Well, as the Founding Fathers clearly stated: “The right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed — except, of course, them nasty automatic knives! Those are straight up bad news!”
Do auto knives come with magazines, have they been known to go on killing sprees yelling Alla snacker /sarcasm
I did not read article just headline struck me as humorous
In deference to semi-automatic knives and manual knives. /S
Are idiot judges protected by the Constitution—especially those willfully violating the Constitution?
This stupid broad....
This stupid broad....
Wanna hear a good one? Check out Maryland knife laws.
One cannot carry a switchblade (Automatic) knife with the intent to do harm.
I virtually always carry a knife, as a tool. I have a really nice, very high end automatic that I never carry because I have no idea how one would measure intent.
Typical Maryland insanity
Knife laws are terrible in some states. There needs to be an NRA for knives.
when will we get judges who stop defining what they believe the law to be...
where are the tars and feathers...
Apparently not.....
Whitest teeth someone ever came across!
What really gets the libs is an automatic knife with more than a 10 round clip and silencer.
Aren’t there some jurisdictions where locking knives, even if manual, are illegal? They want you to cut off your own fingers with your pocket knife!
It’s “right to bear arms” not “right to bear firearms”.
“Arms” is kind of generic.
The problem is not the implement, it’s the human agent. This judge, like SO MANY OTHERS, is a total ass. Just another slip and fall attorney with political connections, an agenda and no ability to think.
What exactly is the difference between an "offensive" weapon and presumably a "defensive" weapon? I would challenge the mental midgets of the court to find any weapon that is only usable as one or the other. In short, their decision is based on not just one but two erroneous premise - 1) that a weapon can be classified as strictly offensive or defensive in nature. 2) that our Constitutionally protected rights only extend to non-offensive weapons.
In its discussion of the Second Amendment, the Heller Court explained that “the Second Amendment right, whatever its nature, extends only to certain types of weapons,” those “typically possessed by law-abiding citizens.” Heller, 128 S. Ct.
The Heller court couldn't be more wrong. The 2nd Amendment makes no such distinction. Keep and bear arms, period. Not, "keep and bear arms that meet these criteria..."
As such, the Constitutional right to bear arms affords no protection to “weapons not typically possessed by law-abiding citizens for lawful purposes.” Id. at 2815–16
This argument is exactly, EXACTLY why the 2nd Amendment was written. "We're only going to limit you to what law-abiding people would have." Of course, we make up the laws and define what is law-abiding or not... Which is the exact reason the 2nd Amendment was written - to protect our innate right to keep and bear arms (note, unqualified "arms") and prevent the government - the law makers - from defining what was law-abiding or not and thus infringing upon that right.
Our Supreme Court has likewise recognized a limitation to the Second Amendment. “While the right to bear arms enjoys constitutional protection, like many other constitutional rights, it is not beyond regulation.”
Couldn't disagree more. Preventing such "regulation" is exactly why these rights are explicitly protected. The SCOTUS royally screwed the pooch on that one. It is embarrassing.
It is apparent from a review of Section 908 that “offensive weapons,” as defined in Pennsylvania, are atypical. They are not possessed by lawabiding citizens for lawful purposes and...
Well, that argument is false on it's face. Every one and every thing is law-abiding unless and until a law is made preventing it. Carrying a particular tool (knife, gun, screwdriver, tape measure...) is not a criminal act. There are numerous purposes for having any of those items that are not criminal in nature. The crime is created out of whole cloth by simply banning the possession of the item. It then becomes a circular justification for the "law."
The statute defines an offensive weapon, including “a dagger, knife, razor or cutting instrument, the blade of which is exposed in an automatic way by switch, push-button, spring mechanism, or otherwise.”
If you have ever had one hand full/busy/pinned/disabled in any way and need a knife, you'd appreciate having one that opens easily. Automatic, even simply assisted-opening knives are a tremendous safety enhancement. For every scenario they could contrive where such a knife is used illegally and it's "automatic" nature is necessary to the crime, I can come up with one where such a feature saves life and limb.
One word, “protection”! What ever it takes to protect one’s self from violence. What if he used a #18 Stilson wrench instead? I could never understand the big deal of a switchblade, when a lockback can open with the movement of your thumb just as quick.
Switchblades are legal here in Maine.
The same law that was signed in 2015 for Constitutional
Carry also made switchblades legal.