Comments on: Mail Order Felony http://www.saysuncle.com/2008/09/09/mail-order-felony/ Remember, I do this to entertain me... not you. Mon, 09 Nov 2009 04:08:50 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: ZerCool http://www.saysuncle.com/2008/09/09/mail-order-felony/comment-page-1/#comment-206610 ZerCool Tue, 09 Sep 2008 21:08:31 +0000 http://www.saysuncle.com/?p=18106#comment-206610 Fracking NY ... the Charger and GSG-5P are both "assault weapons" because they load from a place other than the pistol grip, and weigh more than 51oz. Two lovely plinkers ... and I can't have 'em! Fracking NY … the Charger and GSG-5P are both “assault weapons” because they load from a place other than the pistol grip, and weigh more than 51oz.

Two lovely plinkers … and I can’t have ‘em!

]]> By: KCSteve http://www.saysuncle.com/2008/09/09/mail-order-felony/comment-page-1/#comment-206606 KCSteve Tue, 09 Sep 2008 20:26:12 +0000 http://www.saysuncle.com/?p=18106#comment-206606 The ever-indulgent wife and I recently bought a GSG 5 <b>P</b>. I saw on their website that the sell the stocks for the two rifle variants and the butt-cap for the (P)istol version as accessories. I sent them an email noting that they might want to warn people not to buy the stock for the 'wrong' variant since if they did the ATF could construe that as creating an illegal SBR. Which is why we <b>won't</b> be buying the folding stock to put on our GSG 5<b>P</b> The ever-indulgent wife and I recently bought a GSG 5 P.
I saw on their website that the sell the stocks for the two rifle variants and the butt-cap for the (P)istol version as accessories.

I sent them an email noting that they might want to warn people not to buy the stock for the ‘wrong’ variant since if they did the ATF could construe that as creating an illegal SBR.

Which is why we won’t be buying the folding stock to put on our GSG 5P

]]> By: Ry Jones http://www.saysuncle.com/2008/09/09/mail-order-felony/comment-page-1/#comment-206602 Ry Jones Tue, 09 Sep 2008 20:00:15 +0000 http://www.saysuncle.com/?p=18106#comment-206602 It's good that the laws are so clear and easy to follow. It’s good that the laws are so clear and easy to follow.

]]> By: DirtCrashr http://www.saysuncle.com/2008/09/09/mail-order-felony/comment-page-1/#comment-206597 DirtCrashr Tue, 09 Sep 2008 18:31:00 +0000 http://www.saysuncle.com/?p=18106#comment-206597 Lotsa Felony things I can't order...including magazines. Lotsa Felony things I can’t order…including magazines.

]]> By: Tam http://www.saysuncle.com/2008/09/09/mail-order-felony/comment-page-1/#comment-206596 Tam Tue, 09 Sep 2008 18:24:41 +0000 http://www.saysuncle.com/?p=18106#comment-206596 What Sebastian said. If the gun started out as a pistol, you're good to go with a carbine kit (cf. Mech-Tech Glock and 1911 CCU and T/C Encore & Contender.) If you bought your 10/22 or T/C configured as a rifle from the factory, going to a pistol is a no-go. What Sebastian said.

If the gun started out as a pistol, you’re good to go with a carbine kit (cf. Mech-Tech Glock and 1911 CCU and T/C Encore & Contender.) If you bought your 10/22 or T/C configured as a rifle from the factory, going to a pistol is a no-go.

]]> By: Sebastian http://www.saysuncle.com/2008/09/09/mail-order-felony/comment-page-1/#comment-206592 Sebastian Tue, 09 Sep 2008 18:09:51 +0000 http://www.saysuncle.com/?p=18106#comment-206592 I recalled the Thompson Center case, and thought it applied, but apparently the detail I was missing is that case had at issue a pistol converted to a rifle, which The Court said was legal, because someone can't be prosecuted for a combination of parts that can make the same receiver into two legal firearms, even though it could also make a third illegal firearm. But because it was a pistol at issue, rather than a rifle, ATF still bitterly clings to the notion that having a collection of parts that can make two legal firearms is absolutely illegal if the receiver in question is a rifle receiver. Oh well, as long as gun owners end up in jail, right? I recalled the Thompson Center case, and thought it applied, but apparently the detail I was missing is that case had at issue a pistol converted to a rifle, which The Court said was legal, because someone can’t be prosecuted for a combination of parts that can make the same receiver into two legal firearms, even though it could also make a third illegal firearm. But because it was a pistol at issue, rather than a rifle, ATF still bitterly clings to the notion that having a collection of parts that can make two legal firearms is absolutely illegal if the receiver in question is a rifle receiver.

Oh well, as long as gun owners end up in jail, right?

]]>