The online community of knife collectors, A Knife Family Forged in Steel
Knife Rights supported HB 446, repealing the Texas ban on carry of clubs* (including tomahawks) and possession of knuckles (including trench knives and the like), takes effect September 1.
NOTE: A Trench Knife, or similar, with a blade over 5.5-inches will be considered a Location Restricted Knife and is banned from carry at some specif...
Also taking effect Sept. 1 is HB 3231 which strengthens the state's preemption statute. The new law adds a provision that prevents local governments from restricting firearms and knife sales through the use of zoning and other local ordinances.
It also further clarified and strengthened the statute by adding "possession, wearing, carrying" and "storage" of firearms and knives to the state's preemption statute.
In 2013 Knife Rights' repeal of Texas' switchblade ban was enacted. In 2015 Knife Rights' signature Knife Law Preemption was enacted, nullifying all local knife ordinances more restrictive than Texas state law, including two of the "10 Worst Anti-Knife Cities in America" at the time, San Antonio and Corpus Christi. In 2017 our bill removed all of the "illegal knives" in Texas law, finally allowing Texans the right to carry a Bowie knife, dagger and others in public.
*NOTE: Besides "tomahawk," the Texas definition of "Club" (Tex. Pen. Code § 46.01) includes a world of hurt, so to speak: an instrument that is specially designed, made, or adapted for the purpose of inflicting serious bodily injury or death by striking a person with the instrument, and includes but is not limited to the following:
Replies are closed for this discussion.
And I say that because these two laws appear to be specifically focused on expanding weapons carry, of many kinds.
Not sure what to think about this, Doug.
And the timing, well...
"the right of the PEOPLE to keep and BEAR ARMS shall not be infringed."
Charles, was that directed at my response? Because we can have a discussion on the Second Amendment here, I'm pretty confident in my scholarship on the issue.
But there's no way to avoid it getting political. In fact, I'd point out that the OP itself is political in nature, given the current climate.
Regardless, I'm not going forward with this discussion without Jan's explicit permission to do so.
I just believe that the Constitution means what it says. If it doesn't, it means nothing. If it can be reconfigured or reinterpreted at will, those in power today can say it means one thing. Those in power tomorrow can say it means something else
LOL and thank you both for being, as always,respectful. I am afraid I see it coming on to a political discussion also. One of the glorious things about iKC is that all are welcome but mostly politics are off the table. DLKG, you and I may not always see eye to eye but we always agree that respect for the other persons point of view is paramount to healthy discussions. Charles you and I see eye to eye on a great many subjects, this being one of them. While I have all the faith that the two of you could indeed have a healthy discussion with respect, if I leave this open for more comments...well you know what too many cooks in a kitchen will do and I would rather sleep well tonight., so I am going to close the comments section for this one..