Contrary to "SuperTool" allegations, I didn't "call DOJ" on any personl/vendor...

[Wiz-of-Awd]

What about holding it with ones hands? Isn't there a force of energy holding the weapon along with the tool?

If one were to hold a weapon in one hand, the tool in the other, all 3 entities are now attached.

Might as well include simultaneously existing within the same hemisphere to that ridiculous statement taperxz, but good to see you're hanging out - waiting to offer up some nonsense.

A.W.D.

[r90503]

I am thankful for your warning about using such a tool. I have been able to stop friends from purchasing these said items, and have warned other gun owners from using them. The vendor at the Alameda show got quite upset with me when I pulled a friend away as he was about to purchase one.

I second that!!!! Steve

[cbright1]

Well lets think about this for a hot second. If you "attach" a sling, or a recoil pad, or a scope/sights, or hand guard, etc., etc., to a rifle....is it now part of the rifle? My opinion and common sense would say YES. So a mag magnet, key chain bullet thingy, or any other device as Bill stated above that is "attached"....is well...attached.

That wasn't my question. My question was is it based on your opinion or is it specifically written into law. Based on your answer, I guess opinion would be what you are saying.

You state that if a sling or butt stock pad is attached to the gun, it is part of the gun. Are you sure of that, from a legal standpoint? Or is it your "common sense conclusion"?

If a string with a screwdriver is tied to the firearm, does the screw driver all of a sudden not a tool anymore? If you tied some sort of adjustment tool (sight adjustment or something like that) to the firearm is it illegal because it is part of the gun and can be used to release the mag?

Again, I am just trying to separate fact from opinion. I don't want to go around stating something is illegal as a point of fact when it isn't.

In my opinion, the bullet shouldnt be allowed because it isnt a tool. It has not other use except as a projectile. A screwdriver is a tool, a punch is a tool. If a screwdriver is shoved underneath a door, is it a tool, or is it a door stop?

The law specifically states a bullet can be used as a tool. So my question is, does it specifically states the tool cannot be attached to the firearm? That's all, a simple question. Yes or No would be the proper answer.

[cbright1]

Hate to say it, but I'm afraid good ole' common sense comes into play on this one, and how a jury of your peers may perceive such a thing in court.

Attached = attached = "part of."
Whether by nut & bolt, weld, magnetism, whatever.

A.W.D.

Thank you for your direct answer.

[cbright1]

Well lets think about this for a hot second. If you "attach" a sling, or a recoil pad, or a scope/sights, or hand guard, etc., etc., to a rifle....is it now part of the rifle? My opinion and common sense would say YES. So a mag magnet, key chain bullet thingy, or any other device as Bill stated above that is "attached"....is well...attached.

So this tool kit (attachment) that fits into an ar15 pistol grip, would be illegal in california? Because the "tools" morph into a gun when attached?

[curtisfong]

So this tool kit (attachment) that fits into an ar15 pistol grip, would be illegal in california? Because the "tools" morph into a gun when attached?

According to conventional wisdom (in theory) if it has to be detached to use it, it is a tool.

Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer.

[cbright1]

According to conventional wisdom (in theory) if it has to be detached to use it, it is a tool.

Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer.

Ok, so this pistol grip tool kit would most likely be ok, but a gun sling with ammo slots most likely would not ,because the ammo could be used as a bullet button tool without removing it from the sling...correct?

[curtisfong]

Ok, so this pistol grip tool kit would most likely be ok, but a gun sling with ammo slots most likely would not ,because the ammo could be used as a bullet button tool without removing it from the sling...correct?

Yes, similar to a tool connected to your rifle with a lanyard.

It is dumb, but hey, the law is a a--.

[taperxz]

Might as well include simultaneously existing within the same hemisphere to that ridiculous statement taperxz, but good to see you're hanging out - waiting to offer up some nonsense.

A.W.D.

1. How is it nonsense when there is NO LAW that backs your theory up. (or even CGF's for that matter?)

2. If a drill is hooked up to a cord which is hooked up to an electrical generator, is that now part of the generator or is it still a drill? Or, is the generator now a drill?

The theory that when a tool is somehow attached to its intended use now becomes part of it is flawed. A tool has become defined and legal to use on a bullet button. A bullet is also a tool for the courts definition.

I would like someone to point out one theory where when a tool comes in contact with its use or applied to it where it is no longer a tool but part of the object to be worked on.

Lets hear your side of nonsense AWD. Most of your posts are spot on nonsense or at least not backed by law.

[curtisfong]

IMO it is all 100% conjecture until there is a court case. I haven't heard a single interpretation that makes any logical sense. Any number of things make legal sense (all of them illogical, but hey, that is the law).

[taperxz]

IMO it is all 100% conjecture until there is a court case. I haven't heard a single interpretation that makes any logical sense. Any number of things make legal sense (all of them illogical, but hey, that is the law).

I work with "tools" on a daily basis. In my wildest dreams and in all my experiences, i have never once witnessed that i can fathom where one would consider a "tool" part of its intended work due to somehow being attached.

The magnetic tip on a screw gun holds a screw in place on that tip until its ready to be used. Does the screw gun with a magnetic tip now become the screw?

Yes, i'm throwing out "stuff" but my "stuff" is more real world in the realm of "tools" than thinking a magnetic tool now becomes part of the gun or a tethered tool attached to the gun becomes part of the gun. This theory is the ONLY place in the tool world where people use the theory that it magically becomes part of its intended use.

[Wiz-of-Awd]

Prove me wrong, by all means.

Feel free - based on your insistence of my nonsense - to use a mag-magnet from this day forward, and leave it on your rifle.

Make sure as well, if you ever find yourself on the wrong side of the law and your opinion, to insist that you are right and demand to be set free.

A.W.D.

1. How is it nonsense when there is NO LAW that backs your theory up. (or even CGF's for that matter?)

2. If a drill is hooked up to a cord which is hooked up to an electrical generator, is that now part of the generator or is it still a drill? Or, is the generator now a drill?

The theory that when a tool is somehow attached to its intended use now becomes part of it is flawed. A tool has become defined and legal to use on a bullet button. A bullet is also a tool for the courts definition.

I would like someone to point out one theory where when a tool comes in contact with its use or applied to it where it is no longer a tool but part of the object to be worked on.

Lets hear your side of nonsense AWD. Most of your posts are spot on nonsense or at least not backed by law.

[curtisfong]

Yes, i'm throwing out "stuff" but my "stuff" is more real world in the realm of "tools" than thinking a magnetic tool now becomes part of the gun or a tethered tool attached to the gun becomes part of the gun. This theory is the ONLY place in the tool world where people use the theory that it magically becomes part of its intended use.

Since when does logic have anything to do with gun laws? Go ahead, use that magnet tool, like AWD says.

[taperxz]

Prove me wrong, by all means.

Feel free - based on your insistence of my nonsense - to use a mag-magnet from this day forward, and leave it on your rifle.

Make sure as well, if you ever find yourself on the wrong side of the law and your opinion, to insist that you are right and demand to be set free.

A.W.D.

Every time someone says this^^^

It means you can't articulate a comprehensive response with any legal basis what so ever. Par for the course AWD

[curtisfong]

Every time someone says this^^^

It means you can't articulate a comprehensive response with any legal basis what so ever. Par for the course AWD

That's because their IS no legal basis for any argument. The only legal basis we have is a patchwork of ridiculously stupid and illogical laws that provably never follow anything even resembling logic.

So of course that is the response; prove it in court, because logic does you no good.