Knife detector search draws blank

Why would anyone need to carry a knife other a SAK or similar on suburban streets?
Norm
 
Why would anyone need to carry a knife other a SAK or similar on suburban streets?
Norm


Why does anyone need to own a book or newspaper of which the government doesn't approve?

Why does anyone need to say anything that might upset the government?

Why shouldn't the government be able to stop and frisk you at any time and place? If you've done nothing wrong, you have nothing to worry about - right?


.
 
In the U.S., we have something called the Bill Of Rights (B. O. R.). It emumerates INDIVIDUAL (not collective) rights.

Many have fought for -- and died for -- the U.S. Constitution and the Bill Of Rights. The substance of these hallowed documents, by design, is what specifically LIMITS our government and its powers to "control" the populace -- by tyrannical legislative or judicial action, or by executive decree. This also means that Americans have inherent rights that citizens (or subjects/serfs, etc.) of other nations simply do not have.

The B. O. R. is NOT a Bll Of Needs -- although certain politicians (and certain nanny-state voters who slobber over them) never stop their cute games to gut the Constitution and turn the whole country into one big Day Care Center ("for the children/for the common good/a progressive society," blah-blah, etc.).

One may not NEED a 300 H.P./4,000 lb. auto that can readily withstand a collision with a gerbil... or six 100 lumen flashlights... or a 5,000 sq. ft. house on 10 acres... or a wife with a 40-inch chest... or a bunch of 15-shot pistols to shoot what needs to be shot... OR a stout folding knife with a 3-4 inch blade to cut whatever one needs to be cut.

However, a very substantial chunk of the U.S. population (those not yet pacified, homogenized, and feminized into politically-correct terminal wussy-hood) strongly resists ANY encroachments designed to re-define the B. O. R. as the Bill Of Needs. They tend to be exceptionally stubborn and resistant to the modern academic indoctrination process. Some call such folks "Neanderthals."

I call them street-smart patriots -- and I'm proud to see some CPFers still fit the description.

YMMV.
----------------------------------------------------------------

"When citizens fear their government, you have tyranny. When the government fears its citizens, you have freedom."
-- Thomas Jefferson
 
Well I generally don't get too drawn into such topics but I'm feeling expressive this morning.
Here's my take...

First, humans and metal detectors are not foolproof. Just because nothing was found doesn't mean a whole lot. Many people are quite adept at identifying LEOs (and avoiding them). Knives aren't always made out of metal. There are many places on your person to conceal a knife and most "acceptable" pat downs do not search all of these places.

From the point of view of an American...
Its a shame to see such a story - patrolling the streets with metal detectors looking for people carrying knives has got to be one of the dumbest things I've seen in a so called free country. But then again I see something very similar happen in my own country every time I walk into the airport. Americans still wouldn't put up with LEOs doing knife "Terry" stops to everyone walking out on the streets... yet.

If you ban guns, and people will kill each other with swords. Outlaw swords and people will kill each other with knives. Restrict knives and people will kill each other with IEDs, chemicals, bows and arrows, blowguns, slingshots, catapults, bats, rocks, sharp sticks, animals, bad breath, etc. Oh, and on top of that people will still be using guns and knives for crimes, as they are very easy to obtain elsewhere and not too difficult to manufacture.

The problem doesn't lie with the gun or knife or pointy stick itself, rather the person using it. Here's where good social programs, good education, etc come into play to reduce the "need" of some individuals to commit some crimes. However there is no ideal, utopian society where all citizens are "good." There will always be those who fall outside the norm, and thus not all crime can be prevented even violent crime. But running around with metal detectors is not the answer.

Some people definitely should not be permitted to own a gun. Some people likely have done things where their rights should be taken away. But taking away the freedoms of the entire population is not going to solve the problem. Sometimes it seems democratically elected governments forget who is in charge... the people. It is embarrassing when the system fails and things such as the Patriot Act are drafted, passed, and upheld... but then again, most people don't even know what's going on. A very very large majority have never even bothered to read things like the Patriot Act.

Meh... lets move along.

Why would I carry a knife with me? Other than a SAK?
For most things I don't need anything more than a SAK, quite true. And thus most of the time I don't carry a tactical folder. But sometimes I know I will need a knife that is easier to open, say with gloves on or with one hand; or I know I will need a knife that will stay securely open as I'm cutting because I like my fingers; or I need a knife with a larger blade when I will be cutting something rather thick; or I need a knife that will more efficiently cut hence the need for a serrated blade; or I know I will be cutting in close proximity to another person therefore I want a not-pointy tip. And yes these situations come up for me often enough that I do buy knives for specific jobs at work. And well... most of the time I walk to work. No reason to drive for 10 minutes when I can walk it in 25 minutes.

Do I carry a knife for self defense? No. Do I carry a firearm for self defense? No. Do I even own a Firearm? Not at the moment. Do I know how to effectively use a gun? Yes ...knife, sword, stick, pen, elbow, foot, hand? Yea. Do any of those compare to using my brain? No. Would I use any and all of the above means to defend myself, my loved ones, or those who are unable to defend themselves? Yes. But do I carry a knife around for the purpose of using it on another human? Definitely not.

Many (but surely not all) who carry weapons "for self defense" are simply scared of other human beings. Low self confidence, prejudice, delusions of heroism, fear mongering by the government and the media all contribute to the belief that we could be attacked by (fill in the blank) at any minute; and that it is better if they have a weapon with them... everywhere. You can often identify such people by all the name calling they do.

If I were to walk on the wrong side of the tracks, wear the wrong colors, etc in some places I definitely am at risk; but a vast majority of the time I can prevent this situation from ever happening by using my brain. There are few times when any civilian will actually need to use a weapon. There are many times where one might need a good knife. It isn't a bad thing for most law abiding citizens to posses a weapon. But then again what exactly makes something a weapon?
... thats a huge topic in itself and not for this post.

It is sad to see so many rights disappear under the guise of security... while at the same time so many individuals have such fear of their fellow man and claim they need weapons for safety.
 
I have to cut through things on a most-daily basis that are far too much for a SAK to handle. A nice folder works on the easy days, but many times a fixed blade knife of at least 4'' is required..
 
Why would anyone need to carry a knife other a SAK or similar on suburban streets?
Norm

Because we like to have a good blade on us. Need has nothing to do with it.:twothumbs I ALSO CARRY A .45 AUTO the Brits would have a hartattack:sick::poof:
 
In the U.S., we have something called the Bill Of Rights (B. O. R.). It emumerates INDIVIDUAL (not collective) rights.

Many have fought for -- and died for -- the U.S. Constitution and the Bill Of Rights. The substance of these hallowed documents, by design, is what specifically LIMITS our government and its powers to "control" the populace -- by tyrannical legislative or judicial action, or by executive decree. This also means that Americans have inherent rights that citizens (or subjects/serfs, etc.) of other nations simply do not have.

The B. O. R. is NOT a Bll Of Needs -- although certain politicians (and certain nanny-state voters who slobber over them) never stop their cute games to gut the Constitution and turn the whole country into one big Day Care Center ("for the children/for the common good/a progressive society," blah-blah, etc.).

One may not NEED a 300 H.P./4,000 lb. auto that can readily withstand a collision with a gerbil... or six 100 lumen flashlights... or a 5,000 sq. ft. house on 10 acres... or a wife with a 40-inch chest... or a bunch of 15-shot pistols to shoot what needs to be shot... OR a stout folding knife with a 3-4 inch blade to cut whatever one needs to be cut.

However, a very substantial chunk of the U.S. population (those not yet pacified, homogenized, and feminized into politically-correct terminal wussy-hood) strongly resists ANY encroachments designed to re-define the B. O. R. as the Bill Of Needs. They tend to be exceptionally stubborn and resistant to the modern academic indoctrination process. Some call such folks "Neanderthals."

I call them street-smart patriots -- and I'm proud to see some CPFers still fit the description.

YMMV.
----------------------------------------------------------------

"When citizens fear their government, you have tyranny. When the government fears its citizens, you have freedom."
-- Thomas Jefferson
HEAR HEAR you got that right:twothumbs
 
In the U.S., we have something called the Bill Of Rights (B. O. R.). It emumerates INDIVIDUAL (not collective) rights.

Many have fought for -- and died for -- the U.S. Constitution and the Bill Of Rights. The substance of these hallowed documents, by design, is what specifically LIMITS our government and its powers to "control" the populace -- by tyrannical legislative or judicial action, or by executive decree. This also means that Americans have inherent rights that citizens (or subjects/serfs, etc.) of other nations simply do not have.

The B. O. R. is NOT a Bll Of Needs -- although certain politicians (and certain nanny-state voters who slobber over them) never stop their cute games to gut the Constitution and turn the whole country into one big Day Care Center ("for the children/for the common good/a progressive society," blah-blah, etc.).

One may not NEED a 300 H.P./4,000 lb. auto that can readily withstand a collision with a gerbil... or six 100 lumen flashlights... or a 5,000 sq. ft. house on 10 acres... or a wife with a 40-inch chest... or a bunch of 15-shot pistols to shoot what needs to be shot... OR a stout folding knife with a 3-4 inch blade to cut whatever one needs to be cut.

However, a very substantial chunk of the U.S. population (those not yet pacified, homogenized, and feminized into politically-correct terminal wussy-hood) strongly resists ANY encroachments designed to re-define the B. O. R. as the Bill Of Needs. They tend to be exceptionally stubborn and resistant to the modern academic indoctrination process. Some call such folks "Neanderthals."

I call them street-smart patriots -- and I'm proud to see some CPFers still fit the description.

YMMV.
----------------------------------------------------------------

"When citizens fear their government, you have tyranny. When the government fears its citizens, you have freedom."
-- Thomas Jefferson



BRAVO :clap:
 
Because we like to have a good blade on us. Need has nothing to do with it.:twothumbs I ALSO CARRY A .45 AUTO the Brits would have a hartattack:sick::poof:

You're absolutely wrong on that issue, a large number of Brits like me lost their pistols way back in '97, so it's more a case green with envy:green:. I envy the fact that the vast majority of you have access to firearms, a body like the NRA with the will and the clout to fight legislation, a written Constitution, some politicians at all levels that are prepared to look after the citizens' rights, need I go on? We're lost:candle:

We have no political party that would have the moral guts to say that the present firearms laws in UK are a waste of time. The Conservative government at the time introduced the 1997 act effectively banning all handguns above .22 rimfire as a typical knee jerk reaction. The subsequent Labour government extended the ban to include .22 rimfire. All we have left is muzzle loading black powder pistols. I just gave up. Our other laughably 'main' political party, the Liberal Dems or whatever they call themselves today would happily ban toothpicks as too sharp.

"Just a century ago the people of Britain enjoyed more personal liberty than most people in the US. "As one society advances another recedes" , my original thought. Government's utter incompetence has allowed this to happen and we still have to pay the wages of the otherwise unemployable.

Sweet nightmares all.


The only way in the UK to freely own a firearm is to step outside the law, then the Firearms Act doesn't apply.

OK that's the firearms rant out of the way.

Now the knives, obviously due to the '(perceived) alarming rise in knife crime' a new law was needed to be enacted upon us. All knives now carried would have to under three inches in blade length and folding, anything longer or with a fixed blade would have to be justified to be carried. Then there came a test case that a locking blade, which wasn't specifically mentioned in the Act was in fact a fixed blade, poor sod found guilty. Case went to Appeal, verdict upheld and without some serious intervention is now law.

Fair dues to both the Govt. and the police this was not the intention, it is however the result. I would hope most British police officers would take a reasonable view, I know that some do and others take the view of book 'em. Let the CPS sort it out. Watch out! They're the ones not on these forums.
 
Last edited:
So...... Not finding a knife on people automatically means that gang-related stabbings have not gone up in one region. Yeah, never thought I'd get to use this smiley.... :poke:

Maybe if I poke the British Police supervisor who came up with that idea long enough, I might find a brain!
 
The law in the UK on carrying knives is misleading because it relates to any pointed obeject ie if you cannot explain why you have a 4inch scew in your pocket you could be arrested.
 
Top