Sgian Dubhs are not weapons ... It's official!

[nagod]

so because military regulations say it isnt a weapon according to their definition why do people think this affects civil law?am i missing something or misreading?

[andyfg]

so because military regulations say it isnt a weapon according to their definition why do people think this affects civil law?am i missing something or misreading?

Nagod, I started the thread. Here's what prompted me. I can't speak for others. I had read a number of accounts of the sgian that told the story of the "black knife as a hidden weapon." That had always put me off wearing one (for a variety of reasons that I need not mention). When I read in the Scots regs that the British military do not consider it a weapon, I rather liked it. From what others have said in this thread—who have considered the history of the sgian—the Royal Regiment of Scotland has it about right.

Of course, civil law differs country to country and state to state. A little knife might well be considered a weapon by, say, local police officers in one place but not in another. What interested me was not so much current civil laws as the provenance of the sgian. My post was party tongue in cheek. To be honest I didn't expect it to produce such a lot of posts!:ootd: