Presumably because they are designed as weapons rather than tools. A tool has different justifications for carry, and different implications for preventing carry.

I think some of these laws are in place 'just in case'. For example, our state parks prohibit any use of alcohol. A quick peek into the recycling bin at the end of the loop reveals a truckload of beer and wine bottles and cans. If some nutcase was terrorizing a neighboring camper by throwing or brandishing a big 'zombie killer' knife, it's nice that a LEO can put a stop to the behavior.
I don't think they are after the people who are splitting wood for the family campfire.

I think you are absolutely correct.

Well, then you described a poorly written law that creates a slippery slope. When legislators create a law that dances around the real issues (e.g., brandishing, threatening, assaulting), then we end up with all types of unintended consequences, like in the present case. What's frustrating to me is that the consequences may be unintended but are certainly foreseeable.

It's easy to write a law that cracks down hard on the unwanted behavior (e.g., brandishing) without gouging everybody's rights with respect to possession. Currently, the crime literally is concealing...dumb.

You are certainly correct in that the law probably could have been framed better. However, my last LE training made one point crystal clear - in California, the spirit of the law takes precedence over the letter of the law. Accordingly, I would not put the bracelets on some Boy Scout (or anyone else for that matter) carrying a Ritter as a neck knife, absent other relevant circumstances. I would caution them and ask them to get their vicious weapon out in the open, so that they will once again be a straight arrow citizen.

Given the state of the technology, IMHO a four inch folder can be just as effective a weapon as any non-folder.

One other point - you mention writing a law prohibiting "brandishing." I would love to see a clear, unequivocal definition of brandishing that would apply across the board. I would think we would all know what we mean by brandishing, but putting into clear language is something else. What SCOTUS judge stated that he couldn't define pornography, but he could recognize it when he saw it? This is why attorneys are so fearfully busy....

Well, good point...I'll be more thoughtful and say we don't even need a definition for brandishing. Don't even try. Instead, the laws with respect to assault and battery are good enough and sufficiently defined. If a knife or other weapon is involved in the act of assault/battery, then the sentence should carry enhancements. Not sure, but I think laws are already in place for that scenario. So, wheel invention is unnecessary.

Basically, let's get rid of the criminalization for concealing a fixed blade, especially when there is no criminalization for concealing a folder, for crying out loud.

Agreed. I doubt it would make much difference to me, my surgeon, or my family if I were to be skewered by a folder vis a vis a fixed blade.

I suppose folders are exempt because nearly everyone carries a SAK, a traditional Case, or something similar (well, except in schools, that is). I just laugh and shake my head, because back in the day, we all carried a small folder - played knife games (splits and mumbley peg) on the playground during recess in middle school. What hardened criminals were were!

We did too,That beautiful Cub Scout knife,or Dad gave you one of his....but they outlawed marbles when some parents complained their kiddies had a problem with it (Gambling or something,lost their marbles and Poof-Its Gone!)

IANAL, but "concealing" case law implies that the knife is not apparent to a "reasonable person" and is readily accessible. Since retrieving a FB from a backpack (California considers all fixed blades as dirks or daggers) requires several steps, then it is not readily accessible even through the knife is not apparent.

There was a case a while back where somebody with a Swiss Card in their wallet was tried for concealing a dirk or dagger. The judge ruled that since it took several steps (pull out wallet, open up wallet, retrieve Swiss Card, pull out knife) that it was not readily accessible, therefore not illegal. Had he been carrying the Swiss Card IWB (not apparent and readily accessible), it would have been another story.

There are statutes for brandishing, threatening, or other misbehavior with a "deadly weapon" (section 417). A ‘deadly weapon’ is ‘any object, instrument, or weapon which is used in such a manner as to be capable of producing and likely to produce, death or great bodily injury. So cracking them over the head with your skateboard is the same as pulling a Condor Combat Machete on them.