About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline

LOG IN
LOG IN


13 Conn. Pub. Int. L.J. 219 (2013-2014)
Criminal Use of Switchblades: Will the Recent Trend towards Legalization Lead to Bloodshed?

handle is hein.journals/cpilj13 and id is 219 raw text is: Criminal Use of Switchblades: Will the Recent Trend Towards Legalization Lead to Bloodshed? PAUL A. CLARK I. INTRODUCTION In the 1950s, there was a widespread perception that switchblade knives were the tool of thugs and juvenile delinquents. In the late 1950s and early 1960s, switchblades were banned, or severely restricted, in almost every state.' New York, for example, banned switchblades in 1954, but allowed exceptions for those who could show they were being used for professional or sporting purposes.2 Today, possession of a switchblade is a crime in just twenty states.3 In a few other states, there are such severe restrictions on switchblades so as to be effectively banned. For example, Arkansas and Oklahoma have banned carrying any switchblade on or about the person, whether concealed or not.4 In most other states, switchblades are illegal to buy, sell, or transfer and are considered deadly weapons. They are illegal to carry concealed, and illegal for felons to possess. In t J.D. University of Chicago, 2005; Ph.D. The Catholic University of America, 1995. The author has clerked for the Hon. Robert Eastaugh, Alaska Supreme Court, and the Hon. Consuelo Callahan, Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. He currently practices law in New Jersey. The only states that never placed significant restrictions on switchblades are Alabama, Georgia, Kentucky, Idaho, Iowa, North Carolina, South Carolina, South Dakota, Utah and West Virginia, although, even in these states, they were usually illegal to carry concealed. States that banned switchblades in the 1950s include: California, 1957 (People v. Bass, 225 Cal. App. 2d 777, 780 (1963) (although blades less than two inches are legal in California)); New York, 1954 (see infra, Note 2); Pennsylvania, 1956 (Sale of Switch Blades, 15 Pa. D. & C. 2d 405 (1958)); Texas, 1957 (Curson v. State, 313 SW.2d 538, 540 (Tex. App. 1958)); Virginia, 1955 (Charles Woltz, Criminal Law, VA. L. R. 42:7 (1956)); Wisconsin, 1959 (Wis. Stat. 941.24); Michigan, 1961 (People v. Crow, 13 Mich. App. 594 (1968)); and Illinois, 1967 (People v. Sullivan, 46 Ill.2d 399 (1970)). 2 Act of Mar. 26, 1954, ch. 268, 1954 N.Y. Laws; New York Penal Law 265.20(6) (West 2013). This was apparently a concession to sportsmen who opposed the ban. See infra Sec. III. In addition to the states listed in note 1, switchblades are currently banned in Colorado (COL. REV. STAT. § 18-12-102), Connecticut (illegal over 1.5 inches (CONN. GEN. STAT. § 53-206)), Hawaii (HAW. REV. STAT. § 134-51), Kansas (KAN. STAT. ANN. § 21-4201), Louisiana (LA. REV. STAT. § 14:95), Maine (ME. REV. STAT. § 43-1055), Massachusetts (illegal over 1.5 inches (MASS. GEN. LAW Ch. 269 § 10)), Minnesota (MiNN. STAT. § 609.02 (6)), Montana (MONT. CODE ANN. § 45-8-331), Nevada (NEV. STAT. § 202.355), New Jersey (N.J. REV. STAT. § 2C:39-3e), New Mexico (N.M. STAT. ANN. 30-1-12), and Washington (WASH. REV. CODE § 9.41.250). There are narrow exceptions in some of these states. For example, in New York, it is an affirmative defense that a knife was possessed while physically engaged in hunting or fishing. New York Penal Law 265.20(6) (West 2013). 4 ARK. CODE ANN. § 5-73-120 (2005); OKLA. STAT. ANN. §21-1272 (West 2002) (It shall be unlawful for any person to carry upon or about his or her person . . . any . . . switchblade knife ... whether such weapon be concealed or unconcealed.). See, e.g., OHIO REV. CODE ANN. §§ 2923.13, 2923.20(1), (3) (LexisNexis 2010); see also, e.g., MD. CODE ANN., § 27-339 (LexisNexis 2010); see also, e.g., MD. CODE ANN., CRIM. LAW § 4-101,