PDA

View Full Version : Dont Post ways to get around LAWS!!!!


ArmoredRunner
12-29-2012, 2:59 PM
making the jobs of the yee and fi and AG followers very easy....

Yes gun owners are way smarter than those who want to ban guns... we (gun owners) are innovative, creative, and knowledgable.... the gun banners are generally stupid and want the least amount of work as possible.

dont do it for them

Cheers.

Jeepers
12-29-2012, 3:02 PM
making the jobs of the yee and fi and AG followers very easy....

Yes gun owners are way smarter than those who want to ban guns... we (gun owners) are innovative, creative, and knowledgable.... the gun banners are generally stupid and want the least amount of work as possible.

dont do it for them

Cheers.

wow thanks for the insight ;)

ArmoredRunner
12-29-2012, 3:18 PM
no problem

Tarn_Helm
12-29-2012, 3:49 PM
no problem

Did you mean this?: "Dont Post ways to get around [unconstitutional] LAWS!!!!"

There is the [I]spirit of the law. (The spirit of the law is what it actually aims at achieving--whether right or wrong, in a moral sense.)

Then there is the letter of the law. (The letter of the law is what the law actually says.)

Much of our efforts here and elsewhere focus on "getting around" the letter of the law in legal ways.

Is any of this sinking in?
:facepalm:

Think on these things, my son, before thou art mocked roundly by all here.
:cool:

GaryV
12-29-2012, 3:58 PM
Did you mean this?: "Dont Post ways to get around [unconstitutional] LAWS!!!!"

There is the [I]spirit of the law. (The spirit of the law is what it actually aims at achieving--whether right or wrong, in a moral sense.)

Then there is the letter of the law. (The letter of the law is what the law actually says.)

Much of our efforts here and elsewhere focus on "getting around" the letter of the law in legal ways.

Is any of this sinking in?
:facepalm:

Think on these things, my son, before thou art mocked roundly by all here.
:cool:

I think that's what he means, and is suggesting that by posting about legal ways of getting around the letter of the law, we do the thinking for them about how to make their laws more restrictive, especially if done before the law is passed and could be amended to account for those legal bypasses.

ClarenceBoddicker
12-29-2012, 4:01 PM
The Gun Grabbers are not stupid, they have convinced the dummy taxpayers to give them a cushy life, sometimes for life.

"Getting around a law" is in fact following the law. In 1989 George HW Bush banned the importation of military pattern semi-auto long guns including the Chinese AKS-47. In 1990 the MAK-90 was produced, which was a AKS-47 reconfigured to be legal for importation. Clinton later accused the gun manufacturers with "going around the law" & flooding America's streets with guns. That should be applauded.

Going around any restrictive law is what all Americans should be doing.

Breaking the law is not the same as going around it.

Are you confusing lawmakers with violating the Constitution, which every anti-gun law does, to taxpayers trying to stay out of prison while exercising their rights?

Munk
12-29-2012, 4:10 PM
There is no getting around the laws on these things, there is only obeying them. This is why we can use OLLs, Bullet Buttons, do SSEs and build our own. All of these are not ways of getting around the law, they are ways of obeying the law in order to get what we want.

LCU1670
12-29-2012, 4:20 PM
Did you mean this?: "Dont Post ways to get around [unconstitutional] LAWS!!!!"

There is the [I]spirit of the law. (The spirit of the law is what it actually aims at achieving--whether right or wrong, in a moral sense.)

Then there is the letter of the law. (The letter of the law is what the law actually says.)

Much of our efforts here and elsewhere focus on "getting around" the letter of the law in legal ways.

Is any of this sinking in?
:facepalm:

Think on these things, my son, before thou art mocked roundly by all here.
:cool:

Correct. Don't break the law, but if there is a legal way around it (bullet button-etc), then do it if you wish.:)

X-NewYawker
12-29-2012, 6:14 PM
Whenever I would call the DOJ to ask a question, they guy on the phone would comment of some thread he was following on CALGUNS. For years we have been giving them a blue print of how to screw us next time. I am proud of my guns and love to post pics, but every time we posted out black rifle and bragged about all the features we got on there because of the BB or maglock, we were just setting up the Yee and Feinstein Bills…

Foe God's sakes Feinstein people are making the BB sound like it makes it EASIER t o shoot more bullets! Jesus!

scarville
12-29-2012, 6:41 PM
I guess that means we shouldn't discuss some of the thing clever gunsmiths in England are doing to get around the stupid laws on that side of the pond.

frankm
12-29-2012, 7:08 PM
I guess that means we shouldn't discuss some of the thing clever gunsmiths in England are doing to get around the stupid laws on that side of the pond.

Gosh dang it. Just don't post any links.

uhlan1
12-29-2012, 8:19 PM
Dang, shhhhh!

MudCamper
12-30-2012, 1:37 PM
I've read a lot of these requests lately and I disagree. This is the reason many of us come to CalGuns in the first place. For example we wouldn't have bullet buttons if we stifled this kind of conversation, and then most of us wouldn't have ARs or AKs.

reznunt
12-30-2012, 2:05 PM
sounds like everyone is saying the same thing and arguing semantics.

NytWolf
12-30-2012, 2:36 PM
There is no getting around the laws on these things, there is only obeying them. This is why we can use OLLs, Bullet Buttons, do SSEs and build our own. All of these are not ways of getting around the law, they are ways of obeying the law in order to get what we want getting what the law allows.

Corrected it for you.

ke6guj
12-30-2012, 3:41 PM
I've read a lot of these requests lately and I disagree. This is the reason many of us come to CalGuns in the first place. For example we wouldn't have bullet buttons if we stifled this kind of conversation, and then most of us wouldn't have ARs or AKs.right, but the Bullet Button and other maglocks were talked about when the laws were "static". CA legislators weren't actively writing new laws at the same time. We were looking at the existing laws and determining what they did and did not say. Seeing that they banned A, B, and D, but did not mention C was ok, because they weren't actively planning on banning C.

At this point in time, we have both CA and federal legislators attempting to write new laws that will negatively affect us. At the current time, if the proposed law were to ban, W, X, and Z, do not bring light to the fact that they did not mention Y. Since they are still trying to get a law passed, they can easily add Y into it based on pro-gun people not being able to keep their mouth shut. Now, if that law banning W, X, and Z were passed and became law, at that point, mentioning that we can still get Y is OK.

Moonshine
12-30-2012, 5:33 PM
We already know Yee's staff and DOJ staff read these forums. Heck hasn't DOJ admitted so in court before? No doubt anyone who's drafting legislation has people reading these forums. We're all about freedom here as the first amendment is also exercised freely here despite it being a liability when certain individuals who despise the 2nd amendment troll here. Freedom is what this country was founded on and it's why the 2nd amendment is such a vital cornerstone to the maintenance of a free and open society.

goober
12-30-2012, 6:06 PM
sounds like you may all be talking about BILLS.
not laws.

fizux
12-31-2012, 7:44 AM
This just illustrates the fundamental problem with regulating something that one knows nothing about.

By the way, I just got a cool new barrel shroud for my phased plasma rifle in the 40 watt range. It fits my shoulder perfectly.

DOJ folks and Sen. Yee's staff: I'm always happy to sit down and have a productive discussion about firearms legislation and public safety. I'll even buy coffee.

frankm
12-31-2012, 11:12 AM
Don't worry guys, as soon as the new laws hit, I'll market my Cornucopia device and we won't need mags anymore.

Meplat
12-31-2012, 11:30 AM
It fits my shoulder perfectly.
.

How high does it go up?

stix213
12-31-2012, 12:15 PM
making the jobs of the yee and fi and AG followers very easy....

Yes gun owners are way smarter than those who want to ban guns... we (gun owners) are innovative, creative, and knowledgable.... the gun banners are generally stupid and want the least amount of work as possible.

dont do it for them

Cheers.

If you find an offending post, hit the report post button top right of said post. The mods have quickly deleted any posts I've reported for teaching the anti's how to write a better AWB, so I guess it is fine to use that button for that.

fizux
01-01-2013, 11:59 PM
How high does it go up?

I am not mature enough to answer that without straying into NSFW territory.

phrogg111
01-02-2013, 2:24 AM
making the jobs of the yee and fi and AG followers very easy....

Yes gun owners are way smarter than those who want to ban guns... we (gun owners) are innovative, creative, and knowledgable.... the gun banners are generally stupid and want the least amount of work as possible.

dont do it for them

Cheers.

There will always be ways around their "assault weapons bans", however they structure them.

They won't be removing any guns currently out there, nor will they prevent the sale of semi automatic handguns and rifles - these things are protected by the 2nd amendment to the bill of rights.

The real definition of "assault weapon" is "any weapon that can assault a person". I assure you, my revolver is an assault weapon - 12 rounds in under 5 seconds from a 6 shooter - and I assure you they won't be banning it.

These crimes that have them flipping out will continue to happen, because any weapon that can assault people can be used in these crimes.

The bill of rights protects "arms". That means that if you're referring to a gun, it has to be capable of assaulting a person in order to be protected as an "arm". Until they repeal the 2nd amendment to the bill of rights... we're good.