisfactory and goes against the knife laws of that state. If you can carry on the street then why can't you carry at the museum? I am under the assumption that the museum is a public place. On private property the owner can make any rules they want, however you can hurt them where it really counts- in their cash till, by not patronizing such places.

In summary, If I am not welcome as a visitor, I will patronize elsewhere.

Go home and write a detailed letter of complaint, let them know how you feel about such 'prohibitions'. Unless they get complaints there is no chance of making any positive changes to their rules.

 

[SpyderNoir_JHA]

I am very sorry to hear about that. I have lived in DC for 5 years now and I visit the Smithsonian museums regularly. I have never had an experience such as you describe. What size Spyderco was it? I assume it was something that was legal in DC, even if it may have been beyond the blade length permitted in Federal buildings. May I ask which museum it was? The reason being, although most of them have metal detectors, the security screeners rarely operate them.

 

[cybrok]

This is unfortunate.

When I visited Canada's parliament, I had a SAK classic. They did not like it at all, but they only "confiscated" it and I got it back when the visit was over.

Not bad.

 

[scm2741]

Bufford -

I completely agree that a written letter to the museum is in order. However, I wouldn't tell them their policy is against the knife laws of their state, since D.C. isn't in *any* state.

I think that helps to explain why our politicians appear to be in a world all their own......................:foot: :foot: :foot:

 

[Esav Benyamin]

If you can carry on the street then why can't you carry at the museum? I am under the assumption that the museum is a public place. On private property the owner can make any rules they want, however you can hurt them where it really counts- in their cash till, by not patronizing such places.

This is a slightly different situation. The Smithsonian is a most public place: it is our national museum, housed in a series of buildings along the Smithsonian Mall. You can't withhold money by not going in, because they are funded by general tax revenues, not admission fees.

Also, the regulations are Federal law, since Washington DC is the Federal district, not state land.

However, the problem is familiar to many of us, since other attractions often impose their own private strictures, effectively disarming the populace. Although it is legal to carry a knife, it is made as inconvenient as possible with individual locations barring knives.

It's easy to say just don't go in, but a family on vacation going from park to zoo to museum is going to get tired of dad standing outside clutching his pocket knife instead of joining the wife and kids on the tour.

We are being nibbled to death by ducks.

 

[65535]

IIRC the Smithsonian is a federal building and just as you would not carry a "weapon" into the white house or the pentagon, it wouldn't be allowed their either. When I visited the Capital Building in Sacramento, I had to leave my Leatherman and anything else I had at the time with security, luckily they are kind enough to store your junk under their protection and keep it in one piece, and they are quite honest, so I got my stuff back. I would probably have walked outside and just burried it in some dry leaves.

 

[Bufford]

This is a slightly different situation. The Smithsonian is a most public place: it is our national museum, housed in a series of buildings along the Smithsonian Mall. You can't withhold money by not going in, because they are funded by general tax revenues, not admission fees.

Also, the regulations are Federal law, since Washington DC is the Federal district, not state land.

However, the problem is familiar to many of us, since other attractions often impose their own private strictures, effectively disarming the populace. Although it is legal to carry a knife, it is made as inconvenient as possible with individual locations barring knives.

It's easy to say just don't go in, but a family on vacation going from park to zoo to museum is going to get tired of dad standing outside clutching his pocket knife instead of joining the wife and kids on the tour. As people we need to stand up for ourselves and say 'hey if a rule that prohibits certain personal property is in place for an establishment, then it is the sole responsibility for that establishment to ensure that this property is in safe keeping until the visitor leaves. The onus should be placed soley on the establishment since this is their policy, and so as not to burden individuals as there are so many different policies in place that vary from one establishment to another.

We are being nibbled to death by ducks.

This is where the public needs to voice concerns about security issues such as banning knives or other personal property inside establishments. It would seem fair to me, if a person were given the option of having their knives, firearms or whatever held in a secure place while they are visiting. As a patron, I would gladly pay an extra dollar to have my personal property safely stored while I visit.

I would like to see this expanded to airports, for anything that is confiscated, it should be held until the passenger returns to pick their items up. If a rule that imposses a ban on personal property that is legal otherwise, it should be the responsibility of the establishment to safely store said items until the visitor leaves or upon return of the passenger. Otherwise the rule should be waived. What I am saying here is that everyone should be held accountable, and people need protection from being overruled by the establishments/big business. Without such, ordinary people would have no say in anything.

 

[Esav Benyamin]

It would seem fair to me, if a person were given the option of having their knives, firearms or whatever held in a secure place while they are visiting.

We used to have lockers available in the bus terminal in New York where we could secure our bags and wander around till the bus was ready to leave. Those lockers were removed immediately after 9/11 so no one could slip a bag with a bomb in them.

I imagine much the same fear prevents the procedure elsewhere now. And a tourist attraction might, but a government facility might not, care about what's fair or what you like. Which brings us to your next point:

What I am saying here is that everyone should be held accountable, and people need protection from being overruled by the establishments/big business. Without such, ordinary people would have no say in anything.

Ordinary people do not have much of a say in anything. People with variant beliefs or needs have even less of a say. The powers-that-be find it more convenient to educate the masses to consider knives dangerous than to make it easier for us few to carry them unhindered.

After all, why do we really need to check pocketknives before going into a museum or tourist attraction or theme park? It's another aspect of social control by intimidation, of forcing the population to accept the government as its only protector.