Phil Elmore: Individual Authoring Services

Understanding Knives
In Which Our Hero Shills For AKTI

As anyone who knows me is aware, one of my hobbies involves knives. Ever since I was a small child, I have enjoyed pocket knives in particular. As the years have passed I like to believe I've become knowledgeable on most facets of knives and their use. I believe strongly that the cutting edge is the single most important technological development in the evolution of human society. Consider that for a moment. What is produced that does not require, at some point in its manufacture, the cutting of some material? For that matter, what tools exist that do not require, at some point during their manufacture, the cutting of some material?

Sadly, it is a fact of both biology and physics that a sharpened point or edge will harm the human body, sometimes fatally. Since human beings first learned to forge metal weapons, the knife (or sword) has been a weapon as well as a tool. (While it can be argued -- and I agree -- that a weapon is a tool, I am making a distinction between knives used against aggressors and knives used for utilitarian purposes.) Because a knife may be used to harm someone, misguided lawmakers and power brokers have long sought to "control" possession of blades.

(A good article about knife laws that I did not write, but which I have archived on these pages, may be found listed here.

Because I value liberty, and because I consider the knife in all its forms an essential tool for utility and self defense, I belong to AKTI, the American Knife and Tool Association. Devoted to promoting a positive image of knives and opposed to more needless knife legislation, AKTI has a long way to go before it is truly a viable lobbying organization. Envisioned as a sort of "NRA for knives," AKTI is also the only organization of which I am aware that fights senseless knife laws.

Most people aren't aware that a complex web of laws governs the possession of knives from state to state, from municipality to municipality. Most of the laws regarding knives are found at the state level (the only federal bans of which I am aware are restrictions on the importation into the United States of certain types of knives). There are also restrictions at the city, town, or even village level; one example would be the restrictions on knives in New York City, which are even more strict than those in New York State in general. (Among other things, knives with blades beyond a certain length are prohibited in NYC, but at the time of this writing there was no corresponding restriction at the state level -- though a length limit is indeed being considered as I type this.)

The knives most often targeted for proscription usually fall into certain categories based on their blade shape, folding and opening mechanism (or lack thereof), or size. Before I discuss why knife laws are senseless, let's define some knife types and see where they stand in the context of the law.

A folder is any knife that folds, while a fixed blade or straight knife is any knife that does not fold. Generally, there are fewer laws barring the possession of folding knives than fixed blades. This is because a folding knife is more often regarded as a pocket-sized tool, while a fixed blade is usually seen as either a hunting implement or a weapon.

A lockblade or lockback or liner lock folder is a folding knife that locks open when the blade is deployed. Lockblades and lockbacks traditionally were "rocker bar lock" folders; a rocker bar lock is released by pressing an exposed portion of the spine of the knife. Liner locks, which have become increasingly popular in the past few years, use a bent, springy piece of metal within the handle that blocks the open blade and which must be pushed aside to close the knife. A liner lock allows the knife to be released and closed easily with only one hand, while a rocker bar lock must be closed with both hands unless you're feeling skilled or lucky. Most lockbacks, and particularly most liner lock folders, can be snapped open with only one hand if you've got a strong wrist and know what you're doing.

Several companies have introduced proprietary locking systems such as the compression lock, plunge lock, axis lock, and so forth. These may or may not be improvements on the rocker bar lock and liner lock mechanisms. I won't get into the details of these, except to say that the idea is the same: they provide a means to lock the blade open in what is (hopefully) a secure fashion.

A tactical folder is a lockblade, lockback, liner lock, or other locking folder with a couple of modern features (which have become popular since the late 80's or early 90's). One feature is a thumb hole in the blade (or a thumb stud or disk affixed to the blade) that allows the knife to be opened easily with only one hand by using the thumb or index finger to push the blade open. Another feature (not always, but usually present on "tactical folders") is a pocket clip -- a metal or plastic spring clip like that found on a pager, which allows the knife to be clipped inside a waistband or pocket. As I write this, tactical folders (because they are easily opened and can be clipped just about anywhere) are monstrously popular among Knife People. They are intended as general utility knives, but are also designed to function as last-resort self defense implements, which probably explains their wide popularity.

A balisong or butterfly knife is a Filipino folding knife often seen in martial arts movies. (While the design may not actually originate with the Filipinos, the balisong is undeniably tied to Filipino culture.) The knife consists of a pair of handle halves that rotate 180 degrees to cover the blade. Skilled practitioners of the balisong can open and close the blade with one hand, flashing the handle halves back and forth in an impressive series of movements. Because of their fearsome and exotic mystique, butterfly knives are often banned. Because of the spinning motion of the handle halves, butterfly knives are sometimes classified as gravity knives, even though this is incorrect.

A gravity knife is a knife that uses gravity to deploy the blade. Most often, it consists of a vaguely cylindrical handle with a hole in the front, from which the blade deploys when a button is pushed. The knife must be held pointed down for the blade to fall into place, although a smart snap of the wrist can flick the blade into position if done correctly. Because of the ease and speed with which the blade is opened (and possibly because they are sometimes associated with paratroopers), gravity knives are often banned. One problem with this is that some lawmakers take the position that any knife that can be opened using inertia (by snapping the wrist or otherwise jerking the knife handle around) must be a gravity knife. The slippery slope of gravity knife bans has been used to prohibit butterfly knives, and worse: in a recent dispute with U.S. Customs, a U.S.-based knife importer had scores of knife designs temporarily confiscated. The rationale was that the company's linerlock folders could be flicked open using inertia, and were therefore gravity knives. (Fortunately, Customs backed down and released almost all of the knives -- but the danger of broad application of gravity knife laws remains.)

A switchblade is any knife whose blade opens through spring pressure when a button or lever is pressed. The term "switchblade" is sometimes used specifically for Italian-style spring-driven stiletto knives, as opposed to automatic knife, a term used for any spring-driven blade. (A stiletto is actually a fixed-blade stabbing implement that may or may not have a sharpened edge, but the term is commonly applied to Italian-style switchblades.) Switchblades are almost always banned, and there are Federal import prohibitions on knives of this type. Switchblade bans came about when movies like "The Blackboard Jungle" glorified the switchblade as the tool of gang members and other miscreants in the 1950's; many people seem to believe that because switchblades open quickly and automatically, they must be dangerous weapons. Switchblades do not open appreciably faster than a tactical folder with a thumb stud, however, and their mechanisms are often much weaker and prone to malfunction than those of a sturdy locking folder. Ironically, a criminal armed with a knife has the luxury of opening his folding blade before the attack, whereas a citizen carrying a knife for self defense might find the quick-opening action of an automatic knife very helpful in a self defense scenario.

A Bowie knife is usually defined as a large, clip-point, single-edged hunting knife. Bowie knives are usually fixed blades rather than folders, although I have seen some large folding knives labeled "folding bowies." The Bowie knife was popularized by American Jim Bowie, and might have been designed by his brother, Rezin. There is much debate about what the first Bowie knife actually looked like (it may have been a clip-point blade, which is a traditional hunting pattern, or it may have been an "Arkansas tooth pick" pattern, which is a large, symmetrical, double-edged blade), but it is believed that Bowie killed another man with it during a famous duel. Because of the prevalence of Bowie knives in the 19th century and their association with violent behavior, there are laws in some areas that specifically prohibit Bowie knives and Arkansas toothpicks.

A dagger is a knife with a double-edged blade -- that is, a blade that is sharpened on both sides. A dirk is a knife shaped much like a dagger, but with a blade that is sharp on one side only. The terms "dagger" and "dirk" 'are often used as synonyms, and the definitions of what a dirk and dagger are can be unclear. Most localities have some sort of law prohibiting the possession of a dirk, dagger, or stiletto; in these instances the term "stiletto" is used to mean a long, thin stabbing blade, but may refer (inaccurately) to an Italian-style switchblade.

In some areas, there is a length limit on knives that may be possessed legally. There is some debate about how to measure the length of a blade. Should the measurement include all the metal that comprises the blade, or should it include only the sharpened portion of the blade's edge? In my own state there is a myth, commonly applied by police, that a blade can be no longer than the width of a palm (usually the officer's palm, rather than your own). This does not appear in my state's penal code, but police officers are typically ignorant of the letter of the law, and rely on lawyers to hash out the facts after an arrest has been made. Obviously, in areas that have length laws, possession of a sword is sure to get you in trouble.

One thing that is never particularly clear is what constitutes "possession" of a given knife. Obviously, carrying a knife is possessing it, and keeping a knife in your car might be construed as possession of that knife by the owner of the vehicle, or even of all of the passengers in the vehicle. "Possession," as defined in various state laws, might or might not mean you could own a particular knife in your home. The single common factor in knife laws in the United States is that they are deliberately vague, and subject to a great deal of interpretation by the courts.

At the root of all laws regarding the ownership and possession of knives is the theory that:

- knives are dangerous implements, and
- laws regulating their possession will make society more safe.

I dispute that theory and make the following assertions:

1. Knives are essential tools for daily living.

2. Knives may also be used for self defense, and banning their possession constitutes the de facto prohibition of self defense.

3. While knives can be dangerous, laws banning their possession have absolutely no impact on violent crime, and knife bans lead to deliberately ignorant "zero tolerance" policies that hurt more people than they help.

Assertion 1
The knife is an essential tool for daily living, whether you have one or not. As I said before, all of our advanced technology and manufacturing is based on the need for a cutting edge, either in the manufacture of goods or in the creation of the tools that manufacture those goods. On a personal level, a knife is extremely helpful. I use mine constantly for mundane tasks like opening mail, sealed boxes, and packaging (be it for "dry goods" or food). A knife can also be extremely useful in an emergency situation, like cutting yourself free of a tangled seatbelt or other hindrance. This happens more often than you might think; the magazine Tactical Knives runs "It Happened To Me" stories every issue, detailing emergency situations in which a knife saved someone's life or made getting out of difficulty that much easier.

If you asked me to specify what I did with my knife today, I wouldn't be able to tell you -- but I wouldn't be able specify all the different door handles, keyboard keys, and pens with which my right hand had interacted that day, either. Whenever I don't have my knife with me, I notice it -- about the time I need to cut something. Yes, there are people who get through life opening packets of cookies with their teeth, and ripping open taped boxes with their house keys. But a knife is much more useful -- not to mention a lot more dignified -- than your incisors or the key to your apartment.

Assertion 2
While the best tool for self defense is the handgun, knives, though they are a distant second choice, are still just that: the best second choice available. Portable, generally reliable, and extremely effective, knives are equalizers that make it possible for a smaller, weaker human being to fight off a physically more powerful attacker. "But what if," you might ask, "your attacker takes the knife away and uses it against you?" That might sound like a very real danger -- until you contemplate wresting a sharp-edged knife from someone who doesn't want you to have it.

It is true that knives can be weapons. But laws which seek to ban all knives perceived as weapons are, in effect, saying that no private citizen may possess a weapon. We live in a dangerous world, and that world contains societal predators who will try to harm you to take what you have or violate your person. It is a fact that you are much more likely to successfully defend yourself when you have a weapon and are familiar with its use. Prohibiting the possession of weapons essentially prohibits self defense; it sends the message that our society values your victimization more than it values your ability to be responsible for yourself. Prohibiting the possession of knives by law-abiding citizens who wish to use them for self-defense does everyone a disservice. In fact, it actually endangers the very people the laws were enacted to protect.

Some people will state that they could not defend themselves even if they had a weapon. These people generally project this inability on everyone else, assuming that if they themselves would be helpless in the face of an attacker, no one else should be allowed to own a weapon. After all, they conclude, of what use would such possession be? Pacifists of this type generally desire weapons bans because these laws further the illusion of safety.

Assertion 3
A typical fan of weapons prohibition will counter, "What of the trade off in public safety? Laws banning weapons make us all safer." The implication is that if we pass enough weapons bans, the need for self-defense will be eliminated. (This is nonsense; even if every attacker and mugger everywhere were magically reduced to using only his bare hands, a knife in the hands of the victim would radically alter the odds in the victim's favor. And if there were no weapons, there would still be societal predators -- and they would focus on people smaller and weaker than themselves, just as they do now.)

But the root of the problem is that laws banning weapons do not reduce violent crime. The "gun control" debate aside (and it is a fact that when people are allowed to possess firearms legally, they are safer than when firearms are banned), laws that ban the possession of knives have absolutely no impact on the criminal minority. A stabbing or cutting implement can be manufactured very easily, as inmates in our nation's prisons have proven time and time again by manufacturing jailhouse "shivs" (from a bewildering array of improvised materials, including melted, sharpened toothbrushes). Anyone with a rock and a piece of metal can manufacture a lethally sharp object. If you have the criminal intent to harm someone, no law banning knives will stop you. And those laws will inconvenience and endanger your potential victims, while having no effect on you.

According to the United States Justice Department, the most common knife used to hurt human beings in this country is the common kitchen knife. This is perfectly understandable; the first thing people seem to do in domestic disputes is run to the kitchen for a carving or paring knife. For that matter, the most common implement used by muggers and carjackers isn't even a knife; it's the screwdriver, which is, after all, a deadly stabbing tool. It is completely and totally impractical to ban screwdrivers and kitchen knives -- so banning other knives does nothing to prevent crime, while (again) preventing people from carrying properly designed and constructed self defense weapons.

A left-leaning but well-intentioned friend of mine once asked me: "Why not ban all explicitly 'combat' knives?" Dismissing for the moment my assertion that people should be allowed to carry weapons for self-defense, this is comparable to banning cars that "look sporty" in order to prevent speeding. A "combat" knife is no different in form or function than a large kitchen knife. While it may be built more solidly, a military or fighting knife (and there are many on the market) is only different from a kitchen knife because of its appearance and the fact that it comes with a sheath. Both knives will kill if carried for that purpose; any idiot can manufacture a cardboard sheath for a kitchen knife. Banning a tool because of its appearance is the height of ignorance. And such a law, again, does absolutely nothing to prevent crime.

Columnist Jeff Cooper has coined the term "hoplophobia" for this attitude about weapons. A hoplophobe is one who has an almost irrational fear of weapons. Most knife- and gun-prohibitionists can be defined as hoplophobes, and usually this is because they fear what they do not understand. Education about and familiarity with knives will eliminate people's unreasoning fear of them. But because many people are functioning hoplophobes with closed minds, our society has seen increasing instances of "zero tolerance" policies victimizing people who lack criminal intent.

Primarily children, the victims of "zero tolerance" policies have been well publicized in our popular media. They include a great many honors students and other kids with no criminal intent and no history of wrongdoing, who, for whatever reason, made the mistake of bringing to school knives (or even nail clippers and other innocuous items that incorporate tiny blades). Suspension or even expulsion is the most common, automatic response to violations of zero-tolerance policies, and these policies remove all human reason and common sense from the scenario. How does expelling an honors student who forgot she had a pair of nail clippers in her pocket help anyone? Zero-tolerance policies are the logical result of the hoplophobic mentality gripping our country. They go beyond the injustice of viewing all weapons in the hands of private citizens as wrong and dangerous; they mischaracterize as deadly weapons everyday items that could, in extreme situations, be used to hurt someone. If we insist on carrying this idea to its conclusion, we will be forced to ban all pens, pencils, and objects with sharp edges, until our economy grinds to a halt because we cannot produce enough Nerf to pad the entire world.

Knives are essential tools that, like all tools, can be misused. Knives replace our teeth and our nails, and have made it possible for us to build the technologically advanced society we now enjoy. Denying their possession and use to our sisters and brothers makes criminals of us all -- and diminishes us as human beings.