Whats your favourite penknife or multi tool .

[pe2dave]

And as for that bowie knife. Illegal to own!

 

[J-G]

Me too. We were even known to use a small hand axe.

OUCH!!! Don't remind me - - - When I was pre-teenage my (older) cousin who lived next door, did just this and chopped through my shoe taking a chunk out of my foot!!
That would have been at least 70 years ago & I can still remember being in shock!

 

[JefL]

And as for that bowie knife. Illegal to own!

Not in the UK. Illegal to carry (fixed blade) but not included in the list of banned knives.
My old boy scout knife is a Bowie pattern, and in the 1960s I used to wear it on my belt every time I was in uniform. Walking from home to scout meetings and back, once a month in Church for church parade, going shopping when on camp, anywhere I had to wear uniform. And yes, it did get used for the splits.
Simpler times in those days

 

[Gant]

thats interesting.....maybe there was several versions of the game.

For us you threw the knife to stick in the ground further away from one of the opponents feet...... then they had to reach the knife with one of their feet keeping the other foot on the ground. You' lost ' when you couldn't reach the knife with one of your feet
Thats why it was called the splits

That’s the version we played, but where I grew up in the East Riding of Yorkshire we called it ‘knackerstretch’!

 

[GuitardoctorW7]

I've used a Leatherman Wave multi-tool for 30+ years as it's always been useful for the day job. They can be a pain in the Rs to use (i.e. screw drivers) but have gotten me out of a hole many times.
One thing that impresses me most with them is the guarantee, It's 25 years. The spring on my scissors broke and I wrote to the UK distributors asking if I could get a new spring. They told me to send the tool back. I explained I didn't have the original receipt (who does after so long?) they were non-plussed. I got a brand new tool return of post. Several of my colleagues have had similar service.

 

[Jonm]

Agree there needs to be laws but the absolute nature of the knife laws are a bit OTT. The majority of knife crime is committed with Kitchen knives. I was on the jury for a murder a few years ago and the murder weapon was a kitchen knife. In the press you often see the big Rambo knives or zombie killer blades, still available on the web, shown when knife crime is discussed but they are not the big problem and easily dealt with by the law as there is no possible excuse for carrying such garbage.
The problem is we have a lowest common denominator legislation policy in this country which restrict law abiding people based on the actions of a lawless minority. Because some use a Stanley knife as a weapon a carpenter has to show good cause for the one he left in his pocket after a job. I get the argument that the carpenter could have taken the knife deliberately to use as a weapon but that is based on the premise that all carpenters are potentially going to use a knife for crime. Same for chefs, electricians and people out for a walk in the country expecting to stop for a picnic.

There are people in public places, carrying knives with the intent of using them as offensive weapons. I think most people would agree that the Law has to be able to prosecute these people before they actually use the knife as an offensive weapon.
There appears to be three legal categories with regards to carrying a knife which I have simplified as follows
1. knives which are illegal to carry such as flick knives, Rambo knives etc.
2. knives which are legal to carry which comprise a folding penknife with blade less than 3 inches long.
3. knives where the onus is on the carrier to demonstrate that they have a justifiable reason for carrying them. These include kitchen knives, lock knives, stanley type knives etc.

Lots of complaints on here about the illegality of lock knives in that they are safer to use than a folding penknife but it is the folding aspect which makes them unsuitable as an offensive weapon. A judge apparently concluded that there is no discernible difference between a lock knife and a fixed blade knife in terms of offensive capability, and that seems correct to me.

I cannot see how the law could be changed without removing the ability of the police to arrest thugs, gang members etc carrying knives with clear offensive capabilities. Apparently a second offence carries a mandatory prison sentence.

It is another example of us having to modify our way of life because of the criminal fraternity. We do this all the time.

 

[ALB]

I have a Leatherman Wave which is useful but not carryable every day due to locking blades, thus I only carry it when I am going to do something which specifically requires it.

I have a few pocket knives which I rotate, mostly Spydercos: a UKPK, a Kiwi 3, a Pingo (love this thing, just wish it was a touch bigger), and a PITS MK1 - spectacular but a bit more likely to provoke an irrational reaction from others. I also have a useful Boker Plus, and a lovely Fox Dragotac friction folder which is unfortunately a bit too stabby to carry regularly.

 

[paulrbarnard]

I have a Leatherman Wave which is useful but not carryable every day due to locking blades, thus I only carry it when I am going to do something which specifically requires it.

I have a few pocket knives which I rotate, mostly Spydercos: a UKPK, a Kiwi 3, a Pingo (love this thing, just wish it was a touch bigger), and a PITS MK1 - spectacular but a bit more likely to provoke an irrational reaction from others. I also have a useful Boker Plus, and a lovely Fox Dragotac friction folder which is unfortunately a bit too stabby to carry regularly.

Wow you got a PITS Mk1. That is a very rare blade. I followed Mike going through the design and refinement process on BBF. I think the first ‘production’ run was the MK3 so you have something built as a one or two off. What blade material did you get? The blade material was one of the changes on the MK3 I think. The PITS has got to be one of the cleverest folders I’ve seen.

 

[hairy]

Quoting the Govt link posted above it would seem a button is required for their lock knife definition. Not a rotating collar for instance.
I bought a kids scout knife in a German supermarket a couple of years ago with a round end and maybe a 60mm blade, fixed blade made for small hands. I also remember Scandi supermarkets having the typical Mora type things on the bottom shelves open to all. Slightly more relaxed.

"Lock knives

Lock knives are not classed as folding knives and are illegal to carry in public without good reason.


Lock knives:

• have blades that can be locked and refolded only by pressing a button
• can include multi-tool knives - tools that also contain other devices such as a screwdriver or can opener"

 

[Jonm]

Quoting the Govt link posted above it would seem a button is required for their lock knife definition. Not a rotating collar for instance.

I think that definition is a simplification of a legally complicated issue with case law. Here is an appeal court decision.

http://www.bailii.org/cgi-bin/markup.cgi?doc=/ew/cases/EWCA/Crim/1998/385.html
Towards the bottom it is agreeing with the lower court decision defining a folding knife
However, it seems to us that "folding" in its ordinary meaning, means "foldable" at all times without the intervention of some further process, namely the pressing of a button or release of a catch,

So a knife with a rotating locking collar is not a folding knife.

It also specifically mentions Stanley knives as follows
In moving the amendment Mr John Patten, The Minister of State at the Home Office, explained the Government thinking saying:
"When the Bill was printed for the other place, we arrived at the original formulation of the clause mindful of the important and pressing need to ensure that Stanley knives and other knives with sliding blades which can lock open and do terrible damage, should not benefit from the exemption

So the intention of the legislation was that “stanley” type knives would not be exempt.

 

[JohnPW]

Quoting the Govt link posted above it would seem a button is required for their lock knife definition. Not a rotating collar for instance.
I bought a kids scout knife in a German supermarket a couple of years ago with a round end and maybe a 60mm blade, fixed blade made for small hands. I also remember Scandi supermarkets having the typical Mora type things on the bottom shelves open to all. Slightly more relaxed.

"Lock knives

Lock knives are not classed as folding knives and are illegal to carry in public without good reason.


Lock knives:

• have blades that can be locked and refolded only by pressing a button
• can include multi-tool knives - tools that also contain other devices such as a screwdriver or can opener"

Perhaps if they put a comma in the sentence, it might make it less ambiguous ie:

"Lock knives:
have blades that can be locked, and refolded only by pressing a button."

and changed it to something like "Lock knives have blades that can be locked, and refolded only by pressing or activating a button, lever, collar or similar device."

 

[hairy]

I think that definition is a simplification of a legally complicated issue with case law. Here is an appeal court decision.

http://www.bailii.org/cgi-bin/markup.cgi?doc=/ew/cases/EWCA/Crim/1998/385.html
Towards the bottom it is agreeing with the lower court decision defining a folding knife
However, it seems to us that "folding" in its ordinary meaning, means "foldable" at all times without the intervention of some further process, namely the pressing of a button or release of a catch,

So a knife with a rotating locking collar is not a folding knife.

It also specifically mentions Stanley knives as follows
In moving the amendment Mr John Patten, The Minister of State at the Home Office, explained the Government thinking saying:
"When the Bill was printed for the other place, we arrived at the original formulation of the clause mindful of the important and pressing need to ensure that Stanley knives and other knives with sliding blades which can lock open and do terrible damage, should not benefit from the exemption

So the intention of the legislation was that “stanley” type knives would not be exempt.

Your link is interesting in discussing the difficulty in making the likes of a Stanley requiring good reason to carry and a locking folder under 3" not.
Quote;

In moving the amendment Mr John Patten, The Minister of State at the Home Office, explained the Government thinking saying:

"When the Bill was printed for the other place, we arrived at the original formulation of the clause mindful of the important and pressing need to ensure that Stanley knives and other knives with sliding blades which can lock open and do terrible damage, should not benefit from the exemption. We do not believe that someone should be allowed to produce from his pocket a sharp bladed instrument of 3 in or less, which has a flick effect or a gravity effect or slides out and can then be locked into place. .... In our discussions with the manufacturers with whom we have consulted widely in the interests of industry and employment in Sheffield, it emerged that we could catch those vicious sliding knives, while at the same time exempting ordinary pocket knives that lock into the open position, which is what the amendment seeks to do.

Folding, locking pocket knives, which I am advised that many people carry because they are safer to use than the non-locking variety, will be excepted from the general offence, which is right, but the exception will apply only to folding pocket knives with a sharpened blade of 3 in or less. ..... We wish to keep within the law those people who carry ordinary pocket knives. When an officer finds a person in possession of a pocket knife in a public place he has only to check the length of the blade and ensure that the knife folds. If the knife does not fulfil those criteria, the possessor will have to show a good reason for having the knife with him."

When the matter came before the House of Lords, Earl Ferrers explained the amendment. He said that the amendments then being discussed were the result of discussions with knife manufacturers in Sheffield. Then he said:

"They thought that it would be helpful to put on the face of the Bill a clearer definition of the maximum permitted length of a pocketknife. More importantly, they pointed out that locking pocketknives are now widely sold and used because they are safer for some purposes than non-locking knives. There is less risk of the blade closing accidentally on the user's fingers. So we concluded that we should not exclude small pocketknives from the exemption just because they had locking blades. What we want to exclude is knives with sliding blades. The amendments achieve that by limiting the exemption to small pocketknives with folding blades."

What is apparent from the debating of the amendments being considered between November 1987 and July 1988 is that
(1) at one stage it was intended that the sections should be made expressly to apply to a pocketknife whose blade (however long) when opened locked automatically or could be locked manually;
(2) there was then a decision not to make it so expressly apply and it was contemplated that the word pocketknife would exclude from the section "locking pocketknives"; and
(3) finally that the word "folding" was introduced in order to ensure that someone should not be allowed to produce from his pocket a sharp bladed instrument of three inches or less which has "a flick effect or a gravity effect or slides out and can then be locked into place."

 

[hairy]

I'm not disagreeing with the general view that anything that locks in any way is generally viewed as illegal in the UK, even if a good reason makes it ok. And that most Opinels lock so most think it illegal even if under the max length. Jonm's link would suggest to me an Opinel with a locking ring is within what the law was looking to permit, so is there further interpretation which changes that discussed in the link? Certainly, the Govt simple advice of "button" agrees with the thrust of that link, but not with what buying a UK knife from the likes of Hennie requires to be generally legal.

 

[Jonm]

Your link is interesting in discussing the difficulty in making the likes of a Stanley requiring good reason to carry and a locking folder under 3" not.
Quote;

In moving the amendment Mr John Patten, The Minister of State at the Home Office, explained the Government thinking saying:

"When the Bill was printed for the other place, we arrived at the original formulation of the clause mindful of the important and pressing need to ensure that Stanley knives and other knives with sliding blades which can lock open and do terrible damage, should not benefit from the exemption. We do not believe that someone should be allowed to produce from his pocket a sharp bladed instrument of 3 in or less, which has a flick effect or a gravity effect or slides out and can then be locked into place. .... In our discussions with the manufacturers with whom we have consulted widely in the interests of industry and employment in Sheffield, it emerged that we could catch those vicious sliding knives, while at the same time exempting ordinary pocket knives that lock into the open position, which is what the amendment seeks to do.

Folding, locking pocket knives, which I am advised that many people carry because they are safer to use than the non-locking variety, will be excepted from the general offence, which is right, but the exception will apply only to folding pocket knives with a sharpened blade of 3 in or less. ..... We wish to keep within the law those people who carry ordinary pocket knives. When an officer finds a person in possession of a pocket knife in a public place he has only to check the length of the blade and ensure that the knife folds. If the knife does not fulfil those criteria, the possessor will have to show a good reason for having the knife with him."

When the matter came before the House of Lords, Earl Ferrers explained the amendment. He said that the amendments then being discussed were the result of discussions with knife manufacturers in Sheffield. Then he said:

"They thought that it would be helpful to put on the face of the Bill a clearer definition of the maximum permitted length of a pocketknife. More importantly, they pointed out that locking pocketknives are now widely sold and used because they are safer for some purposes than non-locking knives. There is less risk of the blade closing accidentally on the user's fingers. So we concluded that we should not exclude small pocketknives from the exemption just because they had locking blades. What we want to exclude is knives with sliding blades. The amendments achieve that by limiting the exemption to small pocketknives with folding blades."

What is apparent from the debating of the amendments being considered between November 1987 and July 1988 is that
(1) at one stage it was intended that the sections should be made expressly to apply to a pocketknife whose blade (however long) when opened locked automatically or could be locked manually;
(2) there was then a decision not to make it so expressly apply and it was contemplated that the word pocketknife would exclude from the section "locking pocketknives"; and
(3) finally that the word "folding" was introduced in order to ensure that someone should not be allowed to produce from his pocket a sharp bladed instrument of three inches or less which has "a flick effect or a gravity effect or slides out and can then be locked into place."

This sure is complicated. My post and yours relates to late 1980’s and a lot can have happened since then.

Here is some CPS guidance dated September 2020 and it seems clear to me

https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/offensive-weapons-knife-crime-practical-guidance
Elements of the offences
An article which is bladed or sharply pointed
The article does not have to be sharp: a butter knife, with no cutting edge and no point, is a bladed article. The only exception to the bladed or sharply pointed provision is a folding pocketknife, and only if the blade does not exceed 3 inches. Typically this would catch Swiss army-style knives. “Folding pocketknife” means immediately foldable, simply by pressing it into place. If any further action is required, such as pressing a button or releasing a catch (as is the case with a lock knife), the knife is not a folding pocketknife. All other bladed articles which are plainly not foldable pocketknives, for instance kitchen knives or a foldable cut- throat razor, are caught by this legislation irrespective of length. A folding pocket knife less than 3 inches will be an offensive weapon if carried with the requisite intent. Similarly, a screwdriver is not a bladed article but could be an offensive weapon.

Seems to me that the advice the CPS is following is that any form of lock on the blade and it is not exempt from the legislation. Also seems unlikely to me that CPS guidance is not following the current law. What “reasons” are justifiable for carrying a non exempt knife is another matter.

 

[Trainee neophyte]

There comes a point when you have to say, "I didn't vote for that", and just ignore the nonsense from privileged idiots who have never actually worked for a living. If you need a knife, carry the knife you need. Some plod with a terminal lack of a sense of humour would have to either search you or catch you using said knife. If you are using the knife you obviously needed it - hence carrying the thing in the first place. Being frisked is probably not a common occurrence for the majority of the readership here, so man up and ignore the nonsense spouted by government.

If you stab someone with locking knife, there may be repurcussions. Being in possession of a banned knife might be the least of your problems. Actions have consequences and all that.

 

[JohnPW]

It's actually legal to carry a locking blade/fixed blade knife or a large folding knife in public if there's a good reason.

A good reason includes for work, taking it home after buying it from a shop etc.

Carrying it around just in case you might need to use it is not a good reason.

 

[Jonm]

Your link is interesting in discussing the difficulty in making the likes of a Stanley requiring good reason to carry and a locking folder under 3" not.
Quote;

In moving the amendment Mr John Patten, The Minister of State at the Home Office, explained the Government thinking saying:

"When the Bill was printed for the other place, we arrived at the original formulation of the clause mindful of the important and pressing need to ensure that Stanley knives and other knives with sliding blades which can lock open and do terrible damage, should not benefit from the exemption. We do not believe that someone should be allowed to produce from his pocket a sharp bladed instrument of 3 in or less, which has a flick effect or a gravity effect or slides out and can then be locked into place. .... In our discussions with the manufacturers with whom we have consulted widely in the interests of industry and employment in Sheffield, it emerged that we could catch those vicious sliding knives, while at the same time exempting ordinary pocket knives that lock into the open position, which is what the amendment seeks to do.

Folding, locking pocket knives, which I am advised that many people carry because they are safer to use than the non-locking variety, will be excepted from the general offence, which is right, but the exception will apply only to folding pocket knives with a sharpened blade of 3 in or less. ..... We wish to keep within the law those people who carry ordinary pocket knives. When an officer finds a person in possession of a pocket knife in a public place he has only to check the length of the blade and ensure that the knife folds. If the knife does not fulfil those criteria, the possessor will have to show a good reason for having the knife with him."

When the matter came before the House of Lords, Earl Ferrers explained the amendment. He said that the amendments then being discussed were the result of discussions with knife manufacturers in Sheffield. Then he said:

"They thought that it would be helpful to put on the face of the Bill a clearer definition of the maximum permitted length of a pocketknife. More importantly, they pointed out that locking pocketknives are now widely sold and used because they are safer for some purposes than non-locking knives. There is less risk of the blade closing accidentally on the user's fingers. So we concluded that we should not exclude small pocketknives from the exemption just because they had locking blades. What we want to exclude is knives with sliding blades. The amendments achieve that by limiting the exemption to small pocketknives with folding blades."

What is apparent from the debating of the amendments being considered between November 1987 and July 1988 is that
(1) at one stage it was intended that the sections should be made expressly to apply to a pocketknife whose blade (however long) when opened locked automatically or could be locked manually;
(2) there was then a decision not to make it so expressly apply and it was contemplated that the word pocketknife would exclude from the section "locking pocketknives"; and
(3) finally that the word "folding" was introduced in order to ensure that someone should not be allowed to produce from his pocket a sharp bladed instrument of three inches or less which has "a flick effect or a gravity effect or slides out and can then be locked into place."

All very true but at the end it gives the judgement which I have edited and tried to pick out the important bits. It says

Although in one sense the statements made by Mr Patten and Earl Ferrers were clear, in that they undoubtedly thought that they were excluding from the section not just pocketknives that fitted the Divisional Court's interpretation of "folding", but some which "locked" when the blades were open,................ . It would no longer be interpreting the intention of Parliament, it would be writing the legislation it thought was reasonable. .............

we do not think that it is legitimate to take into account the statements of Mr Patten or Earl Ferrers. ............... However, it seems to us that "folding" in its ordinary meaning, means "foldable" at all times without the intervention of some further process, namely the pressing of a button or release of a catch, and that if any form of "lock knives" are to be brought outside the legislation, that will need clearer definition.............. Application for leave to appeal to the House of Lords refused,

In other words, the intention of the legislation was to allow some types of lock knife but that is not how it is written. The role of the courts is to interpret the legislation as it is written, not to rewrite the legislation. The ruling is that any form or lock means the knife is not exempt. Cannot be taken to H of L so legislation required to change this.

 

[artie]

I'm just wondering is this a bit like theorising about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.
Is it a problem for the vast majority of the population.
I carried a lock knife in my pocket for ten years or so. No problem
I broke it using it as a lever and SWMBO bought me a legal replacement. I don't expect anyone will ever question the legality of it.

They will tell you that you have the right to remain silent. Why not just do that and let them prove you don't have a good reason?.

 

[JBaz]

Coming back to the original post, my "Swiss Army Penknife" is in my desk drawer and is the first thing into the suitcase when I go away (must go in the aircraft hold, though). Invaluable thing.

It may be a bit crude for brain surgery, but open-heart stuff - no problem. Everything else is a doddle.

I did have a "Leatherman" which was good for some things, but if I had to choose one, the old Victorinox wins hands down.

I'll just check which model it is ......damn, where's it gone.

 

[Jonm]

They will tell you that you have the right to remain silent. Why not just do that and let them prove you don't have a good reason?

It’s in that CPS document “If the prosecution has established that an offensive weapon or bladed article was carried in a public place, then the onus shifts to the defendant to prove that lawful authority, reasonable excuse or good reason existed.”