Friday, 25 July 2008

'Anti-Knife Activist In Pointless Publicity Seeking Comment' Shock!

So, we have judges (well, at least one ..) with some common sense after all:
During the case, the 16-year-old accused of stabbing two youths at a party in Watlington, Oxon, admitted using a knife and claimed he only needed one hand to open it.

The judge replied that he had his own blade which needed both hands to open it, and then pulled it out of his pocket to the surprise of jurors and the bar.

He said: “It just so happens I have a folding pocket knife in my pocket. You need two hands to open it don’t you?”

When questioned by a lawyer, Judge Connor said it was perfectly legal for him to carry the knife in public because of its size.
A bit worrying the lawyer didn’t know the law… Still, good on the judge!

But of course, some people feel a need to get their name in the paper whenever the magic word is used, and the newspapers weren’t slow in finding someone brainless enough to make herself look an idiot by opening mouth before engaging brain:
Although the judge was within his rights to carry the pocket knife, Lyn Costello, the co-founder of Mothers Against Murder and Aggression, said: “We need to get tough on knives in this country and our judges should be handing out tough sentences — not brandishing their own.”
So, there you have it. It isn’t against the law, it was used for a perfectly reasonable purpose (that of increasing the chances of convicting a knife wielding thug), yet still this daft bat ignores all the facts and squawks ‘Knife! Knife!’ like a hysterical monkey spotting a prowling leopard.

Could you get a more perfect picture of the modern UK than that…?

9 comments:

teacher.paris said...

"The right of self-defense is the first law of nature; ... when the right of the people to keep and bear arms is, under any color or pretext whatsoever, prohibited, liberty, if not already annihilated, is on the brink of destruction." - Henry St. George Tucker, Blackstone's "Commentaries on the Laws of England (1768)

John East said...

It's not just the shrill cries of "Knife, knife". We have a growing list of shrill cries against inanimate objects, the mere posession of which constitute a guilt in the eyes of some.

"Car,car" "Big Mac, big mac" and "Cigarette, cigarette" are three others that spring to mind.

JuliaM said...

Oh, yes. People laugh at the US slogan 'Guns don't kill people. People kill people', but in what was is that not perfectly true...?

John M Ward said...

Guns don't kill people by themselves, but what is the purpose of owning something is designed for only one purpose -- that of causing harm?

I am aware of clay pigeons, but that is the only exception of which I am aware. I simply wouldn't have a gun (or knife, apart from those in my kitchen) as a matter of personal principle. I am not setting out to cause harm

qsxzh said...

@john m ward

not even against people who want to cause you serious harm???
do you have a death wish ... *suicide-by-scrotey-scumbag* ?

just what exactly leads one to a position where you would wish to disadvantage yourself so completely in a survival scenario?

JuliaM said...

"...what is the purpose of owning something is designed for only one purpose -- that of causing harm?"

Because in the right circumstances, it is legal to 'cause harm' to some other creature - hunting and self defence.

teacher.paris said...

http://www.videosift.com/video/Denny-Crane-for-President

JuliaM said...

Lol! I'd vote for him, if I could... :)

John M Ward said...

For those who seem to be concerned for my safety...

I frequently go into Labour wards of the type that are not entirely dissimilar to the worse parts of (say) Glasgow East, yet I never have any trouble.

I leave it as an exercise for the reader to try to figure out why this is...