Reason.com

Free Minds & Free Markets

Now They’re Coming for People’s Knives. No, Really.

London’s got a homicide problem, but leaders insist it’s being caused by the tools.

KnifeKatie Collins/ZUMA Press/NewscomYou'd better sit down for this one.

London has been suffering a spate of homicides recently, bad enough that some contend the murder rate is now worse than New York's. It is, but only if you look at the past couple of months. February, for instance, saw 11 homicides in New York and 15 in London, most of them committed with knives.

In light of that crime spike London's mayor, Sadiq Khan, has laid down the law. "No excuses," he declared the other day on Twitter. "There is never a reason to carry a knife. Anyone who does will be caught, and they will feel the full force of the law."

Britain imposes strict gun control. It also imposes absurdly strict knife control. The government forbids carrying a knife in public "without good reason, unless it has a folding blade with a cutting edge 3 inches long or less."

Take note: Lock-back knives—the kind in which the blade locks in the open position, to prevent accidental folding while the knife is being held, and thus lacerated fingers—are verboten no matter the blade length. Lock-backs "can include multi-tool knives—tools that also contain other devices such as a screwdriver or can opener." And a "good reason" for carrying a knife includes using the knife for work, or perhaps "historical reenactment or religious purposes." Not, say, self-defense, or just because a knife sometimes comes in handy.

Any violent death is a tragedy, but London's response to recent knifings borders on the comedic. London has a Knife Crime Strategy. The police recently called "an emergency meeting of community leaders" after a spate of stabbings. "[We] have been absolutely clear that we cannot tackle knife crime alone," said the Metropolitan Police.

More broadly, Britain operates under the governing assumption of gun control—which is that instruments cause crime, and if only the instruments could somehow be made to disappear, then so too would crime.

Hence "the UK has some of the toughest gun control laws in the world," reports the BBC. "If you want to own a gun, it is very difficult to do so. [The system] has been designed to put as many barriers [to gun ownership] in the way as possible and to assume the worst, rather than hope for the best." Would-be gun owners must obtain a license, which involves a lengthy process during which "independent referees provide confidential character statements" about the applicant's "mental state, home life, and attitude towards guns." (Note: home life.) Still, the BBC wonders: "Are there areas left that could be further tightened?"

The result of all this gun control? A London homicide rate higher than New York's, at least in the short term.

So now the city intends to crack down on knives. Khan also has announced that "patrols have been stepped up with extra stop-and-search powers in place in the worst-affected areas." If London is anything like New York, those stop-and-frisk policies will target minorities and the poor at highly disproportionate rates, without achieving much of anything: In New York, stop-and-frisk searches found weapons a mere 1.2 percent of the time.

"Our communities are sick and tired of the damage being done by knife crime," Khan writes in the city's Knife Crime Strategy. The strategy aims to "deter anyone thinking of carrying a knife." It notes that those who commit knife crimes are generally male and "frequently from a BAME background"—i.e., black, Asian, and minority ethnic. Some offenders are "habitual knife carriers." And for them, the government supports a policy of "two strikes and you're out"—"a minimum custodial sentence for those aged 16 and over who are convicted of a second or subsequent offence of possession of a knife or offensive weapon." The minimum sentence is four months for juveniles and six months for adults.

But that is still not enough for some. John Crichton, chairman of the Royal College of Psychiatrists in Scotland, wants the country to ban pointed kitchen knives as well. "He first suggested the move three years ago," reported the Express last year, "but his proposal did not win enough support from policy-makers. Since then dozens of people, including schoolchildren, have lost their lives as a result of attacks involving bladed instruments."

If Khan, Crichton, and Co. got their way, that would naturally solve London's violence problem, right? Of course not. In short order they would discover the need to ban some other instrument of violence—lead pipes or cricket bats, perhaps—because focusing on the instrument of violence attends to the symptom, not the disease. And, yes, sometimes treating horrific symptoms is preferable to not treating them. But as Londoners have learned, it's still no cure.

When gun-rights advocates warn that if gun-control groups win, they'll go after knives next, it sounds like an absurd exaggeration. In Britain, it's now official government policy.

Photo Credit: Katie Collins/ZUMA Press/Newscom

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • DajjaI||

    Europeans don't understand freedom and every country in Europe is similarly ignorant each in its own special way. They are heading for destruction and slaughter, and ironically Piers Morgan's 'gun nuts' and "people who shouldn't own firearms" will be sent over to save their asses - again.

  • BestUsedCarSales||

    As Europe is always considered the bastion of culture, progress, and civilization, so are they the ones who seem to cause every great war and conflict of the last while.

    I wish the US wasn't so keen on imitating them with our monstrous adventures abroad.

  • colorblindkid||

    The non-European world has never had any problems starting just as many wars as the Europeans. Blaming nearly everything on the Europeans is just silly, and just another version of the noble savage fallacy.

  • DJK||

    For what it's worth, BUCS said "great war", which is close to true.

  • Entropy Drehmaschine Void||

    I blame everything on the French.

    E V E R Y T H I N G .

  • Elias Fakaname||

    "Hon, hon, hon!"

  • Mark22||

    Blame it on the Franco-German axis of evil; they hate each other, yet are culturally and ideologically pretty much interchangeable.

  • Liberty Lover||

    Many non-European wars are the fault of Europeans, especially England. While the English colonized the world, they drew borders along geological lines and formations. This practiced divided tribes and clans, leaving partial but opposing tribes and clans vying for power in the new "States". A perfect storm is you want war.

  • Malvolio||

    Where exactly did this myth come from? There was no shortage of wars in pre-colonial non-European countries.

  • Red Rocks White Privilege||

    This practiced divided tribes and clans, leaving partial but opposing tribes and clans vying for power in the new "States".

    The benefits of diversity!

  • Earth Skeptic||

    Yeah, but at least half the wars in Europe had to do with which royal was fucking which cousin. Good ol' USA has always had more mercenary objectives.

  • UnrepentantCurmudgeon||

    Every war has mercenary objectives. If by some weird, off chance one didn't start out that way it certainly got that way before it was over.

  • Mark22||

    As Europe is always considered the bastion of culture, progress, and civilization, so are they the ones who seem to cause every great war and conflict of the last while.

    You say that as if there was some contradiction there. In fact, culture and civilization come out of war, poverty, and conflict. Europe became militarily strong and conquered the world because European nations were competing at home and had honed their military skills there. Great literature and art is created by unhappy people with no other outlet for their creativity.

    Of course, too much war, poverty, and conflict is harmful, but too little causes stagnation. Europe's "many nations at war on a small continent" setup was perfect for maximizing innovation, even at the expense of lots of bloodshed. The model went off the rails in the 20th century when weapons had become too powerful and wars too bloody.

  • tpaine||

    " The root of the evil is not the construction of new, more dreadful weapons. It is the spirit of conquest"
    Ludwig von Mises

  • Enjoy Every Sandwich||

    The "no one needs" argument taken to its ridiculous (but predictable) conclusion.

  • Citizen X - #6||

    EVERYTHING NOT MANDATORY IS FORBIDDEN.

  • Quo Usque Tandem||

    And criminals will continue to find their tools of the trade; while regulating guns into oblivion might make it harder for them to procure, and if knives are not legal for sale, they can and will certainly find other means. And if any one says bladed weapons are less lethal than guns, consider that some 800,000 Rwandans were slaughtered over 100 days, primarily with machetes.

  • DJK||

    I wonder how much differently that would have ended if the Rwandan populace had been armed with firearms. Hmmmm.

  • James Pollock||

    Best guess is, the genocide would have gone much faster.

  • dchang0||

    Only if the aggressor side (usually the authoritarians in power) is the only one that is armed.

    If all sides are armed, the deterrent effect of weapons is in full force, and the genocide might not have occurred. This of course would not make any news headlines.

  • Longtobefree||

    Interesting; would you say a machete has a 'point'?

  • JuanQPublic||

    When the "no one needs" argument fails, the reliable backup is the "for the children" argument.

  • Longtobefree||

    No one needs children - - - - - -

  • Cy||

    The Chinese played that game and didn't much like the results.

  • BigChiefWahoo||

    But the slope's not slippery, though. They promise, cross their hearts it's not not slippery. Shall we believe them?

  • dantheserene||

    What do you mean, "conclusion"? They won't stop until they've banned the jawbone of an ass.

  • Longtobefree||

    Not bloody likely; the ass needs his jawbone to get reelected!

  • General_Tso||

    First they came for the guns...

  • DajjaI||

    ... and I was silent because Reason banned me (again).

  • Crusty Juggler||

    Remember everyone: if we all band together and report Dajjal as spam, TreasonNN will ban him.

    Let's do it, Team!

  • Citizen X - #6||

    I reported you as spam too, just to be safe.

  • DajjaI||

    I larfed, even as I stand on the gallows.

  • Cuauhtémoc||

    I wouldn't expect a call from the Governor.

  • DajjaI||

    That would be the last person I'd put my faith in. I'm a libertarian to the bitter end.

  • Elias Fakaname||

    You might get better results from Negan.

  • Cynical Asshole||

    I report everyone as spam. Even myself

  • Citizen X - #6||

    [reports spam]

  • Cynical Asshole||

    [reports spam back]

  • Chipper Morning Baculum||

    [hands out cans of Spam to calm everyone down]

  • Earth Skeptic||

    But what's up with spam in Hawaii?

    http://www.hawaiinewsnow.com/s.....-fast-cash

  • General_Tso||

    Spam is huge in Hawaii.

    They got a lot of the WWII surplus that had been produced for the troops, but weren't needed after Hiroshima and Nagasaki. They absorbed it into their 'food culture' and it's still really popular down there.

  • James Pollock||

    Plus centuries of hunting wild boar throughout the Islands, sure.

  • Longtobefree||

    *gets frustrated because there are no knives to slice the spam*

  • Chipper Morning Baculum||

    Last time Crusty said "Let's do it, Team," it was to a roving band of chinchillas that was part of an elaborate plot to rescue a naughty teacher from jail.

  • ChuckNorrisBeardFist||

    But I want the Spam eggs spam and spam. Only a little spam there

  • Entropy Drehmaschine Void||

    DajjaI|4.11.18 @ 12:30PM|#

    ... and I was silent because Reason banned me (again).

    ... AND THERE WAS MUCH REJOICING.

  • Quo Usque Tandem||

    Great Britain, our "mother country," is a cautionary tale. They will no doubt ban pointed kitchen cutlery, but even in maximum security prisons inmates often fashion shivs from objects as innocuous as hairbrushes and combs. The approach to make the world safe through proscription will, as it already has, only lead to more extreme measures to make it work.

  • Chipper Morning Baculum||

    The root of this is that historically, hunting was a privilege for rich people in England, whereas in the US, hunting was seen as a right for all. This had a direct impact on attitudes toward guns. In some ways, the US is defined by its differences from England.

  • Quo Usque Tandem||

    And may if forever remain so.

  • markm23||

    England seems to have always been a place where "All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others." The peasants were less important than the Yeomen, who were less important than the Knights, who were less important then the Nobles, who were (in theory, at least) subordinate to the King - but even the peasants could be happy that they weren't _French_ peasants, because the French nobles really ground their peasants down. The British nobility were called "Peers" and had a hundred distinctions of rank and title. And going back to their ancient legends, consider the Round Table - a piece of furniture selected to emphasize the equality of those who sat around it, until King Arthur took a seat. Not only could his vote override those of all the rest, but the guy sitting to his right was more important than the guy sitting to his left, who was more important than those seated further from the king...

    (It seems likely that if there was a real Arthur, he was not a king but a general, commanding King Uther's army for the old man. Uther's kingdom was tiny, the size of an English county, and probably with a considerably lower population than most of the later counties. To face the Saxon invasions, he had to persuade several other of the petty Briton kings to combine their armies. And so it's likely that there was a council table, where Arthur and other generals and kings would be equal as they hammered out a joint strategy - but that's not how it was remembered!)

  • JuanQPublic||

    The approach to make the world safe through proscription will, as it already has, only lead to more extreme measures to make it work.

    While simultaneously kicking the can down the road in regards to any understanding of the core issues that are the cause of the symptoms.

  • Quo Usque Tandem||

    Of course that is part of it; as with most of the offenders are noted to be "BAME," similar issues have been observed in the US. The Chicago Tribune reported [October 2015] that mayor Emanuel and then police superintendent Gary Snyder, having observed that most gun crimes there were perpetrated by repeat offenders [!], tried to get the legislature to impose mandatory sentencing. It seems some offenders were in and of of jail 40 or more times, until they killed someone or got whacked themselves. However, a "contingency of Black Illinois lawmakers" stymied those efforts, citing it as nothing more than a "recipe to lock of more Blacks and Latinos." Race and politics rule, and the proverbial can gets kicked, and guns and knives get banned.

  • damikesc||

    I'm glad they opposed it. When they demanded higher sentences for crack-related crimes years ago, they later used that as "evidence" of racism.

  • Quo Usque Tandem||

    So your argument to just let them shoot it out among themselves. Sure, as long as we're clear on that. But meanwhile everyone who owns a gun is somehow to blame for it.

  • damikesc||

    If the people they vote for want their constituents dead, that is on them.

  • UnrepentantCurmudgeon||

    Sounds like it could be a plot for a great B movie. All the BAMEs on an island alone, a President gets captured, an antihero gets sent in to rescue him ...

    What?!? It's been done?!? Shit.

  • Longtobefree||

    The core issue is that there are bad people in the world, and the good people must band together to remove them from the general society by imprisonment or execution.

  • damikesc||

    I have always said that when they take your guns, they will begin removing all of your other rights. In the UK, knives and jokes are now illegal and make you subject to prison. This isn't going to become LESS oppressive over time. It's why I support the NRA.

  • Entropy Drehmaschine Void||

    I am waiting for them to ban the "strawbury"


    ... and then perhaps pointed sticks.

  • Chipper Morning Baculum||

    If looks could kill, they would be banned in England.

  • Marcus Aurelius||

    What about looks that say "who's a sexy tartlet, now?"

  • Chipper Morning Baculum||

    As long as it doesn't include a British smile with parted lips, I say go for it, Marcus.

  • Earth Skeptic||

    If you like your teeth, you can keep your teeth...or maybe not.

  • Rhywun||

    If London is anything like New York, those stop-and-frisk policies will target minorities and the poor at highly disproportionate rates, [...] It notes that those who commit knife crimes are generally male and "frequently from a BAME background"—i.e., black, Asian, and minority ethnic

    How about instead of leaving yourself vulnerable to the argument that of course they are frisking those most likely to have knifes, you instead argue that frisking someone for no reason is a basic violation of their natural rights?

  • sage||

    Pretty simple, really: if you don't want to be frisked, don't be ethnic. Duh.

  • UnrepentantCurmudgeon||

    I'm pretty sure we're all ethnic in one way or another

  • Cuauhtémoc||

    "If London is anything like New York"

    It really isn't.

  • Cynical Asshole||

    How about instead of leaving yourself vulnerable to the argument that of course they are frisking those most likely to have knifes, you instead argue that frisking someone for no reason is a basic violation of their natural rights?

    Depends on who you're arguing with. If arguing with a progressive, the "basic violation of their natural rights" will be countered with the argument that "if you have nothing to hide you have nothing fear" because they tend to believe that rights are granted by the government. They don't even understand the core concept of "natural rights." Pointing out that their preferred policy will disproportionately effect the minorities that they claim to care so much about might at least make them pause for a second while they struggle to come up with a retort.

    Conservatives at least, for the most part, understand the core concept of natural rights. So yeah, you'd probably get further with that argument.

  • Just Say'n||

    In the British version of Clue, hate speech is always the murder weapon

  • Just Say'n||

    - Michael Malice

  • Ornithorhynchus||

    Fun fact-- The British version of Clue is called Cluedo.

    And it's the original version of the game, in fact.

  • General_Tso||

    I thought it was Col. Mustard, in the library, with a candlestick?

  • TrickyVic (old school)||

    Col. Mustard, in the library, with a taunt.

  • markm23||

    Isn't Colonel Mustard an offensive stereotype?

  • action physical man||

    They should ban working out too much and martial arts practice.

  • Quo Usque Tandem||

    It's only logical.

  • Marcus Aurelius||

    Everyone had their required daily reason of chocolate and gin...

  • ||

    England is a joke made by and for jokers now.

    Sigh.

    North America will have to go and save their sorry asses again at some point. After all, their solution to Hitler was appeasement.

    1066 my ass.

  • Chipper Morning Baculum||

    North America, eh? Nice try to include yourself in all our heroic rescue missions.

  • ||

    Well we will. Commonwealth duty and all that crap. Although after they banned Southern I say fuck 'em. Let them cook in their own bull shit.

    /hangs on to that tails.

  • ||

    coat

  • So97gc||

    Just wait til they ban forks

  • Quo Usque Tandem||

    Sporks. Plastic ones. Look for it.

  • Don't look at me.||

    Too much ecological damage.

  • Quo Usque Tandem||

    Damn, you're right. But a metal spork could be honed into a shiv. I suppose beryllium would work; try cutting or grinding that stuff and it'll kill you.

  • Hank Phillips||

    There is a scene in the novel Lucifer's Hammer where a cannibal waves one of those BBQ carving forks.

  • Scarecrow Repair & Chippering||

  • Weigel's Cock Ring||

    Sadiq Khan sounds like the Mofobama of the U.K. How long before he calls the non-Muslims there "bitter clingers"?

  • UnrepentantCurmudgeon||

    It is just a bit odd that he, himself is a BAME and Muslim to boot.

  • sarcasmic||

    Pencils. Screw drivers. Etc...

  • UnrepentantCurmudgeon||

    I recall a time when Brit thugs resorted to bicycle spokes. Nasty things.

  • damikesc||

    I am amazed, truly, that violent folks will use any weapon they can to kill people.

    Cars and vans will be banned eventually.

    You know, for the kids.

    Not to simply make people reliant on public transportation and, thus, under the thumb of an oppressive government all the more.

    And I don't care if they do it with a smile. It is still oppression.

  • Marcus Aurelius||

    Manually driven cars and trucks... Without GPS.

  • Rich||

    I trust "Sweeney Todd" is illegal in London.

  • Marcus Aurelius||

    Is that the name Crusty uses when "Ron Mexico" is taken?

  • Brandybuck||

    A story ripped straight out of The Onion. It's life imitating sarcastic art.

  • Quo Usque Tandem||

    I have noted that for some time. Headlines once found in The Onion, or maybe The National Inquirer, are now mainstream. Example: "America's Constitution is so Outdated We Should Scrap it and Start Over." Or "To Hell with the Legislature, Obama should just enact gun control through executive action" [Michael Bloomberg, December 2012].

  • Don't look at me.||

    "Trump elected as president ".

  • Quo Usque Tandem||

    Pick your poison. There's a smorgasbord.

  • Longtobefree||

    According to Hillary, that is fake news - - - - - - -

  • Mark22||

    Come on, 90% of what Hillary says constitutes its own Onion article. The woman is a walking caricature of a progressive female politician, foremost the fact that Hillary uses her gender for just about every political argument and then screams "sexism" when people criticize her for it. It's sexism if you call her "she" and it's sexism if you don't.

  • JohnKing||

    "If they outlawed nail files, only outlaws would have nail files"

  • Elias Fakaname||

    What about pointed sticks?

  • The_Hoser||

    They're good for pokin'?

  • Morbo||

    Fresh fruit not good enough for you, eh? Well I'll tell you something my lad, when you're walking home tonight and some homicidal maniac comes after you with a bunch of loganberries, don't come crying to me!

  • Elias Fakaname||

    I read that in John Cleese's voice .

  • Gilbert Martin||

    What about long fingernails?

    Someone could inflict a nasty scratch with those.

    Mandatory fingernail inspections for all city residents is needed.

  • MCStengle||

    It's only a matter of time before they come for the woodchippers.

  • This Machine Chips Fascists||

    "Would you like to see Britannia rule again, my friend? All you have to do is follow the worms..."

  • NoVaNick||

    How many parents have kitchen knife sets and/or steak knives in their home? I worry more about my 2 boys getting their hands on our meat cleaver than I would a gun (if I owned any) that was properly stored.

  • Agammamon||

    They (and the Australians) have been seriously (like, seriously) mulling over requiring steak knives and butcher knives, etc to have rounded ends instead of being pointed.

  • NoVaNick||

    Maybe this is really an effort to force everyone to become vegan-I wouldn't put it past the Brits, or Aussies...

  • Scarecrow Repair & Chippering||

  • LarryA||

    Notice the tips aren't as blunt as a screwdriver, which stabs just fine.

  • UnrepentantCurmudgeon||

    Hence the boom in bladesmithing as a hobby

  • Echospinner||

    "A blade never needs reloading"

    Max Brooks

    The Zombie Survival Handbook

  • Quo Usque Tandem||

    British law currently bans "Zombie Knives" which are described as ANY knife, with a sharp or serrated edge, that is emblazoned with words or images promoting violence.

    I swear I am not making this up.

  • Quo Usque Tandem||

  • silver.||

    None of that mall ninja shit.

  • Quo Usque Tandem||

    Mall ninja shit can apparently get you 4 years in a Limey slammer; much like posting a video of your girlfriends dog doing a parody of Hitler

  • Longtobefree||

    Cool! My NRA pocket knife has the logo on the blade, so I have a zombie knife. No more trips to not so great Britain for me.

  • Lucius Fergeson||

    Oi you cheeky cunt, do you 'ave a fist loicense? You can't just boll up you' fists in the middle of the street like that. You could kill someone. Throw your fist away or you will recieve 10 yea's in prison for the possession of a deadly weapon, bruv.

    DON'T GET ME PISSED. BIN THAT FIST.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    'ello, what's all this then?

  • AlmightyJB||

    They should outlaw fire and the wheel as well.

  • Cynical Asshole||

    Britain: it's like looking at what America will probably be like in ~20-25 years.

  • Quo Usque Tandem||

    If we let it; progressives only want a cleaner, safer, and better world, you know.

  • NoVaNick||

    Seriously! I don't get the progressives' desire to infantilize everyone, but they are smarter and better people than the rest of us, so we must never question them.

  • Weigel's Cock Ring||

    Feudalism can be pretty awesome if you happen to be a king, or an earl, or a duke, or a count, etc.

  • Quo Usque Tandem||

    Or even a yeoman. Anything but a serf.

  • Cy||

    That's "Deplorable." Keep up.

  • Cuauhtémoc||

    I question these assertions. They are notably missing protections that the US has.

    So, 30 or 40 years, because those protections will slow the process slightly.

  • Quo Usque Tandem||

    Freaking optimist. You underestimate the will of the progs.

  • sarcasmic||

    Progs have infinite patience. They know that in any compromise, they win. Little by little they eventually get their way.

  • UnrepentantCurmudgeon||

    My 6-year-old grandson can say much the same thing.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    And a "good reason" for carrying a knife includes using the knife for work, or perhaps "historical reenactment or religious purposes.

    Religious purposes, eh?

  • Agammamon||

    Them Sikhs man.

    Oh, and the occasional . . . suspiciously non-denominational, definitely not a terrorist though, public beheader.

  • UnrepentantCurmudgeon||

    "Never leave home without a knife" -- Jethro Gibbs.

    I guess NCIS is banned in Britain

  • Agammamon||

    There is never a reason to carry a knife.

    Funnily enough, his security detail always has a reason *to carry a gun*.

  • BYODB||

    Leading by example is so passé.

  • TrickyVic (old school)||

    ""Funnily enough, his security detail always has a reason *to carry a gun*."'

    Makes sense. Only the ruling class should have weapons like that. The peasants are not trust worthy to carry such things.

  • Incomprehensible Bitching||

    This irrelevant conversation about knives ignores the fact that gun crime is down because gun control. Isn't that all that matters?

  • Quo Usque Tandem||

    Does not matter that you die, but how. Overdosing or asphyxiation is so much more civilized. No one ever gripes about the suicide rate in Japan.

  • TrickyVic (old school)||

    It shows their real concern is objects, not deaths.

  • Cy||

    Isn't there some weird way they track murder in Japan? Something like it isn't a murder until they've solved the crime?

  • BigChiefWahoo||

    Gonna tell us about how the slope isn't slippery?

  • Mark22||

    This irrelevant conversation about knives ignores the fact that gun crime is down because gun control. Isn't that all that matters?

    Great use of sarcasm there!

  • Barnstormer||

    YGBSM.

    weapons-found-by-british-police-during-a-sweep

    The Bobbies have gone 'round the fookin' bend.

  • silver.||

    Speaking of nanny state social media accounts, the TSA runs an entertaining instagram.

    The gun controllers dance in the blood of dead school kids after a mass shooting. The gun rights activists dance in the blood of dead Londoners after a murder spike. Stay classy, politics.

  • Quo Usque Tandem||

    Not now I'm busy dancing.

  • TrickyVic (old school)||

    ""Stay classy, politics."'

    Of course politics has been called many things. Classy is not one of them.

  • ||

    The gun rights activists dance in the blood of dead Londoners after a murder spike. Stay classy, politics.

    So the knife ban on British subjects was initiated by American gun rights advocates? Gun rights advocates here were just waiting for a murder spree in London so that they could defend their right to keep their property? Is my sarcometer on the fritz again? Were Russian hackers involved?

  • Quo Usque Tandem||

    The comments on that site are priceless. "They've raided a hardware store." "They found and elctrician."

  • BYODB||

    Ok, so here's my issue with this at first glance.


    Recall how we usually point out that crime is measured quite differently in the UK as opposed to the US?


    Does this indicate that crime in the UK is actually worse than it is here in the States simply because they don't even consider unsolved cases as being in the statistics at all?


    This is obviously before we get into the clear lunacy of the knife arguments. As if people won't just bash each other's brains in with rocks if knives are unavailable.


    I don't see a bottom to this lunacy anymore. We're approaching ludicrous speed.

  • sarcasmic||

    Just when you think we've reached peak derp, it will always get worse.

  • silver.||

    Seems like I have read somewhere that the UK counts its murders differently. They have higher rates of rape and hot burglary, so that's all I need to know to be glad that we have the 2nd. I can't definitively state that crime is worse in the UK as a whole based on the often conflicting statistics. Even if I could, I'd be accused of cherry picking or using disreputable sources.

  • UnrepentantCurmudgeon||

    It's straight out of Alinsky's "Handbook". Progressives must always have a crisis boiling somewhere. And the fact is, bad as Trump may be, he's not doing the kind of thing that makes for "crisis". So the periodic demented lefty shooting up a school has to do, and becomes the catalyst for all this "ban the guns" nonsense crap. Feinstein and her ilk don't really want a serious discussion, they just want to keep the temperature elevated.

  • AZ Gunowner||

    Of course the elephant in the room is that most of the knife murders are Muslims killing other Muslims.

    None of whom would have been in London 50 years ago when it was one of the safest places on Earth.

    That doesn't mean of course that Muslims only kill other Muslims, just that the number of Muslims is so great now in London that there are plenty of Muslim targets to compete with the main Muslim goal of killing all infidels.

    Islam after all is a religion of violence.

  • Don't look at me.||

    But they can carry knives for religious purposes.

  • Hank Phillips||

    Like Aztec priests?

  • Tamfang||

    I guess that's a sop to the Sikhs.

  • Fearless Truthteller||

    What evidence do you have that "most of the knife murders are Muslims killing other Muslims"?

    The true elephant in the room is the extraordinary rates of violence perpetrated by murderous Trump Trainers, who have murdered HUNDREDS of Americans since Trump was elected.To give just 3 examples, the 2018 Parkland shooting (murderous Trumpkin Nikolas Cruz), 2017 Las Vegas Shooting (murderous Trumpkin Stephen Paddock), 2017 Unite the Right the Rally (pitchfork mob of murderous Trumpkins carrying Trump-Pence signs and chanting "Jews will not replace us!", as is their wont.) Someone MUST do something to keep these deranged, murdering Trump supporters out of the country before they kill us all. The number of murders committed by Donald Trump supporters FAR outnumbers the number of murders committed by Muslims.

  • Earth Skeptic||

    Dude, have you been to Syria lately?

  • Elias Fakaname||

    There have been no mass murders carried out by Trump supporters. You really need to smoke top listening to bullshit like a Media Matters. It makes you sound even dumber than you already are.

  • James Pollock||

    "There have been no mass murders carried out by Trump supporters"

    On a technicality, maybe, since the Chancellorsville murderer only succeeded in killing one person.

  • Fearless Truthteller||

    Stephen Paddock, las Vegas mass murderer, killed 59 people, official member of the Trump Train.

    Nikolas Cruz, parkland mass murderer, killed 17 people, official member of the Trump train.

    Dylann Roof, charleston mass murdered, killed 9 people, official member of the Trump train.

    Sowwy!

  • Mark22||

    That was funny. Almost like a real progressive.

  • BillyG||

    I expect after knives, next would be screwdrivers. But before knives get any sort of messed up limitations, I expect resturaunts in London to only give politicians spoons to eat with because the Chefs would be in open revolt. Never mess with a Chef's cutlery.

  • Quo Usque Tandem||

    See link posted by Barnstormer a few comments above. They seem to be all in about screwdrivers as weapons.

  • Entropy Drehmaschine Void||

    They have "Chefs" in London?

  • Earth Skeptic||

    Dude, have you been to Syria lately?

  • Earth Skeptic||

    Dude, have you been to Syria lately?

  • Earth Skeptic||

    Well, that was weird.

  • UnrepentantCurmudgeon||

    Nothing worse than a revolting chef

  • ||

    Does this sort of thing make anyone less afraid of English prisons? Seems like the food would be terrible, but it would generally be quiet and full of interesting people with no real interest in violence or whatever. Like you get caught with a knife in public and you get to take a 6 mo. sabbatical.

  • Procyon Rotor||

    The fundamental flaw in the reasoning behind banning objects is defining things as "gun crime" or "knife crime". Owning an object is not inherently wrong. Using an object is not inherently wrong. Aggressive violence is inherently wrong. Define violent crime properly, as violent crime, and the potential responses to it become a lot less nonsensical.

  • Fearless Truthteller||

    News flash: things can belong to multiple categories. Murdering someone with a gun can be correctly defined as a violent crime AND as a gun crime. The two are not mutually exclusive.

  • markm23||

    But when people go on and on about "gun crime", but never talk about violent crime committed with other weapons, it is quite revealing. Either they are biased against guns to the point of not being capable of rational thought about violence, or they are elitists who will always be protected with guns no matter what laws are passed to hold down the masses, but fear retaliation by the downtrodden with guns.

  • Hank Phillips||

    A robber killed a physician riding his bike in Brazil, so the Kristallnacht laws were retained and a knife ban added. Brazil still has a high murder rate.

  • dpbisme||

    ...and the LIBTARDS who are on record many, many times telling us they are against personal ownership of guns are telling us it is just about Sporting Rifles... Liars! Since sporting Rifles are not the problem, that would be pistols. So first the Sporting Rifles and then the Pistols and then everything else.

    Sporting Rifles are far the most popular rifle sold today and the people who want to ban the, are a group of people who have never bought a rifle.

    These JERKS are going to cause a lot of trouble because if even 100th of the Eight Million, (8,000,000) Sporting rifles are crazy they just might hurt a lot of people... Since up to that point they were not out shooting people.

  • James Pollock||

    There are a small number of people who are against private ownership of firearms. They are few in number, and will remain so. They are not to be taken seriously.

    There is a substantially larger number of people who say "I don't want to take guns away from people who handle them safely and responsibly, but would like to maybe do a better job of keeping them away from people who either do not handle them safely, or do not handle them responsibly." Answering them by whining about "gun grabbers" is self-fulfilling prophecy... that's what they will eventually become, either out of frustration or out of having to figure out what the rules should be without anyone offering honest criticism of the proposals before they get voted on.

  • Mark22||

    There is a substantially larger number of people who say I want guns taken away from thee, but not from me

    FTFY

    Answering them by whining about "gun grabbers" is self-fulfilling prophecy... that's what they will eventually become, either out of frustration or out of having to figure out what the rules should be without anyone offering honest criticism of the proposals before they get voted on.

    Your concern trolling is touching.

  • ace_m82||

    Do Democrats want to get rid of the second amendment?

    www.washingtonexaminer.com/sur.....n-all-guns

    "The survey also found that Democratic respondents were loosely split on whether the Second Amendment ought to be repealed. Thirty-nine said they'd oppose it, while 41 percent said otherwise. The broader population, on the other hand, overwhelmingly opposed the idea by 60 percent to 21 percent."

  • Nom de Sobriquet||

    Soon they'll be pruning tree with toothless saws and be further reduced to eating only what can be directly bitten off - because, you know, silverware and all that.

  • Fearless Truthteller||

    For a site called Reason, there is shockingly little of it on display here. The author of this "article" merely scoffs on the knife ban, telling us "you'd better sit down for this one" and calling it "comedic" to disallow carrying knives in public, yet never actually presents any argument why this is a bad policy. None. There is simply no argument here. Why, exactly, does one need to carry a knife in public? Apparently, the author feels there is no need to supply reasons for his arguments. How rich. What is truly comedic is the total absence of rational thought on this web blog. In any case, the reason New York's murder rate has dropped so significantly is that we don't allow guns here. "But...but...but...Gun Control doesn't work!" Except that empirical reality has repeatedly shown that it does. See Japan, South Korea, etc. "But...but...but...I only belive facts that conform to my world view and make up the rest!" Exactly. Reason is absent here.

  • Entropy Drehmaschine Void||

    Fuck off, Slaver.

  • Fearless Truthteller||

    Proof, pudding. Thank you for proving my point.

  • Elias Fakaname||

    See my comment below, where I am generous enough to straighten you out. Feel free to thank me.

  • Tamfang||

    I suppose you could argue that no one really needs to open a package or slice an apple while outside their home.

  • dchang0||

    Or cut yourself out of a seatbelt in a car crash or helicopter crash, as the recent NYC helicopter crash in the water proved. The pilot got out of that one alive while the passengers were unable to cut themselves out of their harnesses.

    Or the most valuable survival uses of a knife: making kindling to start a fire, gutting a fish, cutting rope or paracord to string up a tarp for a makeshift tent, among many others.

    Not to mention the DEFENSIVE uses of knives. Merely showing a knife can be a powerful deterrent to a belligerent attacker, even if they are armed with a knife too. A knife can even be used to kill a vicious dog that's clamped onto your arm.

    If knives weren't so useful, they wouldn't have been one of the inventions that gave humans such a massive evolutionary advantage over other non-tool-making species.

  • mscarborough||

    Recently, several people died in a completely survivable helicopter crash in New York. They all drowned because none of them had a knife to cut themselves out of their safety harnesses. So I guess there is at least one good reason to carry a knife in public: I can assure you there are many, many more. Effective, independent, functional humans carry and use tools in their daily lives. And then there are the humans who wait for someone else to come and take care of them. You can find them on the bottom of the Hudson.

  • Earth Skeptic||

    But post-modern humans only need a universal tool (smart phone) that provides access to a Disney-nanny-progressive world that supplies all good things.

  • Earth Skeptic||

    So, Fearless, tell me about your perfect utopia, where no human would ever want to use or threaten violence for some personal or collective goal. Once upon a time (you know, before knives or even sticks) the physically biggest and meanest individuals often got away with, well, murder (and lots of other unfriendly acts).

    You and many of your fellow travelers are really fixated on the offensive use of weapons, but in terms of minutes most uses are purely defensive and actually prevent violence. Weapons also equalize potential opponents (yay, equality!).

    And of course, if gun violence correlated with gun ownership, then places like Wyoming and Montana would not be at the bottom of gun murder rates.

  • Elias Fakaname||

    "the reason New York's murder rate has dropped so significantly is that we don't allow guns here. "

    Really? Everyone else says it correlates to Giuliani's aggressive policing and incarceration of violent criminals. Can you offer some actual evidence to back up your assertion? Gun control typically correlated very poorly with violent crime trends. Look at D.C., Chicago, Baltimore, Detroit, etc.. all have draconian gun control policies, often more oppressive than NYC, yet are slaughterhouses.

    Also, you come,win about a lack of justification on the author's part for carrying knives on public. I'm guessing you don't understand basic debate concepts, so I'll help you out. The status quo is that knives are legal. The knife control people are the one's trying to change that policy. The burden is on them to justify their plan. Not the other way around. Hence the author not providing their own plan, which is not required.

    I suppose if one of your totalitarian comrades insisted on restricting speech you would them ask any naysayers to present an argument with evidence that such speech is justifiable, or forfeit their rights.

    Would you?

  • James Pollock||

    " Everyone else says it correlates to Giuliani's aggressive policing and incarceration of violent criminals."

    In the sense that violent crimes of almost all sorts have been dropping for several decades, throughout the U.S., with few exceptions?

  • XM||

    "More broadly, Britain operates under the governing assumption of gun control—which is that instruments cause crime, and if only the instruments could somehow be made to disappear, then so too would crime."

    That's the gist of the argument, but there are more details in the article.

    The absurdity of this 'knife control' couldn't more plain. Because 15 people died by knives (in a city with millions of people) in a month or two, the government has to waste time and energy trying to penalize people that happens do hundreds, if not thousands of times a day.

    "Why do you have to carry a knife" is a stupid and arbitrary question designed to justify unnecessary action. Let's say I carry a knife in my pocket (a swiss army knife that fixes the blade, which is apparently illegal) because I want to use it for self defense. Why should the government come after me? What crimes have I committed? A knife is a culinary tool, the notion that it's now effectively under house arrest in London is something out of a the Onion.

    More importantly, criminals intent on stabbing someone to death won't hesitate to use a knife regardless of the law. If a radical Muslim wanted to slash a cartoonist's throat on the street, all he has to do is grab a knife from his kitchen and bide his time. I'm sure London will dispatch beadles all over town searching BAME people for knives in their pockets (without warrant, huzzah) but.... how many people are in London? Needle in a haystack.

  • dchang0||

    That's a good point that is often lost on many gun control and knife control advocates:

    You wouldn't punish all blacks for the few crimes committed by a few black gang members, so why would you punish all gun or knife owners for the few crimes committed by a few gun or knife owners?

    Not only is banning weapons ineffective, it is immoral, as it proactively punishes innocent people for crimes they never committed.

  • Mark22||

    telling us "you'd better sit down for this one" and calling it "comedic" to disallow carrying knives in public, yet never actually presents any argument why this is a bad policy. None. There is simply no argument here

    There isn't an explicit argument there because libertarians are not concerned whether something is "good policy", libertarians are concerned with liberty. That is, libertarians don't need to discuss whether progressive policies (whether gun control, knife control, eugenics, forced sterilizations, segregation, etc.) is "good policy" because we consider those policies intrinsically wrong no matter whether they are "good" or not.

  • Longtobefree||

    Really? You think this site exists for any purpose other than mindless venting of the same old nonsense?
    It's about the clicks, stupid.

  • ace_m82||

    Why, exactly, does one need to carry a knife in public?

    Cause the individual is Sovereign, and the State is subservient to it. The better question is why does a "peace" officer need to carry arms in public?

    In any case, the reason New York's murder rate has dropped so significantly is that we don't allow guns here.

    Chicago and D.C. would like to have a word with you.

    Except that empirical reality has repeatedly shown that it does.

    By "works", you mean the state can do this:

    www.reason.com/archives/2014/0.....-and-proud

    262 million UNARMED people killed by government... in only 100 years.

  • UnrepentantCurmudgeon||

    I'm remembering a time, probably in the 1980s or early 1990s, when an emphasis on banning guns in Britain (and, I believe, Italy) led to young thugs using bicycle spokes to attack people. The spokes were a particularly vile weapon because they could pierce the spine and joints. What I do not recall is that either the gun ban or any resulting ban on bicycle spokes (can you imagine?) had any effect on crime, assaults, etc. But what the hell: at least they were "doing something", right?

  • Flaco||

    While we all laugh about this happening in Britain, don't forget that most of America has laws against carrying knives.

    The great state of New Hampshire is an exception!

    http://www.thetruthaboutknives.....hampshire/

  • dchang0||

    True.

    Technically it is illegal for me to carry my chef's knives concealed in a knife case to and from culinary school, as it would be carrying fixed-blade knives concealed while in public. I am not kidding. The law is worded overbroad.

    Join KnifeRights.org. In some ways they are more important than the NRA and GOA and Second Amendment Foundation in that knives are greater in number and are used far more often day to day.

  • mscarborough||

    There is basically only three places to live in this world: 1. A good democracy. 2. A bad democracy. 3. A dictatorship. Technically, there is virtually no difference between 2 and 3. Tyranny of the majority is still tyranny.

  • flyfishnevada||

    Remember, remember, the 5th of November...ah hell, I probably just got banned from Britain.

  • PL@pierrelemieux.com||

    Very good piece! It should however have mentioned that handguns have been forbidden in the UK for two decades.

  • Mark22||

    "Our communities are sick and tired of the damage being done by knife crime," Khan writes

    Indeed! So why don't you resign and let competent adults handle the administration of London?

  • vek||

    God damn Europeans are cucked beyond belief. At least in the UK they will still admit that most of their crime is being caused by recent immigrants... In Sweden, Germany, and other countries they're now refusing to release the ethnicity information for crimes being committed because it is almost entirely non whites doing it.

    I'm glad the Europeans are now getting a slight dose of how awesome diversity is! They always bagged on us for being racist against our minorities, who also commit most of the crime, despite them not having any around to see what we were bitching about in their own lives... But now that they get to see how this shit works first hand, perhaps they'll come to their sense at some point.

    Diversity is only a strength if it is THE RIGHT diversity. Chinese engineers, or Indian programmers may be okay... But taking in uneducated Arabs, Africans, or Pakis is not a net positive. An Arab doctor may turn out okay, but a half illiterate religious nut who is married to his cousin... Not so much.

  • Fooseven||

    They are just a couple hundred years behind the US in terms of learning how to live and coexist in a diverse world, they haven't had enough diversity to have any issues until very recently.

  • vek||

    The fact is the best way to live with diversity is to not have it. Visit other countries to get a taste of foreign culture! Watch YouTube videos! Having whole cities in your own country taken over and turned into foreign enclaves just isn't a good idea. I've come to believe that every country should have an ethno-cultural-religious (that last one is rapidly declining in importance) super majority. The truth is even "model minority" groups still cause infighting and bad blood.

    I think most countries would be fine having 10-20% that doesn't match the main group, provided they're an upstanding minority, and not ghettoized trash... But beyond that you're going to get ethnic based infighting, block voting, etc, even if everybody is doing okay financially and otherwise. You see this time and time again in history.

    People just like to be around others similar to themselves, so bringing in any new people they should only be ones that can assimilate, and preferably not even be "visible" after a generation or so. America worked so well because all the different Europeans ceased being able to be told apart after a single generation or two, and everybody assimilated. If we'd taken in tons of Arabs instead of Irish we'd probably STILL be having infighting over waves of immigration that happened 100+ years ago.

  • Fearless Truthteller||

    "I've come to believe that every country should have an ethno-cultural-religious majority"

    Amazing how many Nazis there are here!

  • ace_m82||

    Yes, wanting a majority (which I, for one, don't care about) of one ethno-cultural-religious type, means you're going to mass murder all the other ones.

    Do you mind making Non Sequiturs?

  • vek||

    LOL

    Yeah, because somebody who says "I think most countries would be fine having 10-20% that doesn't match the main group" is a TOTAL Nazi!

    Look, calling anybody who uses common sense on an issue you're not comfortable admitting the truth on a Nazi is not constructive, it's not intelligent, and it's not accurate. I'm a huge history buff, and if you look back through history almost EVERY instance of internal stability on a nation-state was caused by racial differences, religious issues, or cultural issues. America in 2018 shows this STILL is as true as it ever was.

    White Americans largely still have a pretty solid consensus on how we want things to be. That is approximately what the founding fathers had in mind. We have our lefty morons too, but they're a decided minority in the white population. Almost EVERY issue facing the country today is starkly divided along racial lines if you look at the stats.

    So I think if you remove as many of the big problem causers according to history, that's a good thing. I don't hate anybody, I have black friends, Asian friends etc... But realizing a nation functions better with SOME group essentially at the helm, versus not having ANY group or set of guiding principles at the helm, is not a crazy idea. It's how ALL stable countries throughout history have operated. Many of the unstable ones were multi-ethnic/religious/cultural. It caused them all problems. Why intentionally add problems to your nation when they're easily avoidable?

  • blondrealist||

    Next they'll try to ban scissors with pointed blades, box cutter tools, and X-acto knives (because artists and crafters are potentially dangerous people).

  • TxJack 112||

    London's municipal leaders are the tools...

  • BlueStarDragon||

    Know what's really funny about all this. No one pointed out that Asian martial arts got it big drive when the China emperors out law peasants from having swords or knives, and Japan also did the dame thing. So lets sing one for Elvis.

    "We are all kung-fu fighting ..."

  • drisco304||

    First they came for my gun, but they had already taken it. Then they came for my knives, but they had already taken them. Now they want my cricket bat .......

  • Karl Hungus||

    If Khan, Crichton, and Co. got their way, that would naturally solve London's violence problem, right? Of course not. In short order they would discover the need to ban some other instrument of violence—lead pipes or cricket bats, perhaps . . .

    Or, more likely, stabbings and slashing would continue unabated, since those who choose to use knives in that manner would continue to carry them, regardless of some silly law.

  • QuintessentialPhorto||

    Next they'll try the King Arthur/Black Knight 'solution' (Monty Python's Holy Grail):

    Cut off both of everybody's arms!

  • Eman||

    Of course the autist inside every libertarian wants to reduce everything to statistics, but its just common sense that knives are less murderous than guns. I see these numbers and thank God that these criminals didn't have guns to kill even more people with.

  • ace_m82||

    God made man, Sam Colt made man equal.

    Yes, those criminals only have:
    Motor vehicles
    Cricket bats
    Knives
    Poison
    Bombs
    Guns they can STILL get
    Rocks
    Bare hands
    (About a thousand other things I'm not gonna list)

    To kill people with! How terrible if those people were murdered by legally purchased firearms!

    I'm sure the dead people feel really good about the righteousness you feel about their deaths!

    And, after all, we all know the state is the only organization righteous enough to be armed "safely"!

    www.reason.com/archives/2014/0.....-and-proud

    262 million UNARMED people killed by government... in only 100 years.

  • Longtobefree||

    Told you so!

  • govlite||

    Next to be banned in Britain....ROCKS,PAPER,SCISSORS

  • Deplorable Victor||

    That sandnigger Mayor is trying to destroy Britain. They should fit him with a sandnigger necktie and dangle him from London Bridge.

  • 1980-f||

    Ha. It's fascinating watching the libertarians (and I'm a bit lib, just a bit) struggle over this one. I've lived in the UK all of my 52 years and - after looking at what you have in the USA - I'm very happy with our anti-gun laws. And new anti-knife laws. No-one actually needs those things; get a life, why don't you? We have plenty of freedoms that you don't. Such as the freedom not to worry about being shot by the police or by some civilian committing an offence. I've yet to see a gun being fired in real life, and I have not the slightest wish to do so. Same for these knives whose only purpose is to cause injury or death to people.

    Our cops can't demand ID, either. We can demand that they show their warrant cards.

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online