Consultation on new knife legislation proposals to tackle the use of machetes and other bladed articles in crime (accessible)

Question 1

About this consultation

Accepted Answer

This is a consultation open to the public and targeted to directly affected parties, including the police, Crown Prosecution Service, community groups, businesses and organisations with a direct interest in the proposals.

Duration: From 18 April 2023 to 06 June 2023

Enquiries (including requests for the paper in an alternative format) to:

Serious Violence Unit

5th floor, Fry Building
Home Office
2 Marsham Street
London
SW1P 4DF

machetes-knives-consultation@homeoffice.gov.uk

How to respond

Please submit your response by 6 June 2023 by -

completing the online form at: https://www.homeofficesurveys.homeoffice.gov.uk/s/knife-legislation/
email to: machetes-knives-consultation@homeoffice.gov.uk

Extent

We are seeking views from across the UK. The proposals cover matters that are devolved and which apply only to England and Wales, but we will work closely with the devolved administrations on how specific proposals might apply to or affect Scotland and Northern Ireland. Where proposals deal with devolved matters and legislation is required, this will be agreed with the devolved administrations in accordance with the devolution settlements.

If you are unable to use the online system, for example because you use specialist accessibility software which is not compatible with the system, you may download a Word document version of the online form and email or post it to the above contact details.

Please also use the above contact details if you require information in another format, such as easy read, large print, Braille or audio.

We may not be able to analyse responses not submitted in these provided formats.

Question 2

Executive summary

Accepted Answer

The government is taking action at every level to cut crime and make our streets safer, but we know there is more to do to protect the public and end the scourge of serious violence.

Of all recorded homicides in the year ending September 2022, the proportion where a knife or sharp instrument was the method of killing was 39%. Thousands of people are seeking hospital treatment for stab wounds each year, with some offences never reported to police.

We are consulting on legislative measures to provide the police with more tools to disrupt knife possession and tackle knife crime. We have identified certain types of machetes and large outdoor knives that do not seem to have a practical use and appear to be designed to look menacing and be favoured by those who want to use these knives as weapons. We intend to include them in the list of prohibited offensive weapons set out in the schedule to The Criminal Justice Act 1988 (Offensive Weapons) Order 1988. Weapons listed in this schedule are prohibited under s141 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988. This would mean that the manufacture, importation, sale and supply of these items would be an offence. Possession, both in public and in private, would also be an offence, unless a defence applies. We are inviting views from respondents on the finer details of the description of the items we intend to ban.

We are also consulting on whether to provide the police with additional powers to enable them to seize, retain and destroy bladed articles of any length held in private, or whether the powers should be limited to articles of a certain length, even if the items themselves are not prohibited. We consider it a proportionate response for the police, where they are in private property lawfully, to seize, retain and eventually destroy bladed articles if they have good reason to believe they will be used in crime. We would like to test this proposal with stakeholders and other members of the public so that we ensure that the most effective but proportionate system is put in place.

In addition, we are consulting on whether there is a need for the government to toughen the current penalties for selling prohibited offensive weapons and selling bladed articles to persons under 18, and on whether the Criminal Justice System should treat carrying in public prohibited knives and offensive weapons more seriously to better reflect the severity of the offences.

Finally, we are consulting on whether it would be appropriate to mirror firearms legislation and introduce a separate possession offence of knives and offensive weapons with intent to injure or cause fear of violence. This would carry a maximum penalty higher than the current offence of possession of an offensive weapon in public under s1 of the Prevention of Crime Act 1953 (the PCA).

The responses to this 8-week consultation will inform our proposals on whether there is a need for future legislation and, if so, the form that this will take.

The measures in this consultation are proposals at this stage and remain subject to change following the consultation process. Any legislative proposals considered necessary would apply in relation to England and Wales only. While we have already engaged with operational partners, the consultation is open to the public and seeks the views of directly affected parties, businesses and organisations with a direct interest in the proposals, and key stakeholder groups and communities affected by the devastating effects of knife crime, to ensure our policy development is informed by a full range of views.

In summary, we are seeking views on the following proposals:

Proposal 1: Introduction of a targeted ban of certain types of large knives that seem to be designed to look menacing with no practical purpose.
Proposal 2: Whether additional powers should be given to the police to seize, retain and destroy lawfully held bladed articles of a certain length if these are found by the police when in private property lawfully and they have reasonable grounds to believe that the article(s) are likely to be used in a criminal act.
Proposal 3: Whether there is a need to increase the maximum penalty for the importation, manufacture, sale and supply of prohibited offensive weapons (s141 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988 and s1 Restriction of Offensive Weapons Act 1959) and the offence of selling bladed articles to persons under 18 (s141A of the Criminal Justice Act 1988) to 2 years, to reflect the severity of these offences.
Proposal 4: Whether the Criminal Justice System should treat possession in public of prohibited knives and offensive weapons more seriously.
Proposal 5: Whether there is a need for a separate possession offence of bladed articles with the intention to injure or cause fear of violence with a maximum penalty higher than the current offence of possession of an offensive weapon under s1 of the PCA 1953.

Question 3

Key facts

Accepted Answer

The latest police recorded crime figures, published by the Office of National Statistics in January 2023 for the year ending September 2022, show that knife-enabled crime^{[footnote 1]} recorded by the police in the year ending September 2022 remained 8% lower (50,434 offences) than pre-coronavirus pandemic levels in the year ending March 2020 (55,076 offences). This is mainly because the number of knife-enabled robbery offences (18,253 offences) was 25% lower in the year ending September 2022 than in the year ending March 2020 (24,314 offences).

Levels of knife-enabled crime fell to 45,595 offences in the year ending September 2021 because of government restrictions on social contact. It has increased by 11% in the year ending September 2022 while remaining below pre-coronavirus pandemic levels. There were increases across all knife-enabled violent and sexual offences except for knife-enabled homicide, which decreased by 5% to 260 offences.

The latest increase (11%) in knife or sharp instrument offences compared with the year ending September 2021 can be broken down by Police Force Area (PFA). Metropolitan, West Midlands and Greater Manchester PFAs are the three areas with the highest volume of knife-enabled crime. Compared with the year ending September 2021, knife or sharp instrument offences recorded by the Metropolitan PFA increased by 11% to 11,517 offences in the year ending September 2022. The West Midlands PFA saw an increase of 38% to 5,006 offences, and Greater Manchester PFA remained at a similar level with 3,447 offences.

Police recorded “possession of article with a blade or point” offences were 15% higher in the year ending September 2022 (26,643 offences) than the year ending March 2020 (23,246 offences). This was a 17% increase compared with the year ending September 2021 (22,853 offences). This could have been influenced by increases in targeted police action to tackle knife crime.

Of all recorded homicides in the year ending September 2022, the proportion of homicides where a knife or sharp instrument was the method of killing was 39%. This was a slight increase compared to the year ending March 2020 (37%), but a slight decrease compared with the year ending September 2021 (42%).

The latest provisional admissions data for NHS hospitals in England and Wales showed a continued decrease in the number of admissions for assault by a sharp object in the year ending September 2022 (3,856 admissions). This was 19% lower than the pre-coronavirus pandemic year ending March 2020 (4,769 admissions) and 5% lower than the year ending September 2021 (4,059 admissions).

What is the government already doing to tackle serious violence?

To tackle knife crime and serious violence, the government has introduced wide ranging legislation and implemented extensive programmes, supported by millions of pounds in funding.

The Offensive Weapons Act (OWA) 2019 introduced specific measures for knife offences, in particular making it an offence to possess certain offensive weapons in private, and stopping knives being delivered to residential addresses if the person receiving them is under 18.

The OWA 2019 also introduced Knife Crime Prevention Orders (KCPOs), which can be placed on people as young as 12 and aim to stop a small but high-risk cohort of individuals from causing harm to others by imposing curfews and restrictions on them, such as an individual’s use of social media, travel outside certain geographical boundaries, and explicit prohibition from carrying a knife. The Orders can also include a range of positive intervention requirements such as drug rehabilitation programmes, anger management classes and educational courses.

Serious Violence Reduction Orders (SVROs) have been introduced through the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts (PCSC) Act, providing the police with the power to stop and search convicted knife and offensive weapon offenders. The orders are being introduced on the basis of a targeted pilot to ensure that they operate as effectively as possible before a decision is made on national roll out.

In response to concerns that offenders too often receive sentences below the minimum term, we have also introduced provisions in the PCSC Act to ensure that the courts only depart from the minimum sentence in exceptional circumstances.

The government has made £130 million available this financial year (2022/2023) to tackle serious violence, including murder and knife crime. This includes:

£64 million for Violence Reduction Units (VRUs) which bring together local partners to tackle the drivers of violence in their area. VRUs are delivering a range of early intervention and prevention programmes to divert people away from a life of crime. They have reached over 215,000 vulnerable young people in their third year alone.
Our £30 million ‘Grip’ programme operates in these same 20 areas as VRUs and is helping to drive down violence by using a highly data-driven process to identify violence hotspots – often to individual street level – and target operational activity in those areas.

The combination of these two programmes has prevented an estimated 139,000 violent offences in their first two years of activity.

We are also providing £200 million over 10 years to the Youth Endowment Fund, to build an evidence base around what works in preventing youth violence and make this accessible to practitioners.

The government continues to encourage police forces to undertake a series of coordinated national weeks of action to tackle knife crime under Operation Sceptre. The operation includes targeted stop and searches, weapon sweeps of hotspot areas, surrender of knives including through amnesty bins, test purchases of knives from retailers, and educational events.

The government’s measures have had a positive impact, but we are not complacent and more needs to be done to tackle knife crime. With that in mind, we are putting forward the following proposals for consultation.

Question 4

Proposal 1: Banning certain types of machetes and knives which seem to have no practical use and seem to be designed to look menacing and suitable for combat

Accepted Answer

There are already strict controls on particular offensive weapons, including certain types of knives, which are listed in the Criminal Justice Act 1988 (Offensive Weapons) Order 1988. It is an offence to sell, manufacture, hire, loan or gift these weapons. This offence is in addition to the general offences of possessing a knife or offensive weapon in public or on school grounds. In England and Wales, there are twenty different weapons listed as offensive weapons and they include items such as the “belt buckle knife”, “butterfly knife” and “push dagger”. The full list is available at Annex 1.

There are also similar prohibitions in respect of “flick knives” and “gravity knives” in section 1 of the Restriction of Offensive Weapons Act 1959.

In August 2016, we added “zombie knives” to this list as we were concerned that such knives had no legitimate use and were designed to look menacing, intimidate and encourage violence. In 2019, we added “cyclone knives” to the list.

Machetes and other large, bladed tools such as scythes, billhooks and large outdoor knives have traditionally been used as tools in farming, gardening, clearing land and waterways, as well as in outdoor activities such as bushcraft, hunting and camping. However, we would like to understand whether and to what extent machetes and large outdoor knives are needed in the UK today. We are not proposing to ban machetes that have legitimate agricultural or other purposes, but we would be interested in views from respondents on the extent to which machetes and other large knives do still have a practical use in the UK.

The government’s concern is that certain types of machetes are increasingly being used in crime, such as so-called “combat” or “fantasy” knives and “zombie style knives and machetes” (we refer to “zombie style knives” as knives that are similar to prohibited “zombie knives”, but that do not contain images in the handle or blade that could incite to violence^{[footnote 2]}). These specific types of machetes and knives do not seem to have any legitimate, practical use, but seem to be attractive to those who want to use them as weapons. We are, therefore, intending that such knives be included in the list of prohibited offensive weapons which are prohibited under s141 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988.

We have already spoken to a number of retailers, distributors and manufacturers based in the UK in order to understand the market, but we are interested in hearing from a wider range of views, including farmers and the agricultural sector, gardeners, outdoor enthusiasts, and anybody else with an interest in this area.

The consequence of adding “zombie style knives and machetes” and “combat and fantasy style knives and machetes” to the list of prohibited offensive weapons is that it would no longer be possible to sell, import or possess these weapons, even in private. This would mean that the police could charge the offender with an offence and seize such weapons, even when held in private. Currently, where the police find a bladed article in someone’s home, they can only take action if the weapon is prohibited or if it is deemed to be evidence in a criminal investigation. There are therefore no current seizure powers available to the police if they find “zombie style knives and machetes” or “combat or fantasy style knives and machetes” in private premises.

We are also inviting views on whether it would be appropriate to include any defences^{[footnote 3]}, in order to allow possession in certain circumstances. Section 141 of the CJA already provides defences for displays in museums or for sporting activities, etc. However, subject to existing exemptions, we do not currently see a case for the type of knives shown in the images below to be in someone’s home and possession.

It is not possible to provide a comprehensive set of images of the types of “zombie style knives and machetes” or “combat or fantasy style knives and machetes” we suggest should be banned, but below is a small sample, taken from an internet search, of the types of machetes and knives under consideration:

Question 5

Proposal 2: Power to seize and retain/destroy certain bladed articles held in private if the police are in private property lawfully and they have a reasonable belief that they will be used in serious crime.

Accepted Answer

It is already illegal, under s139 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988, to carry a knife in public without good reason. The Offensive Weapons Act 1996 amended the Criminal Justice Act 1988 to introduce an offence of having an article with a blade or point or an offensive weapon on school premises. The police already have powers, therefore, to seize bladed articles in public places and on school premises.

The Offensive Weapons Act 2019 amended the Criminal Justice Act 1988 to make it an offence to possess in private certain types of knives and offensive weapons, which are listed in the Criminal Justice Act 1988 (Offensive Weapons) Order 1988. This legislation gives the police powers to seize prohibited offensive articles found in private.

We want to ensure that the police have at their disposal the necessary tools to disrupt knife crime. However, at present, if the police find a machete or any other legal article with a blade in someone’s home and they have reasonable grounds to believe that the items will be used in serious crime, they cannot seize such an item, unless it is required as evidence in a criminal investigation.

By way of example, the police, in the course of a drug dealing investigation, may come across several machetes hidden under a bed, but they may not necessarily be linked to the specific offence being investigated. There may be circumstances surrounding the particular individual which lead the police to conclude that there are reasonable grounds to believe that the machetes are likely to be used in crime; for example, the individual may have a history of violence and previous convictions for knife crime related offences. At the moment, however, unless the bladed articles are prohibited, or are needed as evidence, the police cannot forfeit those items. They have to wait until the person is found with a machete in a public place before they can take any action. We believe that if the police cannot act and seize bladed articles in this and similar scenarios, we are missing a valuable opportunity to disrupt serious crime.

Case study 1

Police officers investigating supply of illegal drugs effected entry to the home address of a person linked to Class A drugs supply. He was on a suspended sentence for drug supply, had previous convictions for weapons and Grievous Bodily Harm (GBH) including possession of a knife. Upon search of his bedroom, officers found a 44cm machete. He was charged with drugs offences, but the police had no powers to seize the knife.

Case study 2

Police officers conducted a search in the residence of a male arrested for murder involving a firearm. The male had multiple links with local gangs. A quantity of drugs was recovered, along with two machetes. Whilst there were drugs offences, the machetes were not related to these offences and therefore, the police had no powers to seize the articles.

Case study 3

Police were called to a domestic incident. The male was not present, but the female had found drugs and knives and was in fear due to a history of domestic incidents in the home. A consented search was conducted and during this search a bag containing a large knife was found, as well as cannabis residue. The knife was a ceremonial knife in length similar to a sword. The police had no power to seize the knife.

To address these scenarios, we are proposing the introduction of a new power that will allow the police to seize and retain or destroy certain bladed articles held in private, where the police are lawfully in private property and have reasonable grounds to believe the items will be used in serious crime.

This power would be subject to the existing police complaints procedure, open to any person who has suffered any form of loss, damage, distress or inconvenience as a result of the matter complained about. That is, a person who has had bladed articles seized as a result of the power being proposed, and considers that the police have applied the power incorrectly, can make a complaint directly to the relevant police force or via the Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC), which is legally required to pass the details of the complaint to the relevant police force. The most serious incidents would be referred to the IOPC. Police forces could also refer incidents to the IOPC if they had concerns about the conduct of their officers or staff.

Further information about the police complaints procedure can be found at:

Statutory guidance on the police complaints system (policeconduct.gov.uk)

We are also considering whether there should be a judicial avenue of redress in order to recover an item that has been seized by the police. We invite views from respondents on this point.

Question 6

Proposal 3: Increase the maximum penalty to 2 years for the offences of importation, manufacture, sale, and general supply of prohibited and dangerous weapons and sale of knives to persons under 18 years old.

Accepted Answer

The reason why the government is considering increasing the penalties is three-fold:

a. We want to bring these offences in line with the offence of marketing knives as suitable for violence, which has a maximum penalty of 2 years. This penalty will better reflect the severity of the offence.

b. Increasing the penalty will also provide the police with more time to investigate the alleged offence, without the pressure of the current summary offence time limit.

c. Increasing the maximum penalty will bring the offence within the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (PACE) which confers powers to enter any premises for the purposes of arresting a person for an indictable offence.

The offences of importation, manufacture, sale and general supply of prohibited offensive and dangerous weapons (s141 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988 and s1 of the Restriction of Offensive Weapons Act 1959 respectively) and the offence of selling bladed articles to persons under 18 (s141A of the Criminal Justice Act 1988) have a maximum penalty of six months’ imprisonment, a fine, or both in England and Wales.

In 1997, a new offence of marketing knives as suitable for violence was introduced with a maximum penalty of 2 years in England and Wales. However, the maximum penalty for the offences of selling prohibited weapons and selling knives to under 18s were not amended, although we would argue that they are as serious as unlawful marketing of knives. We are now seeking views on whether selling knives to persons under 18 or selling prohibited knives or offensive weapons should have a maximum penalty of 2 years.

At the same time, purchasing knives remotely is increasingly easy, which brings new challenges for the police. Online sales of knives and offensive weapons are increasingly more common including via social media, social networks and instant messaging. Investigating a suspicious sale made online, particularly where this occurs between private persons, can be complex and time consuming. Increasing the maximum penalty to 2 years, could help the police to address the challenges currently encountered when investigating sales of knives and offensive weapons conducted online.

Currently, where the police wish to bring a charge in relation to the unlawful sales of knives to a person under 18 or illegal sales of prohibited offensive weapons, they must do so within 6 months of the alleged offence having been committed, as the offences are currently ‘summary only’. Any investigation of suspicious sales using social media and other online means takes time and cannot usually be done in the 6 months required for an offence triable as ‘summary only’. For instance, the police have made us aware of investigations relating to the unlawful sales of knives to persons under 18 conducted via web app groups and instant messaging, where additional time has been needed to request access and retrieve data held on private devices. Increasing the maximum penalty to 2 years, would make the offence triable ‘either way’ and would provide the police with more time to investigate the alleged offence and to do so when sufficient evidence has been gathered, without the pressure of the current summary offence time limit.

Case study 4

In 2021, the police proactively targeted the owner of a snapchat account reported to be involved in the sale of knives to members of a street gang. As a result of the investigation of the snapchat account, two individuals were arrested. The intelligence indicated that the individuals were selling knives to people regardless of age. An investigation of this kind can take a number of weeks or months based on the content of the phone. This is likely to involve application to the social media networks and subsequent IP data, which may take up to 3 months dependent on the platform and time period. As a result, the police were unable to prosecute for the offence of selling knives to a person under 18.

Case study 5

The police became aware that a person of interest had sent a snapchat message from his account offering for sale knives with 15 inch and 22 inch-long blades. He was arrested in the street in relation to a s1 Knives Act offence. A search was conducted at his home address and 28 brand new hunting style and machete style knives in their sheaths were found hidden behind the skirting board in the kitchen. The police had little doubt that this person was habitually selling knives to children, but in order to prove the offence they would have to obtain bank production orders, phone downloads, social media analysis and communication data from various social media companies. The enquiries could not be completed in the 6 month statutory time limit. The s1 Knives Act prosecution was not successful and the case was dismissed.

In addition, increasing the maximum penalty to 2 years would bring the offence within s.17(1)(a) of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (PACE) which confers powers on to a police constable to enter any premises for the purposes of arresting a person for an indictable offence. This may be needed in order to investigate suspicious sales.

Therefore, we are considering whether it would be proportionate to amend the penalties for these offences as follows:

(a) on summary conviction, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 12 months or a fine not exceeding the statutory maximum, or to both;

(b) on conviction on indictment, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 2 years, or a fine, or to both.

This would bring these offences closer to the offence of marketing knives unlawfully by suggesting that they are suitable for violence (s1 of the Knives Act 1997), which carries a maximum penalty of 2 years in England and Wales.

Question 7

Proposal 4: Should the Criminal Justice System treat possession in public of prohibited knives and offensive weapons more seriously?

Accepted Answer

Carrying a knife or offensive weapon in public without a good reason is a serious offence with a maximum penalty of 4 years imprisonment, and anyone who does so should expect to face a robust sentence. Those who persist in carrying knives in public should expect a minimum custodial sentence for their second and subsequent offences.

At the moment, the legislation relating to possession offences does not distinguish between standard knives which are possessed in public without a lawful good reason or incidental offensive weapons and those types of knives or offensive weapons which have been specifically prohibited in legislation. While sentencing in individual cases is a matter for our independent courts, we are considering whether the Criminal Justice System should treat more seriously those who carry prohibited knives and offensive weapons, compared to those who carry non-prohibited knives and offensive weapons. We would welcome views on this.

Annex 1 contains a list of prohibited knives and prohibited offensive weapons under section 141 of the CJA and section 1 of the Restrictions of Offensive Weapons Act 1959.

Question 8

Proposal 5: A new possession offence of bladed articles with the intention to endanger life or to cause fear of violence

Accepted Answer

Section 139 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988 (the CJA) makes it an offence to have a bladed article in public without lawful authority or good reason. Similarly, s.139A makes it an offence to have a bladed article in education premises.

Section 1 of the PCA makes it an offence to have an offensive weapon in public. “Offensive weapon” means in this context any article made or adapted for use for causing injury to the person or intended by the person having it with him for such use by him.

Section 139AA of the CJA and s.1A of the PCA make it an offence to be in possession of a bladed article and offensive weapon respectively, and then go on and threaten another person with the article or weapon in such a way that a reasonable person who was exposed to the same threat would think that there was an immediate risk of physical harm.

The maximum penalty for these offences is 4 years’ imprisonment. If the person convicted of these offences is 16 years old or over and has at least one previous relevant conviction, the court must impose a minimum custodial sentence of imprisonment for a term of at least 6 months in the case of adults, or a detention and training order of at least 4 months in the case of 16-18 years old.

We wish to bridge the gap between possession of a knife (or an offensive weapon) in public or education premises and it being used to threaten or harm anyone. We are looking at whether we should take the same approach as firearms legislation in this area and create a separate offence of having a bladed article or an offensive weapon with the intention to cause injury or fear of violence, with a higher maximum penalty than s.1 of the PCA or s.139 of the CJA.

Section 16 of the Firearms Act 1968 (The Firearms Act) makes it an offence to possess any firearm or ammunition with the intent to endanger life, or cause serious injury to property, or to enable another person to endanger life or cause serious injury to property. Section 16a makes it an offence to be in possession of any firearm or imitation firearm with the intent to cause, or enable another person to cause, fear of violence. These offences are triable on indictment and carry a maximum sentence of life imprisonment and 10 years imprisonment respectively. These offences are in addition to the offences under s.1 (possession, purchase or acquisition of a firearm or ammunition without a firearm certificate) and s.5 (possession, purchase or acquisition of prohibited weapons or ammunition without authority) which carry maximum penalties of 7 and 10 years’ imprisonment respectively.

Firearms legislation has proved effective in tackling a wide range of criminal behaviours involving firearms and we are keen to seek views on replicating this approach for knives.

Case study 6

In 2015, an intelligence led operation was conducted on a motorbike ridden by two males in an urban area. They attempted to escape but were stopped. After a short foot chase, they were both detained, arrested and searched. The passenger was found to be in possession of a loaded machine pistol. The rider was found with a loaded pistol and both were found to be wearing balaclavas. Unlawful possession of these weapons is an offence and in view of the circumstances of the case they were charged and subsequently convicted of possession of firearms with intent to endanger life, which carries a higher maximum penalty than unlawful possession of prohibited weapons.

Some of the key evidence to secure this conviction was the fact that the firearms were loaded, they were wearing balaclavas and one of the offenders was a high ranking member of an organised crime gang, who were in a long running and deadly dispute with another gang, which had resulted in numerous murders, shootings and stabbings.

Riding out into enemy territory carrying weapons, in cars or on bikes/mopeds with the intention of finding opposing gang members to attack is commonplace and the police see variations of the above scenario repeated across our communities on a regular basis. The high ranking gang member from this case was convicted and sentenced to 14 years for firearms offences.

However, in contrast to case study 6, if this had been gang members riding around a rival estate on a moped, wearing balaclavas and carrying knives or machetes, the only offence available to the police would be simple unlawful possession of a bladed article or an offensive weapon in public. The context of the offence would be unlikely to be sufficient to prove a conspiracy to commit an offence. However, there is an argument to be made that gang members driving a motorbike around the streets, carrying a machete or any other bladed article unlawfully are likely to have the purpose of using the machete or bladed article as a weapon and thus an intention to endanger life or cause fear of violence.

Case study 7

Intelligence identified a large group (15+) of individuals in a public place, known to be frequented by gang members posting on social media. Material was obtained by the police which showed one member of the group revealing a knife in his waistband and used taunting language towards another gang. The only offence available to the police was possession in public of a knife or an offensive weapon, which the police believed did not reflect the seriousness of the offending behaviour.

However, had the individual in case study 7 been in possession of a firearm, a charge of possession with intent to endanger life could have been made, which carries a higher maximum penalty than unlawful possession of a firearm.

We are therefore considering whether to adopt the same approach as firearms legislation and introduce new offences of possession of bladed articles or offensive weapons with the intention of endangering life, or causing serious injury to property, whether any injury to person or property has been caused or not, or with the intent to cause, or enable another person to cause, fear of violence - with a higher maximum penalty than s.1 of the PCA.

Question 9

Consultation: groups and responses

Accepted Answer

Copies of this consultation paper are being sent to professional bodies and representative groups at Annex 2.

Question 10

Questionnaire

Accepted Answer