Wow. The stupidity is overwhelming. I think transocean's top brass didn't get enough fat as kids.

Actually, knives are known to force themselves into the hands of otherwise innocent workers and to pull themselves toward the metal on the other side of an innocent victim. The only way to prevent this and keep weapons out of the hands of murderers is to ban anything that can be used as a weapon. In fact, because baseball bats can be used as bludgeons, we will have to ban the game of baseball as well. At the least, we will have to keep the bats under lock and key and hand them to the officially registered "batter" when he is about to come to bat during the game. We should not be handing them out to all and sundry to "play" with.

Ban guns, people will use knives. Now they're trying to ban knives. Because the government knows what's best for you.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/4581871.stm

The cricket bats and hammers go next.

It must make steak night on the rig a real pain, too. All those hungry people trying to carve up their steaks with butter knives. Maybe they bring in a specially bonded and insured knife-wielder to go around and cut up everyone's steak for them.

Wow. How stupid. This whole thing is a mixture of stupidity. Watch this bayou lady - mom, fisherman's wife, who somehow got clearance to behind enemy lines - tell it like it is regarding the bogus cleanup:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h3bzypjTIWg

She's my new hero.

I am reminded of a phone conversation with an old Army buddy a year or two ago. We were discussing the possibility of someone I know moving to his part of NYC, Far Rockaway Beach. He was telling how one does not go walking at night, but you are probably safe in your car.

And, I said the person in question is concerned because he is from a carry state, and is not sure if he wants to live with no gun at all.

My old buddy asked, as if totally confused, "Why does he think he needs a gun?"

Um, maybe because where you live you can't go walking at night????

@irlandes - Your Army buddy must have not paid much attention to the whole purpose of guns while he was in, huh?

So...I must be extremely dangerous because I carry two knives? the cutting edge on a Leatherman tool is OK, but not great shakes. So I picked up a smallish locking knife. I have both on me at almost all times.

One exception being the airport. Of course, that's why I have a similar set at my Mom's house, so that I have my normal tool complement when I go visit her and do all the sonny-do jobs.

Is there something wrong with me if I feel naked without them?

When I was in the Navy, I was not allowed to carry a knife on board the ship. The funny thing, though, was that I was a Gunner's Mate in charge of the ship's armory and all of her magazines. We had something like thirty handguns, twenty rifles, shotguns, etc. Not to mention the M-60 machine guns, and the two Browning M2 .50 cal. machine guns, along with ammunition for all of that. Oh, and the one-hundred hand grenades down in that magazine in the middle of the ship.

All of which I had complete, unescorted access to, any time of the day or night.

On every watertight door on every Navy ship is a tool called a dogging wrench. It is basically a piece of one inch iron pipe, about eighteen inches long, and they are everywhere. There are also basic hand tools such as screwdrivers, files, combination wrenches, etc. Even in the paperwork spaces there were basic office supplies like scissors.

But my three and a half inch Buck knife was not something I was to carry on my belt.

(Fans self)

Steve, you can't just write an inventory like that without WARNING a girl.

(swoon)
.
.
.
.

Okay, I'm back.

Do it AGAIN!!!

Semi-OT:

I heard a comment today the reason BP didn't/doesn't just want to cap the well, it that if the well isn't producing anything they lose the lease.

Where if Obama just wrote an executive order that BP retains the lease if the well were capped while they drilled a new hole they could have it done in 2-4 days.

Jim, we're hearing all those rumors too, but most seem to be debunked. I've heard they could stop it with dynamite, which has worked above ground, but never underwater.

As much as I loathe BP, I think they would stop it if they could.

Experience: growing up on Merritt Island, FL (where Kennedy Space Center is), it was a routine in the late '60s to patrol the Island on a bicycle, wearing shorts, sneakers, sunglasses and a sheath knife - my Dad's Ka-Bar. I did that from ages 12-16 or so.

But since we've embraced the idea that we have to treat the thug exactly like the valedictorian, and that fear is the order of the day, that and many other things can't be allowed.

I'm remembering carefully, and I never thought seriously about cutting a person with that knife.

Radwaste,

This is another example of prohibition fails. If you can name me a major city that gun crime went down (significantly over the long term) after they prohibited legal gun owners from access -- I'll send you $10.

No deal, Jim - I know what you're getting at.

For the years it was up, you could find me on the CNN forum "Guns Under Fire", defending individual rights while focusing on the 2nd Amendment.

The list of foolish and just plain wrong ideas about the nature of crime, rights and even gun possession is very long.

This "no knife" rule reminds me of the rules against contractors and interpreters carrying weapons in Iraq. I discovered the existence of such a rule when higher headquarters announced that our interpreters were no longer to carry weapons, after an interpreter in another unit had mistakenly fired a round into a clearing barrel at the FOB (note - the purpose of these clearing barrels is so that if you do forget you had a round it the chamber of your weapon, it gets fired into the sand at the bottom of the barrel and not into your buddy's head in the mess hall).

The rationale given for banning contractors and interpreters from carrying weapons was that they weren't "qualified" with them, which means that they have not been to the range and hit a set number of targets at set distances with a set number of rounds, among other things (Of course, even if you had taken your interpreter to the range and he had qualified on the weapon, you then had a huge administrative process requiring a half-inch thick stack of papers to be filed to request approval to arm your contractor/interpreter).

Of course, I thought this rationale was exceedingly stupid. A simple thought experiment will demonstrate to you how stupid it is: Imagine yourself on the mean streets of Mosul, with face to face with al Qaida insurgents who want to kill you, and how are popping caps from the kalishnikovs on full auto in your direction, or better yet rushing you to take you captive. Now that you've visualized yourself in that situation, ask yourself this question: Given the choice, would you rather face these enemies armed A) with a weapon you had not "qualified" with at the range, or B) with no weapon at all?

I thought so.