NYPD Steals $18,000 from Man Because He Was Carrying a Banned Pocket Knife

knifeBy Alice Salles

In the past five years, the New York Police Department has spent $347,000 on false arrest lawsuit settlements. According to the Village Voice, these costs stem from the city’s “gravity knife statute.”

Passed in 1958, the law banned New York residents from carrying knives fitted with blades that fall out of the handle as the user points them toward the ground while pushing the lever. This antiquated law is responsible for thousands of yearly arrests, despite the fact that current knife designs bear no resemblance to the blades of yesteryear.

But estimates suggest that over the past ten years, this particular ban has been the reason for the prosecution of “60,000 New Yorkers … many of them working people who use folding knives as part of their jobs.” A recent incident shows another unintended consequence of upholding the gravity knife statute — one that cost a South Bronx resident $18,000.

In a very public tweet, the NYPD announced Sunday that officers from Police Service Area 7 had “arrested a male for a gravity knife and vouchered $18,000 dollars cash for forfeiture.” The triumphant tweet, the Village Voice pointed out, even “[publicized the prisoner’s] name and address, down to the apartment number.”

knife-1By coupling an outdated law with civil asset forfeiture rules — which in New York state, happen to be draconian — officers managed to take advantage of yet another property owner in order to “prop up” the local police budget.

While few details about the arrest were made public, the Village Voice added, many on Twitter commented that the model of knife the arrestee was carrying “appear[ed] to be a style often carried by first responders, with a feature designed for safely cutting clothes and tangled seat belts after, say, a car accident.” The news outlet reached out to the NYPD for more information, but officers failed to respond with more details.

The gravity knife ban was tweaked in June when Democrats added an amendment to the state law clarifying “the definition of a gravity knife by excluding any folding knife with a ‘bias toward closure.’” The change has yet to be signed by Governor Andrew Cuomo.

But even if it’s signed, this change to the state law does little to protect the New Yorkers’ constitutional right to own and carry any means of self-defense. Nevertheless, it could help to limit the number of individuals framed by the NYPD over folding knives and pocket knives, which are often “used for work or passed down in a family.”

Even if the tweak to the state’s knife ban is finally signed into law, this measure, alone, will not be enough because the state’s civil asset forfeiture laws remain intact. Until serious criminal justice reforms are passed in the Empire State, New Yorkers will continue to be bullied in the name of policing for profit.

This article (NYPD Steals $18,000 from Man Because He Was Carrying a Banned Pocket Knife) is free and open source. You have permission to republish this article under a Creative Commons license with attribution to Alice Salles and theAntiMedia.orgAnti-Media Radio airs weeknights at 11 pm Eastern/8 pm Pacific. If you spot a typo, please email the error and name of the article to [email protected].


Activist Post Daily Newsletter

Subscription is FREE and CONFIDENTIAL
Free Report: How To Survive The Job Automation Apocalypse with subscription

11 Comments on "NYPD Steals $18,000 from Man Because He Was Carrying a Banned Pocket Knife"

  1. Legal robbery plan as the nose on your face.

  2. And they wonder why they get shot at.

  3. LEOs are looking for trouble, and soon or later they’re going to find it Bigtime.

  4. The NYPD was and is a largely criminal organization. It has been since long before Serpico’s day. Their police unions aren’t called “The Five Families” for nothing. As a kid, I was given momey to give to the cop in case I was shaken down, a common occurance in Harlem in the ’60s. These days, they mostly commit robberies and shakedowns of drug dealers and minorities. They can act with impunity as long as their victims are minorities.

    The good cops know to keep their mouth’s shut and go with the program which means the criminals pretty much have free reign as demonstrated by Eric Garner’s murder.

    • they shake down and inflict crime against all races. Ask me how I know

      Good cops who watch the bad cops are just as guilty of wrongdoing when they do not intervene for the innocent

  5. This stuff makes me sick. They’ve gone way beyond getting their revenue from traffic tickets. Government sanctioned theft is still theft. But I suppose after 911 the 10 Commandments no longer apply either.

  6. There is no LAWFUL asset forfeiture. The supreme law of this land, requires that all laws/codes/regulations/statutes/treaties/etc MUST be in Pursuance thereof (follow) in order to be binding on the American people – and that is in writing. ALL who serve within our governments – state and federal – are bound by Oath to support and defend it BEFORE the orders of superiors and the duties of the position being occupied. Since this is not lawful in any manner per the Fourth Amendment, and the Preamble to the Bill of rights makes clear that it is those who serve within our governments that are forbidden/restricted from any action against those Rights that the governments were created to PROTECT.

    Fourth Amendmnet: “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, SHALL NOT BE VIOLATED, AND NO WARRANTS SHALL ISSUE, BUT UPON PROBABLE CAUSE, SUPPORTED BY OATH OR AFFIRMATION, AND PARTICULARLY DESCRIBING THE PLACE TO BE SEARCHED, AND THE PERSONS OR THINGS TO BE SEIZED.”

    Want to know why we currently have a police state, why America is going downhill so quickly? It is called a “police” state when a armed force be they military or LE are used AGAINST the people. Here in America it is also called *Terrorism.

    *28 C.F.R. Section 0.85 Terrorism is defined as “the unlawful use of force and violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives”.

    The requirement for all Federal and State Civil officers to give their solemn and binding Oath is established in Article VI, Section 1, Clause 4. Those that serve within our governments – state and general – are bound
    by their Oath to support the US Constitution, and when serving within a state government that state’s Constitution also.

    “I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and DOMESTIC; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take
    this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God.” (In the case of states, this Oath is usually blended with the state Oath and taken as one.

    Federal law regulating oath of office by government officials – state and federal – is divided into four parts along with an executive order that further defines the law for purposes of enforcement.

    5 U.S.C. 3331, provides the text of the actual oath of office the three branches of our government, the
    military, all law enforcement, the heads of the States, all federal employees are required to take before assuming office.

    5 U.S.C. 3333 requires the three branches of our government, the military, all law enforcement, the heads of the States, all federal and state employees sign an affidavit that they have taken the oath of office required by 5 U.S.C. 3331 and have not or will not violate that oath of office during their tenure of office.

    18 U.S.C. 1918 provides penalties for violation of oath of office described in 5 U.S.C. 7311 which include: (1) removal from office and; (2) confinement or a fine.

    5 U.S.C. 7311 explicitly makes it a federal criminal offense for anyone employed in the United States Government to “advocate the overthrow of our constitutional form of government”.

    The definition of “advocate” is further specified in Executive Order 10450 for the purposes of enforcement supplements 5 U.S.C. 7311. Executive Order 10450 provision specifies it is a violation of 5 U.S.C. 7311 for any person taking the oath of office to advocate “the alteration … of the form of the government of the United States by unconstitutional means.” It is important to realize that our form of government is defined
    by the Constitution of the United States. That according to Executive Order 10450 and 5 U.S. 7311 any
    act taken by government officials who have taken the oath of office prescribed by 5 U.S.C. 3331 which alters the form of government other then by amendment, is a criminal violation of the 5 U.S.C. 7311.

    Brookfield Construction Company V. Stewart 284 F Sup. 94: “An officer who acts in violation of the constitution ceases to represent the government.”

  7. This is not news to me, I was hassled for having a Barlow knife that does not lock or anything handed down to me by my grandfather, the incident happened in 1983. The cop wanted to take it away from me, I caused such a seen he just let me go. Smart move by the cop. Nowadays a person would not be so lucky. There are good cops in NYC but out of the 14,000 or so 10,000 are nothing but indoctrinated American hating, socialist morons . A 5th generation NYC American.

  8. I have no intention of every going to that slimy city anyway.

  9. hangthegoatphuckerintheWH | September 21, 2016 at 7:24 pm | Reply

    If you know whats good for you you’ll stay away from the concrete jungles.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published.


*