Complete sword ban proposed in UK - UK residents only

[satsobek]

Well, it seems like a silly overreaction to me too. I'm all for dangerous weapons control, but I'm not sure limiting swords is very helpful... once you get below guns and some very obviously nasty weapons, you can just as easily kill someone with a sword as a baseball bat, a wrench... well whatever.

Even though I think freedom to carry arms in the US sometimes goes a little too far and I'm no great NRA fan, I am glad sometimes for our less zealous weapon regulation policies.

Well, at least it isn't SO terrible as it sounds--- even if it did pass, the chances are that it wouldn't put an end to swords and knives for reenacting or the things everyone here does!

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

Hmmmmm, I admire your optimism Christy, but I feel the heavy hand of stifling oppression descending upon us!

[Franklin]

I'd love to see a side-by-side comparison of sword related crimes over the past decade versus any other handy object...violent crimes committed with a cricket bat or golf club for instance. I'd put good money on the sporting equipment but I don't see any move to put a ban on those items.

Disgusting. :x

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

Also, if it did pass, with an exemption for reenactors etc, there would soon be a witchhunt to have them included, ie thugs turning up at events to provoke trouble! :? ? x

[Caius Fabius]

Save lives!
Let's have worldwide strict regulation of automobile ownership, with anyone who gets convicted of any moving violation being unable to drive or own a vehicle for 10 years.
Leave swords alone!
LOL

Which group is responsible for causing the most deaths in the 21st century? Gun owners? Sword Owners? Medical doctors? Automobile owners?

[Praefectusclassis]

This seems to be relevant to the problem in question: the proposed Scottish bill from October '06: http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/busin ... B06-79.pdf

It seems to be less bad than suggested.

[Robert Vermaat]

Indeed. Only Japanese swords seem to be targeted, and re-enactment groups would be among thosde excluded from the ban. Seems reasonable.

[Tarbicus]

Interesting, thanks. I still feel there's something in the works on a UK level, if only because there are so many organisations in the general UK convinced there's a Bill applying to all swords for all purposes.

But, it may be a case of a storm in a teacup. In fact, I hope it is.

But I'm not convinced the definitions of re-enactment will be enough to cover all legitimate activity (meaning one without criminal intent) until it is specifically defined for all to read. If, for instance, the re-enactment were tied in with British culture, would a friendly plod realise we were all mostly Romans once? How would the Greeks amongst us fare? What I think might be unfounded (hopefully), but the police have enough legal detail to keep in their heads, and I do remember Customs not knowing if the stuff I once got from the States was legit to bring into the UK and I had to verify it for them from the Home Office myself - and these are guys with the info available there and then, not out and about on the streets.

[Hibernicus]

Interestingly, we've already had to deal with sword carrying in California USA. It is illegal in California to carry or wield a sword if there is intent is to harm. I believe that our Constitution bans sword dueling. California used to have laws banning swoirds in the 19th C.

It's illegal to have a stick with a lanyard or hand guard! Or a wood replacement handle for a pick in your vehicle. (If you have a truck and you are clearly in construction (etc) intent is assumed. But, in a typical pasenger car, a pick handle near at hand, no store reciept for its recent purchase... crime time!

Some SCA folk have been arrested for tansporting rattan swords. ie sticks with handguards... tossed out of court when it became clear that their intent was use in the sport of SCA combat.

Rules on transporting weapons in a vehicle may apply. Do not carry a sword under your car seat in California!

There is an old body of law regulating blades over 3", folding blades etc.

Concealing a sword on one's person is illegal. Interestingly, you can get a permit to carry a concealed firearm but not a sword.

California treats crossbows as firearms.

These Laws are written with the purpose of giving law enforcement a right to stop and question you. Is that a good thing?

BTW... California should be spelled with a "K".. Kalifornia... and is often named the Democratic People's Republic of Kalifornia.

Thanks be to the "conservative" powers that be that San Diego has the most liberal laws regarding concealed fireams in Kalifornia... More CW permits issued in this county than in the rest of the entire State!

I do not envy our EU friends, but it seems the part of national socialism to disarm the citizenry so that even though they may have an Unalienable Right to rise up and throw off oppressive government their ability to do so is seriously restricted. Govt as parent... no thank you very much.

Can I get a PO Box in the UK? ...or do you need a hard address to sign the petition? Anyone with an extra "room to let"? ...wink wink nudge nudge

[madoc]

I wonder where they stand on BLUNT metal swords, which is after all what most re-enactors in the UK actually use. Of course, sport fencing weapons are also blunt.

Yes they are large and metal and can cause an injury but this potential use are fairly well covered in section 139 of the criminal justice act and the prevention of crime act 1953 defines things like "offensive weapons" and "public places". An "reasonable excuse" for carrying blunted swords is usually "theatrical prop" - after all they are blunted.

Personally, I'd rather not see people walking about in public with sharp metal weapons. Re-enactment not withstanding. I don't actually see why you need a sharp sword with you.
I do not see why you should not be licenced, as I am with my flintlock. After all, they could easily have your arm off ...


However, the one real issue I have is why is this being proposed ? Are we actually facing a problem with sharp swords being used?

[Cornelius Quintus]

Which group is responsible for causing the most deaths in the 21st century?

Ave Charles,

easy question: politicians.

Perhaps the are thinking deeper as we realize.

So 2010 also military guns might be banned, because of environmentally harmful smoke emission when firing (dust filters on the muzzle won't make sense...)

And what would happen then: Everybody would start polishing the rust off his grandpa's sword. But no chance for brutal gangs or civil war - clever politicians will have blocked that way of dangerous public arming just in time.

Britain for sure has to make painful sacrifices. The quality of English green will suffer when only blunt-bladed lawnmowers are allowed...

[Tarbicus]

The quality of English green will suffer when only blunt-bladed lawnmowers are allowed...

ROFL! :lol:

[Salvianus]

Thanks for the link, Jasper. I would agree that a note of caution is as justified:

"...exceptions which will be included in the planned statutory instrument, will allow the sale of swords for legitimate uses to continue. Legitimate uses are stated to include:
Antique Collecting – the preservation of the past by many individual collectors in this country is often to the benefit of our museums and national heritage bodies.
Fencing – fencing swords are used in organised events across the UK and internationally;
Film, television and theatre – swords are frequently used as props in period dramas;
Manufacture – sword-smiths in Scotland manufacture swords, in some cases to extremely high specifications, involving traditional techniques and attracting international interest and renown;
Martial arts – swords are used in many martial arts organised on a national and international basis;
Re-enactment – re-enactment societies do much to bring significant aspects of Scotland’s history to life, using quality reproduction weapons"

The actual proposal has a focus on the vendors, i.e. a licensing scheme.

The figures:
"Detective Chief Superintendent Carnochan stated in evidence ...that:
“in 2004-05 there has been only one murder involving a sword. That is one too many, but we must put the situation in context. There have been four attempted murders and 23 serious assaults involving swords. Those are the crimes that have been reported ..."
(that will only be valid for Scotland itself, not the U.K.).

In my experience, however it is worthwhile both registering concern about the direction legislation is taking and forwarding reasonable views on the options. Whilst, in general, legislation is the product of a long process of expert knowledge applied to thorough consultation of public opinion, who knows what half witted promises will be made by power crazed pillocks in the run up to the next general election. If there is a reasoned concensus, it is harder to justify headline grabbing nonsense.

"The Consultation Paper suggested a number of options in relation to the sale of swords. For example: (a) including swords in the proposed licensing scheme for the sale of non-domestic knives; (b) only allowing swords to be sold to people who are members of a group with a legitimate interest in purchasing that type of sword (eg in relation to particular sports); © prohibiting the sale of swords (or of certain types of sword); and (d) requiring any person wishing to buy a sword to have a personal licence (similar to existing firearms legislation)."

I'd be interested in which options people think would be better for England. It might be useful to forward sensible opinions to your M.P.:

www.parliament.uk/

www.writetothem.com/

Just in case

[Cornelius Quintus]

"Detective Chief Superintendent Carnochan stated in evidence ...that:
“in 2004-05 there has been only one murder involving a sword. That is one too many, but we must put the situation in context. There have been four attempted murders and 23 serious assaults involving swords. Those are the crimes that have been reported ..."
(that will only be valid for Scotland itself, not the U.K.).

Ave Salvianus,

there are some other interesting facts hidden in that document.

The homicide statistics features a larger number of incidents, but just about so called 'sharp instruments' in general. That will include domestic blades, military/hunting knives, razors and screwdrivers... Swords are very rare between that 'instruments' I suppose.

Later, the text indicates that criminals prefer shorter blades, even razors. So two dozen swords assaults are two dozens too much. But still more an abuse of a rarely used weapon (if the swords were sharpened at all). I would like to know what else 'sharp instruments' were used in more than two dozens attacks. Perhaps we'll read a lot about razors, kitchen knives, spades and axes then...

In fact, criminal's first choice are weapons which are easy to hide. That's the real danger. Therefore in Germany 'butterfly' and switchblade knives are banned, but no 'Braveheart'-sized swords.

What's about the also mentioned 'razor gangs'? One hardly will find smaller blades, far from being a large knife or sword. Extremely sharp - very 'domestic' and available in every supermarket...

[Salvianus]

Absolutely. We are clearly dealing with the perception of crime, not the reality. The attack of a 15 year old girl by other teenaged girls with razors for an hour in December was a rare case, I understand, but would not be affected by legislation.

Interestingly, perception of risk is accepted as an acceptable reason both for legislation (e.g. mobile phone whilst driving which was already covered under existing law) and, more importantly, for assigning police effort, which is what effects actual criminal behaviour or drains resources pointlessly, depending.

Some authoritative figures for the UK as a whole would be nice. If they exist, they could theoretically be made public via a parliamentary question from an M.P.