Knife attacks increase in Britain

[Randall Pleasant]

Scholars

One must be careful of what a statistic is actually showing or indicating. For instance, the average age of death is not an indicator of when adults are dying, rather it is an indicator of child mortality (an average age of 30 years means lots of kids are dying, pulling down the average). Likewise, an increase or decrease in a type of crime (or other social phenomenon) may actually be nothing more than an indicator of population changes. And as one person has already suggested, the increase in knife attackes in the UK may be nothing more than better reporting.

By the way, why are doctors against knifes? Itsn't the injuries good for business? Just joking.

[Jeremy Martin]

Don't most deaths from violent crime occur from getting pummeled with fists and feet anyway? Thought I recalled that.

[ElizabethPangerl]

Public awareness of edged weapon attacks may be increased because of the internet as well as the existing news agencies catering to the public's fascination with violence and terror. All the more reason to learn to properly handle them though we may not carry them. One of the masters had it right when he said "Innocence is no defence against murderous intents." I can't remember if it was Hale or Silver.

Personally, I am not surprised that there are a lot of edged weapon attacks. In my crime lab, I inherited a box of confiscated weapons with which to do my study of fabric damage. The box contained numerous hunting knives, folding tactical knives, butterfly knives, boot knives, switchblades, an automatic stiletto, a sword cane, an axe, even a homemade poniard. Except for the cane (which had to be pried open), they all had signs of wear or use, and all of this is just from Minnesota. So much for "Minnesota nice."

[s_taillebois]

M. Pangerl,
Quite right in your observation that technological media has a aspect increasing perceptions of these events. The mere fact we are discussing about such, on a historical weapons/arts forum demonstrates that effect.
The British, interesting they're discussing restrictions which even under the old kings, they did not apply. But we here in the US, shouldn't get too lofty about it all. Here, our restrictions would be almost a postmodern version of the old sedition laws. Either way, in some terms, our 'betters' seem to be willing to apply restrictions because of a barely disguised social paternalism.
Of course the whole proposal is pragmatically impossible to enforce.
That's clear from the prisons and other lockups, a very controlled population, who still make weaponry.
From a view of the arts this forum studies, it would seem one of the better compensations for the problem, would be a return to the staff tradition. Knifes, shanks, by nature, being a immediate proximity weapon, obviously a staff/shellieleh could be useful. But, likely then, there'd be a proposal to stop anyone from carrying a stick, cane, branch or etc.

[JeanryChandler]

But, likely then, there'd be a proposal to stop anyone from carrying a stick, cane, branch or etc.

When I was a kid growing up in New Orleans we used to hide them in the drains and gutters and retrieve them as needed...

JR

[s_taillebois]

But, likely then, there'd be a proposal to stop anyone from carrying a stick, cane, branch or etc.

When I was a kid growing up in New Orleans we used to hide them in the drains and gutters and retrieve them as needed...

JR

That certainly sounds familiar...

Interesting though, the Brit's proposals, and some here in the US, go very much against older traditions. When a hue and cry was raised in old medieval towns, the expectation was that those who were permitted access to weapons, had to have them ready at hand. To not do so, or to evade action or intervention out of fear,was considered a social abrogation. And since the hue and cry was at unexpected times, normal access to some form of weaponry was necessary. And as such, these were tolerated by the aristocracy, at least in England anyway...
In that regard, with the British proposal, and many here in the US, these laws would seem to be structured to prevent routine access to weaponry...even if there's no intention of use. Which implies a fear of preplanned events, either small or large...methinks the new aristocrats of today have learnt to distrust their lower orders...to an implied level even beyond that of the old aristocracy.

[Aaron Pynenberg]

- I have often wondered what would happen if some politician tried to pass legislature which mandated that all people carry weapons and recieve training in thier use--that would make for some interesting political debates, no?- AP

[JeanryChandler]

- I have often wondered what would happen if some politician tried to pass legislature which mandated that all people carry weapons and recieve training in thier use--that would make for some interesting political debates, no?- AP

They did that in some town in Georgia and allegedly crime went way down...

JR

[Eric Dohner]

Have you a link, Jeanry? That's really fascinating.

[JeanryChandler]

Have you a link, Jeanry? That's really fascinating.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kennesaw,_Georgia

JR

[s_taillebois]

Interesting Kennesaw came up, as it's probably the closest contemporary situation to the common weapons and raising the town as mentioned earlier. Main difference is that Kennesaw is a responsive obligation rather than an active one.
Although the Gothic/Renn/Baroque did have some substantial problems with the armed commons, especially when they went arye or amuck (ie pograms), these did keep a cap on certain types of chaos. And these town defensive commons were often a type of counterbalance to the local agents of the crown. Cooperation and obstruction within the same context.
Essentially what these often were, was a kind of merchantile self protection organization (Captain Cox's outfit being an example)
Also interesting that there seems to be a growth in martial traditions out of that period and culture (ARMA and such).
However, weapons without social obligation or discpline, however are likely to cause as many problems as resolve them. And it seems the government may not the best medium to provide that obligation or discipline.
Weirdly enough, going back to the historical context, many of the fechtbuchs, although approved of or dedicated to a reigning Queen or etc, were often intended to be used by those outside of that particular locus of power.

[Jay Vail]

Knifes, shanks, by nature, being a immediate proximity weapon, obviously a staff/shellieleh could be useful. But, likely then, there'd be a proposal to stop anyone from carrying a stick, cane, branch or etc.

I'm currently studying all the aggravated assaults in my town from 2005 with a view toward an article on knife attacks. One thing I have noticed that one of the more popular weapons is the aluminum baseball bat. If this was Britain, no doubt the eminent ministers would be discussing banning baseball bats or baseball, or requiring a license for possession of a bat.

It's interesting that you mentioned shank making in prison. I've worked closely with our state prison system and at the main state prison they have this eye-popping collection of improvised stabbing weapons confiscated from inmates. They make the most amazing stuff out of materials that you would never suspect would make a useful weapon from knives to spears and even cross bows.

[Jake_Norwood]

I recall that in Poland in 1999 we had a baseball bat (a small one) that we would use to play baseball with all the neighborhood kids. One day a cop came rolling by and one of the kids ran up, grabbed the bat, and hid it. "Those are illegal here, you know. Gotta have a liscence." Wow...

Three minutes later, of course, it was "Game on!"

Jake

[s_taillebois]

M. Vail,
Yes the amount of improvisation that the incarcerated gentry can apply to making those weapons is unreal. And it's one of the reasons it's actually safer on the outside, than it is working within one of those places. One of the little secrets of our system is the lockup staff have a higher mortality rate than the patrol contingent.

On a historical level, probably many of the weapons used by the lower freeholders, may not have been a whole lot more refined than what the gentry in the state hotels make today. Probably even a billet of steel, would have been difficult for them to obtain. Likely, mainly made of iron, if any steel at all, probably only at the tip. But they did have them, the lower orders used knifes as tontines as did the aristocrats. Just less evidence survives, because the aristocrats also had written records backing these tontines (I'd wonder if the tradition of wedding silver somehow relates back to that older equating of knife with pact)
Does show how it isn't necessary to have that much equipment to make a functional edged weapon, provided a certain amount of the alloy/somewhat refined metal is available.
So perhaps the people in England making this proposal, are assuming their populace has access to less technology than a unruly freeholder in the 12th century?

[Randall Pleasant]

One thing I have noticed that one of the more popular weapons is the aluminum baseball bat. If this was Britain, no doubt the eminent ministers would be discussing banning baseball bats or baseball, or requiring a license for possession of a bat.

Jay

When I lived in Washington, DC, back in the early 1990s the city had an issue with a lawyer who started carrying a bat on the subway after he was robbed outside of one of the stations by a couple of kids with knifes. So he hung a baseball glove on the end of the bat and the issue went away. Strange how the police will stop a man with a baseball bat but pay no attention to a man with a bat and a glove.