Painting your gun with a 6mm - 2" blaze orange stripe on the end

[Hawkflyer]

imported post

ODA-

Lets leave people from Tenn aside for a moment. I am certain you are as sick of people accusing others of being anti for not swallowing this guys actions and intentions whole like baby birds eating predigested worms, Like you I want to examine the worm a little before dinner. Right now I am not hungary. So here is my point.

My understanding is that in VIrginia a permit does not cover deceptively disguised weapons, even though that is legally concealment. I seem to remember reading that somewhere. Is that your understanding as well?

The law allows full concealment but not deceptive concealment. In fact the last I looked at this issue I think I saw the the North American belt buckle guns were NOT legal for carry in Virginia for just this reason. You could remove the gun from the buckle and carry it in your pocket, but not on the buckle.

If I am correct on this the painting of a weapon to look like a toy becomes very relevant, because even if carried in the open it would be of a deceptive nature such that its true nature was not apparent to common observation..

 

[Bikenut]

imported post

Hawkflyer wrote:

ODA-

Lets leave people from Tenn aside for a moment. I am certain you are as sick of people accusing others of being anti for not swallowing this guys actions and intentions whole like baby birds eating predigested worms, Like you I want to examine the worm a little before dinner. Right now I am not hungary. So here is my point.

My understanding is that in VIrginia a permit does not cover deceptively disguised weapons, even though that is legally concealment. I seem to remember reading that somewhere. Is that your understanding as well?

The law allows full concealment but not deceptive concealment. In fact the last I looked at this issue I think I saw the the North American belt buckle guns were NOT legal for carry in Virginia for just this reason. You could remove the gun from the buckle and carry it in your pocket, but not on the buckle.

If I am correct on this the painting of a weapon to look like a toy becomes very relevant, because even if carried in the open it would be of a deceptive nature such that its true nature was not apparent to common observation..

I, not being up on Virginia's laws, am interested if this is true because it would be an argument based in legality.... even if it only applies to Virginia... or perhaps other States have similar worded laws?

 

[kwikrnu]

imported post

ODA 226 wrote:

If you would take the time to exersize "Due Diligence" and read ALL threads regarding this topic and research kwikrnu's posts from other websites that resulted in him being BANNED from those sites and gun stores refusing to sell weapons and ammunition to him because of his bizzare behavior, then you would have every right to accuse me of being "no better than them" (the Brady Bunch).

Being that you obviously HAVEN'T, get fully educated about this situation and then hopefully we can speak with an educated discourse.

Who refused to sell me ammunition?

Who refused to sell me weapons?

 

[Sonora Rebel]

imported post

MarlboroLts5150 wrote:



Sonora.....when I get back to AZ, you and I have got to get together for a beer.

Nuff said.





You're on. I'm way the hell west of Tucson. PM comin'

 

[bohdi]

imported post

Bikenut wrote:

bohdi wrote:

Nice avoidance tactic. You can't accept it when it is stated regarding a real life incident. You can't accept it when I place myself into the scenario instead of the original actor. You are either chosing to ignore the message or you don't understand it no matter how many different ways it is stated.

The statement, arguement, view point, position, how ever you wish to term it, that coloring a gun any color, so that you won't get shot, is false.

Thank you Les for validating that for me. :lol:

Not an avoidance tactic by me.... a simple exercise in pointing out the ridiculous.

The message is what again? That you, and others, disagree with the method kwikrnu is using to exercise his 2nd Amendment rights?

Edited for spmelling errors.....

Bike - you have not done that.

 

[bohdi]

imported post

There is only one way to not get shot. Who knows what it is?

 

[ODA 226]

imported post

Hawkflyer wrote:

ODA-

Lets leave people from Tenn aside for a moment. I am certain you are as sick of people accusing others of being anti for not swallowing this guys actions and intentions whole like baby birds eating predigested worms, Like you I want to examine the worm a little before dinner. Right now I am not hungary. So here is my point.

My understanding is that in VIrginia a permit does not cover deceptively disguised weapons, even though that is legally concealment. I seem to remember reading that somewhere. Is that your understanding as well?

The law allows full concealment but not deceptive concealment. In fact the last I looked at this issue I think I saw the the North American belt buckle guns were NOT legal for carry in Virginia for just this reason. You could remove the gun from the buckle and carry it in your pocket, but not on the buckle.

If I am correct on this the painting of a weapon to look like a toy becomes very relevant, because even if carried in the open it would be of a deceptive nature such that its true nature was not apparent to common observation..

The answer, Hawk is YES! That is my understanding of the law. It is illegal in Virginia to alter a lethal weapon to make it appear to be something other than what it is. That is exactly why you can carry a NA revolver BUT NOT WEAR THE GUN IN THE BUCKLE! Handguns disguised as pens are illegal. Handguns disguised as gloves are also illegal...and the list goes on.

Why would anyone other than a COWARD attempt to alter the appearence of a lethal weapon to appear to be an innocuous toy?

Maybe we Virginians have a greater sense of honor than kwikrnu (AKA ASSHAT!) and his ilk....

 

[N6ATF]

imported post

bohdi wrote:

There is only one way to not get shot. Who knows what it is?

Jump off the Grand Canyon without a parachute?

 

[bohdi]

imported post

N6ATF wrote:

bohdi wrote:

There is only one way to not get shot. Who knows what it is?

Jump off the Grand Canyon without a parachute?

nope

 

[Carnivore]

imported post

N6ATF wrote:

bohdi wrote:

There is only one way to not get shot. Who knows what it is?

Jump off the Grand Canyon without a parachute?

Point a gun at Carnivore, Orange tip or not!!

 

[N6ATF]

imported post

bohdi wrote:

N6ATF wrote:

bohdi wrote:

There is only one way to not get shot. Who knows what it is?

Jump off the Grand Canyon without a parachute?

nope

The only way to not get shot is to be dead already. Well you could still be shot, but then it would be redundant.

 

[ODA 226]

imported post

kwikrnu wrote:

ODA 226 wrote:

If you would take the time to exersize "Due Diligence" and read ALL threads regarding this topic and research kwikrnu's posts from other websites that resulted in him being BANNED from those sites and gun stores refusing to sell weapons and ammunition to him because of his bizzare behavior, then you would have every right to accuse me of being "no better than them" (the Brady Bunch).

Being that you obviously HAVEN'T, get fully educated about this situation and then hopefully we can speak with an educated discourse.

Who refused to sell me ammunition?

Who refused to sell me weapons?

GO STAND IN THE CORNER ASSHAT!

 

[drkarrow]

imported post

ODA 226 wrote:

The answer, Hawk is YES! That is my understanding of the law. It is illegal in Virginia to alter a lethal weapon to make it appear to be something other than what it is. That is exactly why you can carry a NA revolver BUT NOT WEAR THE GUN IN THE BUCKLE!

Why would anyone other than a COWARD attempt to alter the appearence of a lethal weapon to appear to be an innocuous toy?

Maybe we Virginians have a greater sense of honor than kwikrnu (AKA ASSHAT!) and his ilk....

I thought you said you were done arguing and you were outa here? Sorry. I had my hopes up.

Your post starts out good but then turns to crap with personal attacks again, geesh. Is it even possible for you make a post without personally attacking someone? It would come across as much more credible if you could.

Bikenut wrote:

the tactic of attacking the individual by casting aspersions about his mental health is straight out of Saul Alinsky's book "Rules for Radicals".

You nailed that one right on.




Now if we could stop the name calling and actually get on topic....

There are federal NFA laws about disguised weapons. These are the laws that ban things like wallet guns, pen guns, cane guns, and so on. Now it is perfectly clear that the orange tip is intended to disguise the weapon to be an airsoft.

So does disguising a weapon to look like an airsoft gun make it an AOW and violate the NFA?

That I don't know because what exactly falls into the AOW (All Other Weapons) catagory seems to purely up to the ATF's whim. I'm unable to find any federal laws on what defines a disguised wepon. Does anyone know where these laws are that we could reffer to?

 

[Thundar]

imported post

ODA 226 wrote:

Hawkflyer wrote:

ODA-

Lets leave people from Tenn aside for a moment. I am certain you are as sick of people accusing others of being anti for not swallowing this guys actions and intentions whole like baby birds eating predigested worms, Like you I want to examine the worm a little before dinner. Right now I am not hungary. So here is my point.

My understanding is that in VIrginia a permit does not cover deceptively disguised weapons, even though that is legally concealment. I seem to remember reading that somewhere. Is that your understanding as well?

The law allows full concealment but not deceptive concealment. In fact the last I looked at this issue I think I saw the the North American belt buckle guns were NOT legal for carry in Virginia for just this reason. You could remove the gun from the buckle and carry it in your pocket, but not on the buckle.

If I am correct on this the painting of a weapon to look like a toy becomes very relevant, because even if carried in the open it would be of a deceptive nature such that its true nature was not apparent to common observation..

The answer, Hawk is YES! That is my understanding of the law. It is illegal in Virginia to alter a lethal weapon to make it appear to be something other than what it is. That is exactly why you can carry a NA revolver BUT NOT WEAR THE GUN IN THE BUCKLE!

Why would anyone other than a COWARD attempt to alter the appearence of a lethal weapon to appear to be an innocuous toy?

Maybe we Virginians have a greater sense of honor than kwikrnu (AKA ASSHAT!) and his ilk....

Penalty Flag.

No citation. Hate to throw it but I cannot find the law, or case law, that supports this "disguised firearm" law in Virginia.

We all know that the "concealed" handgun is permissable with a CHP.

 

[drkarrow]

imported post

ODA 226 wrote:

GO STAND IN THE CORNER ASSHAT!

I'd suggest you read this post,

http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum1/1.html

then look in a mirror.

 

[ODA 226]

imported post

Thundar wrote:

ODA 226 wrote:

Hawkflyer wrote:

ODA-

Lets leave people from Tenn aside for a moment. I am certain you are as sick of people accusing others of being anti for not swallowing this guys actions and intentions whole like baby birds eating predigested worms, Like you I want to examine the worm a little before dinner. Right now I am not hungary. So here is my point.

My understanding is that in VIrginia a permit does not cover deceptively disguised weapons, even though that is legally concealment. I seem to remember reading that somewhere. Is that your understanding as well?

The law allows full concealment but not deceptive concealment. In fact the last I looked at this issue I think I saw the the North American belt buckle guns were NOT legal for carry in Virginia for just this reason. You could remove the gun from the buckle and carry it in your pocket, but not on the buckle.

If I am correct on this the painting of a weapon to look like a toy becomes very relevant, because even if carried in the open it would be of a deceptive nature such that its true nature was not apparent to common observation..

The answer, Hawk is YES! That is my understanding of the law. It is illegal in Virginia to alter a lethal weapon to make it appear to be something other than what it is. That is exactly why you can carry a NA revolver BUT NOT WEAR THE GUN IN THE BUCKLE!

Why would anyone other than a COWARD attempt to alter the appearence of a lethal weapon to appear to be an innocuous toy?

Maybe we Virginians have a greater sense of honor than kwikrnu (AKA ASSHAT!) and his ilk....

Penalty Flag.

No citation. Hate to throw it but I cannot find the law, or case law, that supports this "disguised firearm" law in Virginia.

We all know that the "concealed" handgun is permissable with a CHP.

I'm working on it.

 

[ODA 226]

imported post

drkarrow wrote:

ODA 226 wrote:

GO STAND IN THE CORNER ASSHAT!

I'd suggest you read this post,

http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum1/1.html

then look in a mirror.

Oh I'm sorry! Did I offend you? Please pull your head out of your fourth point of contact.

 

[Hawkflyer]

imported post

ODA 226 wrote:

Thundar wrote:

ODA 226 wrote:

Hawkflyer wrote:

ODA-

Lets leave people from Tenn aside for a moment. I am certain you are as sick of people accusing others of being anti for not swallowing this guys actions and intentions whole like baby birds eating predigested worms, Like you I want to examine the worm a little before dinner. Right now I am not hungary. So here is my point.

My understanding is that in VIrginia a permit does not cover deceptively disguised weapons, even though that is legally concealment. I seem to remember reading that somewhere. Is that your understanding as well?

The law allows full concealment but not deceptive concealment. In fact the last I looked at this issue I think I saw the the North American belt buckle guns were NOT legal for carry in Virginia for just this reason. You could remove the gun from the buckle and carry it in your pocket, but not on the buckle.

If I am correct on this the painting of a weapon to look like a toy becomes very relevant, because even if carried in the open it would be of a deceptive nature such that its true nature was not apparent to common observation..

The answer, Hawk is YES! That is my understanding of the law. It is illegal in Virginia to alter a lethal weapon to make it appear to be something other than what it is. That is exactly why you can carry a NA revolver BUT NOT WEAR THE GUN IN THE BUCKLE!

Why would anyone other than a COWARD attempt to alter the appearence of a lethal weapon to appear to be an innocuous toy?

...SNIP...

Penalty Flag.

No citation.  Hate to throw it but I cannot find the law, or case law, that supports this "disguised firearm" law in Virginia. 

We all know that the "concealed" handgun is permissable with a CHP.

I'm working on it.

Ok,
drkarrow- Please just let it go, and calm down. Like I said this is not a question a about a particular individual and nothing that was said was targeted to you until you chimed in so please allow some serious discussion.

ODA-

The basic code is part of 308 and is the definition of "concealed". -

"For the purpose of this section, a weapon shall be deemed to be hidden from common observation when it is observable but is of such deceptive appearance as to disguise the weapon's true nature."

There is similar language in ATF regulations and in fact there is a part of ATF regs that refers to "Hoax" weapons. Generally the Hoax issue relates to fake bombs and the like, but the language talks about "with the intent of targeting emergency or LE personnel to disrupt normal operations." I am trying to reach my contact at ATF to explore this a little.

In any case it is by no means clear tome that it is legal to disguise a firearm and carry it in public. Certainly here in VIrginia there is an issue with this. I think in the case of Virginia part of the problem might be that our permits are for the carry of a handgun concealed. The permit does not cover other devices like knives.

 

[simmonsjoe]

imported post

ODA 226 wrote:

Bikenut wrote:

ODA 226 wrote:

Bikenut wrote:

ODA 226 wrote:

I fully support his right to carry whatever legal weapon he wants to carry. However, painting the tip to lead a LEO to believe he was carrying a NON-LETHAL airsoft gun while CONCEALING FROM COMMON OBSERVATION, that he was actually carrying a LETHAL weapon leads a reasonable and prudent man to believe that he was carrying the weapon with malicious intent, the degree of which is only known to said asshat.

In Virginia, he would have committed a crime by doing this. (Yeah, I know he's in Tennessee...)

"Concealing from common observation" leads a reasonable and prudent man to believe the weapon is being carried with malicious intent? Could that also be said of everyone who carries concealed (concealed from common observation) with a legal carry permit issued by the State?

Quit picking out pieces of complete sentences to support your failed argument. The FULL SENTENCE WAS:

However, painting the tip to lead a LEO to believe he was carrying a NON-LETHAL airsoft gun while CONCEALING FROM COMMON OBSERVATION, that he was actually carrying a LETHAL weapon leads a reasonable and prudent man to believe that he was carrying the weapon with malicious intent, the degree of which is only known to said asshat.


The important part of the sentence is in bold underlined and in italics. And YES this would be a crime in the Commonwealth of Virginia.

 
 

Legally concealing a gun in my pocket would lead the officer (and everyone else) to believe I am not armed is still concealing from the officer that I have a lethal weapon.

Painting the tip orange might cause the officer to consider my weapon to be not lethal but the orange tip "conceals" that it really is lethal.

The important part is that the officer still doesn't know if I have a lethal weapon either way... until he/she investigates if there is a legal reason to investigate.

What part of "concealing" of itself (regardless of the method) does not equate to malicious intent fails as an argument?

And not everyone lives in Virginia. Those who do abide by the laws of Virginia... those who live elsewhere abide by the laws where they abide.

Now, since Virginia would consider that orange tip as "concealment" then, unless the fellow has a permit to carry concealed, the law has been broken. But in other States that have different laws the law may not have been broken at all.

I'm done arguing about this. I stated clearly that I don't give a @#$% about the weapon he was carrying. It was the manner and the intent that is the problem. You know exactly what the real argument is here and refuse to acknowledge it. And with that sir, I'm outta here.

When this guy ends up on the national news, I'll say I told you so.

ODA 226
Good choice to bug out. This thread is in lala land.

 

[ODA 226]

imported post

Hawkflyer wrote:

The basic code is part of 308 and is the definition of "concealed". -

"For the purpose of this section, a weapon shall be deemed to be hidden from common observation when it is observable but is of such deceptive appearance as to disguise the weapon's true nature."

There is similar language in ATF regulations and in fact there is a part of ATF regs that refers to "Hoax" weapons. Generally the Hoax issue relates to fake bombs and the like, but the language talks about "with the intent of targeting emergency or LE personnel to disrupt normal operations." I am trying to reach my contact at ATF to explore this a little.

In any case it is by no means clear tome that it is legal to disguise a firearm and carry it in public. Certainly here in VIrginia there is an issue with this. I think in the case of Virginia part of the problem might be that our permits are for the carry of a handgun concealed. The permit does not cover other devices like knives.

I knew it was somewhere in 18.2-308, but didn't have time to look it up for cite. Thanks. I also was going to call ATF and VSP Firearms Branch but I think they may be closed tomorrow.

Since this deals with "when it is observable but is of such deceptive appearance as to disguise the weapon's true nature", I don't believe a CHP would cover carrying something like this. Of course it may come down toproving mens reaor prima facie evidence that he intended to commit a crime. IMHOboth in this case isres ipsa loquitur.

Maybe we should ask the AG for an opinion?