Fixed blades are common in the woods though far less so on the streets—politics has largely seen to that. Folders are in the pockets of many these days and are somehow considered “less dangerous” than fixed blades. I cannot for the life of me understand this as there is little if any practical difference in terms of capability, with the exception of fixed blades in theory allowing for a longer blade.
There is this idea that a fixed blade is more lethal. Sure, a longer blade allows for greater reach and penetration, but it’s also harder to use in close confines—and substantially more difficult to deploy. The argument against the carry of larger fixed blades is certainly political, not practical. It could be considered in the same vein as the political arguments surrounding guns, most of which are dedicated to regulating what amounts to cosmetic features. If it looks scary, the thinking goes, you can convince people it is more dangerous.
The interesting part is that the four small knives in this, we often think about how the item is meant to be on your person, at the ready for utility jobs and even self-protection if need be. The latter is more the case with guns, where there are no power settings, only a fully lethal one. In my stories on guns, I’ve often talked about how accessory-laden modern self-defense arms can be, but at the end of the day you’re not going to open your FedEx deliveries with a gun. Self-defense is a major purpose of firearms, whereas your EDC knife should be a jack-of-all-trades and capable of handling all your daily cutting tasks.
