The Plaintiffs have filed their reply brief in our federal civil rights lawsuit against Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus R. Vance, Jr. and the City of New York. The reply brief is Plaintiffs’ response to the outrageously misleading briefs submitted by the Defendants. While they once again attempted to steer the Court away from the main issue in the case, which is that no one can ever test a knife using the challenged “wrist flick test” and conclude that it is legal, Plaintiffs’ reply emphasizes that this issue is at the crux of the case and the Court should not allow itself to be misdirected by the Defendants.
This is because the Wrist Flick Test only identifies an illegal knife. It cannot ever identify a legal knife, which is essential if the Plaintiffs, John Copeland, Pedro Perez, or retailer Native Leather (or anyone else for that matter), want to ever purchase and carry a common folding knife in New York City without risking arrest and prosecution. This is the essential constitutional vagueness problem at issue and neither the DA nor the City ever engaged this point in their briefs.
Meanwhile, Knife Rights’ Gravity Knife Law Reform Bill passed in June with only a single “nay” vote in either house. It should be transmitted to Governor Cuomo shortly. This bill attempts to solve the problem of the continuing arrests and prosecutions on bogus Gravity Knife charges in New York City by removing “centrifugal force” from the definition of a gravity knife. That should stop the use of the unconstitutional “wrist flick test” that is the source of the problem and target of our lawsuit.
“We will continue to pursue both tracks towards a solution until we are victorious and New Yorkers can carry a common folding knife without fear of arrest and prosecution,” said Knife Rights Chairman Doug Ritter.