The Massachusetts Supreme Court ruled on Tuesday that the Second Amendment protects switchblades (a type of spring-assisted knife) as “bearable arms,” striking down a statewide ban in place for 67 years.
The case, known as Commonwealth v. David E. Canjura, challenges the Constitutionality of a ban on such knives after Mr. Canjura was charged with possession of a dangerous weapon and assault and battery (the assault and battery charge was eventually dismissed by the state). A lower court denied the motion to dismiss. On appeal, the ruling of the State Supreme Court reversed that denial.
Knife Rights Chairman, Doug Ritter, noted in a statement on their site that:
It is extremely gratifying to see this switchblade ban struck down on Second Amendment grounds in one of the most notoriously anti-Second Amendment states. It also stands in stark contrast with last week’s decision from the Federal District Court in California that got everything wrong that this decision got right.
Gun rights and knife rights are inextricably linked, not only in principle, but also by the efforts of legal experts in the field. Second Amendment attorney, Daniel Schmutter, who is part of the Koons/Siegel v. Platkin challenge to New Jersey’s “Sensitive Places” law, is involved in the Massachusetts knife law challenge and penned the 36-page amicus curiae brief that helped educate the judge in this case.
Justice Serge Georges, writing in a 5-0 decision, said:
The Second Amendment extends to all bearable arms and is not limited to firearms….Like handguns, a person can carry a switchblade for offensive or defensive purposes in case of confrontation.
Judge Georges also showed his receipts by applying the text and history methodology in Heller:
A review of the history of the American colonies reveals that knives were ubiquitous among colonists, who used them to defend their lives, obtain or produce food, and fashion articles from raw materials.
This case is a further testament to the power of the Bruen precedent. Judge Georges notes:
Indeed, despite having the full benefit of Bruen throughout this appeal, the Commonwealth has failed to identify a single onpoint historical analogue to G. L. c. 269, § 10 (b), from the time of the founding, or at least the time the Fourteenth Amendment was ratified.
“This is a positive outcome for the Second Amendment. While we focus primarily on firearms, it’s important to remember that the 2A protects the right to bear ALL forms of arms,” said the National Association for Gun Rights (NAGR) in a statement on Twitter.
The irony is not lost on the Second Amendment community. In July of this year, the state passed another slew of anti-gun laws aimed at “public safety.” Massachusetts has become one of the most restrictive states in terms of firearms ownership, with an approved weapons roster and an extremely strict and complicated permitting scheme. Meanwhile, 29 states have some form of permitless carry.
