Hawaii Butterfly Knife Ban Violates Second Amendment

So the Ninth Circuit held today (Teter v. Lopez), in an opinion by Judge Carlos Bea, joined by Judges Daniel Collins and Kenneth Lee.

The butterfly knife, also known as the "balisong," has a disputed origin. Some sources say it originated in France; others, the Philippines. It is anywhere from a few hundred to over a thousand years old. Regardless of its origin, the butterfly knife resembles an ordinary pocketknife, a tool that has been used by Americans since the early 18th century (at the very latest). See State v. Delgado (Or. 1984). Like a pocketknife, the butterfly knife comprises a handle and a folding blade, the cutting edge of which becomes covered by the handle when closed. Unlike a pocketknife, however, the butterfly knife's handle is split into two components. Together, these two components fully encase the blade when closed and rotate in opposite directions to open. With a few short, quick movements, an experienced user can open a butterfly knife with one hand….

[J]ust as with firearms in Heller, bladed weapons facially constitute "arms" within the meaning of the Second Amendment. Like firearms, bladed weapons fit the general definition of "arms" as "[w]eapons of offence" that may be "use[d] in wrath to cast at or strike another." Moreover, contemporaneous sources confirm that, at the time of the adoption of the Second Amendment, the term "arms" was understood as generally extending to bladed weapons. See 1 Malachy Postlethwayt, The Universal Dictionary of Trade and Commerce (4th ed. 1774) (including among "arms" fascines, halberds, javelins, pikes, and swords). Because the plain text of the Second Amendment includes bladed weapons and, by necessity, butterfly knives, the Constitution "presumptively guarantees" keeping and bearing such instruments "for self-defense." …

Read the whole opinion for more. Alan Beck and Stephen Stamboulieh represent plaintiffs.

Comments

[John F. Carr]

Plaintiffs drew three Republican-appointed judges.

[hoppy025]

Yeah, which means the judges actually ruled based on the Constitution and the law, not their preferences. Unlike when Democrat Party judges rule for the pelvic rights.

[Frank Drackman]

Sound like some tough butterflies!

[Kazinski]

If only we could go back to the days when youths carried switchblades instead of semiauto 9mm pistols.

My son bought me a switchblade that's illegal in a lot of states, spring loaded, blade shoots out the front and locks with a push of the button. Its quite handy when I am on a ladder or the roof and only have one hand to use.

Switchblade laws are so 1950's.

[Mr. Bumble]

When you're a Jet you're a Jet all the way...

[MatthewSlyfield]

And as with the inclusion of "silencers" in the NFA restricted list, the bans are largely based on Hollywood mythology rather than any real issues.

[hoppy025]

People like the Rev. Kirkland do way more damage with their privates than silencers do.

[Brett Bellmore]

More, " Maybe we can't take that gun away, but at least you'll go deaf!"

[Longtobefree]

If only "shall not be infringed" wasn't so obscure and hard to understand.

[Martinned]

If only “well-regulated” wasn’t so obscure and hard to understand.

[I Callahan]

Apparently for you, it is.

The original meaning of that statement is actually the very opposite of what you believe it to mean. "Well regulated" means regular people should be available. It absolutely does NOT mean the government should regulate.

Please stop with this tired and incorrect reading of the amendment. It's dishonest to say the least.

[SRG]

And you get "well-regulated" wrong as well. It has a similar meaning to when it's applied to clocks - in other words, functioning properly, in good working order, etc.

Please stop with this tired and incorrect reading of the amendment. It’s dishonest to say the least.

[I Callahan]

My interpretation is pretty much the same as yours. So quit trying to create an argument just to protect martinned, when even you know he’s wrong.

[SRG]

It isn't. There is no reason to suppose that a militia assembled from regular people will be well-regulated absent proper training, leadership, etc.

You're both wrong, but only you are being a douche about it.

[Rigelsen]

You’re starting in the right place, “functioning properly”, but going too far as to the implications. Historically, militia was drawn from the general able male populace of a certain age range who were expected to provide their own weapons. Thing like training or leadership would only be matters of concern after the milita was called up.

[Chuck P. (The Artist formerly known as CTSP)]

You can just look at the constitutions of the states that were drafted contemporaneously.

New York, for example:

ARTICLE XII DEFENSE [Defense; militia] Section 1. The defense and protection of the state and of the United States is an obligation of all persons within the state. The legislature shall provide for the discharge of this obligation and for the maintenance and regulation of an organized militia.

You can't assist in "defense and protection" without arms.
Odd that the New York of the 21st century gets it so wrong.

[Buddy Bizarre]

"Finally, the adjective "well-regulated" implies nothing more than the imposition or proper discipline & training" Heller v DC.

1709: "If a liberal Education has formed in us well-regulated Appetites and worthy Inclinations."

1714: "The practice of all well-regulated courts of justice in the world."

1812: "The equation of time ... is the adjustment of the difference of time as shown by a well-regulated clock and a true sun dial."

1848: "A remissness for which I am sure every well-regulated person will blame the Mayor."

1862: "It appeared to her well-regulated mind, like a clandestine proceeding."

1894: "The newspaper, a never wanting adjunct to every well-regulated American embryo city."

[Randal]

Yes, and we would love if you would allow us to impose the proper discipline and training.

[VinniUSMC]

My firearm is in working order. I can hit what I aim at.

Look at that, I’m well-regulated.

[Buddy Bizarre]

Yes, the militia can be trained once called up for service. The right of the people while not in active militia service shall not be infringed by excessive requirements like any other right.

Who is we though? Do you have a mouse in your pocket?

[Currentsitguy]

"A well balanced breakfast being necessary to the start of a healthy day, the right of the people to keep and eat food shall not be infringed."

Who has the right to food? A well balanced breakfast, or the people?

[Bob from Ohio]

En banc bound. Loss for civil rights, and the S/C won't hear it.

[I Callahan]

Well aren't YOU the life of the party!

[Magister]

In the 1980s, I tried to get a license to own nunchucks from the city I lived in, where an ordinance banned them; after traipsing all over City Hall, they assured me the gun store would handle the necessary paperwork, and then said, no, you can't get such a license, when I explained it wasn't a gun. Not that menacing a weapon, but the tendency is to ban unusual martial arts weapons because banning the usual and more effective ones would ban all sorts of common tools. You obviously can't ban knives, but butterfly knives or shuriken are weird enough that you can ban them, dangerous or not.

[Buddy Bizarre]

The standard is 'Dangerous AND Unusual". There is nothing about butterfly knives, gravity knives, switchblades that make them any more dangerous than a fixed blade knife. Prohibitions should be right out.

[Brett Bellmore]

The problem with a dangerous and unusual standard is that, on the one hand, as the Court has itself observed, weapons are supposed to be dangerous. So that can't properly be held against them, unless you mean "blows up in your hand" sort of danger. (Admittedly, a butterfly knife or spring knife does have a little bit of that sort of danger, if you don't know what you're doing.)

On the other hand, though, if a weapon is novel, it can not yet be usual. So, the standard allows the government to stop weapons development in its tracks for the civilian populace, forcing it to fall ever further behind the weapons it allows itself.

For instance, those actively stabilized sniper rifles that are steadier than an inert rifle, and automatically compensate for wind and elevation? The government can get those, you can't have them because you don't already have them.

[Magister]

"Unusual" has to be there because trying to ban "usual" hits too many things. As it is, plenty of things met the ordinance's definition of nunchucks; folding canes with a cord through them, flexible threaded tent poles, pairs of candles joined at the wick. But nobody sees those as weapons (well, except a couple of police accosting a blind man in the first case). But trying to ban the the sai or the kama the same way would hit ordinary garden tools.

The argument for bans on the butterfly knife or the spring loaded switchblade is that they are particularly concealable and very quick to draw -- unnecessary for more mundane uses of knives and analogous to sawed off shotguns. So "dangerous" should perhaps be interpreted as compared to other weapons.

There's a decent argument for banning shurikens/throwing stars; they are largely useless without throwing them, and it's likely some idiot is going to hurt other people. (For decorative purposes, completely blunt replicas would perhaps evade the ban.)

The argument for banning nunchucks is hard to fathom; they are rather hard to use effectively. I eventually learned to swing them freely without hitting myself.

[Daddyhill]

Obviously any other laws pertaining to "bladed weapons" must also be suspect, yes? So I want a switchblade, a military-style stiletto, and a cane-sword, strictly for self-defense of course. Any objections?

[MaverickNH]

The "Military-style" adjective makes it bannable, for sure.

[iowatwo]

So I want a switchblade, a military-style stiletto, and a cane-sword, strictly for self-defense of course. Any objections?

You have the exact same worthless logic used by gun grabbers.
AR platform rifles are no more lethal than many other Non-AR platform rifles.
Other than looking more scariest.

[SRG]

Why shouldn't you be allowed to carry a battleaxe (1d8 using the trad system, 2d4 using mine circa 1977) as well?

[tkamenick]

No, why would I have any objection? You having those things has zero effect on me and don't cause any harm to anybody. If you misuse them you should be punished for that.

[Abdul Abulbul Amir]

No objection. The drawer in my kitchen has a half dozen knives as lethal if not considerably more so.

[NvEric]

A muzzle loader is NOT a firearm according to federal law.

[John F. Carr]

...which led to a Massachusetts man getting off on a technicality. He was convicted under a state law that applied to antique guns as well as modern guns. That did not count on his federal record as a gun conviction because the most analagous federal law had a narrower scope, only applying to modern guns.

The law related to serial numbers. If your musket was made with a serial number way back in the 19th century before they were legally required, it is still illegal to alter or obliterate the serial number.

[Religion and Politics, my life]

Why does it even have to be seen under those terms?
THey got rid of guns in London and the knives came out.
All this judicial crap tempts people to get the most absurd weapons just to be provocative. If our fool President had done his job we wouldn't have this problem at all
Biden did sht during the riots, didn't protect judges, didn't act against cities with skyrocketing killlings.

Inflation-proof gun sales over 1 million for 38 straight months