Prohibit, wait, prohibit further

The state government of Lower Saxony is once again urging the federal government to impose stricter knife bans, while lacking compelling justifications. Symbolic politics is in full swing.

Statistics say: Last year, almost 9.000 knife attacks were recorded in Germany. Compared to the previous year, the number of violent crimes, which the police have been recording as a "phenomenon" since 2020, increased by almost 10%. Further comparisons with older data are not useful, as the Federal Criminal Police Office (BKA) has only been counting cases involving dangerous or serious bodily harm with knives for two years now.

Reliable data in the police crime statistics (PKS) has only been available since 2021. This alone shows that decision-makers behind the current discussions and proposals regarding the tightening of gun laws can hardly justify their proposals with actual facts and statistical statements. But apparently, no one is taking it that seriously. So it’s no surprise that the current initiative of the Lower Saxony state government will again receive much praise.

___STEADY_PAYWALL___

Switchblade knives at the forefront of the debate

Daniela Behrens (SPD), the Lower Saxony Minister of the Interior and Sports, announced at the end of May that she would push forward the implementation of the current gun law amendment and complement it with stricter regulations for carrying knives in public. A corresponding proposal has already been approved by the state cabinet and is set to be introduced at the upcoming Bundesrat meeting on June 14 (after the editorial deadline).

"Current crime statistics show that further changes in weapons law must be implemented, especially to further curb knife crime. For me, it is absolutely incomprehensible that the legal handling of certain switchblades is still possible today. I have a clear expectation that the federal government will promptly agree on the reform of weapons law and clear the way for more safety in public spaces," Behrens explained. In the past, she had already advocated for the establishment of more weapon-free zones, despite the associated increased burden on the police.

The new Bundesrat initiative aims to further advance the tightening of gun laws announced by Federal Interior Minister Nancy Faeser (SPD) back in January 2023. "The Bundesrat regrets that the amendment to the gun laws announced by the BMI is still under discussion within the federal government after more than a year."

The carrying of fixed-blade knives should also be further restricted

However, Lower Saxony wants to go even further and proposes additional tightening measures to those already discussed regarding the gun laws. "The Bundesrat therefore considers it necessary to further restrict the handling of weapons and knives in public," states the original wording of the Bundesrat initiative, which was sent to the Association of German Gunsmiths and Weapons Dealers (VDB) upon request from the ministry.

Specifically, a "regulation of a general ban on carrying switchblades" is demanded. The current legal situation allows the acquisition and possession of switchblades, also known as automatic knives, with a blade length of up to 8,5 centimeters. With this type of knife, the blade springs out of the handle at the push of a button. However, they are not allowed to be carried in public. An "extension of the carrying ban to fixed-blade knives from six centimeters blade length" is also suggested. Currently, the carrying ban only applies to fixed-blade knives with a blade over 12 centimeters.

Finally, a "regulation of a general carrying ban on weapons as defined by the gun laws in trains and vehicles of public transportation as well as their structurally enclosed facilities, unless the weapons are carried in a locked container" is proposed.

Incidentally, the state of Lower Saxony had already proposed similar bans back in 2019. At that time, they also drafted a 'Bill to Amend the Weapons Act,' which included, among other things, the aforementioned knife bans. However, the Bundesrat later only adopted the suggestions regarding the option for individual state governments to establish weapon-free zones. Similar initiatives have also been seen in the past from North Rhine-Westphalia and Hesse, some of which even received support from the CDU and SPD. An online petition titled '“No” to the disproportionate tightening of gun laws' received nearly 85.000 signatures from opponents of the proposal shortly thereafter.

Knives are said to be particularly dangerous

Now one might think that such significant changes to the legal situation could also be adequately justified. And indeed, Lower Saxony provides just over two pages of justifications for the proposed measures. However, as with previous proposals and discussions, these do not delve deeply into the crime statistics. It is merely emphasized that attacks with knives continue to be "committed in high numbers." Knife attacks are considered "particularly dangerous and undermine the sense of security of the population." Furthermore, they lead to "significant injuries and can also be fatal." Kitchen knives with blade lengths of over 10 centimeters are cited as examples.

"Especially in places where many people gather in close quarters, there is an increased danger of knife attacks simply due to the number of people present. Not only is the number of potentially endangered individuals particularly high because of the crowd, but there is also an increased risk of injuries due to uncontrollable mass behavior, such as in the form of a stampede," is inferred from the demand.

And even though these statements are certainly true, they do not provide sufficient justification for such significant tightening of gun laws as proposed. In the effort to reduce the number of knife attacks in trains and public transport, to increase safety, and to protect people from violent crime, it is essential to consider far more than just the rise in knife-related offenses. This increase could not be prevented despite already enacted tightening of knife laws, such as the 2008 amendment, and numerous negative media reports surrounding knives.

The FDP recognized this even then and criticized the decision: changes to weapons law would do nothing to combat crime, because they would not defuse the problem of illegal weapons. Doubts about the additional security gain were therefore appropriate. The knife ban also brought nothing from the liberals' point of view. All other parties, i.e. Die Linke, SPD, Bündnis 90/Die Grünen and CDU/CSU, ultimately voted for the resolution, which came into force on 1 April 2008.

At this point, it would be worthwhile to take a look at the statistics to find an indication of why the number of knife attacks continues to rise despite stricter laws. However, neither the police crime statistics nor other publications provide meaningful and conclusive statements on this. The numbers do not reveal which knives were used in the offenses. This is an absolutely essential point if one wants to justify further planned measures with the numbers. After all, it cannot be inferred whether, for example, a ban on switchblades would have any effect. Because it is also clear that such bans are usually only observed by law-abiding citizens. Offenders who use cutting tools like knives as weapons are unlikely to check the legal text before committing a violent crime to ensure they are using a legal and permissible knife.

Significant criticism from politics and authorities

But public criticism was not long in coming. Already on May 28, the day the letter was published, Carina Hermann, parliamentary managing director of the CDU parliamentary group in the Lower Saxony state parliament, commented on the issue: "The planned ban [...] does not sufficiently take into account the everyday reality of many people. Should families really be criminalized on a Sunday outing if they carry normal breakfast knives for a picnic in the countryside? How is this ban to be comprehensively controlled in all public spaces, on buses and trains?" The letter also contains no information on the implementation of the proposed measures.

"Rule-of-law prohibitions with criminal consequences should only be enacted if their compliance can be guaranteed. Given the increasing workload of the police and the understaffing of public prosecutors' offices, this proposal appears to be an impractical measure." Stricter gun laws inevitably lead to an increased workload for the police, who would have to implement the proposed prohibitions through expanded controls. But even with current legislation, authorities in many places are excessively overburdened.

Last summer, there was a wave of criticism from politicians and authorities regarding the establishment of additional weapon-free zones. "General weapon bans do not increase safety for everyone. They are hardly enforceable in practice, and arbitrary controls will be the result," emphasized Martina Renner, the interior policy spokesperson for the Left Party at the time. A spokesperson for the Essen police saw no need for additional ban zones: "As shown by the high number of knife seizures [...], our legal options and the actions of my colleagues in such matters are sufficient so far." Similar reactions are expected regarding the general tightening of the legislation.

A look at the facts is consciously avoided.

In this context, a look at the United Kingdom is interesting. There, knives and other "dangerous objects" have been virtually banned from public spaces by law for years. Yet, the number of knife attacks significantly increased between 2010/11 (36.000) and 2019/20 (54.300), despite strict interpretation by authorities, where even screwdrivers and scissors are regularly confiscated. The British Psychological Society (BPS), after evaluating over 20 studies on knife crime, sees the cause not in the object itself, but for example, in mental health problems or drug abuse.

Personal checks would also show no significant effect on reducing knife crime (more on this in the upcoming pages). The fact that such statements are not mentioned in the current debate here is irresponsible but understandable. Because a critical examination of the effects of such measures makes it much harder to enforce further bans.

Lobby groups also criticize planned changes.

The Association of German Gunsmiths and Weapons Dealers (VDB) clearly opposes the proposed initiative in the Bundesrat. "We see [...] further restrictions in the area of knives as ineffective and disproportionate," they stated in a press release. "Rules without enforcement options cannot have any impact. A significantly stronger police presence and the enforcement and consistent punishment of actions already prohibited under the Weapons Act would be more effective."

Phil Kahrs, an editor at PIRSCH magazine, is even clearer: "Shouldn't we actually focus much more on socio-cultural factors to get a grip on the violence problem in Germany? Well, banning an object is much easier and more pleasant than acknowledging and addressing societal issues. Because the latter doesn't happen overnight."

Further restrictions will be the inevitable consequence.

As of the editorial deadline for this issue, it is still unclear how the initiative in the Bundesrat will proceed. However, the implementation of the announced amendment to the gun law seems increasingly likely, and the bans could become significantly broader than initially planned. And even if these changes are actually adopted, it is clear to every informed observer of the debate that another amendment will follow this one.

Because even if automatic knives and fixed-blade knives with blades longer than 6 centimeters are no longer allowed to be carried, this will not stop potential offenders from using knives as weapons and committing crimes. On the contrary: the restrictions continue to affect only law-abiding citizens, likely until a general knife carrying ban is also introduced in Germany, as is already the case in neighboring Austria.

And even this measure will not solve the problem. If the government were truly concerned about the best possible prevention of such criminal offenses, it would need to engage in detail with the factors and triggers for such acts, refer to further statistics, and actually look at existing measures and their effectiveness in other countries. But all of this is skillfully avoided by decision-makers. It is simply much easier to impose bans, wait until they do not achieve the desired effect, and then propose further bans.

The sensibility of the current proposals can be illustrated by a short thought experiment: despite the proposed bans, two-handed knives without locks, so-called slipjoints, would still be exempt from the carrying ban, and without any blade length limitation. And of course, it makes no difference to the injury risk of a blade whether it has to be opened with one hand or both hands and whether it then locks into place.

And for those who do not want to bother looking for a suitable knife, they can still resort to other everyday objects. Even a simple ballpoint pen can be misused as a weapon and, in the worst case, cause serious injuries. So will we see a ballpoint pen ban in the future? Probably not. What matters to the government is that no one asks questions.