Safety package: Cui bono?

The recent amendment to the gun law, passed as part of a comprehensive security package, has sent shockwaves through the knife enthusiast and legal gun owner community. With an apparent focus on public safety, the law establishes a multitude of new restrictions that raise more questions than they answer regarding their implementation and objectives.

Knives are now increasingly at the center of regulatory efforts, and the new law prohibits their possession and carrying in places where people gather – public festivals, nightclubs, cinemas, markets, and even theater performances.

But the question many are asking is: Who is this law actually protecting? A closer look reveals that the benefit to public safety is marginal, while law-abiding citizens face excessive restrictions, opaque exceptions, and potential criminalization of their everyday behavior.

___STEADY_PAYWALL___

The security package prohibits carrying knives at public festivals and markets as well as in cinemas and allows for random checks by officials. Photo: Leon Seibert / unsplash

A law against everyone – and no one

Particularly frustrating is the double standard of the new regulations. While politicians rely on the supposedly easy accessibility and potential danger of knives as justification, they ignore the obvious fact that knives have always been more of a tool than a weapon.

The far-reaching prohibitions and restrictions seem not only impractical but also contradictory: on the one hand, carrying knives in public is strictly regulated, while on the other hand, the exceptions offer so many loopholes that almost every citizen can claim a "recognized purpose" to legally carry a knife.

These regulations are not only inefficient but also open the door to legal disputes, where courts must decide whether the exception applies in individual cases. This does not create added security but rather a bureaucratic minefield that is of no benefit to either authorities or citizens.

In its article from October 17, DIE ZEIT draws an apt parallel: A knife ban is like taking ibuprofen for chronic pain – it only addresses the symptoms, not the causes. The focus on banning knives distracts from the actual causes of violence.

Knives have been part of human culture for thousands of years and are an indispensable tool. Banning them as weapons while still allowing them as tools creates an illusion of safety. The perpetrators in Solingen and Mannheim used kitchen knives that can be found in any household.

Bureaucratic overload instead of safety

While the new law aims to make public spaces safer, it has primarily achieved one thing: a massive overload of the responsible authorities. Just weeks after the law came into effect, reports from counties and cities are increasing that the processing of applications for gun permits has effectively come to a standstill.

The administration is faced with a flood of new tasks and unclear procedural rules, exacerbated by a lack of preparation on the part of the lawmakers. One example is the lack of coordination with the customs criminal office, which is responsible for reviewing certain applications. The result: applications remain unprocessed, and citizens are left waiting indefinitely – a situation that is frustrating for both applicants and administrative staff.

The criticism from associations that had warned of such overload was largely ignored in advance. The problem is neither new nor surprising: earlier changes to the gun law had similar effects, and the continuous increase in bureaucracy has unnecessarily burdened the already limited resources of the authorities. This development undermines not only citizens' trust in the administration but also raises questions about the sensibility of such measures.

For while the administration sinks into chaos, the actual goal – curbing crime and violence – remains unachieved. Instead, the legislation has created a system that primarily harasses and criminalizes law-abiding citizens while leaving the issue of illegal weapon possession largely untouched.

Legal uncertainties and symbolic politics

One of the biggest weaknesses of the new gun law lies in its legal ambiguity. Although it appears to be a clear and comprehensive set of regulations, many of the provisions are so vaguely worded that they leave significant room for interpretation in practice.

With the upcoming federal government, whether it's a Black-Red or Black-Green coalition, further tightening of the gun law is to be expected. Photo: Conny Schneider / unsplash

This particularly concerns the definitions of "not readily accessible" or "recognized purpose." While the former is crucial for transporting knives in weapon-free zones, practical implementation is hampered by contradictory and unclear wording.

The regulation that knives are only "not readily accessible" if they can be reached with more than three movements is a prime example of bureaucratic hair-splitting that is hardly comprehensible in reality. Such provisions are not only useless but also promote arbitrariness, as their interpretation often remains subject to the subjective assessment of officials.

Additionally, there is the contradictory treatment of switchblades. While political rhetoric advocates for their complete criminalization, the law itself contains an exception that allows their use under certain circumstances. This contradiction not only highlights the flaws in the legislative process but also raises fundamental questions about the seriousness and competence of the political actors.

The entire discussion around switchblades thus becomes a symbol of the weaknesses of the new legislation: instead of creating realistic and practical regulations, the law remains a patchwork of bans, exceptions, and unclear provisions that create more confusion than clarity.

Economic impact on the knife industry

For the knife industry, the consequences are severe. Knife makers like Erich Niemeier, president of the German Knife Makers Guild, now have to destroy all switchblades and are prohibited from manufacturing or selling them. This not only threatens the livelihoods of many craftsmen and dealers but also raises questions about the proportionality of the measures.

Niemeier, who has been making knives of all variations for 20 years, emphasizes to BR: "A knife in itself is never dangerous; it only becomes a weapon when misused by humans." His criticism is directed against the blanket criminalization of knives and their owners. Many of his colleagues also make a living from selling knives that are now suddenly prohibited. The stricter weapons law could cost them their livelihoods.

Ignored Expertise and Lack of Dialogue

Both the German Hunting Association (DJV) and the German Shooting Federation (DSB) criticize that neither the affected associations nor the responsible authorities and police were appropriately involved.

Even the criticism from experts during the public hearing in the Bundestag was ignored. Within a month, nearly 130,000 people signed a petition against the proposed tightening, making it one of the four most successful on the openPetition platform.

"The amendment to the weapons law is nothing more than window dressing. The traffic light parties are definitively squandering their trust a year before the federal election, at least among two million legal gun owners," said DJV managing director Olaf Niestroj.

Walter Wolpert, DSB Vice President for Legal Affairs, adds: "As representatives of legal gun owners, we instead call on the legislature to address the real problem related to combating terror and crime – illegal weapons."

The Association of German Gunsmiths and Firearms Dealers (VDB) has also repeatedly offered its support in recent months. "The VDB is always ready for corresponding discussions and will contribute its expertise to a new version to achieve a practical, liberal, understandable, and enforceable firearms law," it stated in a press release in mid-November.

A Perspective for the Future

Given these obvious weaknesses, a fundamental revision of the gun law is essential. However, this requires more than just cosmetic corrections: a paradigm shift is needed that considers the needs and rights of citizens as well as the requirements for public safety.

Associations like the VDB have made concrete proposals on what such a law could look like. An evidence-based evaluation of the existing regulations could help identify and eliminate unnecessary provisions. At the same time, the law should be formulated more clearly and understandably to provide reliable guidance for both citizens and authorities.

"After the repeated and sometimes extensive amendments to the Weapons Act since 2003, it is essential to objectively and fully analyze and evaluate the effectiveness of these amendments," according to the VDB.

The digitization of administrative processes is another important step to increase efficiency and reduce the burden on authorities. Electronic gun ownership cards and a better-connected national gun register could help reduce unnecessary bureaucracy while strengthening internal security.

Ultimately, politics must recognize that symbolic politics and overregulation are not sustainable solutions. Instead, bold and thoughtful decisions are needed that balance safety and freedom – for a society where knives are not seen as a threat, but as what they truly are: essential tools of everyday life.