U. S. Customs has already ruled that assisted opening knives are
switchblades and therefore banned from import--this is a new ruling despite four
previous ruling that said they were not. This was announced May 25th, with a
comment period that expires June 21 (which is on a Sunday with no mail
delivery). They have refused to extend the comment period despite a request
from the American Knife and Tool Institute.

As a knife owner your comments can only been heard by Customs in written
form, and that comment has to be received in writing by them by this weekend. If
you care about your knife rights, you HAVE TO WRITE TODAY, and MAIL IT TODAY!
We have no time.

I have emailed and called my congressman and both U. S. Senators and
requested they do something--but since this is a ruling and not legislation
there is not a lot they can do before this ruling goes into effect on July 21.
Call your congressmen and senators and cite a local tie in on how it is
affecting voters in their districts or states, and request they rattle the cages
of the bureaucrats at U. S. Customs who are attempting to restrict our freedom
of knife ownership.

For your reference here is the address and a copy of my letter:


19 CFR Part 177
U.S. Customs and Border Protection
Office of International Trade, Regulations and Rulings
Attention: Intellectual Property and Restricted Merchandise Branch
Mint Annex, 799 Ninth St. N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20229

Gentlemen:

I write this letter to protest the reversal of your definition of assisted
opening knives from that of functional knives to that of illegal switchblade
knives.

These knives are utilitarian as any knives are in the kitchen and the
workplace. They are no more designed as weapons any more than an ax,
screwdriver, or baseball bat is designed as a weapon. The knife has the curse of
being one of man's most useful tool—and can be utilized as a weapon outside it's
original designed purpose just as much as any of the aforementioned items. The
use of a knife as a weapon in an illegal manner is already a crime, and
therefore the legal deterrent is in place for illegal knife use, and doesn't
need Customs adding to the regulation.

Your designation changes an inanimate tool into the class of a weapon
based totally on language without any specific facts or crime statistics that
proves an assisted opening knife is more dangerous or more of a weapon. I would
suggest that before your agency bans importation of a type of knife that has not
been proven dangerous and whose ban would unemploy a large number of Americans
that you have some statistics to back up your actions.

I noted in your rationalization of the revocation of the assisted-opening
knife letters that you cited several cases on the state level from New York,
certainly one of the most restrictive states out of all 50 when it comes to
personal rights. However, I question why would you put the New York decisions in
your rationalization while leaving out the state ruling in Oregon, (Oregon vs.
Delgado) in which that state switchblade act was held as unconstitutional. If
you bring state law into it your omission of that state case, or of other state
decisions in which those state courts have determined assisted opening knives
were not switchblades, it appears that this has been an arbitrary decision
without sufficient research, forethought, or knowledge of cutlery. Nor does it
appear an objective decision but a blatant attempt to infringe upon our personal
freedoms.

The reality of an assisted opening knife is that it is a convenience. Some
women enjoy small assisted opening knives simply because they can open a knife
without breaking a fingernail. Any first responder can testify to the essence
of a quickly opening knife should a seatbelt need to be cut to extract someone
from an automobile accident. A stockman with a calf tangled in a rope certainly
appreciates a knife that can be opened quickly, with one hand.

There are many other reasons that I could cite here, but for brevity's sake
I would hope I've made my point. There are thousands of others who would have
weighed in on this issue had Customs been willing to extend the comment period
as requested. This rush to make this change with a short comment period denies
thousands of knife collectors' and owners' comments to be heard, as it is
impossible for knife magazines to properly inform their readers on this assault
on yet another one of our freedoms.

I would ask that you reconsider the revocation of your earlier letters,
and instead of Customs' decision being a danger to our personal freedoms,
concentrate on genuine dangers to our country's security.

The fact that we have government officials that consider this an important
issue on which to spend research time, effort, and if it goes into effect, into
enforcement, is an appalling waste of limited government resources.

Sincerely,

J. Bruce Voyles, Editor
Knives Illustrated Magazine

P. S. My qualifications for commenting on this subject are as follows:

I personally have written numerous knife books, edited the Knife entry for the
World Book Encyclopedia, been accepted as an expert witness on knives in US
District Court. I have appraised knives for donation to the Smithsonian
Institution, and have been a auctioneer of knives for over 10 years.

The only threat that assisted opening knives have over any other type of knife
is simply in the mind and imagination of a non-knife owner who has never carried
or used them.

In my opinion Custom's action in this issue is a misuse of government assets on
a issue that had no need even be considered.