Posted on 05/02/2016 4:25:39 AM PDT by marktwain
You are winning the culture war when the other side accepts your premises. In the 1950’s, legislatures across the country succumbed to the latest trendy weapons ban. Switchblade knives. The trend went so far as to pass a federal ban on the importation and interstate sale of of switchblades, because, at the time, it was widely understood the Constitution forbade the federal government from actually regulating the sale of an item inside of state boundaries. Seven states, including Arizona, did not enact a switchblade ban.
The ban never had any facts or logic to back it up. It was entirely emotion and media driven legislation, based on fear of the “other”, in this case, street gangs armed with switchblade knives. It was a precursor to the the “assault weapon” ban, another fear and emotion based ban with no data to back it up. The icon of the switchblade ban was “Westside Story”, of the “Assault Weapons” ban “Miami Vice”. Both bans were driven by politicians making a name for themselves and a “progressive” media revelling in emotion driven nonsense. It took the rise of the Internet and 60 years, but Conservatives, Libertarians, and Constitutionalists are winning the culture war on switchblades and weapons in general.
The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel has deep “progressive” roots. Milwaukee, Wisconsin, has always been a center of “progressive” thought. A few months ago, Wisconsin passed a repeal of the state ban on switchblades and other knives. The repeal also placed knives in the state preemption law, so that the laws are uniform throughout the state.
The repeal of a weapons ban is reliably heralded by “progressive” media with a flurry of articles about how there will be “blood in the streets”.
(Excerpt) Read more at ammoland.com ...
IMHO, If you have a reason to carry a switchblade that *any* person would agree is due to functional needs -- you need a knife but only have one hand, your job requires you to frequently cut stuff with a knife (professional box-opener maybe?), you have arthritis in your fingers -- then if you end up using it for self-defense, nobody can say that self-defense was the *only* reason you had a switchblade on you to begin with.
Aside from outright bans, liberals love nothing more than muddying the waters enough to scare honest citizens into complying with de facto bans, even if the letter of the law permits said citizens to do whatever it is in question that the left opposes.
And aggressors don't pay any attention to bans.
Do they take turns? Ladies first?
That’s one of about 50 definitions of a bowie knife.
Check this out. http://www.survivalistboards.com/showthread.php?t=168603
Post 8 is especially interesting.
If guys on a knife forum, who seem to have some expertise cannot agree on a common definition, how can a law possibly be written to give police and prosecutors a leg to stand on and limit the citizenry thereof?
The actual “Bowie” knife is lost to history but is rumored to be more of a small sword with an 18” or so blade. Thus, the law should be more tightly defined.
“A knee-jerk ban, similar to switchblades.”
I think the suppressor ban is a bit different. Switchblades, like “Assault Weapons” had a big media push to demonize them, along with political opportunists making a name for themselves based on nonsensical fear.
As far as I can tell, that never happened before the ban on suppressors (silencers) that was passed in 1934.
I think suppressors were just thrown into the grab bag of everything they thought they could grab federal control over. What they really wanted was handguns, but that was a bridge too far.
A suppressor ban never made any sense, but few enough people had them and were using them to mount significant opposition. The ban was steamrollered in under the Roosevelt regime’s general attack on the Constitution and the rule of law.
Here is an article about their use in New Zealand.
http://gunwatch.blogspot.com/2015/08/new-zealand-silencers-cheap-and.html
I have an OLD WEST (or True West, Frontier times) magazine with an article on the SMITHWICK BOWIE. It is claimed to be taken from the original pattern for the first Bowie knife.
The handle is six inches long, the blade is 11 inches long, 2 inches wide with a “clip” on the point of the blade. A simple flat hilt. Nothing fancy like many of the Bowie knives made for movies.
I made a couple of them for myself, they are heavier than a .44 Mag pistol, so I made another from an old machete blade. Much lighter.
I think the Arkansas Toothpick would be a more “agressive” knife. Looks much like a sykes fairbairn dagger of WWII.
Taking back the 2nd Amendment, one weapon (”arm”) at a time.
It always seemed to me that a sheathed knife would be much more usable and reliable than a switchblade.
Silly liberals. When criminals faced severe penalties for carrying switchblades they simply started carrying guns.
His boss says something like, 'Why does a cop need a weapon like that?'.
In the '80s, a friend did a little tour with a music group in Europe, and smuggled back a switchblade in his trumpet case.
Total POS, obviously made to sell to tourists. Press the button, the thing would just disintegrate. Spring flying one way, blade just kinda dangling... Definitely not a Benchmade.
You’re kidding,right?
Oh, yeah. My EDC knife is a Kershaw Leek. It isn't a prybar, it isn't a screwdriver, it isn't a ninja weapon, it's a knife, and I feel naked without it even if I'm wearing a business suit.
Thanks for the link. I agree, a suppressor ban made no sense at all. Calling them ‘machine guns’ was even more wierd. Ahh, those statists...
Good knife. The Ken Onion series are excellent.
I use the Scallion for my EDC (tried the Leek, but I felt it was too big in my pocket - I keep it in my truck).
Enjoy your day.
Found the Kershaw Thermite Blackwash, 3880BW to suit my EDC needs. Bigger than the Onion, but then it’s belt clip carry. Length and weight make it suitable as an “Oh boy” striker without opening the blade as both ends just barely protrude past my closed fist. Blade snaps open swiftly when needed.
Was $26 bargain deal on Amazon s&h included....one of my better buys.
No I’m not kidding. The Cunninghams were a great family.
I can’t you believe you have a problem with them.
Do you also think the Waltons were dangerous criminals?
I meant that your’re kidding me that I would think the Cunninghams were anything other than a model family.Please do something about your reading comprehension skills.
You mentioned the Cunninghams,I DID NOT.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
