I got a 37mm launcher on my banned Bushy
TRIPLE Assault Long Gun!
That probably accepts the child-seeking projectiles, like the AS-007
I got a 37mm launcher on my banned Bushy
If the law does not say that it's not OK to do something then, by default, it's OK to do it
So when I buy a Pistol the MSP states that My Purchase was NOT DISAPROVED, so it is NOT OK for me to take it home? You have a very strange way of looking at things.
It did not say either?
No...
I said what I meant to say.
But thanks.
So go buy one today in Maryland, they are NOT banned. the word WHEN comes into play. You cannot buy one in Maryland today, But you could have bought one in Maryland prior to them being Banned for sale in Maryland.
I bolded the word NOW in your statement. So you must understand the Where and WHEN it was purchased. Is this too complicated?
If you bought it BEFORE it was illegal to buy or if you bought it AFTER it was illegal to buy = WHEN!
Dictionary
ban1
/ban/
verb
past tense: banned; past participle: banned
officially or legally prohibit.
BANNED means it is ILLEGAL.
So the law said it was OK to do that?
Where?
Right on the page where it did not say you can’t.
Why make up extra regulations for this state? Don’t they have enough infringements for us as it is?
I’ll make a deal with you...
I don’t try to tell you how to fly A-10s.
And...
You don’t try to tell me how laws get enforced.
The fact that a lighter barrel vs a heavy barrel is even up for debate on the illegal vs legal spectrum shows how we have incompetent lawmakers. Maybe we can vote them out and have the next batch of turds be less bad.
I guess if your feeling is it was a SALES requirement, not a possession oriented law (like so many other things) I can see your position. I hadn't thought of it that way.Right on the page where it did not say you can’t.
Why make up extra regulations for this state? Don’t they have enough infringements for us as it is?
I’ll make a deal with you...
I don’t try to tell you how to fly A-10s.
And...
You don’t try to tell me how laws get enforced.
I guess if your feeling is it was a SALES requirement, not a possession oriented law (like so many other things) I can see your position. I hadn't thought of it that way.
In other words, the law was written to regulate the selling dealer, not the end user?
You mean about dead weight??????
I am not making up regulations.
Just pointing out, there is a difference in the words Not Illegal versus Legal.
I guess if your feeling is it was a SALES requirement, not a possession oriented law (like so many other things) I can see your position. I hadn't thought of it that way.
In other words, the law was written to regulate the selling dealer, not the end user?
The fact that a lighter barrel vs a heavy barrel is even up for debate on the illegal vs legal spectrum shows how we have incompetent lawmakers. Maybe we can vote them out and have the next batch of turds be less bad.
The fact that a lighter barrel vs a heavy barrel is even up for debate on the illegal vs legal spectrum shows how we have incompetent lawmakers. Maybe we can vote them out and have the next batch of turds be less bad.
Nope. We are vastly outnumbered by stupid and incompetent people. Thus we only have two options left, and voting isn't one of them.
It seems you do not know how this came about.
Back in about 1994, Clinton wanted his Crime Bill, which included an "assault weapon" ban. But he did not want to alienate the "sporting" shooters.
So they did not want to touch hunting and target rifles.
But, the rifle of choice for high power shooting had become the AR. And the only factory "target" AR was the Colt HBAR.
So it was exempted from the ban. As it was a "sporting" rifle.
So we get to 2013, and the MD legislature takes the regulated rifle list, which was partially based on the 94 AWB, and we end up with the Colt HBAR still exempted.
And because "copied and imitations" are also banned, copies and imitations of the Colt HBAR are exempted.
I get how it came about and it absolutely shows how incompetent they are and how willing we are able to be controlled.
Hmm, so they were incompetent to exempt rifles that they felt were sporting rifles????
There are many other examples of incompetence
It seems you do not know how this came about.
Back in about 1994, Clinton wanted his Crime Bill, which included an "assault weapon" ban. But he did not want to alienate the "sporting" shooters.
So they did not want to touch hunting and target rifles.
But, the rifle of choice for high power shooting had become the AR. And the only factory "target" AR was the Colt HBAR.
So it was exempted from the ban. As it was a "sporting" rifle.
So we get to 2013, and the MD legislature takes the regulated rifle list, which was partially based on the 94 AWB, and we end up with the Colt HBAR still exempted.
And because "copied and imitations" are also banned, copies and imitations of the Colt HBAR are exempted.
2a was not meant to protect sporting rifles.
They were incompetent for banning a rifle barrel based on it's weight.
Would I rather be shot by a pencil barrel or a heavy barrel? Answer: Both shooting 5.56 so it won't matter.
The fact that they think 1 is more "dangerous" than another based on a slight variation of weight and shows that they are just out to turn up the temp of the water a little bit more without having the frog jump.
They are either incompetent or very competent. I'm not sure what one is more dangerous to our freedoms.
Pre 2013 pencil barrel is ok to own. Clearly then the barrel is not dangerous or they would have had then all out banned. It's just so illogical it makes me want to vomit. And we pay them good money to make such bad choices over and over and over.