Common sense knife regulation

Timsup2nothin said:
There may be some nominal value in regulation. Currently, if I am pulled up for jaywalking and the cop notes that I am carrying a cooking knife he faces the difficulty the I haven't actually committed any crime. Well, other than jaywalking. He may 'have a feeling' that I'm up to no good. He may try to stretch some sort of existing law into a pretzel so that I can be 'taken off the street' before i do whatever harm he is thinking I am liable to do. But without such stretching I'm very likely to just go my way...and really society is probably better off if under such circumstance I am not allowed to go my way, and is also better off if police are not forced into such corners where they are inclined to stretch the laws.

Unfortunately, at least in the US we have already created an environment where cops stretching the law is an everyday event, netting us a dead guy in Baltimore who's only 'crime' was carrying a pocketknife across a city limit.
Click to expand...

And luckily for us over here, there's no such crime as jaywalking so we're not going to get caught with a kitchen knife in the first place :)
 
The Second Amendment guarantees the right to own and bear arms and that includes knives. And that is found in every state constitution in the USA.

Common sense and regulation are absurd when talking about guaranteed natural rights. If it's a right, it's not a priviledge and therefore cannot be regulated.
 
GoodSarmatian said:
At least you're honest.
Click to expand...
At least you're honest that you see fundamental natural rights as only priviledges for some as it suits your narrow definition. What a joke.

Well apply it equally to every other natural right then like the right to freedom of assembly or free speech.

The first thing Democrats did was try to wrest away the 2nd Amendment from black Americans. Nothing...I mean nothing...has changed.
 
Cassius Critzer said:
At least you're honest that you see fundamental natural rights as only priviledges for some as it suits your narrow definition.
Click to expand...


The existence of "Natural rights" is pretty damnded debatable, to put the right to bear arms into that category even more so.
I'm willing to compromise. Private persons are allowed to have natural weapons. You can grow out your nails and sharpen your teeth. You can make use of your brain and the human penchant for tools and even carry spears, slings stone axes and bows, but I'll draw the line at any weapon which can't be produced without refining ore into metal at some point in the production process.
 
In America, the Bill of Rights are not negotiable. Even so, all fifty states have constitutions that also guarantee the right to own and bear arms and that obviously includes knives. What is more,theSupreme Court over and over has halted the right for states to limit what is protected under the Bill of Rights. So while a state may pretend it's a priviledge like a driver's license,when challenged,the law is changed.

It's not a right that is legislated but guaranteed by sacred contract with the Republican government! How can you ignore "shall notbe infringed" and then ignore the guarantee!

Well, under Fascists,the natural rights of the individual citizen are squashed by the State. How bizarre the left has become.
 
I thought the bill of rights were amendments to the constitution.
Amendments can be amended.
 
Silurian said:
I thought the bill of rights were amendments to the constitution.
Amendments can be amended.
Click to expand...
Hah! Do you understand how impossible that would be? To amend an amendment takes a huge portion of state legislatures to agree it should be done and FIRST they would have to try to abolish the 2nd Amendment in their own state constitutions!

That would cause complete Civil War as a fundamental loss of personal freedoms and guarantees by elected officials in government. You're talking anarchy and the ones without weapns would be totally impotent to impose their will.

How many soldiers who swore an oath to defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign or domestic, would support such an eradication of the 2nd Amendment?

You want common sense? As it's a natural right, then self-regulate whether you are responsible enough to own a weapon like a knife. Don't buy one if they repulse you. Simples.

It's like the first amendment. Who would ever want to abolish or limit that for citizens? If you wanted to do so,then merely not communicate personally.
 
Last edited:
Would be interesting to know how the US Constitution applies to the OP.
 
So you accept that it is in effect negotiable.

Who knows how opinions will change over the next hundred years.

If the amendment is enacted in accordance with the provisions for making amendments then soldiers would be breaking their oath if they did not defend an amendment too the 2nd amendment.
 
Cassius Critzer said:
Hah! Do you understand how impossible that would be? To amend an amendment takes a huge portion of state legislatures to agree it should be done and FIRST they would have to try to abolish the 2nd Amendment in their own state constitutions!

That would cause complete Civil War as a fundamental loss of personal freedoms and guarantees by elected officials in government. You're talking anarchy and the ones without weapns would be totally impotent to impose their will.

How many soldiers who swore an oath to defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign or domestic, would support such an eradication of the 2nd Amendment?

You want common sense? As it's a natural right, then self-regulate whether you are responsible enough to own a weapon like a knife. Don't buy one if they repulse you. Simples.

It's like the first amendment. Who would ever want to abolish or limit that for citizens? If you wanted to do so,then merely not communicate personally.
Click to expand...
So are you saying that in USA even if a constitutionally qualified majority (2/3, 3/5 or whatever it is) wanted to suppress the 2nd amendment it would be impossible because the gun nuts would rise up in arms against such majority, the legal order and the democracy?
 
The original post is about some foolish judge in the UK thinking knves should be less sharp. How kooky. The idea was to cut down on violencedue to firearms so instead they have knife violence and acid attacks in the UK.

For crying out loud,the USA is a Republic not a Democracy. Our rights are all but immutable not subject to whims...by design.

This is as absurd as the Prohibition of Ethanol and frankly is treasonous as natural rights theory is the foundation upon which the American Republic was founded upon.
 
I am frequently, shall we say, intrigued by the American mentality which seems to be, simultaneously, incredibly proud of being the nation with the most freedom on Earth, whilst also being almost religiously devoted to organising their society according to a list of unbreakable rules written up by some dead guys 200 years ago.
 
God bless the USA. MAGA.

How amusing it is to lecture Americans who protect the free world through military might as that task is too distasteful and expensive for some.
 
Cassius Critzer said:
The original post is about some foolish judge in the UK thinking knves should be less sharp. How kooky. The idea was to cut down on violencedue to firearms so instead they have knife violence and acid attacks in the UK.

For crying out loud,the USA is a Republic not a Democracy. Our rights are all but immutable not subject to whims...by design.

This is as absurd as the Prohibition of Ethanol and frankly is treasonous as natural rights theory is the foundation upon which the American Republic was founded upon.
Click to expand...
Republic is the form of government, democracy is the political system. USA is a republic and a democracy, Spain for instance is a monarchy and a democracy. It is all stablished in the constitutions which are the expression of the sovereignty of the people and can be changed or amended through the ways stablished in the very constitution, which most of the time requires qualified majorities to avoid temporary whims.

You consider that the 2nd amendment is someway above the sovereignty of the American people?​
 
Natural rights are guaranteed by GOD not men. That is basic John Locke's theory of natural rights. The whole point of the American revolution was Britain sought to usurp the natural rights of the American colonists. It is actually written that it is our duty to overthrow such tyranny as trying to take away the basic right to self-defense.

Those without weapons are utterly impotent.

The USA is not a democracy in any way. That is a sham. We are a loosely connected group of states containing over 330 million citizens in rural and urban regions. If it were a demcracy, then 100 urban areas would violate the autonomy of the rest of the country. No thank you, no mob rule here on sacrosanct aspects of the government and the compact between politicians and citizens.
 
But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.
The Declaration of Independence
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Leonel
British calls to ban kitchen knives.
2 3 4
Replies
77
Views
3K
Newbunkle
Newbunkle
IglooDame
Could banning pointy knives reduce crime in long term?
2 3 4
Replies
78
Views
2K
cidknee
cidknee
Top Bottom