Why are knife control laws so strong in the United States as opposed to gun control?
I was realizing it would be nice to have a knife with auto opening for boxes, etc., basically a switch blade or similar, and I found out that they are super illegal in my state (and/or there are length restrictions, or both sides of the blade can’t be sharp, etc), but I can go into a sporting goods store and buy a pistol and ammo in under 30min.
Shooting open an Amazon box seems inefficient. What is up with restrictive knife-control laws??
Very old laws on the books that no one has bothered to change in some states. Federally, they aren’t illegal. Federally, knives weren’t protected under the 2nd amendment so states had an easier time putting rules in place against them, and many did. My state just legalized otf and switch blades for everyone a few years ago. Mainly because unassisted knives were able to become just as quick and easy to open, it was a bit silly to leave assisted open knives not legal.
As an added note just for you: cardboard is hell on knife blades and they’ll dull them very quickly. I’d get yourself a box knife and blades f9r it if you open a lot of boxes, unless you want to sharpen a knife like twice a week.
Cut the tape, not the box.
Because knives are the weapon of choice of poor people and abuse victims that are lashing out while guns are favored by the white dudes
The weapon of choice of poor people? 12x more violent crime is committed using firearms than knives in the United States. You may be under the impression that all guns are expensive, but that’s not the case.
Also, your post implicitly categorizes people of color as poor, abused, knife-wielding criminals. That seems like a long, convoluted way to be racist, but you do you.
You were trying so hard to make this a race/class issue that you accidentally did a racism. 🤣
Pointing out that white men are a privileged class the law and especially law enforcement caters to is not in fact a racism.
That’s true. But implying non-white people are poor, abused, and knife-wielding criminals is. You just structured your comment in a clumsy matter, it’s fine. The conversation went somewhere more interesting and involved without you.
No actually, he’s right. Many knife laws were created specifically to target minorities.
For instance, the gravity knife ban that’s in place in many states exists because the state of New York realized that poor people who wanted to carry a safe, concealed knife on them were using gravity knives due to their low price making them more accessible than other folding and automatic knives at the time. New York saw a bunch of minorities carrying gravity knives, figured that they must be a “gang weapon” and banned them, and about half the other states followed suit immediately after. Some states have since reversed course on this obviously racist law, but many are still holding out. The ban has nothing to do with the safety of the knife, it’s only because lawmakers were afraid of armed minorities.
Yes, like gun control laws and the Black Panthers. My point was that guns are the overwhelming choice of violent offenders over and above knives, regardless of race. And it’s a general truism that more violent “street crime” is perpetrated by and against those of lower socioeconomic status in the US.
I use “street crime” here because that’s how it’s labeled in federal statistics AND because if we counted violent crime done through economic imperialism and corporate thuggery, it would dramatically alter that picture.
Nevertheless, saying that poor and abused people use knives and not-poor white men (implicitly, by way of being contra to the former) use guns is a sub-optimal and vaguely racist way to structure that sentiment.
That weapons restrictions are heavily rooted in a history of racism and moral panic in the United States isn’t lost on me. Even more complex when you add in the shifting terrain and definition of “whiteness” during the 20th century, e.g. Irish-, Italian-, Jewish-Americans et al., especially in the context of early and mid-20th century weapon regulations.
Nevertheless, saying that poor and abused people use knives and not-poor white men (implicitly, by way of being contra to the former) use guns is a sub-optimal and vaguely racist way to structure that sentiment.
I don’t disagree, but I think maybe we interpreted his comment differently, as the way I read it was the other person making exactly this point. I took his comment to be explaining from the perspective of one imposing such a law, as opposed to a belief they’re presenting as their own.
Even more complex when you add in the shifting terrain and definition of “whiteness” during the 20th century, e.g. Irish-, Italian-, Jewish-Americans et al., especially in the context of early and mid-20th century weapon regulations.
Yup! A couple other examples I can think of are stilettos and switchblades being banned shortly after Italian knife makers picked up on the trend, under the guise of being “mafia” weapons. One excuse they often go for is that the blade can be deployed too quickly, which is BS; you can give a 10-year old kid any old folding knife with thumbstuds, and with 5 minutes of practice they can deploy it just as quickly as any spring-loaded knife.
It’s a tale as old as time. Any time the feds see a group of people arming themselves, and they’re not white (or not white enough), they’ll bend over backwards coming up with any justification to strip them of their defenses.
My understanding is that the “mafia” thing is also why short-barreled rifles, silencers, and machine guns are heavily regulated. I’m pretty thankful for the latter, but the first two seem kind of silly to me at this point in time.
And then the poverty issue returns when we consider that the regulations require the purchase of a $200 tax stamp for the above. A chunk of change to be sure, but the price has never changed since its inception of these regulations in 1934.
An adjusted tax stamp for one of those ATF items in today’s dollars would make it about $5,000 for each stamp. You can see how, in 1934, that effectively kept certain types of weapons and accessories out it the hands of the poor.
Because knife doesn’t have NKA to lobby for it.
I wouldn’t mind if they did honestly
The US has strong knife laws? I carry a knife almost everyday and this is the first I’m hearing of this. The only time I can’t take my knife somewhere is if no weapons at all are allowed there, like government buildings.
What state do you live in?
I went looking at every state I’ve lived in and the one with the most restrictions was Texas, obviously states like New York or California will be more restrictive, but the only real restrictions that I found outside of new england / California, were switchblades or “automatic opening knives”, and carrying in locations like schools and government buildings, which I expected. I used to carry a 8” hunting knife (13” overall) when I did a bunch of outdoor work, now I carry a smaller 3” folding pocketknife (6” overall).
I’m my state there are restrictions, but they are pretty much accessory charges that you won’t get unless you are a dipshit. You do have to have a firearms permit to carry an automatic knife though, I am not aware of anybody getting charged with that and that alone.
What is funny is you can have a ka-bar on your belt not concealed and be fine, but you aren’t suppose to carry a pocketknife with a blade over 3.5". Also if the fixed blade knife is sharpened on both sides of the blade, that is a no-no, but if it folds it is fine. I think they just removed the ban on butterfly knifes or it has the firearms permit exemption now, but I would have to check to confirm.
As you can imagine, the gun laws make about as much sense and don’t do much to help the problem of violence.
It depends on the state, my state has almost no knife laws, but in New York (for example) nearly all folding knives are technically considered illegal gravity knives. Basically if you open a knife 99% of the way, and are able to flick it the remaining 1% open it’s considered an illegal gravity knife.
It’s pretty dumb.
Not anymore in NY, but yeah.
They aren’t: This is 100% state dependent. Some states have extremely permissive laws allowing you to carry anything from a switchblade to a greatsword if you want.
Yes, and gun laws are state dependent as well. I’m not talking about federal law, I’m saying that arguably the majority of states in the United States have more permissive gun laws than knife laws, and it’s absurd.
Most of the truly ridiculous knife laws are in states with equally ridiculous gun laws. A few have been challenged under 2A grounds with some degree of success but it just isn’t being pursued that much.
You definitely need to start shooting open your Amazon boxes
Not when he/she is buying dynamite though.
Do it. For legal change.
Heck, do it for science.
Shooting open an Amazon box seems inefficient.
True, but it’s the American way.
When a moral panic happens, a lot of things get blown out of proportion. A good example was the panic relating to D&D and satanism. There was a huge panic sometime in the 50s or 60s about the police dealing with young thugs with concealed switch blades, which could be hidden, and then deployed one handed so fast a cop couldn’t draw his weapon fast enough. So this panic got a lot of laws drawn up to ban any switch blade.
Since then, the there are knives that skirt the law by not having a spring which force the blade open, instead a tension bar. There are still types are illegal to carry if a Cop would find out you have it, like “Out the front” switch knives.
The stupid part is, there are plenty of “one hand deployable” knives on the market that are 100% legal. But the laws never get revisited. In my state it’s illegal to have a out the front switch blade, yet a bunch of high end OTF knives are for sale at a sporting store. They just post a sign that says “Know your local laws”, which some how makes it okay to sell.
If anyone has more to add, or corrects, let me know.
Seems correct to me. Thanks for the thoughtful response.
The arbitrarity of some states’ knife laws is also a problem. I don’t remember which state (OK pre ~2015 law updates perhaps?), but I read about one that had few carry restrictions below a certain blade size (somewhere in the neighborhood of 3 inches, IIRC), and if you’re caught carrying one over the limit, you basically have to give a specific purpose for having it. Assuming your case goes to trial, this means it’s more or less up to the judge to determine if your use was valid, which is juuuuuuuussst flexible enough to persecute the “right” people. (assuming I’m remembering correctly that this was in Oklahoma, that would be Native Americans)
Switching gears; Some More News had a pretty comprehensive video about moral panics, which also includes some history on switchblades in particular, for those interested.
I think it’s 1.5 inches in Connecticut. Lol
It also goes to show how laws made during the moral panic don’t go away even decades after that panic fades.
This is often in mind when responsible gun owners are critical of more gun laws. The govt won’t go “that was silly of us here’s your bit of freedom back” even if a law objectively had zero positive effect
For example, short barrelled rifles are still heavily regulated. Pistols aren’t nearly as regulated.
Yes for those that don’t know in the US any rifle with a barrel length less than 16 inches needs to have a buch of extra paperwork and a tax stamp to the govt to register it as a “short barreled rifle” or it is a weapons related felony. The government was afraid of gangs using easily concealed weapons.
The most basic standard rifle of the US military, the M4, used a 14.5 inch barrel. Even if everything else was legal for the average citizen to own by making it semi auto only, that barrel makes it a short barreled rifle by law. But add an extra 1.5 inches and it’s perfectly fine in the eyes of the law.
The way to avoid the pain of excessive paperwork and tax stamp is to replace the stock with a “pistol brace” and make it a “pistol”. You know, the category of gun used most by criminals because it’s easy to conceal.
There are actually some legal movements to reduce unnecessary knife laws, because a lot of them are based around the idea of 50s punks and don’t make actual logical sense.
But yeah, it depends entirely on the state. The only knife laws in my state is you can’t conceal carry a Bowie knife, but all other knives (OTF, automatics, balisongs, etc) are legal.
I suspect it is because knives are not included in the second amendment of the constitution. That is a pretty easy argument for people to use against gun regulation (whether or fair or not), but there is no such thing for knives.
Knives are included in “arms.” In 2008, the Supreme Court ruled in Heller that the term “arms” has the same meaning as it did in the 18th century and includes anything that can be used for defense, carried for offensive or defensive action, or used to strike another person.
I guess knives aren’t socially seen as defensive arms even if legally they are
Wow, thanks for sharing that! So much for my thought… It makes yours more poignant though. Perhaps it is just a matter of obsession? Are the folks who obsess over firearms different than the folks who obsess over knives?
Laws on the books generally don’t get overturned unless they are specifically mentioned in a court ruling, or there is some action by a legislative body. If you want to be able to buy/sell switchblades, you could challenge the law and see where it goes. But apparently nobody has bothered to take it to court.
If you look at the timing of most the laws against specific types of knives… you’re going to notice a pattern where there was some scare involving some minority or alt group.
Switch blades were outlaws after Hollywood depicted African American villains as gangsters with them.
Same with ballisongs and Asian gangsters/villians.
All of that said, auto-openers have a hair trigger and I would suggest instead getting a good flipper you can easily flick open. Benchmade bugout is my EDC (not for fighting, it’s light and solid.)
My opinion is that it comes down to people not caring as much.
Yeah, that seems obvious, but bear with me here.
Know what the biggest difference there is between knives and guns? It ain’t how they do the job as weapons, though that is a big one. It’s that guns all work the same, so if you start banning one kind, it ends up applying to far more than anyone that thinks of firearms as an extension of the right to defense, a core human right, is willing to accept.
You ban switchblades, and there’s still fixed blades, slipjoints, lockbacks, etc. Nobody has ever tried to make the kind of laws you see around knives in other countries, but if there was an attempt, I don’t think there would be as much passion against it as there are with guns because there’s just not as much concern about knives as part of the right to defense because guns exist. Range > melee 90% of the time.
Firearms are the gold standard for personal weaponry. So out of the peeps that care about the enumerated right to keep and bear arms simply don’t think about knives as much. Same as they don’t think about bows, or swords or halberds. They don’t care because the fight isn’t as relevant to them.
And, on the other side of things, because guns are the gold standard, you don’t have as many people targeting knives. There’s less to fight against
Now, if guns disappeared, see how quickly crossbows and swords started being the target as people shifted to them instead of guns. That’s where the fight would go to. Ban those, and there’s going to be steps all the way down until the debate is about how big a rock you are allowed to have.
Also, because of that lack of give-a-shit, knife laws aren’t draconian everywhere. There’s some states where you can own and carry any knife you want. Others only ban knives that can shoot across the room, or other specific, niche types
Also, I think you’re underestimating how easy it is to get a pistol. If you go in without the work done ahead of time, you ain’t buying a pistol in half an hour. I don’t think even Texas is that loose. Background checks take at least that long. Maybe I’m behind the times om something, but even “shall issue” permit states, you have to count getting the permit in the time factor, imo.
As I understand it, NICS checks take minutes now that everything is done electronically. The more comprehensive so-called “universal background checks” are only required in a minority of states.
30 minutes is probably on the longer end for the whole process. So, you may be behind the times a little bit on this one, but idk for sure, and obviously it varies from state to state.
I know my friend bought a hunting rifle in about 15min last year to go deer hunting for the first time, because I went with him out of morbid curiosity. I think if you’re over 21, a handgun purchase is identical.
The background check was so fast I didn’t even know they did one until I told him I thought they need to do a background check and he told me they did it while they were packaging his gun and ringing it up. I thought it was like in The Simpsons where it’s a few days, where Homer goes “aww, but I’m mad now!!” Lol
Well dang! That’s kinda neat that the tech has gotten better.
I’m in a permit state, so I definitely fell behind on that, thanks for the info.
The corrolary is that there’s essentially no knife control in Canada. There’s no length limit or anything. The law just states that you can’t carry a weapon. But if you have a reasonable reason to be carrying a machete (like going bushwacking) you’re good.
There are also length laws and switch laws. I know, because I once had a hunting knife that was slightly over the length limit. The RCMP insisted I grind it down and submit it for inspection.
However, such restrictions are use-based; you can have a set of steak knives that are over the limit, because their intended use is obviously not against humans. But if someone pulls a steak knife on someone in public, they’ll run afoul of the knife laws.
I once sat on a jury for an attempted manslaughter knifing that took place in a kitchen with a steak knife, where both participants were drunk at the time; lots of interesting arguments were made by both sides.
I think switch blades are illegal in Canada too, but I could be wrong
I mean, those are reasonably weapons, no?
Yeah you’re right, that is one limitation. The rational is that it has no purpose other than being a weapon.
I think the difference between “assisted open,” which is almost always legal, and “automatic open” (e.g., switch blades") is very minor. They are both just ways of freeing and locking the blade for use. I don’t think either of them implies they will be used as a weapon. I would guess the laws are just stupid and, as another user pointed out, related to a historical “moral panic.”
Damned greasers and their switchblades and leather jackets. When you’re a Jet, you’re a Jet all the way, from your first cigarette to your last dying day!
I feel you, I needed a bread knife to slice a loaf and there is a 4 day waiting period before I can go down to my FKL and pickup my turbo-bread-saw 9000.
You don’t need a switchblade to open boxes. A box cutter (hence the name) works just fine.
If you think box cutters are too blue-collar, get a multitool with a knife on it (a “pocketknife” with other gizmos).
A steak knife works fine too. So would the end of an axe, or the tip of a freshly cut key. That isn’t the point. But surely you know that…?
If your goal was to open boxes, then it was the point. If you’re saying my comment was not to the point, then your question about opening boxes was disingenuous. But surely you know that…?
You don’t need a blade specifically designed for stabbing to open boxes.
If you’re not being purposefully obtuse, then let me clarify: I said boxes “etc,” but the question is clearly about laws and regulation around knives vs. Guns, as indicated by the title, not about how to open boxes.
