Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Six minus three equals...?

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Your Old Dog
    replied
    Can we please have some perspective ?

    Leave a comment:


  • platypus2020
    replied
    Evan,

    I'm no offended by Doc postings, I thought that the machine work was very interesting, yes before you ask, I'm a gun owner, I haven't shot a gun in probably 8-10 years. Do I have any desire to modify my guns, NO, but I have the right to if I want to within US and New York State legal limits, I know how to cut down a shot gun, does that make me a criminal, NO.

    I'm not offended by your postings, I thought your shaper video was brilliant, and there no doubt that your very talented man, but I also believe your dump cart project was mundane, on par with a jr-high school metal shop project. I believe your posting of an air compressor tank, made from a junk water tank is reckless at best, there is no way except professional testing to ensure that tank was safe. It appears you got a good one, time will tell, but your posting leads people to believe they can do the same thing, what if they aren't as lucky as you and get a bad tank? I believe more people are at risk from that than from Doc's gun modification.

    What does offend me is your self appointed position of moral compass to the forum, who appears to believe his every utterance is on par with Moses delivering the Ten Commandment on Mt Sinai, do use all a favor and get off your high horse.

    Jack
    Last edited by platypus2020; 08-24-2007, 12:35 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Seastar
    replied
    Oh My God He's Right!

    I suddenly realized that EVAN is right, as usual.
    I'm really sorry I started this.
    Now can we stop?
    Please!

    Leave a comment:


  • Evan
    replied
    Doc,

    I'm not going to carry this on any further as you don't know how to debate a point without resorting to invalid debating techniques.

    Statements such as this are an example.

    -Great. Goodie for Canada, that non-totalitarian country that doesn't let it's subjects- not citizens- own handguns.
    You know that isn't true so why say it?
    I can wander down to the local gun store with my Firearms Accquisition Certificate which is available to any adult without a criminal record and buy any legal handgun such as yours without the barrel cut down.



    As for the cite you asked for re browser cache images:

    July 21, 2004
    State of Wisconsin,
    Plaintiff-Respondent,
    v.
    Jack P. Lindgren,
    Defendant-Appellant.

    and

    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    v.
    JEFFREY TUCKER,
    Defendant - Appellant.



    As for the offense of counseling to commit a crime it's known as Vicarious Liability for an offense and is in section 22 of the Canadian Criminal Code.

    Criminal Code
    PART I
    Parties to Offences

    Person counselling offence


    22. (1) Where a person counsels another person to be a party to an offence and that other person is afterwards a party to that offence, the person who counselled is a party to that offence, notwithstanding that the offence was committed in a way different from that which was counselled.

    Idem


    (2) Every one who counsels another person to be a party to an offence is a party to every offence that the other commits in consequence of the counselling that the person who counselled knew or ought to have known was likely to be committed in consequence of the counselling.
    (my emphasis)

    Leave a comment:


  • J Tiers
    replied
    Originally posted by Evan
    Besides, those aren't the rules here in Canada.
    Thank you for bolstering your "opponent's" point!

    YOUR rules are not the rules here........... so if you don't care about US laws, we need not care about those in foreign countries.

    The attempt to pass a law in some small country and make it apply worldwide is not yet valid.

    Originally posted by Evan
    And, it's still irrelevant to this discussion. Plus, it is another invalid arguing technique, in this case a form of ad hominem attack.
    Pointing out an inconsistency and "very flexible attitude" to the very type of issue being discussed is relevant at this level of debate, insofar as it means that your various statements may cancel out and be irrelevant.

    It could be relevant in court, as regards the credibility of your testimony. The fact that in the artificial "debate" environment it might not be valid is simply not even a consideration here.

    You seem to believe that YOU can make the rules, forcing others to adhere to them. While I do respect you, and if we met I would likely find you an interesting friend, I must remind you that in fact, you DO NOT make the rules on this forum, or in the US.

    The "debate" rules are framed by consensus here, and we apparently have a consensus that formal debate is not "on point".

    Leave a comment:


  • Doc Nickel
    replied
    Some people, a very few, are licensed to possess illegal weapons.
    -Being licensed to own them predicates their being illegal, but that's just semantics.

    The Criminal Code of Canada defines such a short barreled weapon as a prohibited weapon and sets out strict penalties for possession of such devices. In fact the recently passed bill C-10 sets out a mandatory three year prison sentence for possession of a prohibited weapon.
    -Great. Goodie for Canada, that non-totalitarian country that doesn't let it's subjects- not citizens- own handguns.

    Now, again, for the umpty-leventh time, tell me how this is any kind of a problem at all, since the gun itself is nowhere near Canada, and Canadian authorities are not going to waste a minutes' time charging someone for having a photo of it on their hard drive.

    This post is a primer on how to turn a legal restricted weapon into a prohibited weapon. The focus here is turning to precisely this sort of information.
    -Sure. Since the process is oh so much more complex than just "take a hacksaw to it".

    Again, show me the Law, chapter and verse, that says it's illegal to have a photo of a short-barreled weapon on your hard drive. Yes, I know there are or will be laws concerning the making of explosives, or the conversion of a semi-auto into a full-auto, or what have you. Those things aren't at issue here. I want you to show me where any country's laws prevents it's citizen from having a photo of a banned or illegal weapon on his or her hard drive.

    If not, then stick a cork in it, would ya?

    From a news story a few days ago in Vancouver:
    -Gosh, people finding out how to do illegal stuff through the intertubes. Stop the presses.

    Okay, one more time, for those of you watching at home: Please tell me where the law says it is illegal to have a photo of a banned or illegal handgun on your hard drive. For that matter, tell me where the law says it's illegal to possess information on how to saw the barrel off.

    And again, yes, I'm quite sure there's proscriptions against instructions on other modifications like full-auto conversions, but again, that's not the issue here. I didn't post those kinds of instructions, nor would I even if I knew how.

    Your issue with me is over a short-barreled handgun. It's now up to you to prove to me that posting these photos wasin any way illegal.

    Then, even if you do find some obscure law, please indicate how that presumably-Canadian law is supposed to affect me, a US citizen.

    This post can actually be considered illegal under several provisions of Canadian law as well as Australian and UK law.
    -Great. Prove it. Chapter and verse, and don't quote it here, link me to the original document, please. It's not that I don't trust you, but... well, no, I don't trust you. I'm sure you understand.

    Information whose only purpose is to facilitate the commission of an offense is illegal. Counseling an illegal act is illegal in many countries.
    -Again, great. Now prove it, chapter and verse.

    And once you've proved it, if you can, then explain to me just exactly how that law affects me, the gun, the gun's owner, the gun mod or the existience and posting of the gun photos, here in the United States.

    And how dare I question this post, right?
    -It's not a "how dare I?" situation, it's more like a "why in hell is he?!?" situation. But please, do carry on, it's quite stimulating.

    It isn't legal here.
    -Great. It's not there, and it's not illegal to have photos of it there. So where's the problem?

    You refuse to acknowledge the increasingly restrictive environment that has come about since the 9/11 attack and the much increased focus on weapons and how they may be obtained and used for what are purported to be "terrorist" activities.
    -No, I refuse to accept your strained and convoluted twisting of how you're trying to interpret some laws- that don't apply to me anyway- simply to make some kind of "I'm right, you're wrong" point.

    9-11, and the Patriot Act notwithstanding, it's still not illegal to post these photos, the mod itself is not illegal in the state it was performed in, and the gun is not illegal to possess- or even carry concealed- in the state it's owned in, either pre- or post-modification.

    So yet again, where's the problem?

    The paranoia level has ratcheted up constantly in the last few years and subjects that wouldn't raise an eyebrow a few years ago are now under scrutiny. Modifying weapons to make them easy to conceal is very high on the list.
    -I await my call from Homeland Security. Here in the US, the mod is not illegal to perform, and the resultant barrel length is not illegal, and the ownership of the firearm itself is not illegal. I can't really see the FBI or DHS spending a lot of time on this case.

    I maintain that it is irresponsible to post this sort of information even if completely legal in the US.
    -Of course you do. Irresponsible, however, is not illegal, and for that matter, it's irresponsibility is purely your opinion. You know, that thing you gaave me some grief over in relation to my opinion of your non-machining posts, over in your cart thread.

    And responsible or irresponsible, it's still very interesting that a bare nine months ago, the subject didn't even pop up, despite your extensive participation a lengthy dissertation on Canadian fiream law in a thread showing a near-identical barrel reduction project.

    This is an international forum and is available worldwide which is the intent of Village Press.
    -Yessir. And since it's such an issue with you, please show me any law, in any country, that makes it illegal to posess a photo of a firearm that is otherwise banned or illegal in that country, on one's hard drive.

    Doc.

    Leave a comment:


  • Doc Nickel
    replied
    Originally posted by Evan
    Repeatedly alleging that I know something doesn't make it true no matter how many times you say it.
    -And claiming something is illegal repeatedly doesn't make it so.

    You also know that if your computer is subjected to a forensic investigation all illegal information will be gathered and used as evidence against you.
    -And having a photograph of an illegal gun is NOT ILLEGAL IN AND OF ITSELF. You keep claiming that somebody, somewhere, might get in trouble for it, but apart from vague allegations of Australian filters, have provided no proof whatsoever.

    US courts have ruled that images in a browser cache constitute intentionally saved images.
    -Cite? That one I'm going to need proof of.

    That is yet another Red Herring. If you are going to try and make a point stick to the topic.
    -This entire conversation is a red herring. You're claiming that posting a photo of a gun is somehow illegal, but again, other than suggesting that Australia might filter sites that show guns, and pointing out that some places declare the gun itself illegal to posses, you've shown no evidence, no proof.

    So, right here- show me proof, an official citation of some form, that someone, somewhere, might get into legal trouble for having a photo of a firearm in their hard drive. And that the photo itself was the illegal item- not that the gun image was found during an investigation into other crimes (tax fraud, child porn, etc.)

    Unlikely my ass. Your computer is the first place investigators will look for anything illegal when they are investigating you in any country.
    -Certainly. And the issue at hand is THAT THE PHOTO OF THE GUN IS NOT ILLEGAL! Show me proof that a photo of a firearm is illegal to possess. Even in China, or the UK, or Australia, or Norway, or anywhere.

    Illegal is illegal and if you are unfortunate enough to live someplace where plans to modify a handgun into a "terrorist weapon" are illegal then you are in trouble.
    -Red herring. Cutting a handgun barrel down does not make it a "terrorist weapon", and even if it did, having photos of the weapon IS NOT ILLEGAL.

    What's so hard to understand about that?
    -Because you keep claiming it's illegal, even felonious, and it's not? Because you keep claiming that somebody could get into trouble because I posted those photos, and that's not true? Because having copies of the photos is not in any way illegal?

    Yeah, go figure out why you haven't objected to the very numerous posts that have no relevance to metal work or machining, to which you have posted numerous times, too many to enumerate here.
    -Red herring again. The off-topic posts were at a relatively low level, and I had no issues with them. But recently, you've been quite productive, as I understand it due to some new medications, and I'm happy for you. You're getting a lot done, and your work shows craftsmanship.

    But really, apart from your rod bender and the picket twister, much of what you have showed us has little or nothing to do with machining. Your roof-safety system was completely off topic, regardless of it's safety or design quality. The tractor wasn't much better, again being predominantly a welding and fab-shop project, involving little machining, and then the trailer was, as the saying goes, the last straw.

    Thus, I posted that maybe we don't really need to see each and every little project. Again, I didn't say stop, I didn't say "you idiot, what does that have to do with machine work", I didn't say "Neal, ban this jerk!"

    You, as your past history shows, can take no criticism whatsoever, and any backtalk is vigorously and loudly shouted down, so perhaps I should have expected the response.

    Yet you object to my post on metalworking which is apparently of interest to at least some BBS members.
    -Yessir. I objected to fab-shop work posted in a machine-shop board, I'm sure it is of interest to other readers, and as I have stated before, it's even in interest to me. My suggestion might not have been the most pleasantly-worded, but I also didn't think you needed to be kowtowed to like a jealous straw boss.

    No, it isn't. It's a prohibited and therefore illegal weapon.
    -Okay, fine. Granted. I'm sure you knowmore about Canadian gun laws than I do.

    BUT THE GUN IS NOT LOCATED IN CANADA, IS NOT DESTINED TO BE DELIVERED TO CANADA, IS NOT OWNED BY A CANADIAN, WAS NOT MODIFIED BY A CANADIAN, THE PHOTOS ARE NOT HOSTED ON A CANADIAN SERVER, THE SITE THEY WERE POSTED TO IS NOT CANADIAN-OWNED, AND NO CANADIAN AUTHORITIES WILL CHARGE A PERSON, LET ALONE ARREST THEM, FOR HAVING A COPY OF THE PHOTO ON THEIR HARD DRIVE.

    So please tell me where the problem is. Where's the illegal aspect you're so darn worried about?

    (Cont'd next post)

    Leave a comment:


  • andy_b
    replied
    Originally posted by IOWOLF
    It was mine also, .380 FA suppressed 32 rounds sounded like a quiet sewing machine, then the brass hit the gravel, Ching-a- ling ching ching. Sweet soundless surprise
    9mm. i recently put a conversion on it that allows the use of cheap 72-round drum mags. if you think 32 rounds seems like a lot, you need to hold the trigger in on 72 rounds. six seconds never seemed so long.

    andy b.

    Leave a comment:


  • Alguy
    replied
    Nicely done Doc. and you did nothing wrong posting it! On my list of things to before i croak,, is to go to alaska and when I head out to the wilds of alaska i will be packin somethin like that.

    Leave a comment:


  • Evan
    replied
    And even in Australia and the UK, no court would even consider charges against someone with pictures of guns in their cached memory. (Assuming that was their only so-called "crime"; and if it wasn't- say they were downloading bomb plans and the like- then the gun photos would be utterly and wholly irrelevant. Again.)

    AGAIN, Evan, you know this. Are you intentionally being this obtuse?
    Repeatedly alleging that I know something doesn't make it true no matter how many times you say it.

    You also know that if your computer is subjected to a forensic investigation all illegal information will be gathered and used as evidence against you. US courts have ruled that images in a browser cache constitute intentionally saved images. The situation is even less favorable in other countries including the UK.

    Saying something such as "Assuming that was their only so-called "crime"; and if it wasn't- say they were downloading bomb plans and the like- then the gun photos would be utterly and wholly irrelevant. Again." is itself irrelevant. We aren't discussing bomb plans. That is yet another Red Herring. If you are going to try and make a point stick to the topic.

    -And you're attempting to ascribe what-ifs, maybes, and could-happens of a vaguely and extremely-questionably-defined scenario where somebody might possibly get in trouble, maybe, if a certain set of unlikely conditions all took place.
    Unlikely my ass. Your computer is the first place investigators will look for anything illegal when they are investigating you in any country. Illegal is illegal and if you are unfortunate enough to live someplace where plans to modify a handgun into a "terrorist weapon" are illegal then you are in trouble. What's so hard to understand about that? Also, since when does the likelyhood of something being found or lack of it justify breaking the law?

    This conversation is getting stranger and more convoluted by the sentence. All because I suggested that maybe we have some machining-related posts on a machining-related board.

    Go figure.
    Yeah, go figure out why you haven't objected to the very numerous posts that have no relevance to metal work or machining, to which you have posted numerous times, too many to enumerate here. Yet you object to my post on metalworking which is apparently of interest to at least some BBS members.

    Go figure.


    The mod IS legal, under certain circumstances, in Canada.
    No, it isn't. It's a prohibited and therefore illegal weapon. Some people, a very few, are licensed to possess illegal weapons. That doesn't make it legal. This isn't a matter of semantics. The Criminal Code of Canada defines such a short barreled weapon as a prohibited weapon and sets out strict penalties for possession of such devices. In fact the recently passed bill C-10 sets out a mandatory three year prison sentence for possession of a prohibited weapon.


    This post is a primer on how to turn a legal restricted weapon into a prohibited weapon. The focus here is turning to precisely this sort of information.

    From a news story a few days ago in Vancouver:

    Criminals who have trouble getting their hands on guns are now turning to the Internet for help, the RCMP noted. They are buying firearm parts and building their own weapons with instructions available online.
    http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/n...8-f79bdd064c11
    This post can actually be considered illegal under several provisions of Canadian law as well as Australian and UK law. Information whose only purpose is to facilitate the commission of an offense is illegal. Counseling an illegal act is illegal in many countries.


    And for the fourth time, you know all this. I have no idea why you're trying to twist and wrestle the conversation into such obscure and irrelevant directions, but hey, I'll be happy to keep correcting you as long as it's needed.
    In order to correct you must be correct. Not so far.

    Besides the fact that this entire conversation is a red herring, since you know the mod was perfectly legal to a perfectly legal firearm, owned legally and displayed legally, but because you are mad at me, personally, for having the temerity to ask that you reduce the number of non-machining-related stuff you post- how dare I!- you've engaged your Ego and now must dredge up increasingly-nonsensical arguments to keep from being proven wrong.
    And how dare I question this post, right?
    It isn't legal here. You refuse to acknowledge the increasingly restrictive environment that has come about since the 9/11 attack and the much increased focus on weapons and how they may be obtained and used for what are purported to be "terrorist" activities. The paranoia level has ratcheted up constantly in the last few years and subjects that wouldn't raise an eyebrow a few years ago are now under scrutiny. Modifying weapons to make them easy to conceal is very high on the list.

    I maintain that it is irresponsible to post this sort of information even if completely legal in the US. This is an international forum and is available worldwide which is the intent of Village Press.

    Leave a comment:


  • John Stevenson
    replied
    Well I have read the whole thread and being UK based would like to add a few bits.
    First off I thought Doc's post was excellent, it was all about machining, what on is irrelevant, more on this later.
    OK so in the UK we can't own a gun such as this so modifying it doesn't come into the issue even if I wanted to, something Evan was trying to make an issue of.

    Only yesterday I did a job very similar to what Doc did but not as complex, not sure what it was but something gun related and to do with insulation filling and it was in alloy so i know it wasn't firearm related.

    As regards having images of guns on the hard drive then this is pure $hite as only certain guns are banned here so it would be impossible to enforce. I still own a black powder gun that requires no license or anything and it's legal. In fact a recent case in court proved that in some cases banned weapons can still be owned and slip thru a loophole. The Google Child will probably find the reference.

    Doc's responses and replies to my mind have been in order, factual and 100 % relevant, if this thread was a debate with a vote on the outcome then Doc's presentation would win hands down.

    .

    Leave a comment:


  • Doc Nickel
    replied
    Originally posted by aostling
    1. Why do they call you Doc?
    -Nope, I'm not that kind of doctor. I don't even play one on TV.

    It's simply an internet nick, that got it's start due to the fact I was the only one of our crew (of paintball players) that bothered to bring any tools to the field- and by extension, I was the one that had to fix them all.

    One fellow, one day lost to history- this was about 1994, about a year before I got my first net-enabled PC- had several problems with his gun during the day, and eventually started cracking jokes about it; "Code blue! We need a crash cart to the back bunker!" and so forth. One of the times I was patching it up yet again, he said "will he live, Doc?"

    The reply was something like "yes, but he'll never pay the piano again", which everyone got a good chuckle out of. (You had to be there.) The nick got brought up again a few times in similar circumstances, and when I got online, I simply used it for a nick on some of the early web boards, to preserve some shred of privacy.

    After a few years of casual use, I started doing business customizing paintball gear over the 'net, and since I was already somewhat known by that name, I stuck with it.

    2. Are you related to the mayor of Seattle?
    -Nope. Don't know anyone at all in Seattle. The entirety of my extended family is either here in Alaska or some of my more distant aunts and uncles are back in the upper midwest.

    Doc.

    Leave a comment:


  • aostling
    replied
    Originally posted by Doc Nickel
    On the .357 earlier, I milled an aluminum "bridge" that slid over the front sight

    Doc.
    Doc,

    I've been dying to ask, (but hesitated, not wanting to get in the sights of your .357, actually or figuratively), two questions:

    1. Why do they call you Doc? For three months in 1982 I was a straw boss in Barrow, trying to control a gang of drug-snorting pipefitters. I failed. One of the crew was a Seattle chiropractor, on the lam. You're not that kind of a doctor, are you?

    2. Are you related to the mayor of Seattle? He has your last name, and it's not unlikely for there to be a Seattle-Alaska connection. I'm a Seattle kid, but my mother was born in Sitka.

    Leave a comment:


  • Doc Nickel
    replied
    Originally posted by Evan
    The US is one of the few countries that doesn't make information on illegal devices illegal in itself. Most countries make the instructions illegal as well as the devices. If for some reason in one of these countries your computer came to be examined and such information was found in the browser cache it could be a serious problem.
    -Good lord... Okay, even taking this at face value, the person in question would have to take the step of saving the images to their hard drive, else they'd be deleted from the cached memory within a relatively short period of time. (For some people, hours, for others, a few days.)

    And even in Australia and the UK, no court would even consider charges against someone with pictures of guns in their cached memory. (Assuming that was their only so-called "crime"; and if it wasn't- say they were downloading bomb plans and the like- then the gun photos would be utterly and wholly irrelevant. Again.)

    AGAIN, Evan, you know this. Are you intentionally being this obtuse?

    It is apparent that you do not understand how things work outside the USA. That is a common fault.
    -And you're attempting to ascribe what-ifs, maybes, and could-happens of a vaguely and extremely-questionably-defined scenario where somebody might possibly get in trouble, maybe, if a certain set of unlikely conditions all took place.

    Even in Australia and the UK, no court is going to charge a person with having photos of illegal objects in their browser cache- with the probable exception of child pornography.

    I know that for a fact, your attempts to claim otherwise notwithstanding.

    Australia wasn't contemplating such action five years ago.
    -Again, so? The damage, so to speak, has already been done. This site already had references to guns and other weapons better than five years before I posted anything gun-related. If it's going to be filtered from Australian ISPs, a situation I still boggle at how you manage to find relevant or even associated with my postings, then nothing you or I could post now, would have the least effect on such a filtering.

    You're reaching, Evan, and no twisting of obscure what-ifs and could-bes can hide that.


    Not relevant to this discussion.
    -But your worry that this site might, just maybe, be filtered from having a few Australian members read it due to my recent posting of a gun-related topic, on a board that's seen gun-related topics posted for better than five years, is?

    This conversation is getting stranger and more convoluted by the sentence. All because I suggested that maybe we have some machining-related posts on a machining-related board.

    Go figure.

    Your mod is NOT legal in most of the world.
    -The gun itself, modded or no, is not legal in the UK or Australia, and therefore, the mod is irrelevant. If someone had such a gun in order to mod it, whether or not he was planning to saw the barrel off would be of absolutely and utterly no consequence.

    The mod IS legal, under certain circumstances, in Canada.

    But again, this is relevant again, how? Simply posting photos of something legal that may or may not be legal in other juristictions is in no way illegal, immoral or even fattening. There's dozens of websites devoted to non-EPA-approved car mods, the majority of which are illegal to do in California, New York and Chicago. But California isn't going to shut the site down or try to prosecute somebody from, say, Kansas, that posted such mods. They may try going after somebody that tries the mod in an area where it isn't allowed, but no one is going to get arrested for looking at such mods.

    And for the fourth time, you know all this. I have no idea why you're trying to twist and wrestle the conversation into such obscure and irrelevant directions, but hey, I'll be happy to keep correcting you as long as it's needed.

    Are you reading what YOU type? Perfectly legal except for being a felony or equivalent in most countries.
    -Doing may well be illegal. Looking is in no way illegal, with the possible exception of some extraordinarily-repressive areas like China... but then, owning the gun in China is itself illegal, so again, looking at pictures of how to mod the barrel is utterly and wholly irrelevant.

    That paragraph illustrates the logical fallacy of Argument by Distraction, Misleading Vividness and the classic Red Herring. Pretty talented of you to include at least three fallacies in one paragraph.
    -"Oh Kettle, how Black thou Art!"

    Let's see; you're trying to accuse me of a potentially-illegal activity (distraction) by bringing up possible actions by a Australian ISPs (more distraction) that might or might not charge some nameless Australian viewer with looking at them (misleading vividness) and pointing out the mod itself is illegal in places where simply owning the gun is illegal (the red herring.) You've also got accusations of totalitarianism (via the "Patriot Act"- that's more misleading vividness.)

    Besides the fact that this entire conversation is a red herring, since you know the mod was perfectly legal to a perfectly legal firearm, owned legally and displayed legally, but because you are mad at me, personally, for having the temerity to ask that you reduce the number of non-machining-related stuff you post- how dare I!- you've engaged your Ego and now must dredge up increasingly-nonsensical arguments to keep from being proven wrong.

    There are plenty of people that think that information such as this "Shouldn't be allowed".
    -Fortunately the United States, where the gun is, the mod was performed, the photos are hosted and the site itself is located, don't agree with those people, and thus allow it. What somebody else outside our borders might or might not do, is largely irrelevant as far as this board and it's postings go. Any filtration or legality of imagery is not and cannot be our concern.

    It isn't legal in Canada, it is a prohibited weapon. I cannot obtain the requisite paperwork and neither can anybody else unless they are a grandfathered gunsmith/collector. That describes only a very few people.
    -That's great. And so how does that affect either one of us? The gun isn't in Canada, I'm not in Canada, the photos aren't hosted in Canada, and Canadian authorities aren't going to arrest or even investigate someone who has photos of it even saved to their hard drive, let alone in their temporary browser cache.

    So where's the problem?

    Actually, I never said that. Jerry did. Besides, those aren't the rules here in Canada.
    -Precisely. Just as Canadian (and English, and Australian, and Chinese) rules aren't relevant here in the US. Glad we finally agree on something.

    And, it's still irrelevant to this discussion. Plus, it is another invalid arguing technique, in this case a form of ad hominem attack.
    -Sure. Like saying I potentially commited a felony because some guy in Australia might have looked at the pictures.

    Most of your "points" are based on incorrect assumptions, wrong information, incorrect attribution twice now and/or ignorance of the facts.
    -And every one of your points are based on what-ifs, maybes, might-happens and could-bes. Looking at my photos might be illegal... in places where the gun itself is illegal. Cutting down the barrel could be illegal, but only in places where the gun is, itself, again, illegal. Somebody in an oppressive place like China might get into trouble for looking at my photos.... but then, they'll also get into trouble for viewing CNN.com, anything to do with Tibet's bid for independence, anything that has to do with Taiwan being an independent entity and not a part of mainland China, and anything even remotely derogatory toward China's ruling party.

    Meaning your entire premise is wholly irrelevant.

    The fact that some of the people here agree with you shows that you aren't the only one holding such misinformed views. That is a shame and you would do well to inform yourself about what is happening outside the USA. It really does matter whether you think so or not.
    -I know quite a bit more than you might think, just as I'm quite sure you know much more than is evident by this sort of nonsensical and eventually futile argument.

    Perhaps I should be direct- please explain to me why my posting these photos is in any way, illegal, immoral or fattening. You've suggested that Australia will filter the site. Okay, so? If that's the case, the site was ripe for filtering years before either one of us joined. You've pointed out the mod is illegal in Canada. Okay, so? I'm not in Canada, the gun isn't in Canada nor is it destined for Canada. Somebody in Canada (or England, or Australia) might get in trouble for looking at the photos? First, that's horsesh*t and you know it, and second, even if that were true, so? There's thousands of photos of firearms on the 'net, some of them even illegal (or at least heavily restricted) to own even here in the US.

    So what's left, besides the fact you got your undies in a wad because I asked to to tone down the non-machining posts?

    Doc.

    Leave a comment:


  • Bguns
    replied
    As a licensed Federal Firearms Dealer/Gunsmith, I find Docs post to be interesting and Machining related. History has shown that firearms have brought many useful tools and concepts, that spread to other manufacturing industries....
    If A Canadian citizen has a problem with an American hosted web site...STAY OFF OF IT... I had a German Hunting Licence and was able to buy firearms in Germany while stationed there, and the gun laws there were fairly reasonable.
    Australian gun laws mean diddly squat in the US and ALWAYS WILL....
    Same for Canadian laws....Unless I was to be traveling through.. which I doubt I will ever do again.... My Concealed Carry Permit would surely invite a strip search/LOOOONG DELAY at border...
    I seem to remember an incident where Canadian boats were blockading a US ferry..http://www.plu.edu/scene/issue/1998/spring/canada5.html
    Seems the Canadians have a history of ignoring what they don't want to hear and breaking International law.... Even the multi million Canadian dollar Gun registration system has turned into mess. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_gun_registry
    In regards to illegal import of firearms into Canada...I also seem to remember that Islamic Terrorists and their exotic items/Knowledge, preferred import route into the US was through CANADA...
    Last edited by Bguns; 08-24-2007, 12:56 AM.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X