Bonkers proposed changes to UK knife law.

[tsuriru]

In Denmark freedom is not restricted, but we have seen more gun related crimes lately.

Lars

Not to mention submarine related violence... :wink:

 

[Dan P.]

Dan, you are correct as to what triggered this law proposal and that there is a problem to be solved. But kids can not really order a knife on internet - they either grab something at home, or their parents find it ok for them ti have one and carry it whenever they like.

I think you might have misunderstood the point of my post, which was to redress the tedious freedom vs. safety arguments (in my opinion mostly spurious) with a dose of reality, which is that this situation is happening specifically in the UK, and the proposed legislation is to address a specifically UK problem.

 

[Matus]

Dan, indeed I did miss part of your point. And I agree.

 

[Noodle Soup]

Yes. I've long been a proponent of making ammunition as expensive as f@ck. Yes, I know you can make your own bullets, but tax the he!! out of the raw materials needed. Require gun powder purchasers to be registered and track quantities. It can be, and is, done with other chemicals deemed to be dangerous. Try buying certain kinds of cough syrup for example. Hasn't totally eliminated the home meth labs, but it has made a dent in production.

Yes, American's are in love with their guns and a majority will fight to the death for their right to own them. But they are useless without ammo.

In IL you can get get three .4 S&W for the same price as one cigarette. Hmmm. Seems prices have gone up. Last time I posted that statistic is was about 8 bullets to one cigarette. Guess which one will kill you faster?

Oh come on, how much ammo does it take to commit a crime? On the other hand, when I was a competitive shooter, I some times fires several thousand rounds a month. Your high price ammo would have made me stop my hobby but would have never prevented a single crime. As for Illinois, I left when I was 17 and would never consider moving back to that den of corrupt political thieves.

 

[malexthekid]

Important to remember that, however stupid and ineffectual the proposition that is the subject of this thread might be, it is designed because the problem is exactly knife crime amongst minors. And in parts of the UK it is a real problem.
My wife worked for some years in an inner-city primary school (4-10yrs) in S London. Confiscation of knives was something they had to do, perhaps not often, but maybe a couple of times a term/semester. 4-10 year old kids. Think about it. We are not talking about "freedom" or any of that political flim-flam, we are talking about little kids who are ready to kill one another.

And it isn't a new problem. I remember a high school teacher who worked in England telling me similar stories 15 years ago. So 20 to 25 years since he was in England.

 

[SliceNDice]

The British government has proposed changes to UK knife law banning the shipping of knives bought online. Instead, online consumers would have to collect in person.

http://news.sky.com/story/online-kn...new-restrictions-as-crime-rate-rises-10952288

Chef knives are the greatest terrorism, after war...:lol2:

 

[kurwamac]

I struggle to see how effectively this could be enforced; they struggle enough trying to prevent far more restricted things being imported. On a personal note; I've always picked up my knives from the post office anyways in order to pay VAT.

 

[Nemo]

I am all for any regulation that makes sense. The problem is, laws such as this one tend to inconvenience good people while having little or no effect on the intended target.

The pool analogy may not be a good one, but, at least here in the states, no one regulates backyard pools. It is truly sad when a child drowns in one, but I still think people should be allowed to have them.

Regulation can be made to work reasonably smoothly but also have a beneficial effect. Particuarly where the regulation provides an expertise-based (or even better, an evidence-based) guide as to what is considered a minimum safety standard (which might otherwise be difficult for the average punter to work out).

Locally, there are regulations around the fencing required when you put a pool in. It can be (and was for us) a little bit of a fiddle to get the fence set up with proper clearances but once you've done it, its set and forget. And you know that your (or someone else's) 2 year old won't be found floating face down in the pool while you weren't looking.

 

[dwalker]

Regulation can be made to work reasonably smoothly but also have a beneficial effect. Particuarly where the regulation provides an expertise-based (or even better, an evidence-based) guide as to what is considered a minimum safety standard (which might otherwise be difficult for the average punter to work out).

Locally, there are regulations around the fencing required when you put a pool in. It can be (and was for us) a little bit of a fiddle to get the fence set up with proper clearances but once you've done it, its set and forget. And you know that your (or someone else's) 2 year old won't be found floating face down in the pool while you weren't looking.

You totally make sense and I agree with your premise. If said two year old could simply step over or around the fence, the regulation would serve no purpose other than to inconvenience the home owner. Regulation such as proposed would do little to keep a 17 year old from finding a knife, in much the same way how regulations do little to prevent the same 17 year old from possession of alcohol of marijuana.

 

[Nemo]

Dare I eve go a step further and ask why is seems excessive violence is more prevalent in some countries as opposed to others? I'm in the US and we're pretty bad, I admit. Yes, in general it seems to be less prevalent in suppressive countries (communist, authoritarian regime, etc) but I hope that's not the only answer.

Violence and anti social behavior is very limited in Singapore, but in general I don't think individual freedoms are all that restricted? I'm pretty sure they aren't in Denmark and New Zealand where I don't hear about a lot of violence.

Whish I had an answer.

I think that this is an important issue in the whole debate around violence and weapon regulation.

In Aus, there are uniform strict gun laws and violence is pretty low key. And gun violence is very rare. Cause and effect? Probably much more complex than that. However, since the ban on auto and semi-auto firearms came into effect (around 20 years ago), there have been zero mass casualty shootings in this country.

Do I feel the need to carry a weapon for personal defence in Aus? No. And I like it that way.

Would I if I lived in USA? Not sure. Maybe. If I lived parts of Centeral America or Africa? From what I've heard, probably.

 

[Keith Sinclair]

Kids do stupid things that later in life they learn to regret. Some don't make it to old age. I think it is prudent to check backpacks at school.

Here Meth is the largest cause of property crime. They get jacked up & go for it. It is a terrible drug esp. for the user.

We have a fare amount of knife crime. Agree that it is the person not the blade that does the killing. One of my good friends was the Chef at Sheraton Waikiki. Local Japanese. He was murdered with a chef knife in his office by a short fuse loser. The writing was already on wall with this guy.

When I was in Singapore years ago made me realize that laws work. When you fly in they warn that drugs are a death penalty offense. Not unlike Hawaii many different cultures. Place was clean no trash laying around. Quite a few people in a small area seems to work well.

We have a serious homeless problem on Oahu. Quite a few do not want to go to shelters because they do not allow drugs or alcohol. Many of the smaller parks the bathrooms are closed because they trash them. We could never have laws that work like in Singapore. Local Lawyer ads on TV telling you to sue for anything they can think of.


I can see why smaller EU countries train young men with military service and proper gun use. An armed population might make an invader think twice. Hitler took over Norway because it had high quality iron ore.

 

[Noodle Soup]

I think that this is an important issue in the whole debate around violence and weapon regulation.

In Aus, there are uniform strict gun laws and violence is pretty low key. And gun violence is very rare. Cause and effect? Probably much more complex than that. However, since the ban on auto and semi-auto firearms came into effect (around 20 years ago), there have been zero mass casualty shootings in this country.

Do I feel the need to carry a weapon for personal defence in Aus? No. And I like it that way.

Would I if I lived in USA? Not sure. Maybe. If I lived parts of Centeral America or Africa? From what I've heard, probably.

I live about 8 miles outside a small logging town. We can and do legally own just about any kind of firearm we want (no full autos) yet I can't remember the last time a firearm was used in a murder. A local activist tried to get strict firearm laws pasted here to "stop the terrible outbreak of violence." Another resident wrote our paper saying it seemed like most of the murders that had taken place in recent years where with knives, clubs, feet, and strangling. The paper checked the records and he was right. Firearm bans would have prevented very little as our crime rates were already like your Australian ones.