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

mross · 28th June 2006, 05:08 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, 08:14 PM

I found this site thought it relavent

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

Aqtai · 28th June 2006, 08:55 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, 10:28 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, 12:07 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, 12:57 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!

t_c · 29th June 2006, 04:03 AM

I think one of the main problems is trying to educate people who do not collect or who do not practice martial arts, that we (hopefully I can speak a little for all of us collectors/practioners) are not the ones out there committing violent crimes with our weapons. I have been having an OCD (obssesive compulsize disorder) couple of months buying edged stuff on ebay and was recently scolded (albeit lightly) on my shopping habits by one our secretaries who works with abused children through her church. She didn't understand that just because I buy all these vintage/antique knives, it doesn't mean that I am an advocate of violence. Her only point of reference was the violence in the history of the children she worked with and could only see the potential for violence in my acquisitions. It took me until today to articulate to her that people like me (us) weren't the problem. It is the people who are under great stress to just survive that has pushed them away from the social norms we all normally share (and yes there are the simply mis-wired individuals out there). What lawmakers are too naive or don't care to see (disregarding A. G. Maisey's lucid points on State, Control, and The Citizen) is that if you take away the knives, they will use sticks. Take away the sticks and they will use stones. As Rivkin expressed earlier: it's not the tool, it's the intent. As for the people who do partake in violent activties (outside the ring): my own personal equation for the ills of society (to over-simplify) goes like this: economic deprevation = social degeneration. In the end it's all about stress, and money, being the medium for much of our modern world, is the primary source of this (again: over-simplifing). Controlling weapons does nothing to solve the real problems. I have carried a knife on my person for the better part of 14 years and not once have I ever brandished it or threatened anyone with it, and I have been mugged (four dollars and a cigarette is not really worth fighting for) and have had someone threaten me with the threat of a firearm (never saw it - probably didn't have it). My use of the proverbial silver tongue has disarmed another on more than one occasion. The point is that I wish we could find a way to better express to people that we (collectors and practioners) are not the threat: Let us keep these things that speak to our soul for we will not abuse them, and the people that would abuse them, would abuse anything anyways. That's the source of my frustration in these issues.....
And also, it does horify me that someone would make scrap metal out of someone else's cultural heritage (keep your treasures under the floorboards if you have to).

29th June 2006, 12:57 AM	#6
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 04:24 AM. Reason: Inappropriate comment

29th June 2006, 04:03 AM	#7
t_c Member Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: ca, usa Posts: 92	more thoughts.... I think one of the main problems is trying to educate people who do not collect or who do not practice martial arts, that we (hopefully I can speak a little for all of us collectors/practioners) are not the ones out there committing violent crimes with our weapons. I have been having an OCD (obssesive compulsize disorder) couple of months buying edged stuff on ebay and was recently scolded (albeit lightly) on my shopping habits by one our secretaries who works with abused children through her church. She didn't understand that just because I buy all these vintage/antique knives, it doesn't mean that I am an advocate of violence. Her only point of reference was the violence in the history of the children she worked with and could only see the potential for violence in my acquisitions. It took me until today to articulate to her that people like me (us) weren't the problem. It is the people who are under great stress to just survive that has pushed them away from the social norms we all normally share (and yes there are the simply mis-wired individuals out there). What lawmakers are too naive or don't care to see (disregarding A. G. Maisey's lucid points on State, Control, and The Citizen) is that if you take away the knives, they will use sticks. Take away the sticks and they will use stones. As Rivkin expressed earlier: it's not the tool, it's the intent. As for the people who do partake in violent activties (outside the ring): my own personal equation for the ills of society (to over-simplify) goes like this: economic deprevation = social degeneration. In the end it's all about stress, and money, being the medium for much of our modern world, is the primary source of this (again: over-simplifing). Controlling weapons does nothing to solve the real problems. I have carried a knife on my person for the better part of 14 years and not once have I ever brandished it or threatened anyone with it, and I have been mugged (four dollars and a cigarette is not really worth fighting for) and have had someone threaten me with the threat of a firearm (never saw it - probably didn't have it). My use of the proverbial silver tongue has disarmed another on more than one occasion. The point is that I wish we could find a way to better express to people that we (collectors and practioners) are not the threat: Let us keep these things that speak to our soul for we will not abuse them, and the people that would abuse them, would abuse anything anyways. That's the source of my frustration in these issues..... And also, it does horify me that someone would make scrap metal out of someone else's cultural heritage (keep your treasures under the floorboards if you have to).

28th June 2006, 05:08 PM	#1
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, 08:14 PM	#2
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, 08:55 PM	#3
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, 12:07 AM	#5
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 7,015	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.