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

[taperxz]

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

The minute they declared a bullet a tool. Common sense was used in that ruling where it made sense that the tip of a bullet could be used as an actionable piece to operate a mechanical object.

Using the definition "tool" created an event where the courts articulated an object that has a different use from its intended job on a mechanical piece of equipment.

[taperxz]

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.

I'm not using simple logic. I am using historical reference to the term "tool"

[Wiz-of-Awd]

I'm not using simple logic. I am using historical reference to the term "tool"

I think what you're missing here, is that things like the mag-magnet - while some may call them "tools" - in reality are magnetically attached mag release buttons, while standard mag release buttons are attached with threads/other parts.

Perhaps the use of the word "tool" in terms of this item is what's incorrect, as a way too close to the edge attempt to work around the law.

I do not see the mag-magnet as a "tool."
This is just my opinion of the mag-magnet, based on what I feel others would think that could ruin my life and financially destroy me.

Call it what you will.
We do not have to agree, that's OK.

A.W.D.

[curtisfong]

The minute they declared a bullet a tool. Common sense was used in that ruling where it made sense that the tip of a bullet could be used as an actionable piece to operate a mechanical object.

Using the definition "tool" created an event where the courts articulated an object that has a different use from its intended job on a mechanical piece of equipment.

So what? "tool" is still term with an incomplete legal definition, which has not been extended to exclude (or include), for example, a magnetically attached device.

Is a device a tool? Maybe. In English (a vague, incomplete, capricious, illogical, inconsistent, subjective, non-deterministically parsable language), it is pure semantics.

The language of law might be marginally better than English, but it certainly hasn't provided any real clarity on this topic either.

Look, we can argue this until we are blue in the face, but I have no illusions that the court will conclude anything according to reason and logic. So to make predictions either way is foolish.

[taperxz]

I think what you're missing here, is that things like the mag-magnet - while some may call them "tools" - in reality are magnetically attached mag release buttons, while standard mag release buttons are attached with threads/other parts.

Perhaps the use of the word "tool" in terms of this item is what's incorrect, as a way too close to the edge attempt to work around the law.

I do not see the mag-magnet as a "tool."
This is just my opinion of the mag-magnet, based on what I feel others would think that could ruin my life and financially destroy me.

Call it what you will.
We do not have to agree, that's OK.

A.W.D.

You have to remember, the bullet button was designed to be operated with the use of a "tool" per the court when they acknowledged that a bullet was OK as being used as a "tool" to operate it.

If someone has the ability to make a better tool to operate the BB button then the courts or the legislature will have to take that up.

If this went to court and lets say Alan Gura were to argue the tool issue, he could bring in a dozen experts in the use of tools and more than likely those experts would agree that the "tool" is still its own entity and separate from the gun regardless of the magnetic field. (there are lots of magnetic tools)

Not withstanding, the government could outlaw the use of magnetic tools if they see fit. They have not done that though.

[cbright1]

Guys, Guys, Guys, we are losing the point of this thread. I get that everyone has an opinion, and hold them firm. The point was: is it fact or opinion? I agree with taperxz on a lot of his points, tools are tools, attached or not. But thats not the point. We already know that if it is not law either way, there is a risk of arrest and fighting your point may be very costly. I just wanted to know if it was specifically written within the law.

[sl0re10]

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.

gonna go with no.

Its why the tool can be on a ring and the ring on your finger and can touch the rifle while you use it.

[taperxz]

gonna go with no.

Its why the tool can be on a ring and the ring on your finger and can touch the rifle while you use it.

Ya LOL I get that! My point is that some gun experts of law are not experts on the use of tools and their definitions or actual use.

I get that CGF and Bill are looking out for the best interest of the CA gunnies but in reality, a tool is a tool especially with this situation. (no one wants to be a test case)

IMHO, it SHOULD be easy to get a guy a "get out of jail free card" without a law in place to define the mag magnet or even a tethered tool to a gun with the historical analysis of "a tool" With expert testimony of course. DOJ or a district attorney would have a helluva time trying to convince a jury or judge that the testimony of 12 experts on the use of tools are wrong. LOL

[curtisfong]

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.

BTW. I agree with you 100% on this point (logically)... but the law specifically goes out of its way to avoid real life logic like this.

Why? Engineers, physicists, and scientists think that way. The law (and courts) really don't want to go down that road. They do not have the intellectual bent (or often even the capacity) to go there.

[taperxz]

BTW. I agree with you 100% on this point (logically)... but the law specifically goes out of its way to avoid real life logic like this.

Why? Engineers, physicists, and scientists think that way. The law (and courts) really don't want to go down that road. They do not have the intellectual bent (or often even the capacity) to go there.

Yep, fully aware of that. Thats why i said IF a series of experts in the use of tools were brought in, the court would have to listen and accept their expert testimony on "tools"

[curtisfong]

Yep, fully aware of that. Thats why i said IF a series of experts in the use of tools were brought in, the court would have to listen and accept their expert testimony on "tools"

I'd be more curious to see what a quantum physicist would have to say about the definition of "attached".

Believe me when I tell you that no court in the country is going to like what he has to say.

[Wiz-of-Awd]

gonna go with no.

Its why the tool can be on a ring and the ring on your finger and can touch the rifle while you use it.

Hell, I could pick up an old, dead, stiff rat at the shooting range and probably get it to release the mag from a rifle.
Does that rat suddenly become a tool?

A.W.D.

[curtisfong]

Hell, I could pick up an old, dead, stiff rat at the shooting range and probably get it to release the mag from a rifle.
Does that rat suddenly become a tool?

Depends on your definition of tool. If your definition says a dead rat is a tool, then yes.

If not, then no.

[dreyna14]

Here is my interpretation. The magnet devices, when in use, are attached to the gun, on which you use your finger to release the magazine. A "tool" is a device held in or attached to your hand with which you use to detach the magazine. Once a tool is incorporated as a part of the gun, whether a screw, a magnet, or a piece of bubble gum, it is now an integral part of the gun and no longer a "tool". Using some definitions, a standard magazine release could be considered a "tool" which we all know won't fly in court for one microsecond.

[taperxz]

Hell, I could pick up an old, dead, stiff rat at the shooting range and probably get it to release the mag from a rifle.
Does that rat suddenly become a tool?

A.W.D.

Depends on your definition of tool. If your definition says a dead rat is a tool, then yes.

If not, then no.

If you used it as a tool then yes. I'm sure the dead rats tail would work just fine if were stiff enough. Isn't a bullet which is supposed to be used as a projectile now considered a tool for use on a bullet button? I have used a bullet to fill out a deer tag and i mean the lead tip as an instrument to write with.