More Idiocy from the Other Side of the Pond.

Reader Doug sent me a link to the Daily Telegraph to an article informing me that now even a butter knife is considered an "offensive weapon" in Merrie Olde England.

A butter knife can be an offensive weapon, the High Court ruled yesterday.

The decision came in the rejection of an appeal by Charlie Brooker, of Welling, Kent, who had been convicted under the Criminal Justice Act of carrying a bladed instrument.

Mark Hardie, appearing for Brooker, argued that the knife had no handle, sharp edges or points and therefore could not fall foul of a law intended to protect people from dangerous weapons.

But Lord Justice Laws, sitting with Mr Justice David Steel, disagreed. He said: "I would accept that a sharp or pointed blade was the paradigm case - however the words of the statute are unqualified and refer to any article that has a blade."

I did a quick Google search, and found a wee bit more information in The Scotsman. Excerpt:

Section 139 of the (1988 Criminal Justice) Act says any person who has an article "which has a blade or is sharply pointed" shall be guilty of an offence if they carry it in public without good reason or lawful authority.

Mr Hardie said it was important that, as the statute criminalised a person for possession alone and placed a defendant at risk of two years imprisonment, it should not be read too broadly.

The law should only be applied to blades which had a point or sharp cutting edge and were inherently dangerous.

But Lord Justice Laws, sitting with Mr Justice David Steel, disagreed.

He said: "I would certainly accept that a sharp or pointed blade was the paradigm case - however the words of the statute are unqualified and refer to any article that has a blade."

"In my judgment we should perpetrate a very great mischief if we construed this statute so as to invite argument in case after case on whether an object is sharp or not."

During the hearing, Mr Hardie said the law would now catch even plastic knives restaurants and cafes supplied to customers with take-away food.

The judge said they should be protected by the section of the Act which allowed such knives to be carried if there was reasonable excuse.

But don't be caught with a plastic spork if you don't have take-out food! What, Mr. Booker didn't have a "reasonable excuse" to be carrying a dull butter knife? It couldn't have been for self-protection, unless he expected his assailants to fall down laughing at it.

I swear, sometimes I'm convinced that two World Wars and emigration have thrice decimated England's gene pool; leaving most of the leadership brainless, too much of the population spineless, and the criminals vicious.