Posted: 8/28/2005 7:02:15 PM EDT
|
I just had to post this thread: As a firearms instructor and a professional in the gun industry, I am getting sick and tired of people attempting to erroneously explain to me what defines a loaded gun. I have always known a “loaded gun” to be: A firearm with an unexpended round in the chamber that can be fired when the trigger is pressed. Evidently several years ago some Nevada rocket scientists in Carson City (that’s where Nevada state laws are made) decided to rewrite the laws of physics and define a “loaded” gun as having a full or partially loaded magazine in the gun and an “empty” chamber. That means if I am carrying a gun, let’s say a 1911 in Condition Three (full mag in the gun, empty chamber, hammer down), would I be carrying a loaded gun? Ok, let’s say I took that same 1911 in the aforementioned condition and I cocked the hammer and pressed the trigger. What would happen? NOTHING! Because the Friggin’ gun is NOT LOADED unless there is an unexpended round in the chamber! Fish and Game laws allow the transportation of long arms in vehicles on public highways/thoroughfares with fully loaded magazines in the gun, as long as there is not an unexpended round in the chamber. And do you know what those guns are considered under Fish and Game laws in the aforementioned described condition? UNLOADED! What’s your view? What the Hell is a loaded gun? Am I correct or do I need to be corrected on this? Be Safe. Joe |
|
my personal idea of a loaded firearm is one that has the immediate ability to be fired, such as a loaded mag being in the mag well, any of the cylinders loaded on a revolver, the clip or tube containing ammo, etc. I think if a semi-auto has a full mag and an empty chamber, it's still loaded. i dont, however think the mag should be considered part of the gun in the sence that if the mag is loaded, the gun is "loaded" if the mag is stored in a seperate place. |
|
Just be glad that we're not in California, where a "loaded gun" means a firearm and ammunition in general proximity to each other... I often wonder why people try to link items such as "understanding of physics", "common sense", etc. with the legal profession. Legislators can and do define terms to be whatever they want. Unfortunately they trap the unwary into confusing the definition with the commonly understood, everyday definition. So to answer your question, yes, you need to be corrected. It doesn't matter how much data you have to back up your position, the law trumps your opinion. 
|
|
......sounds like the kind of issue I usually get torqued up about.....and (perhaps unfortunately) legal definition tops all. Law may be "wrong", but still the law. Maybe a can o' worms not worth openin'........go ahead, make yourself crazy; I usually do. Tell us if anything changes..... |