Knife Crime

3 central driver of knife-carrying (Figueira et al., 2024). The narrative that knife crime is exceptionally prevalent or uniquely dangerous, which is often picked up and amplified by media outlets, may therefore be self-perpetuating. We are also concerned about the way data are presented in the Factsheet. References to “knife-enabled crimes” are not disaggregated and appear to conflate very different types of incidents - from simple possession to serious violence. Notably, many offences involving knives are possession-related rather than involving demonstrated intent or actual harm. Police-recorded crime statistics reflect only those offences detected and pursued, and may be shaped by policing priorities, practices, and resource distribution rather than underlying prevalence. Furthermore, comparisons of homicide statistics by weapon type lack clear interpretive value and risk distorting the public understanding of violence. Knife use is often a feature of broader incidents of serious violence, not a separate category of crime. Understanding and preventing serious violence therefore may be a more constructive approach than focussing solely on knife crime. We would therefore strongly encourage a shift in emphasis away from an offence-based lens, and towards understanding the function of carrying a knife. This includes attending to systemic factors such as unmet social care needs, educational exclusion, community deprivation, and perceived or actual vulnerability. Many people who come into contact with the justice system in relation to knife offences have experienced multiple and compounding disadvantages, and their behaviour is often symptomatic of broader systemic failure. A further challenge is the prevailing discourse, at times explicit but normally implicit, that criminalised children are rational beings or ‘rational actors’ who must be held accountable and taught the consequences of engaging in knife crime or other criminal acts. Aside from the lack of acknowledgement of social harms, such as exploitation, forms of modern slavery and other injustices (Gray & Smith, 2024), this overemphasis on children’s personal shortcomings can be an impediment to growth. This discourse of rational actor theory remains problematic in a context of unidentified and unmet needs yet historically it has underpinned criminal justice responses (Steele, 2016). We would therefore strongly encourage a shift in emphasis away from an offence-based lens, and towards understanding the function of carrying a knife. This includes attending to systemic factors such as unmet social care needs, educational exclusion, community deprivation, and perceived or actual vulnerability. Many people who come into contact with the justice system in relation to knife offences have experienced multiple and compounding disadvantages (Kent et al., 2025), and their behaviour is often symptomatic of broader systemic failure. We suggest that the Government’s aim to reduce knife crime, particularly in children and young people, can only be met through a broader public health and child-centred approach, rather than a singular focus on criminal justice interventions. Central to this is a renewed focus on re-engaging children with education (ahmed Shafi et al., 2023), and adopting evidence-informed strategies - such as peace education or restorative practices -