• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

This gun looks exactly like a smartphone

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
Shouldn't this be classified as a AOW by the ATFE?
If I have to register my Beretta 950BS as an AOW when it's inserted into a wallet holster because it can't be distinguished as a pistol then how is this different.
Looks like a cell phone to me.
<MP>

No. The BATFE has a long history of abusing rights.*

The correct answer is not to infringe this gun because an earlier holster was infringed. The correct answer is to abolish the BATFE.



*See the video about the Gang by Jews for the Preservation of Firearm Ownership. Some clips are on YouTube.
 

Rusty Young Man

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 19, 2013
Messages
1,548
Location
Árida Zona
No. The BATFE has a long history of abusing rights.*

The correct answer is not to infringe this gun because an earlier holster was infringed. The correct answer is to abolish the BATFE.



*See the video about the Gang by Jews for the Preservation of Firearm Ownership. Some clips are on YouTube.

Well said. I'd add that we should remember that a [governmental agency] big/powerful enough to [hold back on classifying something as "banned"] is a [governmental agency] big/powerful enough to [classify it as banned]*. :(


*Yes, the irony of the quote is palpable. :(
 
Last edited:

MaxwellG

Newbie
Joined
Mar 21, 2016
Messages
4
Location
Madison - 77 square miles surrounded by reality
Using a firearm that's disguised as another object could have it's own folly when you have to explain in court why you have such a weapon...a good attorney could have a field day with this.
At first I though she had a staple gun in her hand...you know we have toy guns with red plastic protrusions so they aren't mistaken for a real FA.
I'd suggest just sticking with a regular pistol.
Why does Ideal Conceal need to make it as big as a full size 1911 in .380 for $395?
The ad copy looks like a clip from some Hollywood action film...what happens when this POS fails?
Something they probably didn't consider is it's that much more tempting for someone to steal it from the owner when they leave it at the bar or restaurant table.
I wouldn't put my life on the line with this silly POS.
 

Grapeshot

Legendary Warrior
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
35,317
Location
Valhalla
Under the U.S. Undetectable Firearms Act of 1988, gun markers are prohibited from manufacturing or selling weapons that can’t be discerned by metal detectors. According to NBC, Mr. Kjellberg plans to share x-rays of his product so authorities will be able to differentiate it from cell phones or other devices during security scans.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/mar/30/smartphone-handgun-by-ideal-conceal-virtually-unde/
Many (most?) security scans involve a hands-on check of all items carried.

And that won't help those that live in states where such guns are carried w/o a permit, yet fall under the restriction of not easily recognized as a gun.
 

utbagpiper

Banned
Joined
Jul 5, 2006
Messages
4,061
Location
Utah
Shouldn't this be classified as a AOW by the ATFE?
If I have to register my Beretta 950BS as an AOW when it's inserted into a wallet holster because it can't be distinguished as a pistol then how is this different.
Looks like a cell phone to me.
<MP>

I'm no expert and I have no cites to share....but my best understanding is that the AOW requirement for guns inserted into pocket holsters arises from the ability to actually fire the gun while in the pocket holster. In other words, it is the ability to fire the gun while it "doesn't look like a gun" that justifies the AOW classification under current law.

Since this gun has to have the handle extended to fire, it looks like a gun when able to fire and thus isn't required to be classified as an AOW.

As an analogy in the extreme case, imagine disassembling a firearm down to the point that it didn't look much like a firearm. Does that make it an AOW? Since it can't be fired in that condition, no. Same thing here, it is just that the "reassembly" is faster than in my silly example.

Similarly, your Beretta 950BS and my NAA mini-revolver are not AOWs so long as they are not inserted into a shoot-through pocket holster.

My question is this: Does the holster itself constitute an AOW? Or only if when a gun is inserted into it? Or does it become an AOW when a gun is nearby it?

Charles
 

OC for ME

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
12,452
Location
White Oak Plantation
Think this one has run its course. 395 bucks, two shots, it will take up valuable space in a BUG out bag...not a BUG for my daily comings and goings. The design/engineering is what interested me, not that it resembled a phone.
 

davidmcbeth

Banned
Joined
Jan 14, 2012
Messages
16,167
Location
earth's crust
I'm no expert and I have no cites to share....but my best understanding is that the AOW requirement for guns inserted into pocket holsters arises from the ability to actually fire the gun while in the pocket holster. In other words, it is the ability to fire the gun while it "doesn't look like a gun" that justifies the AOW classification under current law.

Since this gun has to have the handle extended to fire, it looks like a gun when able to fire and thus isn't required to be classified as an AOW.

As an analogy in the extreme case, imagine disassembling a firearm down to the point that it didn't look much like a firearm. Does that make it an AOW? Since it can't be fired in that condition, no. Same thing here, it is just that the "reassembly" is faster than in my silly example.

Similarly, your Beretta 950BS and my NAA mini-revolver are not AOWs so long as they are not inserted into a shoot-through pocket holster.

My question is this: Does the holster itself constitute an AOW? Or only if when a gun is inserted into it? Or does it become an AOW when a gun is nearby it?

Charles

All these categories "AOW","automatic" etc. are regulatory in nature and, as such, hold no meaning.

No need to strain oneself with meaningless definitions and trying to categorize firearms into them ... although one is free to do so for kicks.
 
Last edited:

Grapeshot

Legendary Warrior
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
35,317
Location
Valhalla
All these categories "AOW","automatic" etc. are regulatory in nature and, as such, hold no meaning.

No need to strain oneself with meaningless definitions and trying to categorize firearms into them ... although one is free to do so for kicks.

Regulations have the force of law.

http://dictionary.law.com/Default.aspx?selected=1771

http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Regulation

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]"As the New Deal unfolded in the early 1930's and Congress began to increase both the number of agencies and the scope of the authority of those agencies, the agencies began promulgating voluminous regulations. There was no mechanism for publishing, codifying, accessing or updating these regulations. There was considerable confusion about which regulations were in effect at any given time. In several 1934 Supreme Court cases involving administrative law violations, difficulty in keeping abreast of the current body of administrative law became obvious. Neither the defendants nor the government correctly understood which regulations were currently in effect. In response, Congress passed the Federal Register Act (ch. 417, 49 Stat. 500 (1935)). The Act mandates the daily publication of the Federal Register, whose purpose is to serve as a central repository of the publication of all newly adopted rules and regulations. Furthermore, publication in this periodical is constructive notice to all who may be affected by a regulation."
http://www.originalintent.org/edu/federalreg.php
[/FONT]
 

Ezek

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 19, 2015
Messages
411
Location
missouri
Regulations have the force of law.

http://dictionary.law.com/Default.aspx?selected=1771

http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Regulation

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]"As the New Deal unfolded in the early 1930's and Congress began to increase both the number of agencies and the scope of the authority of those agencies, the agencies began promulgating voluminous regulations. There was no mechanism for publishing, codifying, accessing or updating these regulations. There was considerable confusion about which regulations were in effect at any given time. In several 1934 Supreme Court cases involving administrative law violations, difficulty in keeping abreast of the current body of administrative law became obvious. Neither the defendants nor the government correctly understood which regulations were currently in effect. In response, Congress passed the Federal Register Act (ch. 417, 49 Stat. 500 (1935)). The Act mandates the daily publication of the Federal Register, whose purpose is to serve as a central repository of the publication of all newly adopted rules and regulations. Furthermore, publication in this periodical is constructive notice to all who may be affected by a regulation."
http://www.originalintent.org/edu/federalreg.php
[/FONT]

you mean color of law right?
 

Grapeshot

Legendary Warrior
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
35,317
Location
Valhalla
Regulations have the force of law.

http://dictionary.law.com/Default.aspx?selected=1771

http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Regulation

"As the New Deal unfolded in the early 1930's and Congress began to increase both the number of agencies and the scope of the authority of those agencies, the agencies began promulgating voluminous regulations. There was no mechanism for publishing, codifying, accessing or updating these regulations. There was considerable confusion about which regulations were in effect at any given time. In several 1934 Supreme Court cases involving administrative law violations, difficulty in keeping abreast of the current body of administrative law became obvious. Neither the defendants nor the government correctly understood which regulations were currently in effect. In response, Congress passed the Federal Register Act (ch. 417, 49 Stat. 500 (1935)). The Act mandates the daily publication of the Federal Register, whose purpose is to serve as a central repository of the publication of all newly adopted rules and regulations. Furthermore, publication in this periodical is constructive notice to all who may be affected by a regulation."
http://www.originalintent.org/edu/federalreg.php
you mean color of law right?
Don't shoot the messenger.

Read it, but if a discussion is going to ensue, it deserves a separate thread rather than go off on a tangent on this one.
 
Top