And I still want to get into that kind of philosophical I guess it is discussion on arms vs weapons. If arms are not weapons, how are they different?
If none of your (generic you/your) firearms are weapons because you aren’t using them as such, does that mean it’s okay to ban them because they aren’t arms?
Or are they arms but not weapons? That really seems like a pivotal thing here
So Address shouldered firearms with the barrel length less than 16” with rifled bores and less than 18” with smooth bores.
So pistol braces are the first example. One side says they are an aid to firing one handed. Another side claims they are a work-around to the $200 tax stamp
For smooth bores there’s the axe in 410. And I don’t remember the pump action names. I assume all of them would be painful to fire and difficult to fire while shouldered.
I would still call them firearms up until the point that they are used against someone as a weapon.
I bought beer on the way to a friends house Saturday. They asked to see my id. Then took it and scanned it.
Does that send a signal to the state that I’m driving drunk?
Firearms don’t always have to be weapons
Maybe if I had bought hard liquor (s) it would be intent for dui?
What makes it okay to always think about handguns as weapons instead of any other firearm?
The resident drugstore cowboy is flagging posts again.
Well we have the right to keep and bear arms. I think arms is more broad than it is restrictive.
Is this a weapon? Why or why not?
I wasn’t implying woke be directly replaced with unfounded, but more that a person with a woke attitude isn’t operating based on a foundation of facts. Their opinions/beliefs are not based on facts, but are unfounded (probably based on repeating something they heard, the more dramatic the better).
Wouldn’t the apt analogy for that be, you bought an AR15 style rifle, does that signal that you are going to be a mass shooter?
I don’t get how driving drunk is comparable to this discussion at all.
Are you saying that, when beer is consumed and then the consumer drives drunk, the beer is…no longer beer? Or the beer becomes, something else, other than beer, because of how it was ‘used’?
And what are “arms”?
I have a driver’s license.
I used a motor vehicle to go purchase beer.
I bought the beer
Therefore I must be driving under the influence?
If firearms are weapons then the intent has to be for harming
You keep requesting an answer to what are arms.
Is this the most relevant part of the definition that you are after?
Be careful what are you posting. Better be sure before judging.
Your nightmare, I mean The resident drugstore Cowboy, never has been flagging single post at this Community.
I would recommend to stay focused on the thread. Don’t be distracted.
Are you saying what the beer is changes based on you driving drunk after purchasing it?
If you don’t drive drunk, what is the beer?
If you DO drive drunk, what is the beer?
That is what we need to determine for the beer analogy to work (as you are changing the definition of what the firearm is based on what is done with it, so must you change what the beer is based on what you do with it)
…and if we are changing what they are based on what is done with it, does that mean shouldering a pistol with a brace makes it an SBR? If not, why not?
I never said I was driving drunk. Does having purchased beer and traveling in a vehicle create drunk driving?
Does purchasing a firearm mean it will be used as a weapon?
Some people have waayyy to much time to argue silly s#!t. 
Thanks for the sage advice.
I was just wanting to point out that it doesn’t always present the best optics referring to all firearms as weapons.
Imagine the scouts going back to school and saying they practiced firing all kinds of weapons over the summer…
I’ve never used my firearms as weapons. Hope I never have to.
And I think it does a disservice to the origin and intent of the Second Amendment and the reason the Right of the People to keep and bear arms not being infringed is so important.
It is because they are arms, and arms are weapons…if firearms are not weapons, I don’t think there is an argument for them to be protected by the Constitution.
What would be wrong with scouts practicing firing weapons over the summer?
Nothing at all is wrong with it.
It’s how it sounds and children can now get in trouble for making gun gestures with their hands at school these days.
I was on the school rifle team. We went to Vanderbilt to practice back then. Times have changed…
