‘NEITHER A SUTLER NOR A CUTLER BE’Richard Page (2nd SC) wrote to ACWS Secretary for the AGM, drawing attention to the Criminal Justice Act 1988 (Offensive Weapons) (Amendment) Order, which added to Section 141 of that Act by adding to the list of prohibited weapons ‘a sword with a curved blade of 50 cm or over in length” – the length of the blade being defined by a straight line distance from the top of the handle to the tip of the blade. Politically the original intention appeared to be directed at Japanese Samurai swords, but this definition refers to any curved bladed sword not a specific type. So it includes a cutlass, sabre, scimitar or any other curved sword over 50 cm overall length. There is no inference that a Halberd or Sickle is included in the legislation as it’s specifically says ‘sword’. The legislation does not say what the blade is to be made of (so it could be a ‘pretend’ sword made of wood carbon fibre plastic or alloy). Neither does the definition specify the degree of curvature of the blade. You can already see the legal mind field that the government has got itself into! The law says you must not import, manufacture, sell, hire, lend or give to any other person or have for the purpose of sale or hire such a sword .If any of those acts are done, then that person shall be guilty of an offence. There are NO exemptions. However, there are two defences i.e. if the police nick you and charge you then you have a defence, (but you have to go through that process) IF
For collectors, the blade needs to be made before 1954. For defence 2, lawful activities can be Marshall Arts sports using these weapons or historical re-enactment, and your re-enactment requires a curved blade weapon AND you have Public Liability Insurance. This means that such organisations can sell the weapons to their members or allow shops to sell the weapons to bona fide members of such organisations. The burden of responsibility rests on the person selling the weapon. Therefore historical re-enactment organisations can still use any curved bladed sword as long as it and they fit the criterion of the defence. Also please note that swords purchased before the Act came into force (6th April 2008) and antique swords (over 100 years old) are exempt. Basically, as Richard says, ACWS can use sabres within the statutory defence (NOT exemption) and Sutlers on ACWS events could sell to bona fide ACWS members if they were satisfied that the buyer was a genuine re-enactor. Membership cards would have to be produced. Sales to members of the public would be unlawful . If somebody wanted to buy a curved bladed sword from a Sutler, who proved he or she was a member of another re-enactment group that would be fine, again on proof of membership, and thus (hopefully!) public liability cover, and that the re-enactor needed a curved bladed sword for their historical impression. Thus no point in selling one to an infantry private, First World War, but it would be OK if the person was re-enacting a Napoleonic cavalryman. All this applies if somebody is selling off somebody’s kit and equipment, and a curved bladed sword is involved. This is a typical government sledgehammer to crack a nut legislation, that just makes it more difficult for us who want to re-enact to get on with the job and/or acquire the kit we need for our re-enactment. If yobs and wrong doers are using blades, whether curved bladed swords or not, for nefarious criminal activities, there is plenty of legislation that makes that a criminal offence. All the Police have to do is their job, and go and catch them. Why all this unnecessary, overcomplicated legislation, that might mean perfectly innocent activities get you into trouble. Anyway, there it is, - you have been warned. Philip Clark, Secretary ACWS, with thanks to Richard Page and an article in the November edition of the Law Society Gazette by Michael Finn. The above article first appeared in the ACWS Newsletter, Winter 2009 |