Knife Laws in IN

[Dragon Talon TSi AWD]

i thought you said it was legal?

No, its not legal to rob a bank. But a felony and a misdemeanor is 2 different things. A slap on the wrist for the misdemeanor or a slap on the ass (from Bubba in jail) you take your pick...

 

[cubby]

you continue to state that he has no other options from an auto knife, but why is a fixed blade not an option??? the only way a auto differs from a fixed is in the manor in which its deployed. push button vs. drawn from a sheath. both have to be HELD to be effective. and held firmly. a fixed blade would eliminate more than a few things for your friend: a) more safty to the user, b) speed of access, c) legal 100%, d) no button to hit during an attack, e) no lock to fail, f) more blade length in a package than a folder of same size open... the list goes on.

can he hold the folder hard enough to use it effectively? if not, then there ARE fixed blades on the market which don't require as firm a grip on the weapon. the DDC capsule dagger, a HAK, the LaGriffe. the hak and LG require some dexterity but the DDC not so much. a huge part of using a knife effectively (i am probly not telling you anything) is grip. if you try to stick someone and don't have a firm grip, you are probly going to hurt yourself. or lose your knife. or both.

is it a viable option?


and the point of the "legal to rob a bank v. auto knife" is both are illegal. not the LEVEL of the infraction. just the fact that you'll get just as arrested for either.

 

[CarmelHP]

I took these answers from a .gov website. They were confirmed by some legislators.

Well, hey, you're an expert then. Why did I bother going to law school?

 

[schwaky18]

Well, hey, you're an expert then. Why did I bother going to law school?

Are you currently in law school or were in law school?

 

[CarmelHP]

Are you currently in law school or were in law school?

Completed, a damn lawyer now.

 

[schwaky18]

Completed, a damn lawyer now.

Congrats on being a bottom feeding, bloodsucking, scum of the earth attorney.

I was just wondering cause I hope to be one soon. I am a 2.5L (had to add the .5) day student at IU-law Indy.

 

[RonPaulSupporter]

Possession of a knife on school property
Sec. 2.5. (a) As used in this section, "knife" means an instrument that:
(1) consists of a sharp edged or sharp pointed blade capable of inflicting cutting, stabbing, or tearing wounds; and
(2) is intended to be used as a weapon.

Anyone else find it strange there definition of a knife says it must be something "intended to be used as a weapon"? Could you not argue that a Swiss Army Knife, for example, isn't designed as a weapon and functions in a utility role and carry them in a school? In fact you could make that argument for nearly every knife, even a 9 inch fixed blade has a practical purpose not just for killing.

 

[Dragon Talon TSi AWD]

Well, hey, you're an expert then. Why did I bother going to law school?

Yeah, want a cookie? Don't mock my intelligence, I just can't pull up the statues like you can. But even then, you can't tell me you know every single one by heart either, unless you deal with this on a daily basis 24/7. Now I know who not to go to for legal advice, especially with that attitude.

 

[Dragon Talon TSi AWD]

you continue to state that he has no other options from an auto knife, but why is a fixed blade not an option??? the only way a auto differs from a fixed is in the manor in which its deployed. push button vs. drawn from a sheath. both have to be HELD to be effective. and held firmly. a fixed blade would eliminate more than a few things for your friend: a) more safty to the user, b) speed of access, c) legal 100%, d) no button to hit during an attack, e) no lock to fail, f) more blade length in a package than a folder of same size open... the list goes on.

can he hold the folder hard enough to use it effectively? if not, then there ARE fixed blades on the market which don't require as firm a grip on the weapon. the DDC capsule dagger, a HAK, the LaGriffe. the hak and LG require some dexterity but the DDC not so much. a huge part of using a knife effectively (i am probly not telling you anything) is grip. if you try to stick someone and don't have a firm grip, you are probly going to hurt yourself. or lose your knife. or both.

is it a viable option?


and the point of the "legal to rob a bank v. auto knife" is both are illegal. not the LEVEL of the infraction. just the fact that you'll get just as arrested for either.

I never asked him. And from the way his hands look, I don't think he'll be able to hold it properly either. The auto button he said for him is so easy to use. I'll ask him l8r on and see what he says. He probably looked into it already, and chose what he did.

 

[rhino]

Congrats on being a bottom feeding, bloodsucking, scum of the earth attorney.

I was just wondering cause I hope to be one soon. I am a 2.5L (had to add the .5) day student at IU-law Indy.

I think about going to law school frequently, but then I remember that I don't read very quickly. With the volume of reading you guys need to do just to keep up much less excel, I'd never make it. I pretty much need an Evelyn Wood Speed Reading Course just to get through the cereal box before breakfast is over.

And then there's the fact that my reputation is bad enough already. If I became a lawyer and the public learned of it . . . oy!

 

[Kirk Freeman]

The confusion is analogous to Kirk's First Law of the Internet: if it is the law in Texas, it is the law everywhere.

The exception for disabled persons is an exception in some Southern statutes. When Southern immigrants moved up here after WWII to seek employment, they brought with them their culture (this is what the Speedway ordinance which is mentioned on IGO often was to combat) and their understanding of Southern law. To this day I have Southern law cited to me as if these people still lived in the South.

Even though these Southern immigrants have lived in Indiana for several generations, they still hold to their cultural lifestyles and their (mis)understanding of the law. There is no "disabled exception" under Indiana law. However, I continually meet persons who believe there is as there was an exception "back home, down South".

Like the Law of Texas (51%, dress code, duty to inform, inter alia), foreign provisions are somehow "grafted on" to the popular perception.

 

[rhino]

I long for the day when Kirk's First Law of the Internet will gain the same level of notariety as Godwin's Law.

 

[CarmelHP]

Yeah, want a cookie? Don't mock my intelligence, I just can't pull up the statues like you can. But even then, you can't tell me you know every single one by heart either, unless you deal with this on a daily basis 24/7. Now I know who not to go to for legal advice, especially with that attitude.

Oh, my attitude, right! Yeah, can't pull up the statutes though they're published publicly on the web. Everyone else can and has posted them to prove you're wrong, but you know better because you know some guy. Then you got snotty, and it's now me and everyone else that has the bad attitude. Wow, just wow.

And thank you for offering never to seek legal advice. I have certain standards for my clients.

 

[CarmelHP]

The confusion is analogous to Kirk's First Law of the Internet: if it is the law in Texas, it is the law everywhere.

Kirk, what do you know? Huh? You're not suggesting our Constitutional scholar got it wrong are you? You can't possibly know anything about law can you? You can't know the Indiana statutes that particularly interest you, can you? There, told you off!

 

[rhino]

I'd like to remind the court that I was kind in this topic. For once.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

Carmel, not calling anyone wrong. I like everyone.

Just explaining why the popular perception is often incorrect as to Indiana Law.

I long for the day when Kirk's First Law of the Internet will gain the same level of notariety as Godwin's Law.

Kirk's Laws are immutable.

 

[CarmelHP]

Carmel, not calling anyone wrong. I like everyone.

Someday, when I'm President, I'll appoint you ambassador someplace nice for your diplomacy.

 

[ballzac86]

I've had a few automatics in the last couple years. I don't worry about it, because unless I'm doing something wrong, I have no fear in being "caught" with it. I've even accidentally taken it into Canada with me, but I made sure to BURY it in my toolbox, as if it were one of my tools. I had a few really cheap ones, and then I bought a Boker Kalishnakov 74 off the sight I buy all of my automatics from. If anyone is interested, PM and I'll let you know what site it is...They sell side-open autos, OTF's, OTF spikes, throwing stars/knives, "knuckle weights," sap gloves, batons, etc. Everything from the $2 clearance bin to $350 stilettos. I just don't want to put it out in a public forum, because it is the only site I've found that doesnt require you to give them proof of military/government employment/proof of handicap. I've bought several things off of them, and it's a great site.

 

[rhino]

Someday, when I'm President, I'll appoint you ambassador someplace nice for your diplomacy.

I have a friend who once applied for attorney general of Palau. If hired, he was going to get diplomatic credentials for me. Now THAT is diplomacy.

Unfortunately he did not get the job.

 

[Bill of Rights]

IN law does not provide any exception regarding automatic knife possession by the handicapped. There is no provision to make unlawful the possession of assisted-opening knives, but it doesn't sound like that's what's being discussed. Growing up in Texas, I heard about an exception there for the carry of switchblades by the handicapped. I just did a cursory search, however, and was not able to locate such an exception, even as "an affirmative defense against prosecution". It is possible that such an exception was removed since I left there, but it is equally possible that the exception never existed there either.

Dragon Talon, I don't dispute that your friend has such a knife. I won't even dispute that LEOs have seen him with it, using it, and not done anything about it. Those officers technically disregarded their duties. IMHO, they did the wrong thing for the right reason. Your description of your friend shows that he means no one any harm, but the fact of the matter is that even when the law is disregarded, it's still the law. FWIW, I'm glad to hear that they didn't arrest him or confiscate his knife. That he has no other means of defense does not excuse violating the law. If a 13 year old is thirsty and has nothing around to drink except a can of beer someone left lying around, it's still against the law for him to do so.

Carmel and Kirk, thanks to you both for your input.

Blessings,
Bill