Western Australia is marking the one-year anniversary of what officials call the “toughest knife laws in the nation.” Government leaders are celebrating the milestone. Gun owners and civil liberties advocates should be paying attention.
Since December 20, 2024, police in Western Australia have been granted sweeping authority to stop and scan people for knives—without a warrant, without suspicion, and without probable cause. In just twelve months, that power has been exercised more than 102,000 times across the state.
The result, according to the government: 228 edged weapons seized and more than 1,900 criminal charges laid against 1,076 people.
Those numbers are being promoted as proof that the law is working. What they also demonstrate is how quickly “public safety” becomes mass compliance policing when constitutional limits don’t exist.
Under the legislation, the Western Australian Police Force may scan individuals at any time in designated entertainment precincts including Fremantle, Hillarys, Mandurah, Perth-Northbridge, and Scarborough. Refusing to comply is itself a crime.
Anyone found carrying a knife in these areas can face up to three years in prison and fines exceeding $36,000. Even refusing to submit to a scan or failing to produce an item when ordered can result in a year behind bars and a $12,000 fine.
The law does contain a “lawful excuse” provision—but self-defense is explicitly excluded. In other words, carrying a knife to protect yourself is not a defense. Carrying one because your job requires it might be. The distinction is left to police discretion on the street.
The legislation was modeled after Queensland’s “Jack’s Law,” a policy framework adopted after a fatal stabbing and promoted as a life-saving measure. Western Australia’s government has now folded these knife powers into a broader crime agenda that also includes some of the strictest firearm laws in the country and aggressive anti-gang statutes.
Government officials are unapologetic.
Police Minister Reece Whitby stated that the laws are doing “exactly what they were designed to do,” warning that anyone who brings a knife into public spaces should expect to be caught and punished.
Police Commissioner Col Blanch echoed the sentiment, emphasizing that entertainment districts must be “safe for everyone” and that police will continue using these powers to reduce risk.
From a distance, the numbers look small: 228 knives removed after 102,000 scans. From another perspective, they reveal something else entirely—how readily governments will normalize suspicionless searches once the legal barriers are gone.
Why This Should Matter to Americans
What’s happening in Western Australia shouldn’t be dismissed as a foreign curiosity or written off as “that could never happen here.” History shows that it absolutely can—and often does—once the political groundwork is laid.
Governments respond to violence the same way everywhere: they look for fast, visible action that can be sold as decisive leadership. Whether the tool is knife bans, firearm licensing, magazine limits, or “temporary” emergency powers, the playbook is familiar. Expand police authority. Lower the threshold for searches. Redefine compliance as safety. Redefine resistance as guilt.
Australia’s knife laws are a case study in how that process unfolds.
A tragic crime creates public pressure. Politicians promise safety. Civil liberties are reframed as obstacles. And soon, warrantless searches, mandatory compliance, and prison sentences for refusal become normalized—all in the name of preventing the next incident.
That model is watched closely by policymakers in Washington.
The same officials who argue that licensing gun owners is “reasonable,” that registration is “harmless,” or that expanded stop-and-search powers are “commonsense” are paying attention to outcomes abroad. When foreign governments claim success—no matter how thin the data—those claims become talking points in hearings, white papers, and draft legislation inside the Beltway.
The lesson isn’t about knives. It’s about leverage.
Once the state claims authority to search anyone, anywhere, without cause—and punish those who refuse—that authority rarely contracts. It expands. It migrates. And it’s inevitably aimed at the next object deemed dangerous, then the next behavior deemed suspicious.
That’s why gun owners, civil libertarians, and anyone who values due process should watch these developments closely. Not because America is Australia—but because the same people who want more control here are eager to point overseas and say, “See? It works.”
Freedom doesn’t usually vanish in one sweeping law. It’s chipped away through milestones, anniversaries, and press releases celebrating how many people were searched, fined, or jailed “for the greater good.”
And once the public accepts that tradeoff, reversing it becomes nearly impossible.
More on TTAG About Knife Laws & Knife Attacks
- Armed Citizen Stops Michigan Knife Attack
- Florida: Armed Citizen Saves Woman From Knife-Wielding Attacker In Mall Parking Lot
- Following Terror Attack, German Government Pushes Knife Ban
- Another Bad Guy Brings A Knife To A Gunfight
n****r assholes in gubmint have to make life safe for illegal-alien & muslim-attackers
Remember folks, a baseball bat can be considered a lethal weapon. So always have your glove and a ball so now you just have sporting equipment. As far as a knife goes, make sure you have your steak lunch in a carry out bin so now you just have an eating utensil.
We who took History in grade school know what comes next. Step one in any totalitarian regime is to disarm the people. Zeig heil, Australia, zeig heil.
WA has been a police state for decades now. It is a Democrats wet dream where real criminals are ignored and law-abiding firearm owners are punished for the actions of criminals.
Not that NSW is much different these days.
The aus government proudly stated just last week that free speech/expression has no home in the land down under and the policy of importing and jamming every third world extremist down the people’s throats will continue unabated.
At this point Aussie knife laws are the absolute least of the peoples concerns. Or they should be but the Oz government didn’t get this way without decades of the peoples approval and acceptance so maybe none of this is of any concern whatsoever to them. I hope they enjoy what’s coming.
I commented on a few Australian FB sites after the Bondi massacre. The vast majority of the Aussie losers wanted MORE weapons banned! I carry an ordinary 3″ folding knife,a pepper gel thing & a gat. The horror!!! Once a convict always a convict🙃
I must associate with the wrong people plus I don’t do FB. No one I know wants anything banned except muslim “immigrants”.
Then again I do tick a few stereotypes- rural background and don’t live in city, ex military, self employed. All the things liberals don’t understand.
As a casual knife maker I have a couple of dozen at any time in different stages. I have at least two on me at any time.
As a shooter and hunter I have about 20 firearms. Some people I know have over 200. None of them wants knife or gun bans.
Just a simple question for the anti everything in the name of safty crowd.
If someone has decided to ignore the law making murder or most other violent crimes illegal, exactly what makes them think those persons will suddenly obey anti gun or knife laws?
To be fair to their argument, they’re not arguing that those predisposed to violence would obey the law as it is or as they propose it. We should address what they say, not a caricature of what they say.
They mostly talk about this in the language of “tools”. There’s a reason for that.
In their mind more laws gives them more ways (tools) to jam people up, including the violent who have not yet become violent. Those who would have been violent then lack the means and those who would not have been violent still are not violent. Therefore, violence should drop precipitously.
It’s the “Lambo in my garage” sort of argument. I can’t give you the Lambo in my garage because my garage doesn’t contain a Lambo and I cannot give what I do not have.
Likewise, some violent psycho cannot shoot someone with a gun they don’t have or stab someone with a knife the person doesn’t possess.
Ergo, if we make legally carrying the normal tools of violence illegal and heavily suppress the carrying of such objects then the violent will be forced to take extreme measures that will make those people stand out and become easy to identify before they strike.
Now, that’s the argument made by a bunch of people who do not all believe the same things. Midwit safety minded women, for instance, will make such an argument and actually make it in good faith, but so will revolutionaries who see ineffective violent crime suppression as a tool to gain power for themselves. This is the anarcho-tyranny that SAFE mentions.
True commies make a distinction here as well, because they believe in the perfectibility of man to reach utopia on Earth via the perfect “scientifically” designed society. Such people advocate, often strongly for a USSR style of system where actual violent criminals are treated better than you are.
The reason is simple and, if you accept their schema, the logic is sound: The criminal doesn’t know any better, but you Comrade, being all upstanding and whatnot did know better yet you chose to break the the rules anyway because you’re some sort of malcontent. For this, you deserve more severe punishment than the one who simply doesn’t know better.
[This logic, while sound also leads to the tool of anarcho-tyranny which one might rationally suspect is the actual goal, to be used as a suppression mechanism against overall society via distraction and atomization given how nicely that fits into a RevCom toolkit. To my knowledge, Commies do not openly say this, however. It’s an unstated rule of sorts. One Solzhenitsyn spent a fair number of pages unravelling via the observable social, legal and governmental outcomes.]
All these people will make the same basic argument. You can tell who’s who by the details they provide in response if you question them but this generally isn’t worth the effort. It’s easier to properly characterize the overarching argument and deal with that 80% before dealing with the 20% special cases as they bring them up. Those they don’t bring up should remain unaddressed for the sake of brevity.
As I thought silently after the Bondi Beach massacre:
“Just think of it as evolution in action.”
…228 edged weapons seized and more than 1,900 criminal charges laid against 1,076 people.
Weird. That sounds almost like it’s a fishing expedition under the guise of “safety”.
The logic of big government would be hilarious if it wasn’t so unstable and threatening.
PeOplE aRe DanGeRoUs AnD mUsT bE coNTroLLed! Ok… what’s government made up of? Buildings and office equipment?
They don’t have a Constitution with a 4th amendment…neither does 90+% of humanity.
That’s because, like many people in Revolutionary War America, they are sheep who have a very short attention span and little intelligence. They didn’t pick a side then and they don’t now. People who fear and those who exploit them are evil…so if you don’t shoot back, I do not want to hear about it anymore. Nobody should mourn sheep and embrace victimhood.
And MusicMan…Abraham was raised a pagan almost all his life…the Priests of the Israelites copied pagan Egyptian garb and practices…which the Pope continues to this day. An all powerful, all knowing God (which I believe in) would have no need for priests, prophets or other works of man. An all knowing God would already know the future, so there goes the concept of “free will”. Had the Lord wanted to, the “Word Of God” would instantly be written into the minds of all people.
But the Lord clearly does not want to, as we see.
All religions are therefore manmade, and they eventually turn into businesses to support the operators. All that would seem to be required of the creations would be thanks for the creation and respect for all the created. The creation is ongoing and more magnificent than any sheep herder 5,000 years ago would even be able to comprehend. Stars are being born right now and space is expanding faster than the speed of light which governs us. Physics apparently does not rule the author of all…
The oldest known name of the God of Abraham is Yahweh marking the awareness of the ancients of a Creator, at the birth of monotheism thousands of years before the idea occurred to Pharoh Ahkenaten. Mighty is Yahweh, there is no need of any other.
And why would an almighty God who can create universes with a word need help from anything within it? The answer is; Logically, a being that powerful needs no help from tiny, weak things for any reason.
So quit praying for things that the Lord gave you two hands and a magnificent but generally unused mind to solve. For example, a group of women at church were praying for a child to come back from the dead, which means that they think the Lord makes mistakes, which means they do not believe the Lord is all powerful despite the growing evidence showing the mighty hand at work everywhere?
Grow up, Believers, the ancients who wrote all the books believed the Sun went around the Earth, that the world was flat…you stopped believing that, right? They were ignorant, but had little choice…you do.
The UK already had strict gun laws and when stabbings went down on they banned knovex in open displays in store because a certain faction from a certain religion would steal knives in mall store displays and go on stabbing sprees. Now, all knife and cutlery displays are locked behind glass.
Australia is now going to launch it’s second gun confiscation on to of knives.
The UK proved that if you can’t get guns, knives are the next best thing.
Thats a pattern.
If I white person has knife, they are in possession of a deadly weapon. But if a “religion of peace” immigrant has a knife, they have a cultural artifact.
I can SLIGHTLY sympathize with my Oz friends (Southern Cross, for example), it still comes down to “You didn’t adopt a real Constitution, with a Bill of Rights, and you VOTED for these @$$clowns!” Sorry, not sorry.
As for my Leftist/fascist insurrectionist, anti-freedom fellow countrymen (tongue firmly in cheek), what part of “the right of the People to Keep and Bear Arms (nota bene: “Arms” you @$$clowns, not “guns”) shall not be infringed” are you total fucktards not understanding???? A knife is an arm. A tree branch is an arm. A rock is an arm (cf: Cain and Abel). The jawbone of an ass is an arm.
The 2A does NOT say, the right of the People to keep and bear SOME guns, if we politicians approve it, it says, “the right of the People to Keep and Bear Arms shall not be infringed”. “You can’t carry a knife with a blade longer than 3”? Flatly and facially unconstitutional. Can’t carry nunchaku? Same. Can’t carry a sword? Yep, a sword is definitely an “arm”.
Can we PLEASE stop this idiot nonsense?? Our Founders viewed the right of self-defense and the right to bear arms in the exercise thereof as INHERENT rights, and NO, they didn’t mean ‘muskets’, FFS.
*SMDH*
The fact that our Founders felt the need to write down a set of rules that circumscribed government’s behavior tells you quite a lot.
They knew that over a long enough time, even with a population zealously guarding its rights, encroachment by the type of person to join .gov was inevitable and would likely be both crafty and pernicious.
Which is, effectively, an admission that voting is not some cure-all and that they knew this.
Reading their writings, the people who started this country held a deep and fundamental mistrust of both government institutions and the people who tend to staff them. As such, they provided the Constitution as a touchstone that can be referenced back to while also setting up a government structure designed to pit government against itself.
I fail to see how it is the fault of modern Australians that their forefathers lacked this foresight. The fact that “voting their way out” basically isn’t an option is something acknowledged, in essence, by the existence of the Constitution itself, irregardless of what that document contains.
The fact that you feel the need to write down and publish a set of rules tells you something fundamental about the outlook of the people doing it, the task at hand, and the general nature of people.
On Christmas Eve NSW passed the amendments to the firearms act because the state premier (equivalent of a governor) had a pear-clutching moment that the licensed perp had 6 registered firearms. Although only 3 were recovered at the scene, supposedly two shotguns and a Beretta straight-pull rifle.
Instead of consulting with experts such as police and firearms registry, premier Minns decides a firearms crackdown is a better action than dealing with rampant anti-Semitism and religious extremism.
You may hear news bites that firearms ownership in NSW is capped at 4, but the devil is in the detail where some can own 10. Unfortunately I have to dispose or surrender to “buy back” at least 5.
Perhaps US dealers should pick over the returned items to sell in the USA.
Do not comply.
When I was in the army I had a barrecks mate who planned to ride a bicycle across Australia. We were stationed at Hunter Army Airfield. Perimeter Rd was about 10 miles. Every day after training he would ride that bike around Perimeter Rd. Even when we were in Garrison our training regime was no joke. I read the letter he received from the Australian Embassy granting him permission to carry his Colt Series 70 Government Model on his journey. Times change.
You do know the equivalent distance in the USA would be from Charleston to Los Angeles? Australia is really that big and very empty in the interior.
Yeah, I know. So did he. If you knew this guy you would not have been surprised.
Barracks. I wasn’t paying attention.
That’s not a noyfe, this here’s a Noyfe!
I just did the math. When I walked out earlier today I had a small Swiss Army knife on my key ring. I had a Chris Reeves clipped to my R/F pocket. A Randall Triathlete is always attracted to the front of the chest pouch that supports the rifle and handgun in the vehicle. There are also two multi-tools in the pouch. That’s 15 years not counting the AR and Glock 19X and 43. My son in laws mother is from Australia. My sister spent a summer there diving/research on the reef. No thanks. And what about Dundee? Does he have to give up his knife?
Mick Dundee’s knife would now be classified as a machete and banned anyway.
I have carried a small pocket knife for years as do many gents in my age group. The one I carry now has a blade that is 2.25″ long. I bought it at a gun show several years ago for $1 tax included. Guess the aussies would have a hissy fit if they saw it.
Just the “Knights vs Serfs” redone. The police aka Knights, get special powers because the king (government) always trust the knights, and they disarm the serfs.
Knights have no real issue with the system. Serfs have no say.
Now bring a bat, club, 2X4,empty whiskey bottle,broomstick,high heel shoe or a brick to a gun or knife fight!
You call that a knife?
This is a 🗡
sad to say, the UK has taken the persona of those they sacrificed by the millions to stop – fascists goons. *shakes head*