|
Forum Rules | Firearms Safety | Firearms Photos | Links | Library | Lost Password | Email Changes |
Register | FAQ | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
November 7, 2013, 02:39 PM | #1 | ||||
Senior Member
Join Date: August 16, 2007
Posts: 2,153
|
Glock Files Amicus in California Roster Case
Quote:
http://www.mdshooters.com/attachment...2&d=1383779829 Unfortunately, I believe this link may require a MD shooters reg. Can anybody host it here? Menawhile, some highlights: Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Where the law really jumps the shark is with the magazine disconnect (which almost no common weapon has) and the micro stamping, which is NON-EXISTENT in any production firearm. Put another way, the roster only permits new firearms that are not in common use (with mag disconnect), or new firearms that actually don't exist at all (with micro-stamping capability). If a legislature wished to craft a slow rolling gun ban, then banning guns lacking non-existent features is about as obvious a way to do it as I can imagine. Last edited by maestro pistolero; November 7, 2013 at 02:49 PM. |
||||
November 7, 2013, 02:58 PM | #2 |
Staff
Join Date: September 27, 2008
Location: Foothills of the Appalachians
Posts: 13,059
|
I can't find a copy of the brief online. There are articles mentioning or quoting it, but they all seem to be sourcing the same story.
__________________
Sometimes it’s nice not to destroy the world for a change. --Randall Munroe |
November 7, 2013, 04:26 PM | #3 |
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: June 29, 2000
Location: Rupert, Idaho
Posts: 9,660
|
Are we forgetting that the docket is listed in the Current 2A Cases thread (item #8 in the list)?
Docket: Pena v. Lindley (was Cid). Amicus Brief: Doc #66. |
November 7, 2013, 04:26 PM | #4 |
Senior Member
Join Date: June 4, 2007
Location: Concord, CA
Posts: 193
|
__________________
|
November 7, 2013, 04:29 PM | #5 |
Senior Member
Join Date: August 16, 2007
Posts: 2,153
|
You guys are good.
|
November 7, 2013, 04:46 PM | #6 |
Staff
Join Date: March 11, 2006
Location: Upper US
Posts: 28,756
|
Who else but GLock would include what seems to be ad copy language in a legal brief?
__________________
All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better. |
November 7, 2013, 04:55 PM | #7 |
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: June 29, 2000
Location: Rupert, Idaho
Posts: 9,660
|
Ad copy or not, you simply can't argue those facts.
(and no, I don't own and have no plans to own a Glock) |
November 8, 2013, 12:14 AM | #8 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: June 4, 2007
Location: Concord, CA
Posts: 193
|
Quote:
__________________
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|