UK Sword law

[Kevin]

The current UK government appear to be interested in making a bonfire of New Labour legislation. With that in mind, I've just fired off a letter to Nick Clegg suggesting that he rescind the addition of Japanese swords to the offensive weapons list. Nothing ventured, nothing gained. Anyone else want to join in and send him reasons why this was a bad law?

 

Kevin

[Clive Sinclaire]

Kevin

I applaude your idea but wonder if it is wasted effort. I attended several meeting at the Home Office where we mamaged to negotiate so many "defences" against the law (ie. all swords over 100 years old, completely exempted, all swords made before 1954 (including Showa-to)exempted, those made after 1954 by traditional means, exempted, swords used for historical re-enactment, exempted, swords used in martial arts, exempted) that it is really something of a toothless tiger. You are correct in saying that it was a useless piece of legislation but I would not really want them looking at it again in case they made it more difficult rather than rescind it altogether.

Clive Sinclaire

[Tcat]

I would be happy to wager a first class stamp on this but in the end agree with Clive. I believe Johnathan Nandris had a fairly well worded drapht for this purpose back when the original (new) law was being considered but I am unsure of the value of hundreds of copies of the same letter...and a toothless tiger isnt so bad.

The current legislation also does Nihonto enthusiasts the favour at least cutting down on the number of cheap China-tana imports. This encourages more investment in true Japanese swords and the artform we appreciate.

 

As for the "offensive weapons list" I think legally speaking this is a different kettle of fish and may be a waste of breath. Arn't nunchaku are also listed as "offensive weapons"....? Not quite sure when two pieces of stick attached by a string became a deadly weapon but I think it was around the same time Bruce Lee became popular...

[estcrh]

How do you prove you are exempt? I imagine the paperwork and bureaucracy involved will have the same effect as if the swords were not exempt for a lot of people.

[Kevin]

The current legislation also does Nihonto enthusiasts the favour at least cutting down on the number of cheap China-tana imports.

 

Actually it didn't. The manufacturers retooled to make straight 'Japanese' swords, which were on the market, and on Ebay, the moment the legislation was passed. Which was predictable.

 

In effect, nothing got banned. However Customs intercept all swords, even when marked as antiques with the correct tariff number and coming from Japan with shinsa papers, which adds to a layer of major inconvenience for collectors. The onus is then on the collector to prove the sword is exempt. Failure to do so means that the sword will be destroyed. The swords that were meant to be banned, however, sail straight through cos they are now made straight.

 

Kevin

[IanB]

Kevin, I tend to agree with others that in many respects it is better to leave well alone - sleeping dogs etc. We at least know where we stand and the current situation doesn't stop the import of genuine swords, although I grant it does introduce delays and minor irritations. Remember it isn't only the UK who have got their knickers in a twist over swords and to some extent the UK law was designed to harmonise with those of other countries. Any changes might just make things worse in the long run. The only benefit I can see is that a repeal of the law might be used to apply pressure on eBay to change their absurd stance on swords in the UK, but I have my doubts.

Ian Bottomley

[Kevin]

Ian, that had occurred to me. :-) In fact I cited Ebay's decision as one of the absurd consequences of the law.

 

An outright ban would be unlikely. Firstly there is the problem of definition - you'd have to ban all curved single-edged swords, which would get any number of people very upset. Secondly there's the cost. Collectors and dealers would be entitled to demand compensation for loss of business and loss of the value of their collections. The Treasury isn't going to want to pay out money. I made this point in my original submission.

 

Then of course there would be the loss of revenue from businesses that can't sell single-edged curved swords. Sotheby's stopped auctioning Japanese swords just ahead of the legislation coming into effect and moved their Asian Arts department to New York and Paris. Christie's would follow suit if there was a total ban, with a consequent effect on both Treasury revenues and the London economy.

 

OTOH, HMRC is currently having to spend money detaining parcels that are exempt by wasting officer's time corresponding with their owners before releasing them. Right at the moment the Government is looking to cut down on public expenditure. That is an argument that would interest them. That and the political capital of pointing out that the law was only intended as tabloid fodder by the previous Government and was an example of rampant spin that has only impacted law-abiding citizens.

 

Loss of revenue, costs to the Treasury, effects on the economy, opening cans of worms and making the other guy look bad are things that politicians understand. :-) All in all, it is a good time to try. And after all, changes can be made in this instance by Statutory Instrument.

 

Kevin

[Kevin]

Actually, I've generally found that if you refrain from doing something for fear of things getting worse, they generally get worse anyway. OK, there's such a thing as tactical thinking, but that's more to do with when to join battle - at a time of your choosing, on your own terms, and by your rules or no rules at all rather than respecting the opponent's rules - rather than a reason for not doing something.

 

Anyway, something has already been done. The sleeping dog has just been poked with a pointy stick. Now I'm not sure whether my contribution on its own will do anything, other than make folks think. Then again, it is timed to coincide with the Government looking to make major cuts in Civil Service budgets, including HMRC. OTOH as I recall it only took three people to write letters to the Met Commissioner of Police to start the events rolling which culminated in Tony Blair being questioned by police. A small number of folks can have a major effect.

 

Kevin

[Tcat]

Kevin,

 

Actually it didn't. The manufacturers retooled to make straight 'Japanese' swords, which were on the market, and on Ebay, the moment the legislation was passed. Which was predictable.

 

Let me rephrase to:

"Cutting down on the import and sale of a large portion of the Chinese made Japanese styled curved blades over 50cm which were ending up in high street shops and UK ebay stores." Only a small number of people who want a Japanese (style) blade are in the market for choku-to (jo-koto) replicas.

 

While I agree with your gripes regarding some added aggrovation with customs proceedures (the onus being on the individual to provide proof of age and provenance of a sword being my main issue) those who have lost revenue are the aforementioned highstreet shops who were selling reproduction swords for neither re-enactment nor martial arts training purposes.

 

Although legislation has no doubt made life more complicated for UK based Japanese art and sword dealers, loss of revenue from sales has not occured. What is likely have occured is some loss of revenue through time wasted in negotiating with customs and ignorant shipping agencies bleating about the "inability to ship swords to the UK" - a pet peeve of mine.

 

Then of course there would be the loss of revenue from businesses that can't sell single-edged curved swords. Sotheby's stopped auctioning Japanese swords just ahead of the legislation coming into effect and moved their Asian Arts department to New York and Paris. Christie's would follow suit if there was a total ban, with a consequent effect on both Treasury revenues and the London economy.

 

Sotheby's closing their Japanese art department in London had nothing whatsoever to do with the new sword legislation (which would not have affected them in the slightest anyway) and everything to do with economics, the non-necessity of an operational Japanese Works of Art department in London and a general dip in the Japanese art market as a whole, just ask Christian Bouvet.

 

Actually, I've generally found that if you refrain from doing something for fear of things getting worse, they generally get worse anyway. OK, there's such a thing as tactical thinking, but that's more to do with when to join battle - at a time of your choosing, on your own terms, and by your rules....

 

Anyway, something has already been done. The sleeping dog has just been poked with a pointy stick. Now I'm not sure whether my contribution on its own will do anything, other than make folks think. Then again, it is timed to coincide with the Government looking to make major cuts in Civil Service budgets, including HMRC.

 

Whilst I do not fault your logic, tactics or reasoning, for better or worse you have chosen to ignore the advice you requested (and recieved from two of the most highly respected UK experts) in this thread. I will reserve judgement on this untill something (or nothing) changes as a result of your time spent on this matter.

 

Regards,

[Kevin]

Whilst I do not fault your logic, tactics or reasoning, for better or worse you have chosen to ignore the advice you requested (and recieved from two of the most highly respected UK experts) in this thread.

 

I didn't ignore the advice. If you read the OP, I'd already posted the letter before posting.

 

Kevin