[W.E.G.]

concealed kitchen steak knife does not violate §18.2-308

Court of Appeals of Virginia DECEMBER 22, 2009
http://www.courts.state.va.us/opinions/opncavwp/0771092.pdf

Commonwealth fails on "like kind" weapon argument

[HOME DEPOT GEORGE]

Yeah he was carrying the knife because he wanted to make sure he had clean silverware the next time he visited the local high end steakhouse for a filet mignon gimme a break.

[kingpin008]

What does this have to do with guns?

[JShirley]

Discuss laws concerning firearm ownership, concealed carry and self-defense.

Arguably falls under SD.

[Floppy_D]

What does this have to do with guns?

I PM'ed a moderator about that once... the fact that there is an entire Non-Firearm section, which inherently is not gun related. The answer I received is that THR used to have several other subforums, like "Politics" and whatnot. Being that things went south there often, they closed that sub-forum in an effort to focus mainly on firearms. The Non-Firearm section is a relic of that past that never needed closing. :)

[wishin]

The law in VA most definitely needs to be changed. He obviously got off on a technicality. We know for a fact that he wasn't eating a steak (or anything else) when apprehended, nor was he carrying it in preparation for his next meal.:mad:

[carebear]

One man's "technicality" is another man's "letter of the law".

The larger issue in this case is the whole idea of a mere felony, not even per statute necessarily a "violent felony", permanently depriving an individual who has served their sentence and been released, thus presumably no longer a danger to society in the eyes of the law (if they still are a danger, why on earth have they been released?), of their right to effective self-defense.

I suppose no THR posters would mind if they got convicted of the up to 3 felonies each of us may commit any given day (because of our out of control pretend "tough on crime", assuage the rubes, legal system) and couldn't carry a steak knife for protection?

What's good for the thug goose is good for the "good guy" gander and vice versa.

[wishin]

I think you're missing the point. VA already has a law that is intended to keep knives out of the waistbands of felons. It just needs to be tweaked to include something like a 10" steak knife. :p

[carebear]

No, I got the point, and you're right that it seems silly to bar one thing and not another, functionally identical thing, simply because of the label on the box.

I simply disagree with the breadth and nature of the law in and of itself. This guy might in fact be someone who shouldn't be carrying any kind of knife, but simple possession (which is harmless, only actions are dangerous) can't demonstrate that, nor can his felon status, as he might have committed any number of innocuous, utterly non-violent crimes. If so, who cares if he has a weapon, he's statistically no more likely to use it criminally than you or I.

I'm not big on prior restraint without real, demonstrable, rational, basis. "Felon in possession" laws, by their very non-discriminating nature as to the nature of the felony and statistical likelihood of recidivism, fail such rational basis tests from the outset.

[wishin]

I simply disagree with the breadth and nature of the law in and of itself.

That I wont argue with. I suppose "felony" could be more narrowly defined.