EPIC FAIL

[ironraven]

I think what this and other threads over the past few weeks are coming down to is that there are two camps here.

There is the camp  which feels that being vilified by the actions by someone else is wrong, and it's insulting. Being deprived of property by the state, or being made second class citizens, or abused, or otherwise punished because someone else did something bad is morally wrong and any attempt to justify it is intellectually dishonest. It is wrong when the distinction is your income, your religion, your skin color, your gender, your sexual orientation, nationality or choosing to be a tool making, tool using, self sufficient member of a tool making and using species. It is bigotry. And we're sick of it. And we're tired of it. And we're speaking up.

And then there is the faction that thinks we are in the wrong to feel this way.

I don't have an answer for it. But if I wanted to be spit on, I'd wear my NRA hat and go down town into the campus district. Someone (undoubtedly with poor hygiene and a huge trust fund) would happily oblige me if that was my wish. But I feel that this forum is, deep down, is slowly shifting to not longer be a friendly, safe and supporting community for multitool and knife owners. On a global level. Too many people are taking stances that sound like "surrender to the inevitable, we can't win".

That bothers me. That bothers me greatly.

If our ancestors wanted to surrender to the inevitable, we'd still be on the menu.

[Smashie]

I really think that people are getting all bent out of shape over this and without understanding the context.

Teenage knife crime is constantly in the media here in the UK, but the problem is that it's impossible to get to the facts behind the statistics to truly see where the problems lay, age group, region, type of 'weapon' etc. There is also one bit of information that will never be released, ethnic background.

At the end of January '17 the government published the Quarterly crime Statistics Bulletin which reported that knife crime in England and Wales had increased by 11% on the previous year. The NHS reported an increase of 13% in hospital admissions for knife wounds (very carefully worded to not differentiate between accidental and malicious). The conclusion of the report stated that this was due to an improvement in record keeping and 'an actual rise in knife crime'. In February the MET police commissioner indicated that between 2014 and 2016 the number of children carrying knives in schools rose by almost 50% and the number of offences involving a knife in schools rose by 26%.

In October '16, the Sentencing Council published draft guidelines for stiffer sentences for people carrying knives. Chief Constable Alf Hitchcock, who leads the National Police Chiefs Council task force on knife crime, told the London Evening Standard in early March that the “peak age” for carrying knives is “getting younger”, and is currently between 13 and 17. “You’ve got a group of people probably being influenced by their siblings, by their peer group, and carrying, which is not a good trend,” he said. In Manchester, parents of a 14-year-old were ordered to pay £1,000 to a boy their son stabbed several times outside school. During a month-long amnesty in Surrey, police collected 237 knives, which will be used, along with knives collected by police across the country, in a 27ft sculpture called Knife Angel, which may yet adorn the empty fourth plinth in Trafalgar Square.

When politicians and officials seek to pre-empt public indignation by making statements about wake-up calls and warning lights, it is a sign that something unacceptable is unfolding, which they lack either the will or the ability to address.

“How many more of our children have to die before the government act?” – is both damning and complex. Many more children will die from knife-related violence; indeed, four more have been stabbed to death since she posed it. But it is not because the government and related agencies are not acting. Pretty much every week, somewhere in the country, there is some kind of initiative to tackle “knife crime”’ – an amnesty, a new charity in the name of the fallen, an appeal from police, a mayoral statement.

The trouble is that these efforts seem to have little effect. That might be because efforts to make a positive intervention are dwarfed by all the things the government is doing that are making the situation worse. These deaths occur at a moment when the country has made a conscious decision to defund and under-resource its young. When you slash youth services, underfund child mental health services and make swingeing cuts to education and policing, there will be an effect. The most vulnerable will suffer. Austerity didn’t invent knife crime, but it is certainly contributing to the conditions in which it can thrive.[/quote]

The media did not invent “knife crime” either. But, with considerable help from the politicians, it has certainly shaped – or rather distorted – our understanding of it.

These distortions are, in no small part, made possible by the paucity of accessible facts. National data on the number of children and teens killed by knives in any given year is not publicly available. Contact the Home Office and it will tell you that individual police forces collect that information; for the best available data, it suggests that you try the Office for National Statistics. Contact the ONS and it informs you that all the deaths in England and Wales are collated in the Homicide Index, which is maintained by the Home Office. Send a freedom of information request to the Home Office and it refuses on the grounds that it would “be likely to prejudice the prevention or detection of crime or the apprehension or prosecution of offenders”. It also notes that the release of the names of victims could endanger the safety, or physical or mental health of their families.

So, while knife crime, particularly as it affects young people, has been the subject of national debate for a decade, our awareness of its true scale is limited, our grasp of its trajectory is only approximate, and coverage of it is erratic. In short, as a nation we are conscious that there is something out there known as “knife crime”, but as yet we lack any coherent or enduring national response.

Without accessible official data, or well-informed discussion, our understanding of the problem is cobbled together from a mixture of personal assumptions, media representation and political projection. “Our opinions cover a bigger space, a longer reach of time, a greater number of things, than we can directly observe,” wrote Walter Lippmann in his landmark book Public Opinion. “They have, therefore, to be pieced together out of what others have reported.” But what others report when it comes to knife crime is neither neutral nor consistent.

Edited to add - We now have seen a rapid and alarming rise in 'acid' attacks, something that was a very rare occurrence before this year and was mainly limited to one specific culture and motive. The media are having a field day with it at the moment, simply because here, like every other country in the world, the media have become 'The Media' and stopped doing what they had previously done. Investigate and report the news.

[AimlessWanderer]

The thread title is epic fail.

The epic fail is not one little charity working in one little corner of a small island nation to raise awareness of something in their immediate community, but the attempts of people from a different cultural and legal perspective in other lands to "globalise" this and therefore make it about them somehow. It's not. Not even remotely.

Related fails include legal assumptions based not on the laws of the land where the charity works, but on laws of the overseas commentators. The fails there are too epic for me to waste time on. Hardly any of the legal assumptions in this thread are right from what I can see.

It's so... ... it's almost (but still not quite) laughable.

[Syncop8r]

The thread title is epic fail.

The epic fail is not one little charity working in one little corner of a small island nation to raise awareness of something in their immediate community, but the attempts of people from a different cultural and legal perspective in other lands to "globalise" this and therefore make it about them somehow. It's not. Not even remotely.

Hear hear.

[pomsbz]

The people this group are attempting to shame by parading that name/statement around include, but are not limited to all law enforcement agents, all soldiers, me, my deceased grandpa, quite a few people on this forum, and billions of other individuals, past and present.

No, that isn't who they are attempting to shame. They are attempting to shame children who carry things as weapons.
I think you're taking it all a bit personally.

Agree with that. I think it's very obvious that the campaign is against carrying tools as weapons. The knee jerk reaction of 'they are saying tools are weapons' is far out of proportion to the message IMO. Weapons carry in the UK is illegal full stop. The legitimacy of that can be debated but not the illegal carry of tools as weapons. It is against the law.

I'm not sure I agree with the campaign. I don't think cowardice is the motivation for carrying weapons. Outside of psycho babble. Using bad arguments does not advance a cause, however worthy. I also find the laws against self defence outmoded in a country which blatantly cannot begin to protect its citizens using the police force. I agree with the concept but it has to be backed up with protection for the citizenry. I am worried about the situation (I'm a Brit and the vast majority of my family live there) because I do not see an answer. The 'band aid' type solutions are trying to hide a reality where the underlying problems are probably far beyond repair at this point and only getting worse.

[Ron Who]

IMO there are two reasons why anyone would carry a knife or a gun.

1. Neccesity.
2. Macho or criminal behaviour.

The second reason is one we should not condone and that's where education and law (enforcement) come in.

Raising awareness is not a bad thing but some methods may be questionable for people with different cultural backgrounds. (And questionable doesn't neccesarily mean wrong).

[styx]

The thread title is epic fail.

The epic fail is not one little charity working in one little corner of a small island nation to raise awareness of something in their immediate community, but the attempts of people from a different cultural and legal perspective in other lands to "globalise" this and therefore make it about them somehow. It's not. Not even remotely.

Related fails include legal assumptions based not on the laws of the land where the charity works, but on laws of the overseas commentators. The fails there are too epic for me to waste time on. Hardly any of the legal assumptions in this thread are right from what I can see.

It's so... ... it's almost (but still not quite) laughable.

The problem is that those things tend to spill over the borders of one little corner of a small island. I wouldn't exactly call Britain small, but that is a landmass vs cultural significance debate. And regardless of the Brexit, Britain is a big player in the EU.

Since you're keen on hitting that cultural perspective, tell me is there a legitimate reason a teen could carry a tool in Essex?

As far as legality goes - criminals don't adhere to laws anyway so either that point is moot or we're just starring at a very huge can of worms.

[AimlessWanderer]

The thread title is epic fail.

The epic fail is not one little charity working in one little corner of a small island nation to raise awareness of something in their immediate community, but the attempts of people from a different cultural and legal perspective in other lands to "globalise" this and therefore make it about them somehow. It's not. Not even remotely.

Related fails include legal assumptions based not on the laws of the land where the charity works, but on laws of the overseas commentators. The fails there are too epic for me to waste time on. Hardly any of the legal assumptions in this thread are right from what I can see.

It's so... ... it's almost (but still not quite) laughable.

The problem is that those things tend to spill over the borders of one little corner of a small island. I wouldn't exactly call Britain small, but that is a landmass vs cultural significance debate. And regardless of the Brexit, Britain is a big player in the EU.

Since you're keen on hitting that cultural perspective, tell me is there a legitimate reason a teen could carry a tool in Essex?

As far as legality goes - criminals don't adhere to laws anyway so either that point is moot or we're just starring at a very huge can of worms.

Of course. A teen just like any other person in the UK is allowed to carry whatever they need to carry out their daily lives. It's only the act of carrying for the purposes of causing harm that they are trying to change, not carrying of household items under any circumstances whatsoever. If the teen in question is on his way to fix his Gran's garden gate, no problem.

[Don Pablo]

The thread title is epic fail.

The epic fail is not one little charity working in one little corner of a small island nation to raise awareness of something in their immediate community, but the attempts of people from a different cultural and legal perspective in other lands to "globalise" this and therefore make it about them somehow. It's not. Not even remotely.

Related fails include legal assumptions based not on the laws of the land where the charity works, but on laws of the overseas commentators. The fails there are too epic for me to waste time on. Hardly any of the legal assumptions in this thread are right from what I can see.

It's so... ... it's almost (but still not quite) laughable.

The problem is that those things tend to spill over the borders of one little corner of a small island. I wouldn't exactly call Britain small, but that is a landmass vs cultural significance debate. And regardless of the Brexit, Britain is a big player in the EU.

Since you're keen on hitting that cultural perspective, tell me is there a legitimate reason a teen could carry a tool in Essex?

As far as legality goes - criminals don't adhere to laws anyway so either that point is moot or we're just starring at a very huge can of worms.

Of course. A teen just like any other person in the UK is allowed to carry whatever they need to carry out their daily lives. It's only the act of carrying for the purposes of causing harm that they are trying to change, not carrying of household items under any circumstances whatsoever. If the teen in question is on his way to fix his Gran's garden gate, no problem.

And if said teen wants to EDC a tool?
Thats a similar situation to the one I find myself in here in the ROI. There is no provision for carrying a multi for daily EDC purposes under the law here, and I doubt that "Its my daily EDC" would fly as a "reasonable excuse". 
But I'm going off topic now.... 

[AimlessWanderer]

The thread title is epic fail.

The epic fail is not one little charity working in one little corner of a small island nation to raise awareness of something in their immediate community, but the attempts of people from a different cultural and legal perspective in other lands to "globalise" this and therefore make it about them somehow. It's not. Not even remotely.

Related fails include legal assumptions based not on the laws of the land where the charity works, but on laws of the overseas commentators. The fails there are too epic for me to waste time on. Hardly any of the legal assumptions in this thread are right from what I can see.

It's so... ... it's almost (but still not quite) laughable.

The problem is that those things tend to spill over the borders of one little corner of a small island. I wouldn't exactly call Britain small, but that is a landmass vs cultural significance debate. And regardless of the Brexit, Britain is a big player in the EU.

Since you're keen on hitting that cultural perspective, tell me is there a legitimate reason a teen could carry a tool in Essex?

As far as legality goes - criminals don't adhere to laws anyway so either that point is moot or we're just starring at a very huge can of worms.

Of course. A teen just like any other person in the UK is allowed to carry whatever they need to carry out their daily lives. It's only the act of carrying for the purposes of causing harm that they are trying to change, not carrying of household items under any circumstances whatsoever. If the teen in question is on his way to fix his Gran's garden gate, no problem.

And if said teen wants to EDC a tool?
Thats a similar situation to the one I find myself in here in the ROI. There is no provision for carrying a multi for daily EDC purposes under the law here, and I doubt that "Its my daily EDC" would fly as a "reasonable excuse". 
But I'm going off topic now.... 

The object only becomes a problem under certain conditions. I do not believe that age alone is enough to trigger legal intervention. The officer in question would have to be able to demonstrate in a court of law that said item was being carried for nefarious purposes. A teen with a LM Juice in his pocket or a Vic Classic on his keys is not automatically up to no good (unless being carried in a blade free environment such as schools, airports etc). Questions may be asked, but for legal intervention there has to be cause to believe that the individual intends to use it to break a law. This is purely my interpretation, and ultimately it would be a charge officer's/magistrate's/jury's interpretation of the situation that matters.

Again this is not what they are trying to change. They are trying to stop youths carrying items as weapons, not to stop them engaging in productive activities.

[styx]

To be fair our local law says that umbrellas can be considered dangerous weapons in crowded places like public gatherings, concerts, etc.

Most here agree on the point that they want to accomplish - stop youths carrying items as weapons. But they are going by vilifying the items because of the actions, not the actions regardless of items used.
I oddly took the time to look into some practices that are pretty much standard in Europe and if personal experience is any gauge then I can pinpoint why the campaign is the way it is. In developing such projects, experts (very loose term for any smurf willing to lose way too much time) have to cerate a cause effect relationship. Often it is done in a tree form, but my suspicion is that it is just one visual approach to a general way of doing it. Now the cause is the hilariously dumb problem because of a cutoff point that has to be imposed.
The cutoff point serves because the root of every problem is deeper and usually comes down to local laws, economy and similar things that organizations can't influence. And that is when it comes to the zealotic prerogative of one individual

[WoodsDuck]

The thread title is epic fail.

The epic fail is not one little charity working in one little corner of a small island nation to raise awareness of something in their immediate community, but the attempts of people from a different cultural and legal perspective in other lands to "globalise" this and therefore make it about them somehow. It's not. Not even remotely.

Related fails include legal assumptions based not on the laws of the land where the charity works, but on laws of the overseas commentators. The fails there are too epic for me to waste time on. Hardly any of the legal assumptions in this thread are right from what I can see.

It's so... ... it's almost (but still not quite) laughable.

I didn't personally say anything about laws, so I have to assume that bit isn't directed at me. However the bolded bit seems to be, and I have to take issue with the assertion that because something takes place in another country, or is being done by a relatively small group, that makes it none of my business. Since I'm an American I should just shut up about anything that happens anywhere else in the world, because my cultural background prohibits me from understanding it? That's a really ignorant idea, and I'm disappointed to see this kind of close-mindedness on MTo.
I have no problems with the people of the United Kingdom, whether I agree with all the laws in place there or relate to every facet of the culture, or not. In fact, the harshest sentiment I've ever even posted about knife restrictions specifically can be summed up as "hey, that's a bummer." Not because I think my culture is superior, or my laws are more just. But because I assume that everyone posting on this forum is a tool/knife enthusiast of some description, and find it to be kind of a downer that some of my fellow hobbyists have stricter laws to contend with, which may hinder their enjoyment of said hobby.

When people from other nations comment on United States politics or anything else, my response isn't "look at that foreigner trying to butt in on my glorious nation's culture, he should mind his own business." I try to understand his point of view, and consider how his specific background (which may include nationality, ethnicity, religion, etc, etc) might color his perspective, and attempt to have a civil discourse wherein we might compare and contrast our viewpoints and gain a greater understanding of one another.

But when it comes to the issue of an organization that chooses to basically slander all who carry weapons with even the naming of their group, I don't care where they are or what they're doing. Whatever good intentions there are behind it, they're leading with an insulting generalization that is a textbook example of demonizing the opposition. I'm not going to take the stance that says "oh, these guys are a small group from another nation, so they're allowed to defame me and billions of others."
What is it about the size and location of both the nation and organization that should inspire me to give them a free pass? I'm not calling for them to be dismantled or their ideas silenced, I am just expressing my opinion on their chosen tactic.

I've tried to make this post as clear as I can, and get my points across, though I sometimes struggle to capture exactly what I want to say in text. I'm not a good writer by any stretch. I know a lot of people, including some on this forum, like to argue points. I generally prefer to discuss them. This case is especially silly since, if they had named the group almost anything else, I wouldn't have even bothered to comment. But they did, and so I have responded to it in the only way I feel it should be responded to.

[Obi1shinobee]

Im a biggest coward 

[Poncho65]

Come on guys let's cool down on this one a bit It seems to be drifting toward political and we don't want that

It all started with a pic that the majority of us had no clue about and went from there So let's agree to disagree and move on

[Don Pablo]

Come on guys let's cool down on this one a bit It seems to be drifting toward political and we don't want that

It all started with a pic that the majority of us had no clue about and went from there So let's agree to disagree and move on

I'm chilling now. 
Maybe too much drink? 

[Syph007]

I have to object to the only cowards carry tools line.  They should rephrase that.  Boyscouts are cowards?  I'm in the always be prepared camp as is my son and wife.

A sharpened stick is equally dangerous ad a screwdriver so   let's drop the naming of objects more used as tools then weapons and think of a better slogan.

It needs to target the youth violence itself not the method as to how it's carried out or nothing is going to be solved.  Why do they want to attack each other?  Do they need more positive things to do with their time? Probably but I don't know. 

Kids should want to be like macgyver still even though it's not the 80s. 

[Aloha]

We don't have to agree.  We also don't have to like our own law or anyones else laws.  I enjoy a good discussion but as of late it gets too personal.  Come on guys, on both side chill the F out.   

That being said, I along with others were just reacting to the picture of the Cookie Monster with the slogan without any context as to political, social, cultural, regional or otherwise. 

I had no clue nor did I look up what the reason for the picture was as I believe others didn't or wouldn't do.  I didnt care where it was targeted as it could have been here in the city I live and my reaction would be the same.  I never took the time to look up why this picture created.  My reaction is based solely on the picture and text. 

Having clearly stated the picture with slogan was directed at a specific area then it all made sense.  While I still stand by my reaction to the picture and text only,  I understand better and am sad this is needed anywhere.       

Guys, its really simple.  I understand as do most of you that this familys grief was channeled in a way they felt was right.  Hell I can fully respect that and I know many of you can.  Whether we agree on how they went about their LOGO is really where I and others I believe were taking issue.  We dont have to agree but as with the other thread we shouldnt take jabs, from either side.  Clearly we have some passionate folks and passionate about their homelands. 

Thank you all for posting I do appreciate it.  I read thru every post with a clear perspective.

Guys please stop bickering back an forth about anything remotely political.  This is never going to go well and we all know that.  At that same time lets not get to sensitive that we cannot have a feisty debate about things.  I do really enjoy when we can have a lively conversation but a fair one. 

   



     

 

[pomsbz]

Whose turn is it to buy a round? 

[pomsbz]

double post

[AimlessWanderer]

I'm a little confused as to the extent that the charities' and my comments seem to have been taken out of context.

If a small charity was set up in another country (with a legal system I am not familiar with) for issues local and specific to them, I wouldn't relate them to UK law and then get upset about them. Even if I didn't understand them and asked genuine questions about them, if someone tried to explain them from a local perspective , I'd try to understand it purely from their perspective and leave it at that. I don't see why people should get upset and take personal offence at something that doesn't affect them or isn't aimed at them in any way. To claim it's libelous ... seriously? Who to? Based on whose laws?

This is a logo that folks didn't initially understand. Fair enough, out of context it can look very perplexing and potentially inflammatory if that was used elsewhere. I completely understand that. So, I've looked into it and tried to share some context and clarity as to what it's actually about, and who it's actually aimed at etc. People have then asked specific questions about the way a teen in the UK would be judged at the scene, and I've tried to answer those too.

This is not a cause I am championing or anything I am affiliated to in any way.

However, taking offence when a slogan, name, logo or any other aspect is taken outside of the context and locality and placed into another environment or judged from a completely different perspective from where it was intended and used is simply ridiculous. There is absolutely nothing to be achieved there aside from feeding persecutory delusions, and justifying personal crusades... but that's only possible if you misinterpret what is actually happening with this charity/logo. In it's original setting and context, and without reading other stuff into it that isn't actually there, there is nothing whatsoever for a wider audience to get upset about. You have to intentionally remove it from it's original context and measure it against things that don't apply here for it to be inflammatory.

If someone wants more clarity on something, and if I can answer the question, I'm happy to assist where I can - but I'm not interested in some out of context pissing contest when it is judged against standards from a different system, or viewed from a totally different perspective to which it actually relates. That's just nonsense. That is why I facepalmed.

[AimlessWanderer]

Whose turn is it to buy a round? 

Well volunteered Ben. Cheers mate 

[SteveC]

Come on guys let's cool down on this one a bit It seems to be drifting toward political and we don't want that

It all started with a pic that the majority of us had no clue about and went from there So let's agree to disagree and move on

^  This
 

[MusicMen]

I'll buy.   
Meet at The Stone Pony in Asbury Park, NJ?
If in a hurry, tonight at The Saint in Asbury Park.   

[Don Pablo]

I'll meet you there, I just need to get Concord back into service in less than 3 hours.

[pomsbz]

Mine's a Guinness. 

[Obi1shinobee]

I'll buy.   
Meet at The Stone Pony in Asbury Park, NJ?
If in a hurry, tonight at The Saint in Asbury Park.   

 

[Steinar]

Rather not, I've had as many as my liver can take already tonight.

[MusicMen]

Rather not, I've had as many as my liver can take already tonight.

Maybe another time, then. 

[Steinar]

Yeah, I think that's for the best. 

(Those Estonians sure know how to make their DIPA.)

[kirk13]

I'll meet you there, I just need to get Concord back into service in less than 3 hours.

And a time machine