Oddly enough, it is the left-wingers in New York who overturned an absurd ban on so-called gravity knives that had been used to capriciously punish innocent people who dared own and carry convenient cutlery.
Under the old law, the knife pictured above would be considered an illegal gravity knife if a cop could flip the blade open with the momentum of flicking his wrist, and thus could charge any one with such a knife as a criminal regardless of intent or evidence. That was naturally used especially against minority communities, and it was this racist enforcement trend, not the inherent absurdity of the law itself, that persuaded the courts and legislature to overturn the old law. Of course, switchblades (and probably butterfly knives) remain illegal, because it isn't really about liberty when laws are overturned, just maintaining the illusion of political legitimacy.
This leads to my main topic for today's post: Legality versus morality. I have written on this before. Slavery was once legal across most of the Americas and Europe, and the antebellum Underground Railroad was an illegal criminal conspiracy to deprive people of their lawful property. Remember that whenever anyone appeals to legality as if it were a rational argument. Let's take a look at some things I own, do, or believe that are illegal somewhere today.
I carry an assisted-opening knife with a flipper design. It is incredibly handy when I am holding something that needs cut, pried apart, or otherwise poked at in one hand, and thus only have one hand to reach for and open a knife, but this is still illegal in parts of the USA.
I own firearm magazines that are definitely illegal in parts of the USA due to their capacity. The guns they feed may also have other illegal features that make them assault weapons, even though that term is meaningless outside of arbitrary legislative dictates. An assault rifle or machine gun has a specific definition based on mechanical operation, not cosmetics. Of course, those shouldn't be illegal either.
I adhere to religious beliefs that are condemned and persecuted in much of the world, and my political stances are generally hated where they are not outright illegal.
I own books that advocate ideas that have been outright outlawed in many countries. Banned Books Week at the library every September is also a reminder of the puritanical busybodies who want to control society here and now.
None of these objects or philosophies harm anyone. Legality is not morality. My question for my readers here is simple. What do you do every day that is illegal somewhere in the world? This isn't a request for self-incrimination, just self-reflection.
And I apologize for the excessive sarcastitalics.
That knife law is pretty stupid. when I was working as a mover in NYC I carried a similar knife, as just as u said, it's useful for cutting things like tape on boxes with just one hand. If someone wants to stab someone, then they can easily get a kitchen knife and conceal it. Makes little sense to worry about the tool used in a potential crime, but much more sense to work on prevention, by engaging with marginalized communities, educating, more visible policing, etc.
Plenty of stuff is illegal somewhere - drugs, sex, rock n roll, firearms, thoughts ...
Generally I advocate freedom to do whatever you want, as long as you're not bothering or endangering anyone else.
G
Agreed. Even a cheap kitchen knife is better for someone acting with ill intent than the most flamboyant folder, butterfly knife, or switchblade. But Hollywood tinges public perceptions, and the gullible majority clamor for laws in the name of sssssaaaaaafetyyyy regardless of reason and evidence.
I am usually aware of my "three felonies a day". And I can't bring myself to feel bad about them.
Only 3? Ya lazy bum! :)
Greetings @jacobtothe, sometimes there are other causes, but they do not say them, who knows what the reality is...
I am not sure what you mean. The existence of arbitrary legislation and arbitrary enforcement precludes the claims of serving a greater good or common interest or any other such excuse for political legitimacy.
The legal society seems to think that they can Author-Right.
Trap them in their own words. "Are you the man/woman who has been assigned to this case? Who has given you this delegation of authority, can you show me who gave that to you?"
Unfortunately, that only works if reason and honor have a place in government courts.