like me used to ask "why not ban box cutters? Why not have a seven-day waiting period to buy a kitchen knife?" We used to think it was a rhetorical jape that highlighted the fact that gun-banning fascists' arguments don't last long in proximity to common sense.
We used to.
Now we read that the same ridiculous arguments so regularly applied to ban guns are, in fact, being used to urge a ban on . . . wait for it . . . . . kitchen knives. The article's in blue, my comments in black.
"A team from West Middlesex University Hospital said violent crime is on the increase - and kitchen knives are used in as many as half of all stabbings . . . " Yep, that's kitchen kives -- the "weapon of choice" for your average thug.
"They argued many assaults are committed impulsively, prompted by alcohol and drugs, and a kitchen knife often makes an all too available weapon." Yes, you're 459 times more likely to be knifed by someone you know. Never keep a knife in the house. A would-be impulsive drunk will take it away from you and stab you with it. Your children will find it and stab themselves or others when playing Ghurka Roulette. Cue public-service announcement by the cast of Family Ties: "If you must have a knife in the house, keep it locked away where no one can use it."
"The researchers said there was no reason for long pointed knives to be publicly available at all. They consulted 10 top chefs from around the UK, and found such knives have little practical value in the kitchen." Yeah, who needs an Uzi to go duck hunting? Only the same bloodthirsty lunatics who think they need a seven-inch Wusthof to make slits in baguette dough, that's who! Never mind the fact that, like all ‘item-control' statistics, this one's bogus. The only thing "top chefs" in the UK need a knife for is to cut the string off whatever bag they're boiling dinner in tonight.
"None of the chefs felt such knives were essential, since the point of a short blade was just as useful when a sharp end was needed." You just need to use eight or nine knives when you're cooking, you see -- one small, sharp-pointed blade for chicken, one for fish, one for meat . . . . Of course, building a kitchen that can accomodate ten keypad-operated knife safes may be a little harder on the pocket book than a new Analon Brunello 8-piece set, but hey, if it saves even one life . . .
"The researchers said a short pointed knife may cause a substantial superficial wound if used in an assault - but is unlikely to penetrate to inner organs." I see that knife-control researchers wade out of the same shallow end of the gene pool as gun-control researchers. You don't need to worry about a long, pointed knife penetrating your "inner organs" (are there any other kind?) if a short, pointed knife's been thrust into your jugular vein or femoral artery, both of which are far less "inner" than your gall bladder and far more essential to your continued residence on the planet. Have these numbskulls done the basic research which shows that most knife-attacks -- especially by people who aren't trained ninjas or special-forces operatives -- inflict "slashing," rather than "penetrating," wounds and, therefore, banning "long, pointed" knives will do little to affect whatever problem these people claim to be worried about? Of course not. Like gun control, knife-control is an area in which actual knowledge of the issues proves that one's psychologically or mentally unfit to participate in the discussion. You know about that stuff? Eeeeewwww . . . . .
"In contrast, a pointed long blade pierces the body like "cutting into a ripe melon". Cue the Nighline segment where beer-gutted knife owners chew tobacco and slash melons with faces drawn onto them. How can anyone justify owning an assault knife whose only purpose is to pierce the human body like a ripe melon?!!!
"The use of knives is particularly worrying amongst adolescents, say the researchers, reporting that 24% of 16-year-olds have been shown to carry weapons, primarily knives." So 24% of an unknown sample of 16-year-olds (surely not a sample taken from court records or juvenile facilities, that would skew the data set!) carry "weapons, primarily knives." Primarily knives? What does that mean? If, out of 100 sampled sixteen year olds (and remember, the sample may be Scotland Yard's "violent youth offender" files):
1 carries a gunThe geniuses at West Middlesex University can say that British teens are running around with broadswords strapped to their backs and demand that Parliament make it a felony to possess a nine-inch Henckels. Even if the sample is somehow representative of all the U.K.'s teenagers, which means that almost one-quarter of them go about armed, doesn't any Englishman have wits enough to exercise skepticism in light of past rhetoric about how banning guns was the last step toward keeping England's children safe? Probably not -- they kept buying all that "war to end all wars" crap through three Ypres offensives.
3 carry brass knuckles,
5 carry sticks, pipes or blunt objects,
5 carry assorted martial-arts implements,
4 carry sharpened screwdrivers, and
6 carry pen-knives
"The study found links between easy access to domestic knives and violent assault are long established." No kidding -- it's astonishing to see statistics prove that, when people want to commit violent assaults on other people, they look for knives with which to violently assault other people. Note the backwards thinking, so apparent in the arguments of gun-control fascists -- it's the knives that are the real catalyst for violent assaults, just as guns cause street crime. People don't cause violent crime, it's the guns! And if you say "steak knives don't kill people, people kill people," they'll laugh you out of the cocktail party.
"French laws in the 17th century decreed that the tips of table and street knives be ground smooth. A century later, forks and blunt-ended table knives were introduced in the UK in an effort to reduce injuries during arguments in public eating houses." Don't stop for an instant to think that this proves West Middlesex University is suffering from a recurrance of the same stupidity that afflicted the ancien regime and the Hanoverian monarchy when they wanted to control human behavior by trying to turn society into the equivalent of a padded cell. Just pay attention to the fraudulent theses by ‘researchers' proving that there were no guns in colonial America, and how in the old west the choice was either a peaceful haven of gun-control or a booming mortician industry. That's why it was more peaceful in olden days -- not because children were raised by married couples who went to church, but because the state regulated the pointiness of their eating utensils.
"Kitchen knives can inflict appalling wounds [Gruesome Photo]" Gotta have the gruesome photo -- it shocks people out of their wits, and witless people are required to pass the ridiculous legislation being proposed. If you can tell me the wound pictured couldn't have been inflicted with a cheese knife, and keep a straight face doing it, you're qualified to be Dean of Research Faculty at West Middlesex University.
"The researchers say legislation to ban the sale of long pointed knives would be a key step in the fight against violent crime." No, it would be a key step in continuing the pretence that godless secularism can do anything to mitigate violent crime besides imposing a criminal regime characterized by perpetual violence. The secularists have their marching orders -- "Don't you dare look into the human heart . . . we're busy in here!" Leave the human heart alone. Just go on filling the culture with a lust for death in all its forms, and get ready to read the next study on the use of "assault scissors" in household murders.
Anybody think we can take a "key step in the war on terror" by banning the Koran? Congratulations to the man with drool on his lapel -- you're the new Chair of Counter-Terrorism Studies at West Middlesex University!