Saiga 12 Drum Question

[Merc1138]

Ohh yea...but your allowed to call someone a "piece of chicken crap scum" (if I remember correctly) and thats ok?!

Sounds a little one sided to me. Ohh but I forgot...your "head janitor" right? So the rules dont apply to you...

Yet I said someone was being thick skulled and a nitwit...and Im the one brandished as being rude and insulting?

This place is laudable indeed...

Because it's HIS forum and HIS rules. It doesn't matter if it's one sided. If you want your own forum rules you're free to run your own forum on your own website(that's how the internet works, and you have the freedom of speech to post what you want, on your own website).

Now while you were correct in pointing out that I had assumed you were referring to your own plans about getting large capacity magazines(which I pointed out that you mentioned that the personally illegally importing them happened to be your friend instead of just "some guy", but you have to understand that there are a lot of people on this board who post similar things(almost verbatim) and are speaking about their own acquisition. If that's not the case then I apologize, however it did not require namecalling to point that out.

repubconserv is also correct. That's why I didn't quote your text when I made my comment about posting things publicly on the internet(that way you could simply delete/edit it if you wanted to). I'd rather not see otherwise law abiding gun owners end up in jail. Same reason why I pointed out that your scenario was a bad idea.

You can be defensive without breaking the forum rules at the same time.

[repubconserv]

"On a train bound for nowhere"

[Bagelthief]

Dude - his house, his rules... (free advice..). Do you have your own servers and website? Just saying....

I don't care. Everyone should be equal. The rules should not apply to only "certain" people.

Does the president get to pull out a .500 and blow the brains out of the guy whos serving ice cream at 31 flavors; then shout "my country, my rules!"

Does the president get to drive 140 on the freeway?

Does the president even get to litter???

When people are in a position of leadership and power, they should be held to even HIGHER standards then everyone else. I think the phrase is "Lead by example!"

[Cokebottle]

Clarification - I was under the impression (from CA DOJ summary) that Saiga 12's (shotties) by definition were to be maglocked, and 5 round capacity maximum.

All semi-automatic shotguns must be of fixed-magazine configuration. That part is true.

Where the heck did the DOJ summary claim a 5 round capacity limit?
There is no capacity limit for shotguns codified in the PC.

I'm not saying that it's not in the DOJ summary. Their summary also gives the impression that it is illegal to acquire and possess high caps, and they conveniently omit open carry as a legal option for transport.

[Merc1138]

I don't care. Everyone should be equal. The rules should not apply to only "certain" people.

Does the president get to pull out a .500 and blow the brains out of the guy whos serving ice cream at 31 flavors; then shout "my country, my rules!"

Does the president get to drive 140 on the freeway?

Does the president even get to litter???

When people are in a position of leadership and power, they should be held to even HIGHER standards then everyone else. I think the phrase is "Lead by example!"

I even apologized for my assumption... ffs..

Get over it. If you want to post whatever you please on a forum, then do it on your own forum. Don't argue with Kestryll, it will not end well for you(you'll just be digging your way to a ban).

[Merc1138]

All semi-automatic shotguns must be of fixed-magazine configuration. That part is true.

Where the heck did the DOJ summary claim a 5 round capacity limit?
There is no capacity limit for shotguns codified in the PC.

I'm not saying that it's not in the DOJ summary. Their summary also gives the impression that it is illegal to acquire and possess high caps, and they conveniently omit open carry as a legal option for transport.

Yeah, that part isn't from the CA DOJ, I recall it has to do with the shotguns being importable per the ATF, 922(r), and that whole mess.

[orangeusa]

All semi-automatic shotguns must be of fixed-magazine configuration. That part is true.

Where the heck did the DOJ summary claim a 5 round capacity limit?
There is no capacity limit for shotguns codified in the PC.

I'm not saying that it's not in the DOJ summary. Their summary also gives the impression that it is illegal to acquire and possess high caps, and they conveniently omit open carry as a legal option for transport.

And now I have to go find where I thought I read that... omg..
And yes, I've posted FUD before by reading the summary and not the detailed laws before.. (one time, I believe I was wrong - ha).. thanks for clarification...

[Kestryll]

Yet I said someone was being thick skulled and a nitwit...and Im the one brandished as being rude and insulting?

Yes, you are.

So make up your mind, do you want to open your pie hole again and throw your cyber-weewee around again or do you want to stick around and act like an adult?

[Kestryll]

Why should I have to be the one to bow down and say sorry? Hes the one whos putting words in my mouth. Hes the one who is accusing me. If he wants to say "be careful of what you say and how you say it," then he can do so without trying to make me look like a hoodlum. If I'm defensive; then its because its warranted. If someone jabs at me, im not one to look the other way. ILL JAB BACK!

The problem is you are trying to be mister tough guy and 'jab back' when your jabs have no effect but the uppercut you're trying to earn can not be blocked.

[Bagelthief]

Yes, you are.

So make up your mind, do you want to open your pie hole again and throw your cyber-weewee around again or do you want to stick around and act like an adult?

Funny how you didn't quote my entire post...

So are you saying that your allowed to call people names (ie: chicken crap scum) but others can not?

In effect, are you saying the forum rules YOU HOLD EVERYONE ELSE TO so stringently; do not apply to you!?

If you are saying anything remotely close to the above, then go ahead and wield the all mighty DICTATORIAL ban hammer!!! Id be thankful...

[Kestryll]

Funny how you didn't quote my entire post...

So are you saying that your allowed to call people names (ie: chicken crap scum) but others can not?

In effect, are you saying the forum rules YOU HOLD EVERYONE ELSE TO so stringently; do not apply to you!?

I'm saying knock off the attitude and act like an adult or get banned.

You're trying to make this an issue of everything but you being responsible for your words and actions.
Here's a hint, what I or anyone else says does not excuse or absolve you from being responsible for what you say or do.

So, same choice as before, think hard on the decision/

[Merc1138]

Dude, you're in such an internet nerd-rage right now you haven't even noticed that I apologized for what you had originally complained about.

Go drink a beer, go to bed, and forget about it in the morning.

[Kestryll]

If you are saying anything remotely close to the above, then go ahead and wield the all mighty DICTATORIAL ban hammer!!! Id be thankful...

Since you edited this AFTER my response I guess we have our answer.

But you're not even able to take responsibility for asking to be banned, you've got to couch it in conditionals so you can say it was someone else's decision.

[Bagelthief]

Ill admit I broke the rules by name calling. I'm taking responsibility; and it wont happen again. Trust me.



But are you too going to take responsibility and admit that you broke the very rules you wrote; by calling someone a very serious name???

Yea that's fine if you want to delete my posts because I call someone a nitwit...but not if your doing the same exact thing (perhaps worse) and all the while thinking its perfectly acceptable!!!

[Merc1138]

It's his forum and he can, just like you can choose to not participate. Forums on the internet are not a democracy, republic, or anything of the sort.