The Fed gov’t can’t even agree amongst itself as to the definitions of cars vs. trucks.
Makes one wonder what crazy laws one is subject to in one’s own state or municipality.
So, if I separate the upper from the lower with my AR, it’s no longer a firearm if I have to use a part or tool to reassemble?
Finger guns are even scarier.
Isn’t a gun just s special purposed metal pipe?
“...One man was prosecuted for possession of a firearm for a collection of parts that experts testified could not fire, but could be made to fire if nonexistent custom parts were created and installed on the existing components...”
That happened to the husband of my sister’s friend. He got 40 years!! His kid was busted for pot. The feds raided his home and confiscated this gun collection. They tied the ‘illegal firearms possession’ to the drug case cause the kid lived at home, even though the parents had nothing to do with selling pot.
I wonder how many new “Laws” are being put on the books across America each day. Does America have the highest ratio of lawyers to population on the globe?
I think a tennis ball canon fits the proposed definition.
An air pistol that can shoot pellets is defined under Michigan law as a handgun with all of the requesite purchase permit and registration requirements.
If it can only shoot BBs then it is a toy.
Question: Since AZ enacted its Constitutional carry, are not all restrictions in their state statutes now null and void? If not why not? Is there some reason that the Statutes are greater than the Constitution?
My muzzleloading firearms do not use fixed cartridges. By this language these would NOT be considered “firearms”.
At the time of the formulation of the 2nd amendment, muzzleloading flintlocks were considered firearms. I do not think the above definition is properly constrained—it is too tightly constrained.