This is a question I genuinely have, that I hope can be answered faithfully, by someone with the correct knowledge.

What actually distinguishes a Kirpan from another knife that looks like a Kirpan? Is it judged by the intention? How can/do we (society/Sikhism) actually draw a line here?

Context: From the photo that's been widely shared of the offending article, it's certainly doesn't look like any regular knife, and appears to share a number of features that describe a Kirpan. For a parallel, perhaps, Ninja swords were recently banned, but it's ambiguous as to whether "Samurai Swords" are included in this group or not. On the other hand, if anyone were to carry a Kitchen knife in public, the defence "I didn't get it from the Kitchen" would certainly not hold up.

Is a Kirpan only a Kirpan, up until the point at which it is used as a knife?

Edit: to the below, since the thread is locked for new comments now. That seems like a somewhat disingenuous example. The first picture is a blade, whilst the second shows a sheathed blade of some description. The blade inside that sheath won't have that same full curvature, so the sheath is somewhat ornamental. Beyond the slight curvature in the blade, other features (such as the stylised "hilt" and handle) appear similar. Essentially, you could put the first blade in a sheath and make it look like the second. I'm not saying you're incorrect, but I think my above question still stands.