Carrying a Sgian Dubh

[The Supreme Canuck]

Awesome. Thanks, both of you.

The Wizard of BC (Steve?): The word of a mountie is good enough for me. Thanks for calling.

Moosehead: I wasn't sure what concealed meant. Didn't know if it had to be entirely obscured. Oh, and the lack of a length restriction seems to take care of dirks as well. Thanks.

[davedove]

I don't know about in Canada, but here in the States carrying around a blade the length of a dirk would probably have some of the police keeping an eye on you, even if it is legal. It would depend on the circumstances.

[The Wizard of BC]

An Addendum to the addendum.

The Officer I spoke to also added a note of "Concealed".

A "pocket knife" in your pocket is not concealed. It's where it's supposed to be and readily discovered during cursory search. A knife in your sock that has slipped down and no longer visible is still not concealed. A knife on your belt but not visible due to a loose fitting sweater is not concealed.

A knife strapped to your thigh under your kilt is concealed and falls under applicable weapons statutes.

[The Supreme Canuck]

davedove: Of course. But I wouldn't mind the attention: I'm not going to break any laws, so let them look. Besides, it's not like the dirk would be worn regularly or to places that it shouldn't.

An Addendum to the addendum.

The Officer I spoke to also added a note of "Concealed".

A "pocket knife" in your pocket is not concealed. It's where it's supposed to be and readily discovered during cursory search. A knife in your sock that has slipped down and no longer visible is still not concealed. A knife on your belt but not visible due to a loose fitting sweater is not concealed.

A knife strapped to your thigh under your kilt is concealed and falls under applicable weapons statutes.

That makes sense. I suppose there needs to be an intention to conceal the weapon for it to be concealed.

[ozmeath]

found this link on smith and bolton knives of canada. It seems to outline the do's and don'ts:
http://www.smithandboltonknives.com/..._practiceID=16

[The Supreme Canuck]

Yeah, again the key point is intent. You can have an offensive weapon as long as you can prove you don't intend to do anything illegal with it.

[Casey]

I have worn my sgian dubh on many occasion, in cluding casual wear and I have had no difficulty.

An interesting note: Last summer I was seeing my nephew off at Pierre Elliot Trudeau Airport in Montréal. I was wearing a kilt but not a sgian dubh, rather a Swiss Army knife on my belt. I very friendly Sûreté Officer (Quebec Provincial Police) asked me if I was taking a plane as he feared that my knife would be confiscated at security.

[The Supreme Canuck]

Well, my Mountie drum major got back to me, and he says there are no laws against wearing a sgian that he knows of, either nationwide or in Ontario.

So, that, along with everything else here, wraps that up nicely.

[jkdesq]

I had a look in a paid legal decision database (www.westlawecarswell.com) and apparently, there is no reported Canadian decision by a judge that includes the words "sgian dubh" nor any decision with the words "knife" and "kilt". There are decisions with "knife" and "highland" but the highland is always part of a place name. One thing is for sure: the police are NOT staking out Burn's Nights in order to up their conviction rates.

Apparently, kilts do not really get a very good play in Canadian law. There are two reported cases involving men in kilts. In one the kilted guy was harrassing his employees and the other the kilted guy sexually assaulted a woman in a buffet line. At least there are no sgian dubh welding maniacs mentioned.

Something I would draw attention to is that "weapon" is defined in s. 2 of the Criminal Code:

"weapon" means any thing used, designed to be used or intended for use

(a) in causing death or injury to any person, or

(b) for the purpose of threatening or intimidating any person

and, without restricting the generality of the foregoing, includes a firearm;

Would the typical sgian dubhs that one buys these days be used, designed or intended to kill, injure, threaten or intimidate? Would a letter opener better fit the definition of "weapon"? I've seen one sgian dubh sold with a real blade that you could take hunting, but the rest of them -- is granny going to be arrested for having her knitting needles?

Obviously a police officer's word is better than most, but they do not speak for judges and legislators. A police officer's word is not authoritive. No Canadian Criminal lawyers on this site?

[jkdesq]

Yeah, again the key point is intent. You can have an offensive weapon as long as you can prove you don't intend to do anything illegal with it.

I don't know if you can say this. I think there are three charges that could relate to wearing a sgian dubh or dirk:

i) s. 88 Possession of weapon for dangerous purpose
ii) s. 89 Carrying a weapon while attending public meeting
iii) s. 90 Carrying concealed weapon

Section 90 is not one to worry about, because the dirk and sgian dubh are likely not going to be concealed. The whole point of wearing them is so that they can be seen.

Section 88 is likely not a concern, because (presumably) one is not possessing a weapon for a dangerous purpose. If you go somewhere intending to use your sgian dubh to kill someone, you are likely committing this crime. Then again, a radish roser used for the same purpose would amount to the same crime.

Section 89 I think is the one that is inconsistent with the above statement. The defence I see, if one was charged under this section, is in the fact that a typical sgian dubh does not fit within the definition of "weapon". They are letter openers with highland handles.

Maybe I am going academic here. My suggestion would be that you don't call your sgian dubh or dirk an "offensive weapon". Contrary to what Supreme Canuck says, there is a law about carrying "offensive weapons" (per the definitions in the Criminal Code "offensive weapon" = "weapon") to a "public meeting" (ie. Burns Night, Highland Games, St. Andrew's Ball, etc. etc.) -- s. 89. If your sgian dubh or dirk fit the definition of "weapon" and you are carrying it at a public meeting, the only question would be do you have an "excuse" to carry it. Arguably you do. As I said above, the question does not seem to be answered by the Courts. Who wants to be the test case to set the precedent??