george b

offensive weapon or not

Recommended Posts

you happen across two groups of youth's Having a bit of a stand off in the park,a lot of posturing and name calling, however one of the youths is swinging a set of of numchucks ( rice flails) about and trying to intimidate the other group. You take action to spit the groups and detain the Bruce lee want to be, on suspicion of possesing an offensive weapon,

However on closer inspection the numchucks are a training aid, made of foam and incapable of causing any sort of injury beyond mildly annoying the person being hit. He has however been using them offensivly to threaten to the other group, who don't know they are ' fake' . So,, , arrest for off wep or tell him not to be so silly ?

Edited by george b

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, george b said:

you happen across two groups of youth's Having a bit of a stand off in the park,a lot of posturing and name calling, however one of the youths is swinging a set of of numchucks ( rice flails) about and trying to intimidate the other group. You take action to spit the groups and detain the Bruce lee want to be, on suspicion of possesing an offensive weapon,

However on closer inspection the numchucks are a training aid, made of foam and incapable of causing any sort of injury beyond mildly annoying the person being hit. He has however been using them offensivly to threaten to the other group, who don't know they are ' fake' . So,, , arrest for off wep or tell him not to be so silly ?

If they where intended to be a weapon by the user, then it's an offensive weapon. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, funkywingnut said:

If they where intended to be a weapon by the user, then it's an

,but he didn't intend To hit anyone with it, that would be rather pointless, he only wanted them to think he might if they came to close

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not for me. Off weap needs to be able to cause injury so maybe public order offences would be more appropriate of  words of advice weren't enough. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Definition of an off weap. You've stated yourself that it's incapable of causing injury. I could attack ppl with a balloon and I could even Intend to hurt them but wouldn't be an off weap offence as there is no way I could cause injury. 

Probably more likely to be looking at a common assault or an s. 4a poa  

Edited by Starts_23

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Starts_23 said:

Definition of an off weap. You've stated yourself that it's incapable of causing injury. I could attack ppl with a balloon and I could even Intend to hurt them but wouldn't be an off weap offence as there is no way I could cause injury. 

Probably more likely to be looking at a common assault or an s. 4a poa  

hmm, but the cja 1988 specifically bans items that consist of a length of cord or chain with an attached weight or hand grip. That description seems to include numchucks (of what ever matterial they are constructed ) and would therefore automatically be off wep?

Edited by george b

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Initially offensive weapon, yes. However, after that close inspection then no. 

Even though CJA bans it, since it's a training aid I'm not sure if it would still apply? Just as you can carry a knife for ceremonial purposes presumably you could carry training nunchuka.

He'd be getting arrested for public order s.4, and I'd seize the 'weapon' for being used in crime. You could go for common assault as well, but considering it's being used on a group there's no single victim so that would be a bit more difficult to get home.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Stripe said:

Initially offensive weapon, yes. However, after that close inspection then no. 

Even though CJA bans it, since it's a training aid I'm not sure if it would still apply? Just as you can carry a knife for ceremonial purposes presumably you could carry training nunchuka.

He'd be getting arrested for public order s.4, and I'd seize the 'weapon' for being used in crime. You could go for common assault as well, but considering it's being used on a group there's no single victim so that would be a bit more difficult t home.

im not sure the comparison with a dagger for ceremonal reasons is useful as the law is far from settled in that area. But at face value, if the possession was lawful, if he was seen waving it about in a threatening manner , there is a specific offence under the cja 88 of threatening someone with a pointy or bladed article of which he may fall foul.

if the possession of the numchucks had a lawful excuse of being taken to a place of practise, I feel that wouldn't extend to waving them around in a public park, let alone threatening someone with them

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, HMService said:

Made adapted or intended or offensive weapon per-se which I would suggest this is not.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

see my post above, items of this description are specifically identified as off wraps under the cja88

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree cja states that and in a black and white view of the world however in the grey area we deal in I would not treat it as such.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Starts_23 said:

I agree cja states that and in a black and white view of the world however in the grey area we deal in I would not treat it as such.

ok fair enough, let's run another numchuck senario based on them not being outlawed under the cja.

back when I was a young lad in the mid 70s and the kung fu craze was at its height. We used to make our own chucks ,either by turning them out of hard wood in woodwork or if less talented by cutting down two table legs and tying them together with toilet chain. Nb we made " death stars " out of quarter in plate in metal work. Ground to sharp points,( and our own ieds in chemistry) we were well armed in those days

so Sid decides. To make his own for practise purposes, he gets a length of broom handle cuts two bits off ,fixes a length of cord with curtain eyes and tucks them in his waist band and sets of to the park to practise. Where you happen on him swinging them about like a mad thing

offences ?

Edited by george b

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Sir Penguin said:

Affray?

for which scenario ? I wouldn't have thought so for either, as it requires a hypothetical bystander who is put in fear of their safety, just scaring the intended victim(s) isn't sufficient

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There are 24 hidden replies in this thread that you do not currently have access to as a Guest User of our forum. To unlock the forum register for an account for FREE today by clicking HERE
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.