Young British men view knife carrying as a 'legitimate response' to potential threats

Where guns are not allowed, of course less effective weapons are chosen for personal protection.

Note the same tired (and incorrect) arguments are used to control knife ownership and usage as are used to control gun ownership and use.

Knife carying is completely legitimate. Just think of MacGyver.

Where guns are not allowed, of course less effective weapons are chosen for personal protection.

By one particular subset of society - and one that regards a prison sentence as a 'trivial' consequence. Were the same questions asked of a broad cross-section of society, the answer would have been very different.

I personally don't know anyone who would think carrying a knife - or indeed any deadly weapon - a 'normal' thing to do. Nor do I know any gun owners.

Note that the study is of Britain, not America. Different societal attitudes towards weapons constitute the norm. Other western countries don't seem to have the same relationship with the gun as America has.

Note the same tired (and incorrect) arguments are used to control knife ownership and usage as are used to control gun ownership and use.

I always thought it is the law that controls ownership and usage.
But I agree that young men who carry knives are deserving of any violence they experience.

Tepid punishment for violent criminals is the root of the problem. Defending yourself with a knife or gun or cricket bat is the recourse. The politicians and judges go home at night to their gated communities "I'm All Right Jack" and are oblivious to the carnage.

But I agree that young men who carry knives are deserving of any violence they experience.

What? Why the hell? Carrying a knife or other weapon for personal protection is a wise thing to do in bad neighbourhoods. Whats bad about that?

MA law does not allow open carry of a pistol for civilians. One can obtain a permit to carry a concealed firearm.
The 'rationale' I heard was a civilian carrying a sidearm in was considered a belligerent act.

Some people who like to wear cowboy boots with pointed toes like to put metal caps on the toes. Norway bans those. I have also been told that if one has martial arts training an you injure someone defending yourself, you can be prosecuted for assault with deadly weapon.
I guess most states want their 'citizens' to be helpless sheep.

"I personally don't know anyone who would think carrying a knife - or indeed any deadly weapon - a 'normal' thing to do. Nor do I know any gun owners.

Note that the study is of Britain, .."

I am British and, for my sins, I worked with adolescents, offenders and those in care. Sadly most of them had lived on sprawling estates with no facilities where crime and particularly menaces to keep quiet about crimes were rife. None of those kids carried knives but I can understand (not agree with) the mindset that sees the police as uninterested in protecting them. That was exactly what I saw. Carrying a knife is no protection really against a reprisal gang - all it does is boost confidence to try to live a normal social life - until the bluff is called.

Good people ought to be armed as they will, with wits and Guns and the Truth. Gun control is about control and not guns - or knives.

I think the perception of Danger and the Perception of security are the real issues here.

If some one feels that contravening the law is the only way to be secure then obviously the law is failing these individuals, other wise; why would they feel a need to carry a weapon for defense?

This article reads like some secret Orwellian social engineering project. The disturbing thing is that they didn't even feel the need to make it a secret.

"Utilize propaganda to associate self reliance with immaturity and deviance."
That's some scary shit.

...why would they feel a need to carry a weapon for defense?

Like any other tool, it's better to have it and not need it than to need it and not have it.

Good people ought to be armed as they will, with wits and Guns and the Truth.

I have a very useful Gerber folding pliers with a scissors, and a knife, screw driver, can opener, etc.
Anyone ever watch Grosse Point Blank? A ball point pen is used as a deadly weapon.
The edge of a credit card makes a nice cutting edge.

I think it's valid for a reasonable person to have some form of protection if they believe they need it.

However, the idea behind this article is to make it seem uncool to have a knife among the group that is most likely to be irresponsible. I think that is pretty clever. I would seriously doubt that it would have much impact on those who use a knife as a tool instead of a weapon. This article is not about taking away anyone's freedoms, it's about ways of reducing risk to society as a whole. I also think that violent crime should be punished more severely.

and I would like to point out that some forms of mace are in fact legal in the UK, and they happen to be a more effective defensive weapon than a knife...

preventing knife injuries "must involve promoting recognition of the low controllability and unpredictability of knives

I have never had a knife jump up and cut me. A knife is quite predictable. What is really dangerous are dull knives.

Comedian George Lopez talks about the differences between a mother and father. A father will tell his child 'don't touch that, it's hot.' The child asks, 'what is hot?', father: 'touch it'.

However, the idea behind this article is to make it seem uncool to have a knife among the group that is most likely to be irresponsible. I think that is pretty clever.

The criminals who carry knives to mug people won't care. This feels like a subversive attack on the people who carry knives to protect themselves from the criminals.

Mace is probably superior, this article is no help in knowing how many people use it.

However, the idea behind this article is to make it seem uncool to have a knife among the group that is most likely to be irresponsible. I think that is pretty clever.

The criminals who carry knives to mug people won't care. This feels like a subversive attack on the people who carry knives to protect themselves from the criminals.

Mace is probably superior, this article is no help in knowing how many people use it.

Yeah, you're probably right. I still think it would reduce major injuries associated with escalated fights from young guys, which is probably significant, but it won't do anything for crimes where there is criminal intent in advance of the crime.

A question to ask is how many assaults , muggings, violent crimes etc are done in the UK? The authorities are more than willing to install cameras to "protect" people. When you are being attacked police are just minutes away.

[q/]. When you are being attacked police are just minutes away.

If only that were true...
but sadly that is not the case in some areas.

To demand citizens give up the right of self-defence, endowed by their creator, for the alleged good and safety of society is fascist and immoral, therefore, the British government is immoral.

Rather than go down the line of the discussion of what weapons are or are not accetable for use against potential threats, why isn't the topic of conversation more about why these people feel the need in the first place?

Good question. Weapons are 'force multipliers'. They give those who feel powerless a feeling of power.

The world over we are giving the young generation the feeling that they cannot changethe system, have no chance to advance beyond mind numbing wage-slavery and will never be respected for anything they do (while those who do nothing but smile into a camera have it all their way).

It seems only natural that they wish to carve out a niche in which they are 'most powerful' - confusing that with 'most respected' and not seeing that it is the weapon people respect dismissing the one holding the weapon as an imbecile.

To demand citizens give up the right of self-defence, endowed by their creator, for the alleged good and safety of society is fascist and immoral, therefore, the British government is immoral.

Your point would be more appropriate if the article said anything about 'demanding'. No...it didn't even suggest taking away any rights. It only suggested that we try to persuade a group at risk for creating crime and injury to not carry around knives everywhere. One star for you for misplaced political pandering.

I will agree with some of the other statements tho, that bring some question into this about their protection - what are the chances of someone getting attacked from a criminal rather than a fight out of control. There are definitely other angles that need to be explored to fill out the whole picture.