Today's Wall Street Journal Article

[Fred Sanford]

We need to get this back on the topic of the Wall Street Journal article.

[TazKristi]

I'm not going to lock it down because it is (in it's original form) an important discussion. Am I pleased with some of the other discussion? No. I do however, have faith that it will come around and the bickering will stop. This discussion is key to everyone here as a whole. I truly believe the energy spent could be better used in communication to Mr. Fritz and others who share his view.

How can we expect to change his mind or anyone else’s, if we as a community cannot move beyond petty comments said in anger? Stop adding fuel to the fire, be constructive and realize that each of you have the ability to make a difference.

I don't share personal views too often, but in this case, I'll make an exception. Someone who not only does not understand knives, but has no desire to either wrote this article. This article was directed at people who do not understand knives and for the most part, also have no desire to. Part of Mr. Fritz' goal would be to create a sensational stir - he succeeded.

And yes, non-knife people do come to this site and to this forum. We've already received a letter from someone who based on information from Mr. Fritz' article has deemed Spyderco as being a contributor to the downfall of our society and possibly a supporter of terrorists. We assume that person came to our site to get the information needed to reach us since it was through e-mail. So, yes, what is said here can and does have a direct effect on Spyderco and our community as a whole.

So, in the end, I would say this, focus. Focus on the bigger picture and the greater good. Agree to disagree with some and move on. Use the energy that has been created to bring about a change. Bickering amongst ourselves isn't going to help us reach the goal. Throwing negative comments about anyone around won't help us reach the goal. Perception is important, and right now, the non-knife people are basing their perception first on the information provided by Mr. Fritz in what has long been widely accepted as a legitimate source. Secondly, their perception will then be influenced by how we react to him.

Kristi

[Episteme]

Unfortunately, recent times have seen a changing attitute in the minds of the masses as it relates to carrying a folding knife. From what I've observed, this change in attitude has roots sometime even before the tragic events of September 11th. Even more disturbing to me seems to be the manner in which this change has evolved: namely, through faulty reasoning and exaggerated fears that are ussually based on irrelevant or viceral reactions.
Here are some of my thoughts on the issue:
One of the problems with criminalizing the carry of a pocketknife is that such a law would be an inchoate offense. An offense is inchoate if and only if the behavior that the offense proscribes does not produce a harm to others per se, yet is deemed to produce a risk of harm to others. Other inchoate offenses include possessory offenses of firearms, and illicit drug laws. Inchoate offenses ussually aim at reducing the risk of harm to others by proscribing that behavor that the government deems risky for harming others. In this case, the behavior proscribed would be carrying a knife on one's person. Main problems with inchoate offenses are numerous; for one, they are overinclusive. Overinclusion occurs when the said inchoate offense would punish those people that the law does not aim to punish. In the case of criminalizing pocketknives, such laws would make criminals out of otherwise law abiding citizens who carry a knife for utility purposes. It should be emphisized that the knife collector who appreciates high-quality cutlery is among the least likely population to commit a violent crime with a knife; violent crimes with knives almost always occur with large kitchen knives, or cheap stanley / box-cutter knives. In a just legal system, any inchoate offense that is as overinclusive as a law prohibiting the carry of a pocketknife would be unjust, and for this reason alone, a bad idea.
Furthermore, this sort of inchoate offense is also Underinclusive; it fails to reduce the very harms that it is designed to reduce, which would be knife related crime. As it is known that most knife related crime is the result of a criminally inclined offender using either a kitchen knife or box-cutter, a prohibition on carrying a pocketknife would fail to stop the very harms that it intends to prevent.
There are many other good reasons to resist the criminalization of pocket-knife carry; the ones I stated here are just two reason that seem to be the most important if we are to continue in the tradition of a just and fair legal system.
Mike

[peacefuljeffrey]

I don't share personal views too often, but in this case, I'll make an exception. Someone who not only does not understand knives, but has no desire to either wrote this article. This article was directed at people who do not understand knives and for the most part, also have no desire to. Part of Mr. Fritz' goal would be to create a sensational stir - he succeeded.

I am very glad to read that you have this belief about Fritz. I feel that anyone who has not drawn this conclusion about him has to have missed something.

The article was written from a willfully ignorant point of view, and it sought to perniciously spread that ignorance. It is extremely likely that it did so.

And yes, non-knife people do come to this site and to this forum. We've already received a letter from someone who based on information from Mr. Fritz' article has deemed Spyderco as being a contributor to the downfall of our society and possibly a supporter of terrorists. We assume that person came to our site to get the information needed to reach us since it was through e-mail. So, yes, what is said here can and does have a direct effect on Spyderco and our community as a whole.

I think an important realization that must be made in this situation is that there will inevitably be those people who do not WANT to get the facts and the proper understanding of the subject, and thus their minds will never be able to be changed by us, no matter whether we screech at them hysterically, call them names, or approach them calmly and rationally.

I have never heard Charlton Heston or Wayne LaPierre or Marion Hammer yell or call names when discussing or debating gun rights, but they have never changed the minds of dyed-in-the-wool gun ban proponents, and they never will. Why would knives be any different?

Any person who would ever in his life say he believes Spyderco is a terrorist supporter because they make knives that can be used for harm to other people (did he single out Spyderco?? :rolleyes: ) but who would not say that Exxon is a terrorist supporter because it makes the gasoline that terrorists use to drive around scoping out targets is irrational. I used the terms "idiot" and "moron," and some people here have taken a dislike to that, but I really think that people who are so far across the line outside of rational and intelligent really have to be called what they are. We waste time and energy when we dance around the point.


-Jeffrey

[Ruud]

The Wall Street Journal
July 25, 2006]http://online.wsj.com/article/SB115379426517016179.html[/url]

Mr. Ray was a pioneer in a technological revolution that has transformed "tactical" knives -- originally used in military combat 'tactical knife' does not equal 'combat knife'. It may just mean 'high spec knife used by military or law enforcement personnel'.-- into a $1-billion-a-year consumer business, aimed at just about anyone in the market for a small knife.

In March, a monthly FBI bulletin alerted law-enforcement agents nationwide to "the emerging threats" posed by the knives. It remains unclear what kind of 'threats' these knives pose, other than 'regular' knives. If readers have more questions after reading an article in stead of less, the writer is not doing his job. Though there are no statistics on how many crimes have involved tactical-style knives, the FBI says knife-related crimes have edged up, to 15.5% in 2004 from 15% in 2000 0.5 of a percent during FOUR years is hardly statistically significant. This is even more so when the writer implies later on that knife ownership has increased greatly, when the absolute number of violent crimes has dropped by 4.1%. Especially when it remains unclear what the percentage of 'tactical knives' used is. Therefore, these numbers mean nothing and thus prove nothing. Only use statistics if they clearly show something, not to 'window dress' the article.. In that time, violent crime in general dropped 4.1%.

The knives' popularity has been a boon to some retailers. Mike Janes, owner of Second Amendment Sports, a hunting, fishing and camping superstore in Bakersfield, Calif., says that knife sales have been climbing an average of 25% a year in the past decade and that 75% of the pocketknives he sells are tactical See my earlier statement. If possession of these knives has increased so dramatically, and people are actively training in using these 'tactical knives' as weapons, why is it not showing in statistical data?There would have to be a significant increase in knife related violent crime..

And Spyderco Inc., for example, makes that should read 'used to make', and it's not tactical by any definition of the word (not ergonomical by a long shot, and certainly not suitable for use in 'combat'. Nor can it avoid detection by metaldetectors, so there is nothing setting it apart from any other knife apart from the fact that it is rectangular. a tactical knife that, when folded, masquerades as a credit card.

But the marketing techniques for some of the new pocketknives aren't so mainstream. Cold Steel Inc. makes the ¾-ounce "Urban Pal," which has a 1.5-inch blade. "The Urban Pal should be standard equipment for survival in today's urban jungle," its Web site says Agreed, There are a number of companies feeding off - or even creating- fears that normal people have of becoming victims of violent crime. However, these companies DO NOT represent the majority of manufacturers active in this market. It would be unjust to lump the good in with the bad .

Lawyers for the tactical-knife industry have persuaded government officials that even minor manual movement -- no matter how enhanced by levers and springs -- separates the knives from switchblades, which require pressing a button on the handle to flip open the blade. "We have to resist the application of the 1950s switchblade laws to the new technology," says lawyer Daniel Lawson, a knife collector in Pittsburgh who represents the tactical-knife industry. Thirty-seven states now outlaw switchblades, partly because they developed a cult following among teenagers in the 1950s Citing kneejerk legislation based on a fifty year old hype to help create a new hype does not add credibility to any of the possibly valid points put forward by the writer.\.

The blades on most of the new pocketknives are less than four inches long, the maximum length that passengers were permitted to carry onto U.S. airlines before the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. In 2004, the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks concluded that the hijackers in those attacks used short knives -- not box cutters -- to seize control of the planes. At the Pennsylvania crash site, 14 badly damaged knife parts were collected, and at least half have tactical-knife characteristics. But the FBI cautions that it can't be sure those parts are from knives that belonged to the hijackers If the FBI can't definitely conclude anything from the data gathered, then neither should the writer.Other than that, bringing it up is moot in the first place because ALL knives, including tiny swiss army knives, have since been banned. It just suggests bias by the author.

Technology has made blade length almost irrelevantSweeping statements are generally untrue. And anecdotal evidence is just that. Anecdotal. It does not conclusively prove anything. Mr. Autry made do with what he had. I know of a similar case were a woman used a tiny Swiss army knife to mortally wound one of two muggers by stabbing it in his thigh. Does that mean that SAK's should be treated the same as the knives belonging to that elusive 'tactical' breed of knives?. Yet, in a widely publicized case, ex-Marine Thomas Autry used a two-inch blade in May to kill one mugger and wound another when he was confronted by five assailants armed with a shotgun and a .38-caliber pistol.

"Clearly we are seeing wounds you would expect from a bigger blade from what victims sayUnless you have seen first hand, the length of the knife in question, and the way in which it was used, it is sensationalist to make these types of statements. A knife with a one inch blade can make a 20 inch superficial slash, but if such a knife can make a 20 inch stab wound, then I would like to know exactly what 'tactical' features make this feat possible. Questions, questions. Trotting out someone in a white coat does not make word of mouth evidence more believable. was a small knife," says Andrew Ulrich, a Boston Medical Center emergency-room doctor.

Nicholas Nobella, 25, took a four-hour class at the Bakersfield shop. Several months later, he admitted to police that he stuck his tactical knife into stripper Edward Pedrosa, 24, during a melee that broke out when men attending a bachelor party raided a bawdy bash for the bride-to-be, says Kern County, Calif., Deputy District Attorney Matt Magner. Mr. Pedrosa died. Mr. Nobella's lawyer says his client was acting in self-defense So someone got stabbed with a 'tactical' knife and died. Would he still be alive if it had been a kitchen knife? Would it have made a difference it mr. Nobella had not received training? Who knows. This is just an anecdote to spice up the story..

Meanwhile, in the race for the next big thing, some companies are competing to make more durable ceramic and plastic knives that can pass through metal detectors These products are deliberately designed to avoid measures put in place to detect knives, and can really only be used for stabbing, not cutting. Therefore they clearly belong to another category altogether, and should in no way be regarded as 'knives', be they tactical or otherwise..

Write to Mark Fritz at mark.fritz@wsj.com1

Mr. Fritz,
All you have shown is a) that there have been several tecnological breakthroughs in the design of pocketknives, and b) that these are being marketed by some companies (sometimes in very unscrupulous ways) as 'tactical' knives.
You have not shown that they are used exclusively or even increasingly for criminal purposes by criminals, that they are 'deadlier' than 'regular' knives, or that there even has been a significant increase in knife related crimes. You haven't even made clear what properties you consider to set a 'tactical' knife apart from a 'regular' knife.
However, you probably have succeeded in making people question the need for 'normal people' to own these 'deadly' knives with 'tactical' features, because they have been made fearful of them by the seemingly willfull use of scare tactics throughout your article.
I don't like to be made out a criminal or a danger to the public because I happen to own and carry a well designed pocket knife with features that make it both safer and sturdier to use. That you seem to do so leads me to question your abilities a journalist, as well as your motives for writing this piece. Your job as a journalist is to educate and inform the public, not to use propaganda techniques to add to the climate of fear, mistrust and insecurity that increasingly seems to influence people.

[Ruud]

Sorry people,

I could not resist adding some ammo to the arguments put forward already to disprove some of the statements made by mr. Fritz. Hope it's not too long of a read for all of you.

I wonder whether or not mr. Fritz would be willing to give a reaction to all our comments on his article. I, for one, would greatly appreciate it.

With best regards to all,

Ruud

[BlackNinja]

If this guy is worried about a knife, wait until he see's my light saber!

I'm sorry to hear that Spyderco received a letter stating " as being a contributor to the downfall of our society and possibly a supporter of terrorists." It's hard for me to grasp that people actually take seriously a money magazine, writing about knives. :confused: It's "The Wall Street Journal." They know how to keep rich people rich, and have wonderful credentials, in that respect.
I don't plan on buying "Balde" magazine to get my best stock options, just as I'm not getting the WSJ to get some knife information.

Too bad that somebody took the article seriously, and wrote a nasty letter to Spyderco. JACKASS... :rolleyes:

[Slick]

I've been reading this thread and planning to throw a bit of fuel on the fire but the lovely Ms. Kristi is right. So....

I will only say I agree whole heartedly with Joe L. and P. Jeffrey etc and I am very liberal. There may be a drop in temp in ****. I am also more conservative than most of us here. I'm so far left I'm right. :) :) :) I do know right from wrong.

Fritz is guilty of yellow journalism not liberalism.

I hope this is taken as I mean it.

[peacefuljeffrey]

I don't like to be made out a criminal or a danger to the public because I happen to own and carry a well designed pocket knife with features that make it both safer and sturdier to use. That you seem to do so leads me to question your abilities a journalist, as well as your motives for writing this piece. Your job as a journalist is to educate and inform the public, not to use propaganda techniques to add to the climate of fear, mistrust and insecurity that increasingly seems to influence people.

Excellent paragraph here, Ruud.

BTW, don't you know that it's your duty and obligation to civilized society to have to use a weak, dangerous-to-the-user pocket knife so that the public can be safe from the threat of you having something sturdy with which to go on a rampage?

Best if all you have is a flimsy knife that can't do much damage, even if it's riskier for you. :rolleyes:

-Jeffrey