Pinned Knight Cannot Move

Complete rubbish.

Perhaps you can explain why you want to allow one side, black in your example, to be able to move into check, but not allow white to do the same....ie NxK ?

Napoleon was quite good at manoeuvring troops. I like things like old letters and whatnot. They can be really interesting. Somewhere I have a letter written by a German General to (I think it might have been) the King of Prussia, telling him that he was concerned about a forthcoming battle because he was pretty sure there were French troops in a nearby forest at night, engaging in a flanking manoeuvre. This was in Belgium, if I remember right. It was sent back in haste, to try to either get reinforcements or a change of plan. But the German General duly had to meet the French on the battlefield the next day and got pretty much wiped out.

     Of course Napoleon had the whole thing planned in advance. The wing attacks were carried out by smaller bodies of troops who were expected to be repulsed and tempt large masses of troops to pursue them, hoping to surround the French center but instead opening the way for the decisive counter. Once the Emperors were seen to be fleeing the tables were turned on both flanks and the small bodies of French troops routed their "pursuers".  The curious thing is that Napoleon printed about 30,000 explanations of this plan and distributed copies to his army the night before the battle but not one copy fell into enemy hands.

It would have been too late, judging by the failed effort of the Prussian General to obtain a change of plan. In the end, Napoleon's good luck ran out, at Waterloo, where the tables were turned. Here, the British and Allies withstood intense attacks and the Prussians broke through on the other flank and routed the French. I should dig out that letter I told you of and find out its exact date.

Chess has a perfect set of rules that should not be touched. If what are you saying is good enough for a change then why are we not seeing more chess players bringing that point up? I don't think there is a game as fair as chess is.

Interesting history...

As @blueemu said, "Who would lose their king first?"
This is the simplest solution to this problem, and my interpretation for why the rules are so. Let's assume for a moment that the objective of the game is to "capture your enemy king" rather than to "give checkmate". In this case, black would lose their king first, because after they capture the white rook with their king, the white knight will capture the black king. It doesn't matter that on the next move that the black rook can capture the white king, because the game is already over at that point.
However, as we know the objective of the game isn't to "capture the enemy king" but it is to deliver checkmate. However (disregarding stalemate), the definition of perfect play is exactly the same for both scenarios. So the game of chess that we all play, we play as if we are ultimately trying to capture the enemy king.
So to answer your question, this is why the current (and longstanding) rules about pins/legal moves make total sense, and why they shouldn't be changed.

That was 2 years ago.

Is their any reason to resurrect this thread from the dead? There is a similar topic every week anyway.