The Knife Amnesty in the UK....the repercussions for edged weapons collectors

Rivkin · 28th June 2006, 05:23 PM

I can offer just my personal experience - I went to school in slums. During my stay there 4 students were killed - one was stabbed, one had his brains blown out by a hammer, two were tied up and thrown from the 9th floor.
Trust me, you don't need a knife to kill someone - screwdriver or hammer work great. There are also tons of other possibilities, like heavy belt buckles, socks with pennies and piano strings for true weirdos. Otherwise, like it happened with me, you can just take someone and smash his head into a heater.

For some biological reasons violance is rather exciting and on some level is quite pleasant, altough the taste is an acquired one. Unfortunately, with the life of most people in slums being rather dull and gloomy, drugs, alcohol and violence is what people resort to.

katana · 28th June 2006, 05:58 PM

Violence is latent in all of us, to a degree the ability to attack / defend yourself is instinctive, its only circumstances and an individual ability to control their emotions that ensures that there is less violence.
Chimpanzees, have for years, been considered fairly peaceful vegetarians.....but that was far the truth. Anthropologists and zoologists have discovered, by observation that Chimpanzee's can be incredibly violent, they have the capacity to seek revenge, gain power or to bully.
Occasionally they hunt for meat, usually a small monkey; the hunting party will capture the animal and literally rip it apart, with great excitement and 'blood lust'.

Seeing that the genetic make-up of a chimp is one of the closest to Man, we can see our 'true' selves after our emotional / educated sophistication has been stripped away.
Articles used to injure/maim/kill are many and varied, as has already been stated everyday items have / are used. The source of the problems with violent attacks is not the weapons used. It is the inability of individuals to control themselves and in societies where stress is dramatically increasing....this lack of control would, surely, increase dramatically.........

mross · 28th June 2006, 06:08 PM

I am on a Nihonto list and one of the members is meeting with "John Reid (Home Sec) at the Home Office, to discuss the proposed ban on "Samurai Swords". " I will let you know what information I can. I suspect though that a good model to gleen information from as to what will happen is the UK gun ban. As others have said it is not about effective crime control it's politics.

katana · 28th June 2006, 09:14 PM

I found this site thought it relavent

http://www.hideawayknife.com/main.php

Aqtai · 28th June 2006, 09:55 PM

I don't think this applies to collectors. For starters we don't carry our blades around. Mine are in a box in my study waiting to be mounted on the wall. And we certainly don't go around stabbing people. This law is for yobs who stab teenagers in front of schools etc.

Saying that I was in the Royal Armouries Museum in Leeds today, and they had an exhibit of amnestied bladed objects, and among the usual homemade knives, modern hunting knives etc was an antique cavalry sabre...

mross · 28th June 2006, 11:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aqtai

I don't think this applies to collectors. For starters we don't carry our blades around. Mine are in a box in my study waiting to be mounted on the wall. And we certainly don't go around stabbing people. This law is for yobs who stab teenagers in front of schools etc.

Saying that I was in the Royal Armouries Museum in Leeds today, and they had an exhibit of amnestied bladed objects, and among the usual homemade knives, modern hunting knives etc was an antique cavalry sabre...

Please take note of my reference to the UK gun ban. No one cared if it was a
collector piece and safetly locked away. It be came contraband and had to be turned in.

A. G. Maisey · 29th June 2006, 01:07 AM

The point has been made that restrictive action taken by those in authority, is really about control.

It is probably fair to assume that most people in the world today live in communities.

The purpose of a community is to support and sustain the members of the community.

The members of the community must submit to the level of control necessary to ensure that the community remains a viable entity.

The viability of any community in the developed world today depends upon that community's continued economic viability.

The economic viability of a community relies upon the members of that community being productive units who will direct their productive capacity towards the support of themselves and the community.

If restrictive action is about control, and I personally believe that it is, it may be of benefit to all of us to try to come to some sort of understanding in respect of who gains the greatest benefit from that control.

Does the greatest benefit accrue to the community member who is furthest down in the pecking order of the community, or does it accrue to the community member who is at the top of the pecking order?

Since communities in the developed world are economic entities, is it not reasonable to expect to find that those at the top of the community pecking order, are also at the top of the economic pecking order?

Has anybody noticed the increasing polarisation of wealth in our societies?

Does anybody truly believe that our elected representatives are acting in the best interests of the majority of people who elected them?

Or is it possible that those elected to govern us are in fact governing us in a fashion calculated to produce the greatest benefits for those in control of the economic wealth of the community?

If this is so, then ask yourself, who really controls the community in which I live?

Is it I and my neighbour through the power of our vote and our voice, or is it some unseen person or organisation?

When we have lost all our rights, ( or , if you live in Australia, your privileges,) except those inalienable rights to be born, produce, consume, and die, we may console ourselves with the thought that as members of a community we have ensured the continuation of a system that on the whole has more to recommend it than its alternative.

You thought this was all about taking away our toys?

Well, it ain't.

Its about the continuation of the human race.

If a steamroller is coming down the road a smart man steps to one side, he does not try to stop it.

ariel · 29th June 2006, 01:57 AM

There used to be a horrendously strict weapon control in USSR: a hunting knife required a police permit. Well, anybody with a neuron in his brain had a home-made shiv, and kitchen knives were used widely. I have a book:" Russian Prison Knives": you should see what kinds of knives imprisoned criminals made in the GULAG!

29th June 2006, 01:57 AM	#8
ariel Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 5,503	There used to be a horrendously strict weapon control in USSR: a hunting knife required a police permit. Well, anybody with a neuron in his brain had a home-made shiv, and kitchen knives were used widely. I have a book:" Russian Prison Knives": you should see what kinds of knives imprisoned criminals made in the GULAG! Last edited by Ian; 29th June 2006 at 05:24 AM. Reason: Inappropriate comment

28th June 2006, 05:23 PM	#1
Rivkin Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 655	I can offer just my personal experience - I went to school in slums. During my stay there 4 students were killed - one was stabbed, one had his brains blown out by a hammer, two were tied up and thrown from the 9th floor. Trust me, you don't need a knife to kill someone - screwdriver or hammer work great. There are also tons of other possibilities, like heavy belt buckles, socks with pennies and piano strings for true weirdos. Otherwise, like it happened with me, you can just take someone and smash his head into a heater. For some biological reasons violance is rather exciting and on some level is quite pleasant, altough the taste is an acquired one. Unfortunately, with the life of most people in slums being rather dull and gloomy, drugs, alcohol and violence is what people resort to.

28th June 2006, 05:58 PM	#2
katana Member Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Kent Posts: 2,658	Violence is latent in all of us, to a degree the ability to attack / defend yourself is instinctive, its only circumstances and an individual ability to control their emotions that ensures that there is less violence. Chimpanzees, have for years, been considered fairly peaceful vegetarians.....but that was far the truth. Anthropologists and zoologists have discovered, by observation that Chimpanzee's can be incredibly violent, they have the capacity to seek revenge, gain power or to bully. Occasionally they hunt for meat, usually a small monkey; the hunting party will capture the animal and literally rip it apart, with great excitement and 'blood lust'. Seeing that the genetic make-up of a chimp is one of the closest to Man, we can see our 'true' selves after our emotional / educated sophistication has been stripped away. Articles used to injure/maim/kill are many and varied, as has already been stated everyday items have / are used. The source of the problems with violent attacks is not the weapons used. It is the inability of individuals to control themselves and in societies where stress is dramatically increasing....this lack of control would, surely, increase dramatically.........

28th June 2006, 06:08 PM	#3
mross Member Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 478	I am on a Nihonto list and one of the members is meeting with "John Reid (Home Sec) at the Home Office, to discuss the proposed ban on "Samurai Swords". " I will let you know what information I can. I suspect though that a good model to gleen information from as to what will happen is the UK gun ban. As others have said it is not about effective crime control it's politics.

28th June 2006, 09:14 PM	#4
katana Member Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Kent Posts: 2,658	I found this site thought it relavent http://www.hideawayknife.com/main.php

28th June 2006, 09:55 PM	#5
Aqtai Member Join Date: May 2005 Location: Merseyside, UK Posts: 222	I don't think this applies to collectors. For starters we don't carry our blades around. Mine are in a box in my study waiting to be mounted on the wall. And we certainly don't go around stabbing people. This law is for yobs who stab teenagers in front of schools etc. Saying that I was in the Royal Armouries Museum in Leeds today, and they had an exhibit of amnestied bladed objects, and among the usual homemade knives, modern hunting knives etc was an antique cavalry sabre...

29th June 2006, 01:07 AM	#7
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 7,085	The point has been made that restrictive action taken by those in authority, is really about control. It is probably fair to assume that most people in the world today live in communities. The purpose of a community is to support and sustain the members of the community. The members of the community must submit to the level of control necessary to ensure that the community remains a viable entity. The viability of any community in the developed world today depends upon that community's continued economic viability. The economic viability of a community relies upon the members of that community being productive units who will direct their productive capacity towards the support of themselves and the community. If restrictive action is about control, and I personally believe that it is, it may be of benefit to all of us to try to come to some sort of understanding in respect of who gains the greatest benefit from that control. Does the greatest benefit accrue to the community member who is furthest down in the pecking order of the community, or does it accrue to the community member who is at the top of the pecking order? Since communities in the developed world are economic entities, is it not reasonable to expect to find that those at the top of the community pecking order, are also at the top of the economic pecking order? Has anybody noticed the increasing polarisation of wealth in our societies? Does anybody truly believe that our elected representatives are acting in the best interests of the majority of people who elected them? Or is it possible that those elected to govern us are in fact governing us in a fashion calculated to produce the greatest benefits for those in control of the economic wealth of the community? If this is so, then ask yourself, who really controls the community in which I live? Is it I and my neighbour through the power of our vote and our voice, or is it some unseen person or organisation? When we have lost all our rights, ( or , if you live in Australia, your privileges,) except those inalienable rights to be born, produce, consume, and die, we may console ourselves with the thought that as members of a community we have ensured the continuation of a system that on the whole has more to recommend it than its alternative. You thought this was all about taking away our toys? Well, it ain't. Its about the continuation of the human race. If a steamroller is coming down the road a smart man steps to one side, he does not try to stop it.