Separate names with a comma.
Welcome to Oklahoma Shooters Association! Join today, registration is easy!
Discussion in 'NFA & Class III Discussion' started by dubs chops, Jun 15, 2010.
False. No law does not always mean legal.
Aruements based on what might happen don't hold a lot of water.
Then you are admitting that your argument doesnt hold water? Because you are assuming they will interpret in a way you agree with...
How do you figure? Is there a law that says you can chew gum in your car on the way to work in the morning? No? Means it's legal.
Interpret what? There is nothing to interpret. There is no law. Not that I know of at least.
OK, below is what Title 21 says you can carry (a concealed handgun) and it defines what a handgun is (derringer, revolver or semiautomatic ). A silencer is NOT a handgun, an MG is NOT a handgun, an SBR is NOT a handgun, etc.. Therefore, if they are not handguns, they cannot be carried concealed. I am not trying to argumentative with you and I apologize if it comes across that way. It just seems to me that you are mixing definitions of firearms to fit what you think they should be and acting like the federal definitions mean nothing. If you cannot see my point then nothing else I can post will change your mind. We will just have to agree to disagree and leave it at that. You could always send an e-mail to the OSBI SDA unit and see what they say about this issue.
TITLE 21 § 1290.2. Definitions
[FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman][FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman]As used in Sections 1 through 26 of this act: [/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman]1. Concealed handgun means a loaded or unloaded pistol carried hidden from the detection and view of another person either upon or about the person, in a purse or other container belonging to the person, or in a vehicle which is operated by the person or in which the person is riding as a passenger; and [/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman]2. Pistol means any derringer, revolver or semiautomatic firearm which: [/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman]a. has an overall length of less that sixteen (16) inches and is able to be fully concealed from detection and view, [/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman]b. is capable of discharging a projectile composed of any material which may reasonably be expected to be able to cause lethal injury, [/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman]c. is designed to be held and fired by the use of a single hand, and [/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman]d. uses either gunpowder, gas or any means of rocket propulsion to discharge the projectile. [/FONT]
Go take a legal or ethics class. I had 3 years of them for my 2nd minor. Lack of does not equate to permission. It is considered undefined. All that needs to be done, to nail you for it, is for them to start interpreting. They dont have to go back and rewrite T21 to include verbiage that a suppressor is a type of handgun. All they have to do is show that based on the fact you have an ATF stamp you are aware of the definitions. Since the SoOK does not include suppressors in their definitions, they can claim they default to federal definitions. BAM. You are carrying illegally.
And countering by saying my argument is based on conjecture and therefore invalid is argumentum ad ignorantiam.
I agree, no ccw with the G18 based on what you just posted. But it deals with carrying a concealed handgun And the definition of a handgun. A silencer woud be covered by neither. The sda seems carefully worded to not use the term "firearm" when limiting things. It's just too broad. I won't be carrying my silencer and I wouldn't recommend someone doi it either out of caution. I don't believe it would be illegal to do so though.
I don't know it all. I never claimed I did. I don't know why this has to get to personal insults either.
Cause you know it all. And quit being sensitive. If you take that as a personal insult, you need to thicken up your skin. You are saying that I am basing my opinion on conjecture (obviously, isnt all opinion based on conjecture), and then turning around and selling your opinion as fact (when it clearly isnt). Now how is that not knowing-it-all?