Knife debate in Berlin: GdP and BZL agree - more prohibitions do not bring a solution to razor crime

Veröffentlicht:

Von:

In diesem Artikel wird die Diskussion um neue Messerverbote und deren Auswirkungen auf die Messerkriminalität beleuchtet. Jochen Kopelke von der GdP und Matthias Klotz vom Bundesverband zivile Legalwaffen sind sich einig, dass solche Verbote nicht das gewünschte Ziel erreichen. Stattdessen wird auf die Bedeutung von Maßnahmen gegen Täter und potenzielle Tätergruppen sowie die Stärkung der Polizei hingewiesen. Lesen Sie mehr über diese kontroverse Debatte in Berlin.
In this article, the discussion about new knife bans and its effects on knife crime are illuminated. Jochen Kopelke from the GdP and Matthias Klotz from the Federal Association of Civil Legal Weapons agree that such bans do not achieve the desired goal. Instead, the importance of measures against perpetrators and potential groups of perpetrators and the strengthening of the police are pointed out. Read more about this controversial debate in Berlin. (Symbolbild/MB)

Stark police instead of new bans / Jochen Kopelke (GdP) and Matthias Klotz (BZL) in personal conversation

In a personal conversation between Jochen Kopelke from the police union (GdP) and Matthias Klotz, the chairman of the Federal Association of Civil Legal Weapons (BZL), it became clear that new knife bans are not being banned to combat razor crime. Both Kopelke and Klotz agree.

Jochen Kopelke had suggested to reward the delivery of banned knives, for example with a Netflix subscription. This proposal was viewed critically by the BZL as a representation of the interests of sports shooters, hunters and collectors, whereby the polarizing effect of Kopelke's proposal became clear. However, his goal was to revitalize the discussion about increasing knife crime.

In the conversation between GdP and BZL, it became clear that both parties agree that further knife bans will not achieve the desired goal. According to Kopelke, the police are already lacking in personnel for effective controls, and new betting zones would bind even more resources that are missing elsewhere. Matthias Klotz is convinced that further bans would not interest the criminals.

Jochen Kopelke emphasized that hunters, anglers, sports shooters, knife collectors, craftsmen and legal loyalty with multitool or Swiss knife are not the problem. However, with further knife bans, the likelihood that these population groups, often without knowing it, get into conflict with the law. The local officials then feel the understandable displeasure of these people because they know that they are checking the wrong ones.

Both the GdP and the BZL advertise to focus on the perpetrators and potential groups of perpetrators. This includes a general ban on weapons for convicted violent offenders, which also includes knives, as required by the BZL. In addition, the police need more staff and a more robust mandate. The population is better protected if the police can act against the actual dangers instead of introducing further bans.

This conversation between the GdP and BZL shows that a strong police and targeted measures against perpetrators and potential groups of perpetrators are more effective than new bans.