Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Chase Williams on August 14, 2009 at 14:13

For anyone who has questions on this issue, please don't be afraid to ask them. I will do the best I can to answer any of them and I am sure that if I can't someone here can. If you would like to read the CBP's proposal or the amendment of the ruling that passed the Senate and is on its way to the House to hopefully be passed in to law, please visit www.akti.org.

Permalink Reply by David Hawkins on August 14, 2009 at 16:51

So far the strongest argument I see for businesses closing/economy killing due to the CPB proposal are for the companies that would get stuck with "illegal" knives in their inventor. Of course, most assisted models be made into unassisted knives? I hear A.G Russell has a shop, I bet they could remove some springs and deplete their inventory eventually. There would probably be a huge secondary market for springs then.
You say there are not that many US knife companies left. It seems to me there would be a new niche to fill by American owned and operated companies if the CPB proposal would pass. Case would be fine. Spyderco is trying to keep viable by making knives like the UK Pen Knife, I would still be able to by all the Al-Mar knives I can legally buy now. These more traditional knife manufacturers would have to increase production and grow to keep up with the new demand on their products because they would already be making what would still be legal. In fact, a shrewd cutlery businessman should be looking at all of this as an opportunity.
When were assisted knives first sold in the US? I believe it was Ken Onion's Speed-Safe technology introduced around 1998 or so. Before that we had Camilus, Shrade, and many others that we miss now because they couldn't compete with the new hi-tech companies using overseas labor. Would it be hypocritical to complain about the loss of some knife companies now due to the CPB proposal banning the very type of knife that competitively killed off its fair share of some old and favorite traditional knife manufacturers? I think I can find room to complain on both accounts but it is still something to think about.
As for A.G. Russell and other mail-order companies, yeah, you would lose some knives from certain manufacturers, but you would gain those knives back in other styles that were legal. Consumer choice of style would be limited which I would despise, but knife retail would survive just fine. Not to mention the sky high profit margin they could command for a short time for the knives about to become illegal should the CPB proposal go through. Just like firearms and ammunition do when a Democrat is elected.
So I am still not buying into the "it will hurt the economy" argument against the CPB proposal because it seems like a smoke-screen and too much of a stretch. The CPB proposal is just simply an ill-conceived, facist, freedom killing, reactionary, fear-feeding, prejudiced and plain un-American idea that should be put out of our misery. That, to me, is the argument that means the most.

Permalink Reply by Chase Williams on August 16, 2009 at 8:31

You are missing the fact that CBP is trying to take away all one-hand opening knives inculding but not limited to assisted openers. That means that if you can take the knife and blade open it, open by use of a thumstud or pressure on the blade or by means of a spring or a torsion bar. The only thing that would be safe are fixed blades and traditional slipjoints. Not even the Buck 110 is safe. Spyderco would not be safe, you can open all of them with one hand, unless they started making traditional slipjoints like Case and Queen, but I don't see that happening. As far as anyone making the non-assisted versions, what does that solve? They would still be part of the ban if it were to happen.

As far as companies going over seas for production, there is no one to blame but us for that one. People want American quality for Chinese prices and that isn't possible unless you go over seas for production. You can not produce the knives people are wanting in the U.S. for less that $100.00 retail. You can offer up Case knives as an example against that, but most people don't want Case knives. They want SOG, Benchmade and Spyderco. They want the tactical look, but in and EDC. The Amercian companies like Camillus went out of business because of bad managment, not because companies were going over seas.

You don't have to believe what I am saying. I am not trying to convince you of anything, just stating facts for you to make your own informed decision. Have you read the Customs proposal? Have you read the amendment to the proposal?

The whole point of starting this discussion was to get people's attention and I have done just that. If I have your attention, then you are less likely to forget about it.

I work in the knife industry day in and day out. I see what is happening to it on a first hand basis. The economy is hurting a lot of knife businesses already and if they are not strong enough to survive things now, then how would they survive if their main source of income was banned. They wouldn't be able to sell it, export it, or import it. They would have to re-tool their machines to make something they could sell and re-tooling costs a lot of money. Money they would already be in short supply of.

It really doesn't matter what argument is used in the long run as long as the point is gotten across. Our knives are in trouble. That is the bottom line.

Permalink Reply by Zach Grissom on August 16, 2009 at 10:32

Ooh-Rah!

Permalink Reply by James Cole on August 17, 2009 at 9:40

Chase,

You are right on so many of your points.

Let's take this to the extreme. If I were to hold my Buck 309 with one hand and open the main blade with my teeth, that could be argued to be one hand opening. You mentioned the Buck 110, I have been opening that knife with one hand since 1970. So as a point of fact, if "anyone" can open a knife with one hand the knive can be banned.

I once worked with a man who could open any knife, with a blade length greater than three inches, with a wrist snap.

Oh ya, how about the one armed man, I guess he would be banned from owning any folding knife.

As far as the law; once the camel gets its head in the tent...

JC

Permalink Reply by Chase Williams on August 18, 2009 at 16:36

You could argue that it would be one hand opening, but I don't think CBP has gone that far.....yet. Certain states allow people who only have the use of one hand to use autos because of their ease in opening and closing with one hand. If they make and exception for autos, I don't see why they wouldn't for assisted openers and one handers, but you never can tell with the government.

Permalink Reply by Alexander Noot on July 13, 2011 at 1:20

The reason Locking folders are illegal to carry (withouth valid legitimate reason) is because they're viewed as fixed blades by the law. So fixed blades fall under the same restrictions in the UK. Illegal to carry unless needed for a good reason (could be camping, hiking, gardenwork etc...but "just in case" or "I'm affraid it'll snap on my fingers" are not viewed as legitimate reasons.).

David Hawkins said:

Tony,
In the UK, as you indicated "locking" folders are illegal. what restrictions does the UK have on fixed blades?

Permalink Reply by Herb Hoover on June 28, 2012 at 9:37

 Thats why they call politicians law makers. They never stop making new laws that always gets deeper into our freedom and libertys into they decide toilet paper may hurt your butt. It's called politic for a reason.....

 Poli is many and tic is a blood sucker, "many bloodsuckers". They will keep growing till they suck the life out of you. Funny thing is we vote them into office and pay their hi wages just so they can drain every last tax dollar they can out of you. Ever heard of your taxes getting less ?

Permalink Reply by Herb Hoover on June 28, 2012 at 9:47

If knives and guns kill people then a spoon made Rosie O'donald FAT... Lets bann spoons ...

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• Next ›
• Page