Knife Rights To Appeal Outrageous NYC Ruling by Obama-Appointed Judge

Critter

Well-Known Member
A U.S. District Court Judge has ruled that persons falsely arrested or threatened with arrest have no standing to sue in Knife Rights' Federal civil rights lawsuit against New York City and District Attorney Cyrus Vance Jr. Although every prior ruling in the case went our way under two previous judges, the case was recently reassigned to Obama appointee Katherine B. Forrest. Litigation always presents the risk that a judge (and especially a judge new to a case) will make an erroneous ruling.

On Tuesday the judge ruled that the plaintiffs in our case - who have been falsely arrested or threatened with arrest over common pocket knives - do not have standing to sue, in part because the case documents don't identify specific knives that would be illegal under New York City's interpretation of state law. The trouble is, it's nearly impossible to identify them under New York City's haphazard and inconsistent approach - which is the whole point of the case in the first place! Even the DA has admitted that different specimens of the exact same make and model knife could be simultaneously found to be both legal and illegal! Click to read the judge's ruling.

So here we have a situation where we're suing because we can't know with certainty what's legal or banned, yet the judge is saying we don't have standing to sue precisely because we haven't identified what's legal or banned in our court papers. That's simply absurd! :52:

But even if the judge were correct - which she is not - she was required by well-established legal principles to allow us a chance to amend our papers to "correct" the supposed "defects." Instead, she simply ignored these principles and declared the case over.

A similar situation arose in a recent lawsuit involving a U.S. District Judge in neighboring New Jersey. After straining to find supposed "defects" in the complaint that affected standing, the judge refused to allow the complaint to be amended to correct the "defects." On appeal, the ruling was reversed and the appeals court criticized the judge, saying she had abused her discretion. The same thing could happen here.

But whatever happens, this ruling forces Knife Rights to spend more time and money to appeal the judge's decision - all while Rome continues to burn. We still receive calls every week from innocent citizens whose lives have been turned upside down simply because they carried a basic tool, a pocket knife, in New York City. Thousands have been arrested on bogus illegal knife charges. In at least one instance of which we are aware, the result of the bogus arrest was that the victim's entire knife collection was confiscated from his home. Gun owners have had their firearms confiscated based on bogus knife arrests.

We cannot let New York City succeed in its attempt to redefine "gravity knife" to include ordinary folding knives. This could become a model for other cities and jurisdictions across America, resulting in knife owners throughout the country being arrested for doing nothing wrong. We cannot let that happen! And, we will not!

Knife Rights is carefully planning its response to Judge Forrest's ruling. We will never stop fighting for your rights, and neither should you. Please help us win this critical battle by contributing to Knife Rights Foundation's Legal Fund today as generously as you can. We've led the fight to defend knife rights in the legislative arena and we are pioneering it in the courts. Please help us defend freedom!

Make a tax-deductible donation to the Knife Rights Foundation Legal Fund TODAY!
 
As someone who carries a knife, makes knives and sells knives for others to carry, I would really like to see NYC DA Vance shut down and appreciate what KnifeRights is doing. I don't see this as a rant and I respectfully disagree, Fred. If issues like this don't belong on a forum of knife lovers, are we really knife lovers?

Just my $0.02.

Kevin
 
Let me clarify what I said. I fully support the Knife Rights Foundation. I do not support threads that imply that in some way the President of the United States, who ever he happens to be at the time is somehow involved in any judges rulings from the bench. That is guilt by association and that is wrong.

Fred
 
I hear ya Fred, It seems like we can't go anywhere without one side or the other of every issue pounding us, that is one reason why we try to keep politics outta Knife Dogs.

This is a little different, though in my opinion. Doug is relentlessly supporting us, and our collective interests. I have a lot off appreciation for what he and his people do for us.

That earns him a little slack in the rope, so to speak. There is nothing ugly or inflammatory in his posts, the implication of the presidents involvment that you mention seems to be only in the origin or the judge's appointment. That's just a point of fact to me, it is what it is.

These are a copy an paste of the Knife Rights news letters, I believe, not so much a rant.

The Boss is welcome to over rule me in this, but I say we let it stand. No harm, no foul.

Thank you all! :)
 
I donated a $800 camp knife and sheath to this organization because they are on our side. I too don't like to bad mouth our president although I voted for the other guy.

Im pretty sure we don't all read everything Doug posts mostly because the post is long and we are on the go and don't have time but I feel he is winning our battles that we are too lazy to fight.
 
I'm not sure that specifying one's appointer necessarily constitutes guilt by association, no more than saying she was a Democrat would have implicated all Democrats as anti-knife or otherwise.

At any rate, this fight isn't against the President, a Judge, or even a political party for that matter. It's against the much larger issue of our rights as citizens being restricted and/or removed based on vague definitions and absurd laws that DO NOT maintain the interests of the people or the common good in any way.

This whole case started, IIRC, with the DA of NYC questioning the legality of a very simple and basic tool: a one hand opening folding knife. As a result, otherwise law abiding citizens and business owners are made to suffer, and rights are trampled on at great expense.
If the NYC DA succeeds in banning one hand opening knives and shaking down citizens and businesses, then what (or who) is next? Where do we eventually have to draw the line?

I'd be much more concerned with the larger picture that KnifeRights.org is fighting against. Not whether a Judge's appointer is mentioned in passing.

Just my $.02
 
Let me adjust my original post to reflect my feelings; I hadn't had my coffee, when I posted and I was a little cranky yet. :)

Any time you attach a statement or phrase that divides, to important topics you lose a segment of your audience. If your purpose is to attract and influence people to your cause, then that is foolhardy.


These threads about knife rites are ones I gravitate to and read from top to bottom. I think its a worthy cause. But why make it political if your going to lose a big segment of your audience.
Even though I have political views; I never found it advantageous to discuss them with my customers or friends I respect. That also is foolhardy.

No offence meant and I hope none is taken; but please include everyone when you post your next thread.

Regards, Fred
 
Unfortunately, the right to carry a knife has become political. Doug is a lobbyist on our behalf and by the nature of what he does tends to frame up his postings with a political point of view.

KnifeDogs is a supporting member of Knife Rights and I personally support the Knife Rights organization.

We all need to know that there are people and politicians out there very engaged in working towards restricting or taking away entirely our knife rights and we need people like Doug working to keep our rights in place and to help regain lost ground like the situation in New York.
 
Back
Top