Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Here's a classic example of gun control laws going asinine. I really don't see the freaking point of this.
Could anybody tell me if what the guy is doing in the picture is legal?
Here are some premises:
1. He's shooting a semi-auto pistol with a barrel length less than 16 inches that he legally owns.
2. The suppressor is registered and legal.
3. He's not in a state that mandates legal gun owners must use reduced capacity magazines.
4. It's not an assault rifle - it's not even a rifle.
5. He's in a shooting range compliant with all the regulations.
6. He's not shooting at a paper target, not at people or anybody's property.
I had one of those Inglis Hi-Powers with a tangent sight issued to the WW2 Chinese Army. When the shoulder stock was fitted, it was considered a carbine.
Most gun control laws are written by peoole who's ultimate goal is to ban ordinary citizens access to guns altogether.
Guns and cars can be used to kill people.
Ban guns? Librals climb off the couch to scream YES!
Ban cars? Same people, heck no, make it electric, have it go faster than any other car, make it luxurious, make the electric for it free, let the driver use the toll free lanes, give the owner a tax credit, give them an insurance rate discount...
Now imagine that thinking applied to gun control.
Some will say the logic above is twisted and one has nothing to do with the other.
Ah, you got the point. Gun control is twisted logic and few gun control laws have anything to do with people being killed. Gun control is its own beginning and end.
They are legal so long as you pay ceasar a tribute and submit to a backround check. It also may not be an actual silencer and just an aesthetic enhancement.
Silencers are a safety device and should be availiable to anyone with the money to purchase.
Silencer or suppressor doesn't silence the gun, which was a Hollywood imagination. It merely reduces the sound decibel but you still need to wear earplugs because it's still loud.
I think the movie Sicario got that the sound fairly accurate.
Airguns are far more silent and just as effective for assassination.
If that "brace" were properly strapped to his forearm as designed, then he would be shooting a pistol which is legal. Using the mag well as a foregrip is also legal, as long as it isn't modified specifically to be used as a foregrip.
If he rests the brace against his body as a shoulder stock (which is how most people use those so-called "braces"), then under the definitions used by the ATF that becomes a rifle. As it has a barrel less than 16" it must be registered as a Short Barreled Rifle. Assuming it is NOT registered, then it is illegal. Another way to make it legal is if the suppressor were permanently welded to the barrel. You didn't mention that, so I'm assuming it is removable so it does NOT count when measuring overall length.
He is resting the brace against his cheek and not his shoulder which is a legal gray area.
But ultimately, every time I've ever seen someone shoot with a forearm "brace" it was used as a shoulder stock at least a few times during the session. This makes it illegal under current definitions.
this is a brilliant explanation and thank you for it.
Now for the sad part. That was really complicated. the law is utterly completely complicated. when the law should be "he is a law abiding citizen with no felony convictions and he purchased a firearm where he is firing it in a place that is legal to do so.
this is a brilliant explanation and thank you for it.
Now for the sad part. That was really complicated. the law is utterly completely complicated. when the law should be "he is a law abiding citizen with no felony convictions and he purchased a firearm where he is firing it in a place that is legal to do so.
period.
end of story.
Do you realize how many people would lose jobs and how much simpler our life could be if we actually have done that? No, we don't want that.
I have the same attitude toward firearms as I do toward drugs. all should be legal and the only government regulation should involve quality assurance. You do not want the gun to blow up in your face or the drug to be some poisonous concoction that could kill you.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
