Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
BCM
User Panel

Posted: 10/20/2004 4:33:33 AM EDT
Granted my wording (regarding mags) was dumb..... but if the law can't prove they are post-ban that means I can't prove they're post-ban either.  Which means the thread was not about legality but about liability.

and I know it was worded badly!!!!!

DAMMIT, that's my first lock!!!!

Here's the thread as a CLEANED thread:

Let's say I live in NY/NJ.
Let's further posit that CDNN has unmarked hi-caps for the p89/pc9.
Let's not even ASK them when they were made.
Neither John Law nor  I am able to tell that they areepost-ban - ZERO MARKINGS WHATSOEVER.

This has been coming up alot, so I figured it was a good topic.  
I DO NOT INTEND to EVER do ANYTHING illegal (Hey, the Olsens are 18 now.  Pounds that is.), so if I knew these mags are/were post-ban I WOULD NOT PURCHASE THEM.  disclaimer over.
Link Posted: 10/20/2004 4:37:24 AM EDT
[#1]
Link Posted: 10/20/2004 4:39:27 AM EDT
[#2]
IT'S A TRAP!!  IBTL!



Link Posted: 10/20/2004 4:40:08 AM EDT
[#3]
Link Posted: 10/20/2004 4:41:23 AM EDT
[#4]
yes it is a trap!
Close Join Our Mail List to Stay Up To Date! Win a FREE Membership!

Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!

You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.


By signing up you agree to our User Agreement. *Must have a registered ARFCOM account to win.
Top Top