Questions of sale aside, Mark, you may be wrong about the swords not falling into the category of the sword.
I eagerly await your British test case in legal contest.

If this were to happen in the United States, the first court decision would likely be that a dance sword qualifies as a sword from a practical law enforcement standpoint, even if it doesn't technically meet the legal definition of a sword. (And, as some dancers have already said, many swords used by Tribal style dancers here in the united states are heavy, sharp, and pointed.)

For nerds and geeks who want a description of what would probably happen, read on. To the rest of you, have a good day!

------------------
Here in the United States, the Justice System is profoundly complicated and involves the police agencies, the local, regional, state, and federal government agencies, the legislators, and the multi-leveled and sometimes overlapping courts systems (criminal and civil). I'd be surprised if the legal system in Britain is as complicated, but it may be since Britain is so much older than the United States. Still, the British seem keen or redesigning and fixing their systems every hundred years, either explicitly or behind the scenes, while in the USA Americans would rather add-on to the complexity and kind of patch things up as we go, just making things more complex.

"It _looks_ like a sword, it _sounds_ like a sword, it's _shaped_ like a sword, it's made of metal, and the dancer herself _called_ it a sword, therefore it _is_ a sword."

My point is that because law enforcement is so complex in this country, many events that could be called "potential infractions" of the law never make it to court, and can cause you a big bunch of trouble anyways. But because the defendants don't get to court, they never really have much say and can't defend themselves properly, and have little real retribution. The laws continue to be enforced in whatever way is most practical for the enforcers and prosecutors, rather than in what is technically accurate.

When a case does go to court, it starts in a lower court. In the United States, the tendency of lower court judges is to interpret situations in a light that makes enforcement of the laws possible and practical. The judge would likely side with the police and say something to the effect of "if it looks like a duck, sounds like a duck, and walks like a duck, it's a duck".

If the defendant loses and certain legal conditions are met, the defendant may file to have an appeal to challenge certain very limited aspects of the case that were formative in either the verdict or the sentencing. It is likely that the appeal would not be granted, since the case load for appeals is so large, and since there is no profound benefit to the general public regardless of the verdict of the appeal.

If the appeal is granted, another court session will be held in a "higher" court with a different judge. It would be in a higher court that a judge might make the distinction between a dancer's sword and a real sword meant for cutting.

That's a great idea on the video, Christiane! I like it and can almost visualise the script.

There are several ways we can approach this as I see it, I don't doubt we'll win in the end if we can put a sensible campaign together and there are a number of ways we can legally get access to dance swords in the meantime. The big problem at the moment is that no retailers seem to be willing to stick their necks out (pun intended) and those of us who are not already sword owners can't find one for love nor money!

Christiane- I said the exact same thing on this thread post elsewhere :)

I think the youtube campaign is a brilliant idea.

Then, once there's a lot of videos linked together (think 'channel' on youtube) get everyone to send it to their local news station, newspapers....someone will pick it up guaranteed.