6 Baltimore cops charged in relation to Freddie Gray's death

[MobBoss]

English language comprehension should have kept that law off the books, so it's a little late to hope for it now.

A knife with an automatic spring or other device for closing the blade is not only not "commonly known as" a switchblade knife, it is flat out not a switchblade knife, so English comprehension tells us the law makes no sense in the first place.

Then we go to previous case law regarding the issue. Is there a history of charging spring assisted folding blade knives? Has the 'commonly known as switch-blade' language been an effective defense in the past? It's hardly likely that this is the first time this has come up.

Also, the problem with the 'commonly known as' is that definition is rather subjective. A switchblade to some people is a knife that produces a blade straight out of the hilt when a button is pushed, but a folding blade can also be considered switchblade if it is of the type that the blade swings out unassisted if a button is pushed. It is of the latter type that the knife in question might be.

In doing a google search for 'switchblade' this is what comes up. From the images seen it is very common for a knife with a folding blade that is released with a button to be called a 'switchblade' (and in fact the majority of switchblade type knives are exactly that)...which is why the prosecutor in this could very well be wrong.

https://www.google.com/search?q=swi...a=X&ei=68BMVZalGNKryATPtYG4Bg&ved=0CAcQ_AUoAg

 

[dgfred]

Would the policeman's suspicion that it was illegal be enough to detain him?

Was he hurt before entering the van? Did he harm himself while in the van?

Did he just have it in his pocket? Was it already in his hands? Was he holding in a threatening manner? Or did they find it after detaining him?

I find these questions more important than the wording... twisting words is the specialty of some. I didn't even say a Clinton .

 

[bathsheba666]

So, if I understand the drift of this thread correctly, the nature of the knife that he no longer has in his possession is justification for him dying later at police hands.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Then we go to previous case law regarding the issue. Is there a history of charging spring assisted folding blade knives? Has the 'commonly known as switch-blade' language been an effective defense in the past? It's hardly likely that this is the first time this has come up.

Also, the problem with the 'commonly known as' is that definition is rather subjective. A switchblade to some people is a knife that produces a blade straight out of the hilt when a button is pushed, but a folding blade can also be considered switchblade if it is of the type that the blade swings out unassisted if a button is pushed. It is of the latter type that the knife in question might be.

In doing a google search for 'switchblade' this is what comes up. From the images seen it is very common for a knife with a folding blade that is released with a button to be called a 'switchblade' (and in fact the majority of switchblade type knives are exactly that)...which is why the prosecutor in this could very well be wrong.

https://www.google.com/search?q=swi...a=X&ei=68BMVZalGNKryATPtYG4Bg&ved=0CAcQ_AUoAg

The issue with the language is the "and/or closing the blade" part. I'm all for including the "press here and the blade pops out" under switchblades whether the blade pops out straight or swings out, because either way what you have is a knife meant to be more quickly deployed.

But there are a whole lot of knives with springs that hold the blade closed. They are "spring assisted" to keep the blade from partially opening in your pocket and if the spring has any effect on how quickly you can deploy the knife it is to slow you down. Lumping all those knives in with switchblades is just stupid. Making all those knives that are legal (for good reason) statewide illegal in one municipality is just looking for a selective enforcement opportunity.

"Yes sir, clearly this is just a work knife. No problem. Thanks for supporting law enforcement."

"Hey you criminal scum, this is a switchblade right here! Into the van with you!"

 

[dgfred]

So, if I understand the drift of this thread correctly, the nature of the knife that he no longer has in his possession is justification for him dying later at police hands.

Not correct drift. We are still asking questions about the information available and what really happened. No one is justifying anything as far as I can tell.

 

[MobBoss]

The issue with the language is the "and/or closing the blade" part. I'm all for including the "press here and the blade pops out" under switchblades whether the blade pops out straight or swings out, because either way what you have is a knife meant to be more quickly deployed.

But there are a whole lot of knives with springs that hold the blade closed. They are "spring assisted" to keep the blade from partially opening in your pocket and if the spring has any effect on how quickly you can deploy the knife it is to slow you down. Lumping all those knives in with switchblades is just stupid. Making all those knives that are legal (for good reason) statewide illegal in one municipality is just looking for a selective enforcement opportunity.

"Yes sir, clearly this is just a work knife. No problem. Thanks for supporting law enforcement."

"Hey you criminal scum, this is a switchblade right here! Into the van with you!"

Actually, I disagree with you. A blade that has a spring to keep it closed can be opened quickly by pushing the button and a flick of the wrist. Where I live, we even have a dangerous weapons ordinance against butterfly knives and knives that are easily deployed like that. The point of the spring mechanism is to allow it to be easily concealed and then deployed quickly. That can be the case whether the spring holds the blade closed or deploys it with a push of a button.

And the city ordinance plainly states any spring mechanism for either opening or closing the knife.

But to address dgfreds question, would it be enough for a cop to arrest him for? Absolutely.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Actually, I disagree with you.

Well, I'm glad things are back to normal.

 

[Phrossack]

Why is it often legal to go about with a 16-shot firearm that has no purpose but killing, yet illegal to carry a general-purpose tool that isn't nearly as lethal?

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Why is it often legal to go about with a 16-shot firearm that has no purpose but killing, yet illegal to carry a general-purpose tool that isn't nearly as lethal?

Because selective enforcement is a real thing.

Cops need laws that allow them to bust whoever they decide to bust, and they have plenty of such laws. That's why once you come to their attention you are likely to get busted over and over and over.

 

[dgfred]

Like 18 times .

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Like 18 times .

Not atypical. Cops watch a hundred people walk in and out of a bar. Out of that hundred how many are probably carrying something they shouldn't be? A little weed, a used pipe, a pocketknife that would be legal outside the city but isn't because of the clever wording of a law, a fake ID; whatever. Twenty out of the hundred? Fifty? But the cops just need to bust one to justify their shift. Shake down one, the rest will dump their contraband or scatter, so rather than risk playing the odds they shake down that guy, because they know him.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

Actually, I disagree with you. A blade that has a spring to keep it closed can be opened quickly by pushing the button and a flick of the wrist. Where I live, we even have a dangerous weapons ordinance against butterfly knives and knives that are easily deployed like that. The point of the spring mechanism is to allow it to be easily concealed and then deployed quickly. That can be the case whether the spring holds the blade closed or deploys it with a push of a button.

And the city ordinance plainly states any spring mechanism for either opening or closing the knife.

But to address dgfreds question, would it be enough for a cop to arrest him for? Absolutely.

Not too interested in the technicalities of this one, but knife laws in general are pretty idiotic. You can deploy a non spring knife within a fraction of a second...hell you can "deploy" a sharp kitchen knife with enough length to stab lethally just as quickly as any switchblade...yet possessing one is somehow perfectly legal.

 

[JollyRoger]

So, if I understand the drift of this thread correctly, the nature of the knife that he no longer has in his possession is justification for him dying later at police hands.

It may be relevant to some of the charges (assuming that the language of the statute is improperly read too broadly), but it isn't going to get the violent thugs completely off the hook.

 

[Paul in Saudi]

There are now press reports the lieutenant who "made eye contact" with Grey had some sort of personal grudge. This is the same fellow with the history of domestic violence.

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/may/08/baltimore-officer-brian-rice-freddie-gray

 

[Borachio]

Not atypical. Cops watch a hundred people walk in and out of a bar. Out of that hundred how many are probably carrying something they shouldn't be? A little weed, a used pipe, a pocketknife that would be legal outside the city but isn't because of the clever wording of a law, a fake ID; whatever. Twenty out of the hundred? Fifty? But the cops just need to bust one to justify their shift. Shake down one, the rest will dump their contraband or scatter, so rather than risk playing the odds they shake down that guy, because they know him.

But doesn't that guy know this? So why doesn't he make sure not to be entering a bar that the cops are watching while carrying something that the cops can prosecute him for?

Or is that guy just plain stupid?

Or do the cops go equiped to fit him up? In which case, why couldn't they fit up just about anyone?

But in any case, the picture you paint is a dismal one.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

But doesn't that guy know this? So why doesn't he make sure not to be entering a bar that the cops are watching while carrying something that the cops can prosecute him for?

Or is that guy just plain stupid?

Or do the cops go equiped to fit him up? In which case, why couldn't they fit up just about anyone?

But in any case, the picture you paint is a dismal one.

I'm sure you have heard "ignorance of the law is no excuse," right? Well, "the law" is enough volumes to fill a small library, so pretty much everyone is ignorant about it to some substantial degree. Look at the current discussion. Baltimore adds a "spring assisted closing" phrase to a state law banning switchblades. How many people crossing the city limits do you think know that their legal pocketknife just became an illegal weapon as they crossed the street?

Then there is your valid question about cops being equipped to "fit him up." A quick pinch from the last guy's stash into the pocket for personal use or the next bust is certainly not out of the question. Just picking someone at random to plant it on would be risky, but a guy who has been busted a half dozen times already isn't going to have any credibility...so we're right back to the trouble with being that guy.

Now, before an apologist jumps in here, I'm not suggesting that every cop is a lazy jerk that will make their day by just grabbing up some familiar face, or even that the laziest cops do such every day on the job. But it does go on, and the thin blue line gets drawn around it going on. Because...well, cops.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

I'm sure you have heard "ignorance of the law is no excuse," right? Well, "the law" is enough volumes to fill a small library, so pretty much everyone is ignorant about it to some substantial degree. Look at the current discussion. Baltimore adds a "spring assisted closing" phrase to a state law banning switchblades. How many people crossing the city limits do you think know that their legal pocketknife just became an illegal weapon as they crossed the street?

Then there is your valid question about cops being equipped to "fit him up." A quick pinch from the last guy's stash into the pocket for personal use or the next bust is certainly not out of the question. Just picking someone at random to plant it on would be risky, but a guy who has been busted a half dozen times already isn't going to have any credibility...so we're right back to the trouble with being that guy.

Now, before an apologist jumps in here, I'm not suggesting that every cop is a lazy jerk that will make their day by just grabbing up some familiar face, or even that the laziest cops do such every day on the job. But it does go on, and the thin blue line gets drawn around it going on. Because...well, cops.

It's a tough reality, because police enforcement is absolutely crucial to our society as we've designed it. However, the reality is as you say; human beings given the means to do things like that will do it if they perceive it as beneficial on at least some scale. Microeconomic theory predicts the behavior you describe. It's the same problem as governance in general; who polices the police when they control the information to such an extent?

 

[Timsup2nothin]

It's a tough reality, because police enforcement is absolutely crucial to our society as we've designed it. However, the reality is as you say; human beings given the means to do things like that will do it if they perceive it as beneficial on at least some scale. Microeconomic theory predicts the behavior you describe. It's the same problem as governance in general; who polices the police when they control the information to such an extent?

Society's answer to who polices the police, unfortunately, is the police. For an individual to acknowledge what a bad plan that really is involves accepting an inherent responsibility for replacing it with something better. Given that any effort to do so puts one at odds with the police most people use whatever self delusion is necessary to convince themselves that everything is working just fine.

 

[Borachio]

I'm sure you have heard "ignorance of the law is no excuse," right? Well, "the law" is enough volumes to fill a small library, so pretty much everyone is ignorant about it to some substantial degree. Look at the current discussion. Baltimore adds a "spring assisted closing" phrase to a state law banning switchblades. How many people crossing the city limits do you think know that their legal pocketknife just became an illegal weapon as they crossed the street?

Then there is your valid question about cops being equipped to "fit him up." A quick pinch from the last guy's stash into the pocket for personal use or the next bust is certainly not out of the question. Just picking someone at random to plant it on would be risky, but a guy who has been busted a half dozen times already isn't going to have any credibility...so we're right back to the trouble with being that guy.

Now, before an apologist jumps in here, I'm not suggesting that every cop is a lazy jerk that will make their day by just grabbing up some familiar face, or even that the laziest cops do such every day on the job. But it does go on, and the thin blue line gets drawn around it going on. Because...well, cops.

You make some valid points, imo. Though why a known felon would carry any sort of knife at all, is a bit of mystery. Given that he must know how likely it is the police are going to want to search and convict him for just about anything. Where's the statute that says, as a felon, you must do everything you can to ensure the police have reasonable grounds?

(And I'm mystified why anyone wants a pocket knife. I have one at home which I quite like, and which I use very occasionally for no very good reason. I could just as easily use another sort of cutting implement. I have from time to time carried a pocket knife around with me, but I can't remember ever putting it to very good use. And generally I've either abandoned the habit, as they tend to wear holes in one's pocket, or I've simply lost the things. When I was truck driving, a knife of some description very occasionally came in useful for cutting ropes off loads that some bright individual had decided it was hilarious to tighten a ridiculous amount, but pocket knifes tended to be rather too feeble for the job - I had a knife that I found in a pile of hides one time. That was quite a useful blade, but not suitable for carrying in the pocket, as it resembled a rather small scimitar.)

For some reason, and not necessarily a relevant one, I'm reminded of the riots in London in 2011. The overwhelming number of convictions for those riots were for people with previous records. But this has a really commonplace explanation: the people who were successfully identified via surveillance cameras were precisely those people who were already known to the police. If you've just a face as evidence, and nothing else to go on, how are you going to track that person down?

 

[JollyRoger]

Though why a known felon would carry any sort of knife at all, is a bit of mystery.

The Constitutional right to self defense.