Gun Control & RKBA

Glaug-Eldare

(1,089 posts)

39. Then why haven't they passed a law against them?

Sun May 27, 2012, 03:53 PM

May 2012

CA has defined and banned "assault weapons," so Colt is selling the rifles that California has deemed permissible. Here's an analogue: Maryland requires at least a 35% Light Transmittance Value on car windows. It's not "spitting in the face of the State of Maryland" to tint your windows all the way down to 35% LTV.

Simply put, some Californians want to do more than the law allows -- they will fit the shape of the container to exercise their right as fully as they can. It's not wrong for them to do this, no matter how much some of legislators don't want them to.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

59 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Colt Offers Two New California-Legal Carbines [View all] Johnny Rico May 2012 OP

Very nice product for a market the richly deserves it. ileus May 2012 #1

With all the problems in the world, who needs such a rifle? And, who really cares it's available? Hoyt May 2012 #2

Couldn't you use that argument against almost anything? Glaug-Eldare May 2012 #3

Computers aren't guns. Do you consider strutting down the street with a gun a "hobby?" Hoyt May 2012 #4

You do realize that it is a target rifle? ProgressiveProfessor May 2012 #6

Not a "hobby" SGMRTDARMY May 2012 #12

You're back. "Welcome." Whatyaneed to defend yourself from on city streets? Hoyt May 2012 #13

I'm back? SGMRTDARMY May 2012 #14

Some people in California appear to need it, otherwise Colt wouldn't be marketing it. Johnny Rico May 2012 #5

Hoyt's schtick only "works" through his ignorance. PavePusher May 2012 #10

"All the problems in the world" . . . isn't that an argument for needing a rifle? DanM May 2012 #8

What does all the problems in the world have to do with AR's in Ca? ileus May 2012 #16

Probably a real Meiko May 2012 #7

Seems to use the bullet button like everyone else. ManiacJoe May 2012 #9

Well, at least it doesn't look like these Californicated abominations: Johnny Rico May 2012 #11

It's clear that CA gun laws violate the FIRST Amendment... friendly_iconoclast May 2012 #15

If the CA AWB is succesfully overturned... -..__... May 2012 #17

Gun companies just won't accept the message... ellisonz May 2012 #18

if it was the will of the people gejohnston May 2012 #19

Why do you insist upon... ellisonz May 2012 #21

they are ignorant on this issue gejohnston May 2012 #23

How can you possibly call any CA-legal gun an "assault weapon?" Glaug-Eldare May 2012 #22

The "will of the people"... -..__... May 2012 #24

The former is a clear issue of the 14th Amendment... ellisonz May 2012 #25

how so? gejohnston May 2012 #26

I think he meant drug laws are a criminal issue n/t Glaug-Eldare May 2012 #27

Since you want to talk about MS13... ellisonz May 2012 #28

Saw enough of them in California gejohnston May 2012 #31

I'm sorry, but white supremacists/militia-nut/sovereign citizens types... ellisonz May 2012 #33

actually I can gejohnston May 2012 #36

I wouldn't deny that... ellisonz May 2012 #37

why should I admit to something that is not true? gejohnston May 2012 #38

It's not a "clear issue"... -..__... May 2012 #29

So take it to court... ellisonz May 2012 #34

Then why haven't they passed a law against them? Glaug-Eldare May 2012 #39

Please stop saying "we" in your comments related to CA. TIA. petronius May 2012 #40

So Colt obeying California law is spitting in their face? Really? nt hack89 May 2012 #45

"we don't wan't..." How very royal of you. friendly_iconoclast May 2012 #46

Will of the people? Clames May 2012 #30

It's when you compare... ellisonz May 2012 #35

And when you have nothing left but labels... Clames May 2012 #42

That's exactly the comparison you made... ellisonz May 2012 #49

"tote" = "own" ? Glaug-Eldare May 2012 #51

Insinuating? Clames May 2012 #54

It's the will of the people when it's Constitutional... ellisonz May 2012 #57

Freedom's good, whether regarding arms or marriage. Glaug-Eldare May 2012 #58

I've never insisted on what you assert. Clames May 2012 #59

Neither "toting" nor "assault rifles" are the focus of this thread Glaug-Eldare May 2012 #43

What does this thread have to do with assault rifles? Johnny Rico May 2012 #44

I see you have your dancing shoes on. n/t ellisonz May 2012 #50

That's rather amusing, given that you didn't address my point. Johnny Rico May 2012 #55

That's twice you've called firearms that aren't assault rifles "assault rifles". friendly_iconoclast May 2012 #47

Probably both in his case. Clames May 2012 #48

anything that's not a single shot or bolt action is an assault weapon. ileus May 2012 #52

Sophistry noted sylvi May 2012 #56

Sounds like gun companies hear a different tune... ileus May 2012 #32

A firearm is either classified as an AW under California law, or not an AW. slackmaster May 2012 #53

This message was self-deleted by its author Tuesday Afternoon May 2012 #20

Necessity is The Mother of Invention Tuesday Afternoon May 2012 #41