UK Doctors are calling for kitchen knives ban

[<HELLS^ANGEL>]

:D UK Doctors are calling for kitchen knives ban :lol:

A&E doctors are calling for a ban on long pointed kitchen knives to reduce deaths from stabbing.

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.

They argued many assaults are committed impulsively, prompted by alcohol and drugs, and a kitchen knife often makes an all too available weapon.

The research is published in the British Medical Journal.

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.

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.

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.

In contrast, a pointed long blade pierces the body like "cutting into 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.

The study found links between easy access to domestic knives and violent assault are long established.

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.

The researchers say legislation to ban the sale of long pointed knives would be a key step in the fight against violent crime.

"The Home Office is looking for ways to reduce knife crime.

"We suggest that banning the sale of long pointed knives is a sensible and practical measure that would have this effect."

Government response

Home Office spokesperson said there were already extensive restrictions in place to control the sale and possession of knives.

"The law already prohibits the possession of offensive weapons in a public place, and the possession of knives in public without good reason or lawful authority, with the exception of a folding pocket knife with a blade not exceeding three inches.

"Offensive weapons are defined as any weapon designed or adapted to cause injury, or intended by the person possessing them to do so.

"An individual has to demonstrate that he had good reason to possess a knife, for example for fishing, other sporting purposes or as part of his profession (e.g. a chef) in a public place.

"The manufacture, sale and importation of 17 bladed, pointed and other offensive weapons have been banned, in addition to flick knives and gravity knives."

A spokesperson for the Association of Chief Police Officers said: "ACPO supports any move to reduce the number of knife related incidents, however, it is important to consider the practicalities of enforcing such changes."
Story from BBC NEWS: http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/health/4581871.stm

Published: 2005/05/26 23:48:35 GMT

[Virtualbody1234]

This is absolutely ridiculous. How are they doing to eliminate the knives people already own.

[Biggles]

I do agree with the chefs though. Of all my kitchen knives the big 8" "sans attitude" one is the least used and the small paring knife my favourite.

[GepperRankins]

how do you open bacon without a pointy knife though. :fear:

[Virtualbody1234]

how do you open bacon without a pointy knife though. :fear:
Use your teeth? :unsure:

[Money Fist]

hmmm my colleague never mentioned this to me
its probably just one of them things that get said and forgotten

like when RIAA was talking about not letting people hear your car stereo player because its a copyright breach

[Samurai]

how do you open bacon without a pointy knife though. :fear:


scissors, one blade pierces then cut it open

[99%]

thats it all barber shops are closing
http://www.left-handed.com/acatalog/bargain-left-handed-scissors-small.jpg

everything can be used as a weapon (even breath)

uk doctors should go over to the usa (no offence bsymn) and see what the "feel" about pointy guns.

[Busyman]

:lol: :lol: :lol:

I am not surprised. :dry:

[muchspl3]

what the hell :lol:
reminds me of carlin and airport security
"after you've been flying for an hour, they give you a knife and fork. They actually give you a fuckin' knife!"

[bigboab]

Would it not be better to eliminate the people who stab other people with sharp pointed knives?:rolleyes:

[Chewie]

Would it not be better to eliminate the people who stab other people with sharp pointed knives?:rolleyes:
Yes but prevention is better than cure, and how would you detect who will do such a thing.

[muchspl3]

I'm getting tired of security at the airport, There's too much of it. I'm tired of some fat chick with a double-digit IQ and a triple-digit income rootin' around inside my bag for no reason and never finding anything. Haven't found anything yet. Haven't found one bomb in one bag. And don't tell me, "Well, the terrorists know their bags are going to be searched, so now they're leaving their bombs at home." There are no bombs! The whole thing is fuckin' pointless'

And it's completely without logic. There's no logic at all. They'll take away a gun but let you keep a knife. Well, what the fuck is that? In fact, there's a whole list of lethal objects they allow you to take on board. Theoretically, you could take a knife, an ice pick, a hatchet, a straight razor, a pair of scissors, a chain saw, six knitting needles and a broken whiskey bottle, and the only thing they would say to you is, "That bag has to fit all the way under the seat in front of you."

And if you didn't take a weapon on board, relax. After you've been flying for about an hour, they're gonna bring you a knife and fork! They actually give you a fucking knife. It's only a table knife, but you could kill a pilot with a table knife. It might take a couple of minutes.

Especially if he's hefty. But you could get the job done. If you really wanted to kill the prick. Shit, there are a lot of things you could use to kill a guy. You could probably beat a guy to death with the Sunday New York Times, couldn't you? Suppose you just have really big hands. Couldn't you strangle a flight attendant? Shit, you could probably strangle two of them, one with each hand. That is, if you were lucky enough to catch 'em in that little kitchen area. Just before they break out the fuckin' peanuts. But you could get the job done. If you really cared enough.

http://64.233.161.104/search?q=cache:MuuPWi1svYEJ:www.humorcafe.com/humor/gems/george_carlin.htm+george+carlin+airport+%22get+the+job+done%22&hl=en%20target=nw

[bigboab]

Would it not be better to eliminate the people who stab other people with sharp pointed knives?:rolleyes:
Yes but prevention is better than cure, and how would you detect who will do such a thing.

Get rid of the ones that do it. Then they wont breed more. There is also the fear factor that may prevent the use.

[lynx]

Yes but prevention is better than cure, and how would you detect who will do such a thing.

Get rid of the ones that do it. Then they wont breed more. There is also the fear factor that may prevent the use.
There's a good idea.

You kill one of your family, then give yourself up.
They lock you up.
Meanwhile they get rid of the rest of your family.
You get out after 10 years.
You are the only one left in your family so you inherit everything.

When does this scheme start?

[thewizeard]

...while they are at it, all rolling-pins should be banned to, not to mention the rotisserie pins...

[bigboab]

Get rid of the ones that do it. Then they wont breed more. There is also the fear factor that may prevent the use.
There's a good idea.

You kill one of your family, then give yourself up.
They lock you up.
Meanwhile they get rid of the rest of your family.
You get out after 10 years.
You are the only one left in your family so you inherit everything.

When does this scheme start?

Where did the idea for that part come from?:unsure:

[lynx]

There's a good idea.

You kill one of your family, then give yourself up.
They lock you up.
Meanwhile they get rid of the rest of your family.
You get out after 10 years.
You are the only one left in your family so you inherit everything.

When does this scheme start?

Where did the idea for that part come from?:unsure:Just following your breeding comment to it's logical conclusion. If it is down to breeding, the rest of the family must be just as bad so it makes sense to get rid of them too. Breeding obvious if you ask me. :pinch:

[sArA]

back on topic....

I think its Just another case of nannyism I'm afraid.

[<HELLS^ANGEL>]

It was sugested by a rich doctor who probably never cook for themselves. :rolleyes:


What's so unreasonable? No one needs a kitchen knife for utility
purposes. Kitchen knives are designed to cut pieces of flesh in quick succession
with razor sharp or serrated blades. Blades that can kill a police officer before
he can draw his club. There is no need for these dangerous weapons to be on
our streets. Kitchen knives should be licensed and registered with serial numbers
only to people like chefs that actually need to have them. :w00t:

[Money Fist]

LMAO
iv got a kitchen knife with a scratched off serial number

[bigboab]

LMAO
iv got a kitchen knife with a scratched off serial number

:lol::lol:

[MCHeshPants420]

Makes sense to someone as annoying as myself. Having said that, my girlfriend would probably use something blunt (like an ashtray) to prolong the pain.

[sArA]

If 'they; have their way, we will only be allowed those silly plastic knives and forks that wobble and break when any form of pressure is applied.

Oh no, we can't have that can we? The breaking plasic might splinter and shoot into someone's eye causing blindness, or if a shard was to enter the brain...perhaps even death....so we all have to wear safety glasses whilst preparing and eating too.....

While we are at it...how about nice cotton wool suits to wrap us all up in?

[Money Fist]

i have heard too many storys about girlfriends stabbing their boyfriends in domestic distributes
soo if there is a ban im blaming the girls

[Arm]

How about they ask knife manufactures to stop making them and selling them in kitchen knife packs if they are of little use?

[Busyman]

It was sugested by a rich doctor who probably never cook for themselves. :rolleyes:


What's so unreasonable? No one needs a kitchen knife for utility
purposes. Kitchen knives are designed to cut pieces of flesh in quick succession
with razor sharp or serrated blades. Blades that can kill a police officer before
he can draw his club. There is no need for these dangerous weapons to be on
our streets. Kitchen knives should be licensed and registered with serial numbers
only to people like chefs that actually need to have them. :w00t:
....but...but..but,,,kitchen knives are designed for cutting food. That makes the difference. :)

[MagicNakor]

It was sugested by a rich doctor who probably never cook for themselves. :rolleyes:


What's so unreasonable? No one needs a kitchen knife for utility
purposes. Kitchen knives are designed to cut pieces of flesh in quick succession
with razor sharp or serrated blades. Blades that can kill a police officer before
he can draw his club. There is no need for these dangerous weapons to be on
our streets. Kitchen knives should be licensed and registered with serial numbers
only to people like chefs that actually need to have them. :w00t:

So, the rest of us have to frequent carry-outs?

:shuriken:

[lynx]

Next thing we will have chefs telling us we don't need razor blades, and the only people who need anything so small and sharp are surgeons with their scalpels.

It's a conspiracy I tell ya. :ph34r:

[hobbes]

Part 1


The UK has banned handguns for exactly this safety reason, so why are you not supporting banning long knives?

It seems that when people get drunk and argue, this becomes the weapon of choice in the UK versus the multitude of firearms we have here in the US. Rather than goring the person through and through with a 14 inch knife, the author would prefer a superficial puncture wound from a government issued spork*.

The premise of the author is that these long knives HAVE NO FUNCTION in the kitchen that cannot be carried out by smaller knives.

My question is about psychology and logic.

Guns and Long knives have NO FUNCTION other than to induce injury. Long knives and guns tend to escalate the consequences of drunken confrontations.

What logic separates the overwhelming response that removing large knives is ridiculous, but people shouldn't be allowed to have handguns.

To a citizen of the US, removing guns would be considered "nannying". It is a ll a matter of perspective.

This leads to the next issue of psychology.

Guns in the US have a very integral role in the establishment and development of our country. They are sort of engrained in the fabric of our nation. When we make moves to tell people that guns no longer have a use as the Indians aren't going to attack, property can be "defended" with insurance and every citizen is offered the protection of a police force, people respond very negatively.

I think that something that has always been there becomes engrained in our perception of the world and an inalienable right. If one were to look at the question of gun control from a foreign perspective (such as the UK), they can easily see the logic that removing all the guns would be a good idea.

So is it really the psychology that people have always had whatever length kitchen knife they wanted and it is an instinctive response to retain these knifes or is there something intrinsically different between removing long pointy useless knifes and the removal of handguns.

* http://www.keeme.com/haggis/archives/Spork.jpg

[hobbes]

Part 2

An argument might be that if used properly, knives, like cars, don't kill people. Unlike cars, however, a knife is just a truncated sword, which was designed to kill. So although intentioned for veggies, a knife looks exactly like something that was fashioned to slit throats. People can be quite creative with appliance usage. Some might even see it as a weapon. :shifty:

Also different is that when drunk and angry, we don't jump in our cars and run people over. Most alcohol related fatalities are the inadvertant result of poor judgement.

What do we do then to help reduce these deaths? We add safety features. This covers all things from traffic lights and speed limits to airbags and improvements in force dispersement.

The key is that the full functionality of a car is maintained. We could drastically reduce fatalities by setting the speed limit at 20 mph, but then we have almost completely negated the whole advantage behind owning a car. What we want to target are features that contribute no additional function to the car, but present a possible hazard.

So back to knives, if we find that all cooking chores can be completed with knives no greater than "x" inches and that knives longer than "x" are highly associated with knife related deaths, then a "safety feature" might be to shorten knifes to a maximum of "x" inches.

Again, anyone with a reasonable need for a long knife should be able to own one. Like professional murders, they would obviously need a full 15 inch knife. :blink:

Rather than call it a ban on knives, call it a knife safety feature. The knife could come with the following disclaimer

"If you are drunk and angry, you are far less likely to fatally wound someone with this new "safety knife" than the conventional long knife."

Of course, that would bring out the "safety knife" brigade that would claim that less such a knife would encourage stabbing. :frusty:

and, inexplicably wanton sex with vaccinated women.

[Money Fist]

ever tried to cut cheese with a baseball bat?

[hobbes]

ever tried to cut cheese with a baseball bat?

I use a knife. Where are you going with this?

[Money Fist]

ever tried to cut cheese with a baseball bat?

I use a knife. Where are you going with this?
ah erm no were
but it wasnt really directed at you
it was just an on-topic thing.... kinda

[Busyman]

People will make a weapon out of anything once you take the "weapon of choice" away.

I'm not surprised by this coming from the UK (I'm sure there are American supporters too). I wonder if people will be able to breathe on their own without government intervention in the future.

@hobbes - cars are also able to go 150+ mph. Yet there is no speed limitly close to that. I've taken my trusty Lincoln to 125 mph yet the highest speed limit around here is 65.

[bigboab]

People will make a weapon out of anything once you take the "weapon of choice" away.

I'm not surprised by this coming from the UK (I'm sure there are American supporters too).

@hobbes - cars are also able to go 150+ mph. Yet there is no speed limitly close to that. I've taken my trusty Lincoln to 125 mph yet the highest speed limit around here is 65.

A weapon is anything used to attack or defend. Sex has been described as an attack with a friendly weapon.:)


I wonder if people will be able to breathe on their own without government intervention in the future.

In my case I hope not.:lol:

[hobbes]

People will make a weapon out of anything once you take the "weapon of choice" away.

I'm not surprised by this coming from the UK (I'm sure there are American supporters too). I wonder if people will be able to breathe on their own without government intervention in the future.

@hobbes - cars are also able to go 150+ mph. Yet there is no speed limitly close to that. I've taken my trusty Lincoln to 125 mph yet the highest speed limit around here is 65.

Yeah, but a fast car means your penis is ginormous. The industry and politicians alike know that. Plus you never know, you might want to drive it on the speed-limit free Autobahn or just simply create an exciting chase scene for the next episode of "Cops". Just watch out for Vidcc going 35 mph in the highway passing lane with his hazard lights flashing.

[GepperRankins]

there are places you're allowed to drive 150+mph, which is fun.

what's fun about a pointy knife?

[Snee]

We have laws against carrying big knives in public places, I'm cool with that.

I'm less enthusiastic about this, as I actually use long knives in the kitchen, long serrated blades for cutting up bread and such, but if it means less people dying I'm all for it.

I don't think it can be compared to a gun-ban, since most people use knives in the kitchen for supposedly peaceful cooking, and only a small percentage, probably far less than a percent, of all kitchen knives actually end up in someone's guts, whereas guns, when used at home, do tend to do what they are supposed to. That is, hurt people.

Me using a knife I like isn't important compared to a single human life, and if giving up the right to have one means that hundreds of people won't die, then I won't even argue if a law like it comes into effect here.

I reckon they've thought quite a bit about it before asking for it, so I reckon there might be something to what they are saying.

[Busyman]

,but if it means less people dying I'm all for it.

People will make a weapon out of anything once you take the "weapon of choice" away.

Where will it end? :(

[GepperRankins]

if the biggest knife you can find bends when you try to stab someone then they get under control, surely that's better than a knife that goes straight into their internal organs first poke don't you think?

[bigboab]

You can stab someone with a brick.

If you did you might get put awa for a long time.:blink:

[lynx]

Of the 10 chefs spoken to "none gave a reason why the long pointed knife was essential". The original article (in the BMJ, not the BBC's version) doesn't actually say if they were asked to give a reason. It is an old trick to illicit a non-response by failing to ask for one. They also failed to state what the chef's reaction would be if told they were to be deprived of such implements. I'll bet that's another question they didn't ask.

Just to put things into perspective, Home Office figures show

234 homicides in 2003/4 where the weapon was a "sharp instrument."There are no statistics for serious injury caused by knives or sharp instruments. Even assuming that some of these would have been "long pointed kitchen knives", I am guessing that in most cases those would be where the knife was taken away from it's kitchen environment, which is already illegal. There are many instances where something taken away from it's normal function becomes a weapon. In those situations a ban on such implements would merely result in something else being chosen as a weapon.

Btw, what is not clear from the BBC article is who the authors are. It turns out (from the original article (http://bmj.bmjjournals.com/cgi/content/full/330/7502/1221?ehom)) that the first two named are actually trainees in emergency medicine (with over 2 years training left), and the third their training consultant. Assuming they have followed standard practice where the order of appearance indicates level of contribution I suspect that the consultant's name is there merely to give "weight".

Rather than banning these implements, wouldn't it be better to get manufacturers to introduce a new design. They could even emphasise how much safer these new implements are, and possibly get new sales. But all in all I can't help thinking that the authors have watched Psycho just once too often.

[Snee]

So, in other words, not that much thought has been put into it, or at least it isn't based on solid facts :blink: :dry:

I reckon it doesn't make sense, then :unsure:



@busy: It's all about the odds, I figured they'd based it on solid statistics, and that it was a suggestion made by someone who might know what the hell they were talking about, thanks to having a lot of experience in the matter which is why I was fine with the notion.

It's not as if long blades play an integral part in anyone's life.

But if it is as lynx makes it out, it sounds to be based on belief and dodgy reasoning more than anything.

I reckon there is a limit to what could be banned, anything can be used to kill someone, but only something that isn't vital to society, fairly likely to be used in killing someone in proportion to how many there are of it, and so forth should come into question for a ban.

[hobbes]

I imagine that this article came to them (probably bleeding) to be written, rather than the other way around.

After the 6th stab wound with a sharp long knife came into the ER that week, the two trainees (people with an MD receiving additional subspecialty training, aka residency) looked at each other and said, "lot of stabbing going on with those long knives, maybe we should collect some data".

They presented this idea to the faculty who said, "You do all the data collection and write the paper, I'll sign on if it seems reasonable".

Now Lynx brings up a point we should all think about. How "good" is the data. All that is published is not gold and in some institutions there is a strong "publish or perish" threat. Lots of crap out there just for the purpose of adding to ones Curriculum Vitae.

The British Medical Journal is a peer reviewed publication, meaning that submitted articles are analyzed by several different doctors to look for weaknesses in the paper. There is a process of sending revisions back and forth as the reviewers demand clarification or refinement. I do not think the authors were trying to "trick" anyone with phraseology, as this is exactly what the peer review process is there to catch. That is why only 9% of submitted articles actually ever makes it to press (according to the BMJ website).

Had this article been published in a non-medical journal, you would really have to ponder if the authors are trying to put one over on people. Books also are merely opinions and ARE NOT peer reviewed.

What I am simply pointing out is that all that you read is not equivalent. The peer review process is the most rigorous way to screen trash as you have a group wanting to publish, and reviewers trying to expose any weakness.

Also, the name of the Journal is important. It seems that the BMJ is a respected publication and is not in need of something to publish. You need to be careful when things are published in the more obscure journals. The typical process is to try and get published with the "big boys", then shop your article around if it gets rejected. Eventually, you can get it published in "Bob's Journal of Medical Hearsay".

Anyway, I think that is how this all got started, not some nervous Nancy looking around for ways to ban things.

[Snee]

Arrgh

[lynx]

I wasn't intending to suggest that they deliberately set out to "trick" anyone, merely pointing out that if a question is not specifically asked, it is unfair to raise as an point the lack of replies. I can't understand why they did not follow the usual procedure used in articles of this nature and actually state what questions were asked and the responses received. In any case, 10 chefs is hardly statistically significant.

That said, I'm quite sure the data is "good", but I strongly question how relevant it is. As I said, if we remove one household item as a possible weapon another will be readily available as an alternative, so from that point of view the conclusions are spurious.

True, it may reduce the number of stabbings in the home, but it is unlikely to make much difference to the incidents where the perpetrator has deliberately sought a weapon beforehand, merely the weapon used. And for incidents in the home, what alternative will be used? A bottle? A chair leg? A heavy cleaver? All just as readily available in many homes, and capable of causing as much if not more damage.

If the intent was for the article to be a serious study of how to reduce knife crime rather than "adding to one's CV", I feel it should not have started with sensationalist quotes from leading newspapers:

We need to ban the sale of long pointed kitchen knives

"Britain in the grip of knives terror—third of murder victims are now stabbed to death." Daily Express, 31 January 2005

"Stabbing rampage kills one, injures five—a large kitchen knife was found." Independent, 24 December 2004

[hobbes]

Actually Lynx, I was just assuming that their point was valid for the purpose of discussion. How then is this different from banning guns?

I also wanted to point out that medical journals rely on "quality" publications and not on hype for the purpose of sales. Nobody is going to subscribe to the BMJ because of this article, but many will cancel subscriptions if they publish unreliable or poorly thought out articles.

As I have actually located the original, I find that it is an editorial. This means that it does not necessarily have the endorsement of the BMJ, but the editors thought that it was import enough to publish as "food for thought".

So the thought is, how is this different from gun control? When I first read this thread I was struck at the strong negative response from the UK. A knife really is a domesticated weapon, as it's function is to cut through flesh. Enraged drunk people tend to use whatever they can conceal in their clothing or the first thing they can grab when at home.

My interest in the thread was to determine if this negative response was due to a logical difference between this situation and guns or more of a reflection of human psychology. People just don't like their stuff taken away from them. It's like that thing you own, but never use, but when someone tries to throw it away you object, "Hey, I might need that someday, don't take away my stuff." People also don't like being told by "the man" that they are not responsible enough to keep that knife they have always had there in the kitchen drawer.

I think psychology plays a large role in how we respond. Instead of thinking about "why" we need a long knife, we focus on "why" you shouldn't take away my stuff. The parallel in America is guns. The people who own guns highly resist people messing with their stuff.

[Busyman]

Seems to me knifing deaths will rise. Why?

No guns. Once knives are banned it'll be...

:devil: :shifty: Teh ScIsSoRs!!! Mwaaahahahhahahah :shifty: :devil:

[bigboab]

We are forgetting pointed tools.:ph34r: You wont be able to have a screw driver.:( Lilmiss wont be pleased about that.:cry:

[<HELLS^ANGEL>]

If you do stab someone remember to do it in the lung and not in the
heart, so they won't be able to scream for help. :w00t:

[lynx]

Sorry, Hobbes, I assumed you knew it was an editorial, especially as I posted the link. :rolleyes:

I don't fully agree with likening it to the "banning guns" argument. Guns have only one purpose - as a weapon. Kitchen knives are not actually very well suited to that purpose - the handles are all wrong for one thing.

However, I take your point about the psychology of the thing. I was heading in that direction myself when I proposed putting the emphasis on safety when making/selling large knives without the pointed end. "Thou shalt not" often gets the response "wtf has it got to do with you".

If taken up the change won't happen overnight, from the sound of things it could take 20 years for the results to be meaningful. It is difficult to say whether the reduction in stabbings in the home would be measurable over such a long period, given that the incidence can't be all that high at the moment, but I suppose that even a few lives saved for what is really no cost is worthwhile.

[Busyman]

Eliminate the long pointys and you'll have less stabbings.....

....but more slashings.

The slit throats will still be around.

[maebach]

i think its dumb. it'll never work, we need knives for everything with food.

[Money Fist]

and for killing burglars

[Busyman]

and for killing burglars
:lol: :lol:

Exactly. You already don't have guns in the UK. Why not go all out and make everyone use their hands to defend themselves and eliminate the teaching of martial arts too.



2 man enter

1 man leave


Thunderdome