[Canadian_Mind]

andyt andyt:

He will be on a lot thinner ice than somebody who can claim their religion requires it. I hope he loses, but then I would like to revisit the sikh decisions too.

Why would you want either banned? I can't speak for the Kirpan, but the sgian-dubh is no more dangerous than your average pocket knife, which is perfectly legal to carry completely concealed.

[andyt]

because I don't want some silly right to carry a knife in areas where knives are banned for the general population.

[rickc]

The link in the article stated that Montreal has a "municipal bylaw" that outlaws carrying all knives in public places or transit vehicle without a reasonable excuse. I do not see how such a poorly written law could ever stand up to a higher court challenge. What is a reasonable excuse? Who gets to make that call? This law is way too vague.

[herbie]

Yeah you're right, all the concealed carry talk made me overlook that. My bad.
Don't think you can walk around downtown in most cities with a knife on your belt these days either.

[2Cdo]

I can't remember the last time I left my house without a pocket knife. But to no ones surprise andy is all for banning a simple knife.

[Lemmy]

In law, it is generally held that a weapon is defined by its use, not its appearance. A kirpan in a school, therefore, is no more a weapon than a hole-punch or a beaker, both of which would make more effective weapons than a kirpan. Same with my skean duhb, which I wear frequently. Why would I bother to pull it from my sock when any old object lying around would make a better weapon?