Thread: WE LOST

Originally Posted by Beavis

Nicholas Taylor has released an opinion on the case. It appears there was also another ruling on length recently that somewhat contradicts the latest one.

I see what you mean, "get creative" with what they have got. What they have is the law, and the ability to abuse their ability to arbitrarily apply it.

Here is a link to Nicholas Taylor's opinion on the case. http://www.firearmslawyer.co.nz/uplo...th_opinion.pdf

I read it. It does not have a strong feel to it, and is based on a distinction of present and future tense. Does not strengthen his credibility to suggest any court would accept that no fit and proper person would ever fold/collapse the stock of an MSSA...

Of course they would use such a practical feature, particularly as it allows the gun to be readily fitted to the stature of the shooter. Shame club guns cannot have such a useful feature as they're usually A-cat.

On the other hand it seems 100% worthwhile to fight against police policy measuring guns without any muzzle attachments, even where they require a tool for removal. You can easily argue that to be arbitrary, since such a rule could as readily be applied to an AR15 muzzle brake as to a SMLE butt stock (which also needs tools for removal), so this was clearly not intended by the original lawmakers.

But Beavis, have you got the link to the other case that went the other way?