View Single Post
Old September 15, 2017, 08:00 AM   #55
zukiphile
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 13, 2005
Posts: 4,439
Quote:
Originally Posted by DT tom
But that isn't Nanuks claim.
He believes SBR's are specifically prohibited that "You cannot carry loaded, in your car a registered SBR in many places"
Quote:
Originally Posted by z
That is incorrect. The claim wasn't that a prohibition was specific to SBRs but that the legal treatment is more restrictive in some places than for a pistol. The latter clearly true. Repetitively asking for citation for the former isn't insightful.
No actually it WAS his claim in post #32:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nanuk
you cannot carry loaded, in your car a registered SBR in many places, you cannot cross state lines with an SBR without prior written permission from BATFE which specifies where you are going and for what purpose. You do not need to do that with a pistol.
His claim was specific to SBR's and whether it's easier to transport a loaded pistol.
Emphasis added.

Follow the bolded portions above. An observation that the law of a state will treat an SBR as a rifle isn't a prohibition specific to SBRs.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DT Tom
He started posting about his supposed ability to carry his AR pistol anywhere without permission and I told him why that wasn't true, now he's inventing laws about SBR's.
Quote:
He actually claimed "I can legally carry a loaded pistol in many places I cannot a carbine or SBR."

See the difference?
No, his first claim was

Quote:
Nanuk: I can carry my AR pistol pretty much every where I go without asking anyone's permission.
Emphasis added.

That you don't see a differences amongst the bolded illustrates the specific manner in which you've misunderstood Nanuk's assertion.

That you felt so strongly about your misreading that you had to post about three times in 15 minutes and maintain that Nanuk needed to provide citation for your misreading lends support to the idea that you sought to "bully [your] way through" a point rather than grasp it.



The silver lining from the colloquy is some greater clarity. In addition to the burdens of NFA regulation associated with an SBR, one would expect each state to treat it as a rifle rather than a pistol. Where state ccw laws are geared toward pistol carry, an item classified as a pistol may permit use with fewer restrictions.

I don't know if that means that the SBR concept is dying. I am not a student of that genre, but a real stock seems like one of the key advantages of a rifle.

Last edited by zukiphile; September 15, 2017 at 09:40 AM.
zukiphile is offline  
 
Page generated in 0.03768 seconds with 8 queries