Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Posted: 5/7/2002 11:18:04 AM EDT
[url]http://www.thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&postid=988653#post988653[/url] Todd is starting the "CavArms is in ATF violation" crap again. I know you want to avoid this, but some butt nugget might believe it. Love the way Todd just makes ATF violation statements on gun forums.
Link Posted: 5/7/2002 11:35:29 AM EDT
Link Posted: 5/7/2002 11:42:25 AM EDT
Will happen anywhere, just add Todd.
Link Posted: 5/7/2002 11:44:54 AM EDT
Link Posted: 5/7/2002 2:17:20 PM EDT
Originally Posted By SteyrAUG: [url]http://www.thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&postid=988653#post988653[/url]
View Quote
When I try this link, it tells me that I can't access the page, and that maybe I'm trying to edit someone else's posts. ???
Link Posted: 5/7/2002 2:24:27 PM EDT
Link Posted: 5/7/2002 2:36:12 PM EDT
What's the idiot's claim? The thread was gone by the time I clicked on it.z
Link Posted: 5/7/2002 3:42:03 PM EDT
Link Posted: 5/7/2002 3:52:45 PM EDT
I am glad I just registered over there, I'm going in....If I'm not back in 10 minutes call the President....................
Link Posted: 5/7/2002 4:02:57 PM EDT
That thread seems to be gone.
Link Posted: 5/7/2002 5:22:06 PM EDT
The thread has been nuked. The jist of it was Todd claming that Cavalry Arms builds guns on a unlicensed premise in violation of the law. Todd has brought this up once before and Garry shut him down with facts. Todd however is not above repeating a lie that has already been disproven. BUT while doing a search for the username Special Weapons over at the firing line I come across this... [url]http://www.thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=96914[/url] [img]http://specialweaponsllc.com/images/sw369.JPG[/img] [img]http://specialweaponsllc.com/images/sw368.JPG[/img] What do we have here? A "pistol grip" AND a "folding stock" on a postban weapon. Can you say felony? First, it is NOT a LE Restricted firearm, it is clearly a postban HK SL8. Second, it is NOT a post dealer sample as it again is clearly a SL8 and NOT a G36. Third, it is NOT a licensed conversion or preban sear gun as it doesn't even have internals installed at all. Seems pretty cut and dry. A postban rifle ILLEGALLY built into a assault weapon. The Firing Line should really be careful about this clown posting his felonies on their board. Normally I'd hesitate to point out the obvious illegalities of this on a public forum, but as Todd is perfectly willing to repeatedly do the same in an effort to get competitors into ATF trouble I will extend to him the same consideration.
Link Posted: 5/7/2002 5:55:44 PM EDT
Yeah, I was going to ask about that stock on hk54.com, but my one attempt to register went unanswered. Their stock is apparently made such that you can put a block where the spring mechanism usually is which holds it in the open position. They did this so that if the AW ban isn't replaced in 2004, it can easily be made into a folder. Now, logically I believe (and I think most gunowners would agree) that this should be OK, but I don't think the ATF holds the same views. Just like I don't believe they consider a plastic AR-15 collapsable stock that has been fixed in one position as being legal no matter what you do to it, as the only "permanent" ways of fixing a stock is by welding or blind pinning metal. The ATF doesn't seem to care that you could likely swap out a pre-ban stock that has been "fixed" with a fully functional one much easier than returning the fixed stock to functionality... Still, as stupid as it is, that is their interpretation of the law, so it seems to me that designing a stock that was meant to be easily converible between fixed and folding modes is a nono. This was one move that I actually admire about SW, as it would not force their customers to buy a second stock set off of them if the AW isn't replaced. However, those in glass houses shouldn't throw stones... if he's going to be petty and accuse CavArms of some stupid crap like he is (whether they are in the wrong or not is irrelevant - it is still petty), then he should make sure all his T's are crossed and I's dotted first. Rocko
Link Posted: 5/7/2002 8:30:32 PM EDT
Yeah, but that one is not blocked for future conversion. It IS a folding stocked, pistol gripped felony.
Link Posted: 5/7/2002 10:53:11 PM EDT
If my reply over there EVER posts, I asked a very good question... Scott
Link Posted: 5/7/2002 11:32:18 PM EDT
I'm no expert but seeing how there are no internals it could be a "toy" for all intensive purposes..... The inside of the receiver could be solid for all we know..... Don't get me wrong I think Toad is a piece of work, too. I'm just not sure you got anything here.... John
Link Posted: 5/7/2002 11:58:11 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/7/2002 11:58:54 PM EDT by SteyrAUG]
Originally Posted By Beagles747: I'm no expert but seeing how there are no internals it could be a "toy" for all intensive purposes..... The inside of the receiver could be solid for all we know..... Don't get me wrong I think Toad is a piece of work, too. I'm just not sure you got anything here.... John
View Quote
If you click on the link you would see it is a SL8, you don't need internals for a violation. ATF is pretty clear on this. But "I" ain't gonna call them.
Link Posted: 5/8/2002 3:12:14 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 5/8/2002 3:13:28 AM EDT by rocko]
Originally Posted By SteyrAUG: Yeah, but that one is not blocked for future conversion. It IS a folding stocked, pistol gripped felony.
View Quote
Nono, I think you missed my point - they are [i]all[/i] like that. You presumably get it with the aluminum(?) block that replaces the spring/folding mechanism, but all you need to do (from what I have heard) to make it a folder again, is simply remove stock, take out the block and replace it with the correct spring/folding mechanism. The part that makes it a fixed stock is purposely designed to be easily removed and replaced. If you are just refering to that one gun in the picture above which shows the stock in its folding form, I assume SW is a class 2 SOT, so can do anything they want with their own personal guns. So, the gun in the picture is likely 100% legal, but I don't think their stock concept, if being sold to us common serfs is. Rocko
Top Top