Question on blade length and why folks measure as they do...

[The Deacon]

Unpopular opinion, but how many times have you been stopped and searched by an LEO? I can count the number of times I have on no hands, and I "bend the rules" from time to time.....like stealth camping at park on bike tours.....

True. Most knife laws, regardless of how their original intent, are most often used to add one more charge as a "bargaining chip" when someone is already being charged with more serious crimes. Most of the rest who get charged fall into the "act like an *******, get treated like an *******" category. (Drunks, sovereign citizens, and gansta wannabes fall into this category)

don't tell anyone you carry for self defense because that is illegal (But carrying five handguns for sd isn't, lol....).

I'm not sure that's true. Self defense is legal in most states so, at least in theory, it should be considered a lawful purpose as long as the object being carried is not illegal to carry for any reason. OTOH, I'd agree that it's stupid to volunteer any information and, from watching Live PD, I don't recall a cop ever asking anyone why they had a knife in their pocket.

I'd also agree that weapons laws not specifically linked to overtly criminal behavior make little, if any, sense.

[Pelagic]

Yeah, when it comes down to it, actual self defense is always legal. But of course, most of life isn't determined by what something IS, but by what it appears to be. And even further, a certain person's interpretation of which.

I would feel safer walking through an extremely bad neighborhood if I had my knife in-hand, just out of sight inside the cuff of my sleeve. I think this should be legal, despite never having considered any knife (that I've ever owned) a weapon.

The appropriateness of laws is of continuous debate, and for good reason. In most ways though, we can see either how the could benefit the public, or at least understand some of the thought process behind the law's creation.

Blade length is a tricky one. Some places have laws that prohibit any knives with blades over 3 inches, yet butter knives are seemingly never included in this. Public perception and build quality aside, the only thing separating a butter knife from a fixed blade of similar dimensions is the level of sharpness.... Or am I wrong in saying that?

I'm sure if you asked many people who previously claimed to understand the knife law in question, you would get several different explanations for this phenomenon, perhaps even an "I'm not sure." If you buy a butter knife with a 3.2 inch blade from the dollar store, and you're walking home with it, I'm sure the chances of even the most zealous police officer enforcing a 3 inch knife law on you are quite slim. But technically, could he enforce it? Or is the butter knife truly excluded from the law? And if so, why?

I have seen youtube videos of people sharpening butter knives to a high level of sharpness, and afterward concluding "this is probably illegal now." This is probably initially what got me thinking about this concept. Evil D brought up a good point as to why the choil is included in the blade length. I agree with the reasoning but also feel that a clause could be added for choils of a certain size (a choil using 0.5 inches of blade versus a choil using 12 inches of blade are obviously 2 different items/scenarios). But it would be somewhat strange if sharpness mattered in the case of the butter knife, but not in the case of the choil, and not solely because the level of (/definition of) sharpness is largely perception.

[The Deacon]

Blade length is a tricky one. Some places have laws that prohibit any knives with blades over 3 inches, yet butter knives are seemingly never included in this. Public perception and build quality aside, the only thing separating a butter knife from a fixed blade of similar dimensions is the level of sharpness.... Or am I wrong in saying that?

In the US at least, all the blade length laws I'm aware of restrict what's legal to carry, not what's legal to own. Furthermore, most states make a distinction between transporting things that are legal own but can be considered weapons and carrying them. If you purchase a knife, open the box, and put it in your pocket, your're carrying that knife. If the knife remains in its original packaging, inside a bag, and you have a receipt showing it was purchased within the past few hours, you're transporting it.

Granted, other factors can enter into it and a cop may invoke the "act like an *******, get treated like one" rule, even if the charges later get dropped.

[MichaelScott]

Regarding the butter knife and choil size arguments, trying to legally define a growing and perhaps endless set of requirements is a rabbit hole that won’t be approached by sensible legislators. Probably be loved by lawyers though.

Just how sharp must a butter knife be before it is legally considered a weapon? Does sharpness even matter? Must the entire blade be sharpened, or only a portion, and if so, how much?

What is a choil? Must it have jimping, and if not could it be considered a part of the blade for length purposes? Should it be measured in inches, millimeters or as a percentage of the blade, or of the cutting edge length? How deep must it be to be considered a choil? In inches, millimeters or percentage of the blade height?

If there must be a standard I favor plain old blade length measured from the end of the handle to the tip of the blade. At least that way you know what you are dealing with.

[SF Native]

When did politicians permanently wet their pants and clutch their pearls?

Is it politicians or your local police chief and DA?
Most of these knife laws are strongly supported by your local law enforcement. And I agree with decon, used as secondary charges when someone steps out of line. Just pile on more infractions. Never heard that in the news pulled over for blah blah blah and “weapons charge”?

[lonerider1013]

The problem for me is most of these concerns are irrelevant -- and probably to a good many of the others here if not all. We: 1) are probably not going to be acting like arseholes or drawing attention to ourselves by flashing our knives on streetcorners, 2) are responsible people and wouldn't assault anyone.

I guess what I was hoping for was a clear law ... The point for me, at least is I *don't want* to break the law even if it's a dumb law.

And for what it's worth I've never been hassled over a knife. In fact, ironically I was once helped by the police when my car broke down on the way back from a historical fencing club. I not only had my pocketknife on me (Benchmade at the time) I also had febncing gear...incl. two (blunt) full metal longswords in a bag in the back with the hilts sticking out, and a handforged (sharp) tomohawk a local guy had made for me and I'd picked up there. The cop and I were very polite to each other and he didn't say anything about the armoury in the back seat of my hatchback. So maybe I should not worry about knife length lol. I'm just trying not to be the guy that inadvertantly does something wrong.

[Pelagic]

Blade length is a tricky one. Some places have laws that prohibit any knives with blades over 3 inches, yet butter knives are seemingly never included in this. Public perception and build quality aside, the only thing separating a butter knife from a fixed blade of similar dimensions is the level of sharpness.... Or am I wrong in saying that?

In the US at least, all the blade length laws I'm aware of restrict what's legal to carry, not what's legal to own. Furthermore, most states make a distinction between transporting things that are legal own but can be considered weapons and carrying them. If you purchase a knife, open the box, and put it in your pocket, your're carrying that knife. If the knife remains in its original packaging, inside a bag, and you have a receipt showing it was purchased within the past few hours, you're transporting it.

Granted, other factors can enter into it and a cop may invoke the "act like an *******, get treated like one" rule, even if the charges later get dropped.

So, do you think (in said instances) if you were CARRYING a butter knife over 3 inches, the 3 inch law could hypothetically be enforced?

I'm genuinely curious. I feel as if it would be very rare for this to be enforced in reality. I'm speaking both hypothetically and without regard to how the individual would treat the officer.

[Woodpuppy]

When did politicians permanently wet their pants and clutch their pearls?

Is it politicians or your local police chief and DA?
Most of these knife laws are strongly supported by your local law enforcement. And I agree with decon, used as secondary charges when someone steps out of line. Just pile on more infractions. Never heard that in the news pulled over for blah blah blah and “weapons charge”?

DAs are just authoritarians looking to climb a ladder on the backs of low hanging fruit. Police chiefs are nothing more than politicians with decorations on their clothes, since they exist at the pleasure of city gov. Sheriffs on the other hand are elected, and in some places, may have very different opinions than the political creature that is the “police chief”. In cities which have a controlling majority of a county’s population or have otherwise gobbled up an entire county, I suspect there’s very little difference. Local police may also have very different ideas than their “leadership”.

As for trying to be on the right side of the law, good luck with that. We wouldn’t need lawyers if legislators were capable of critical thinking and writing.

[Woodpuppy]

Blade length is a tricky one. Some places have laws that prohibit any knives with blades over 3 inches, yet butter knives are seemingly never included in this. Public perception and build quality aside, the only thing separating a butter knife from a fixed blade of similar dimensions is the level of sharpness.... Or am I wrong in saying that?

In the US at least, all the blade length laws I'm aware of restrict what's legal to carry, not what's legal to own. Furthermore, most states make a distinction between transporting things that are legal own but can be considered weapons and carrying them. If you purchase a knife, open the box, and put it in your pocket, your're carrying that knife. If the knife remains in its original packaging, inside a bag, and you have a receipt showing it was purchased within the past few hours, you're transporting it.

Granted, other factors can enter into it and a cop may invoke the "act like an *******, get treated like one" rule, even if the charges later get dropped.

So, do you think (in said instances) if you were CARRYING a butter knife over 3 inches, the 3 inch law could hypothetically be enforced?

I'm genuinely curious. I feel as if it would be very rare for this to be enforced in reality. I'm speaking both hypothetically and without regard to how the individual would treat the officer.

I think its likely a sharpened butter knife would be regarded more along the lines of a shiv. Something less virtuous than a folding or fixed knife of the same length.

[lonerider1013]

The irony is while we are having this discussion the hoodlums are going about their business mugging people with all manner of ironmongery, never giving it another thought!

I think in the butter knife example the question is, it is a knife despite the name? My grandpa used to call it a spreader... as in for spreading butter. More accurate if you ask me. It lacks point and edge and is used like a flat spoon.
In other words, not sure anyone would treat it as a knife unless you sharpened it. Then it would be like an improvised knife.

[The Deacon]

Is it politicians or your local police chief and DA?
Most of these knife laws are strongly supported by your local law enforcement. And I agree with decon, used as secondary charges when someone steps out of line. Just pile on more infractions. Never heard that in the news pulled over for blah blah blah and “weapons charge”?

It's politicians who make the law and, in most cases, politicians or political appointees who prosecute you for breaking it. And to, be clear, while I'd rather blade length restriction and laws against switchblades and balisongs didn't exist at all, I'd much rather see them used against a criminal or a smartass who has already "stepped out of line" than against a law abiding citizen. The "good news" is that's exactly how they're usually used, because 99% of cops are too busy, too lazy, or just too decent to go out of their way to write someone up.

And yes, I've heard of that. Heck, twenty odd years ago I witnessed one young man use his mouth and middle finger to turn what would have been a ticket for a seat belt violation into a trip to jail.

So, do you think (in said instances) if you were CARRYING a butter knife over 3 inches, the 3 inch law could hypothetically be enforced?

I'm genuinely curious. I feel as if it would be very rare for this to be enforced in reality. I'm speaking both hypothetically and without regard to how the individual would treat the officer.

Hypothetically, yes. But again, it's going to come down to what else was going on. I could see it being used to turn a simple robbery charge into an armed robbery, or to add "possession of a weapon by a convicted felon" to a list of other charges against him, or to charge someone found running around the local park waving it at passers by while speaking in tongues. Otherwise, unless you go somewhere that has metal detectors, there's little reason for a cop to discover that you have it.

[FK]

I have several friends who are state troopers and local LEO's.
Every one told me that if they stop someone for traffic violation and they are polite and co-operate,,, a warning is given 99% of the time. Mouth off and try to give the LEO grief,,,, every violation is written up.

One retired LEO told me about the large collection of Buck 110 knives he owns. Very commonly at a traffic stop, he walks up to a young male and there is a Buck or other manuf. knife on the ground near the car. When he asks the driver if it is his knife,,, "no officer not mine, never saw that knife" Well a Buck 110 is legal in CT however, the question remains on why they felt the knife would be considered a weapon and not just a pocket knife. In my home state, a legal length knife is not a weapon unless intent is demonstrated.

Regards,
FK
Member since Feb 17, 2001

[Lodestar]

Sorry, to resurect posts from the slight dead. Long time lurker first post on the forum, randomly came across this thread.

The way OP posed the question, going strictly by the AKTI's definition of how to measure, to be safe, you would measure from tip to handle regardless of choil. I however, strongly disagree with AKTI and other comments that say a choil or unsharpened portion is generally legally part of the "blade length", unless that is specifically stated as such in a law/ordinance.

To be clear, the dictionary definition of the word "blade" IS "the flat cutting edge of a knife". Google 'blade definition', every dictionary varies but agrees, it's the sharp part. I do understand that the way spyderco and sites like bladehq list knife specs, or just general assumptions, may lead some people away from actual definition of "blade" length, but it is pretty clear.

If the actual law/ordinance for a state/city/locale (not the generalized play it safe thoughts of american knife and tool institute) does not specifically refer to measuring a blade from the handle, you would then defer to the common accepted definition of the word, and measure the cutting edge. Some extra section along the lines of, 'for the purposes of this law blade length shall be measured from the blade tip to the forward most point of the handle', would be required for a stricter legal interpretation and enforcement. Absent that, by definition you would measure the "blade" length = "cutting edge" length. The most restrictive one could measure the cutting edge would be along the curvature to generate the longest blade length.

Counterpoint: This does not mean you can't end up on the wrong side of the law due to a LEO's ignorance, improper training, or an improper policy, regarding how to measure. If unsure, I tend to think a LEO would (human nature) try to use the longest measurement they could apply once they have decided you were worth hassling about a small knife.

Assuming i read/knew the actual wording of a knife law/ordinance, and that there was no extra wording on how to measure, I would be extremely confident that i would have no lasting legal issues carrying a 3.0 inch blade, with an additional 1/2 inch choil, in a restricted 3 inch or less area. However, in the rare instance of LEO interaction, I would not be so confident that I would not be subjected to false hassle, confiscation, ticket, arrest, or needing a lawyer, just that it would be cleared up in my favor in the end. Worth it??

The above is my opinion, not legal advice, and staying on the safe side of ambiguity will potentially cause you less problems. Additionally this is my thoughts on US laws/courts. To be super safe and still carry what you want, you can always ask law enforcement in your area for specifics on how they measure. If you get the answer you want, get a business card and/or that officer's information and keep it in your wallet in case you have issues.

[Woodpuppy]

You’d be better off thinking about how far the sharpened tip could make it inside someone’s chest cavity. A 4” handle with 6” of steel forward of the handle with a 1” sharpened section up from would make for a deadly stabbing tool. Would you argue that’s a 1” blade or a 6” blade? Discretion being the better part of valor, I stick with using the longest possible measurement of the blade. I have neither the time, money, nor determination to fight ignorant laws in court. It would be a truly never ending endeavor.

[ladybug93]

You’d be better off thinking about how far the sharpened tip could make it inside someone’s chest cavity. A 4” handle with 6” of steel forward of the handle with a 1” sharpened section up from would make for a deadly stabbing tool. Would you argue that’s a 1” blade or a 6” blade? Discretion being the better part of valor, I stick with using the longest possible measurement of the blade. I have neither the time, money, nor determination to fight ignorant laws in court. It would be a truly never ending endeavor.

and because you’d lose that battle, you will also lose the battle over a .5” finger choil. it’s a shame, but the law isn’t going to make concessions like that.