While everything you've said here is perfectly accurate, the original poster did use the **first half** of his post to indicate he had an idea of what was legal and to imply that he didn't intend to break the law and his question was that of reinforcing his understanding. He never implied intent or said a word about going below legal length, those well intentioned comments were ALL made by others.
To me, and not to be the wet blanket here and not trying to be abrasive, but merely objective, the whole thing was a knee-jerk reaction to the word "saw" and the meat of the original post was sorta overlooked in the ensuing riot . . .
IMO, it is quite prudent to be cautious, it's quite another to let paranoia run rampant and color our understanding of the actual question. . .
Knee jerk reactions or conditioned responses due to previous experiences is not paranoia. DorGunR's reaction is completly understandable, even if it was misplaced IMO.
and I'm not hard to find either.........but I still remember Ruby Ridge and Waco ..........so I tend to err on the side of caution. 
