<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Idiot shows off unlicensed AR-15 on youtube. Video used as evidence.</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2009/01/14/idiot-shows-off-unlicensed-ar-15-on-youtube-video-used-as-evidence/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2009/01/14/idiot-shows-off-unlicensed-ar-15-on-youtube-video-used-as-evidence/</link>
	<description>Firearms not Politics</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 12 Mar 2010 06:33:13 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Nate</title>
		<link>http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2009/01/14/idiot-shows-off-unlicensed-ar-15-on-youtube-video-used-as-evidence/#comment-22626</link>
		<dc:creator>Nate</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 Dec 2009 16:45:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/?p=4252#comment-22626</guid>
		<description>In the US, suppressors are not really restricted, but they are unusual due to a set of National Firearms Act (Title II), which is also what governs automatic firearms and non-handgun weapons with barrels less than 16&quot; for rifles and less than 18&quot; for shotguns (one thing you Canadians have over us...). All these laws are left over from Prohibition, though they&#039;ve mutated a bit over the years.

The basic rules for suppressors are that you must be 21, you must get a $200 tax stamp for each one, and I believe they must be registered, though I am not sure of that.

I&#039;ll just let the BATFE* speak for themselves:
&quot;As you are aware, the terms &quot;firearm silencer&quot; and &quot;firearm
muffler&quot; mean any device for silencing, muffling,
or diminishing the report of a portable firearm, including any combination
of parts, designed or redesigned, and intended for use in assembling
or fabricating a firearm silencer or firearm muffler, and any part intended
only for use in such assembly or fabrication. Thus, certain internal
components, intended only for use in a silencer, are silencers as defined.

If an individual made one of these parts, even for use as a
replacement part, the individual would be making a silencer. Under
the provisions of the National Firearms Act, any person must apply
for and receive permission to make a silencer and pay the making
tax for each silencer made. This would require the individual
owner to file an ATF Form 1 application for each silencer part to
be made with the payment of $200.00 for each application prior to
making any replacement part.&quot;

Yes, theoretically, this could mean you need to register your finger, since it aided you in making the silencer. This is the same agency that declared once that shoestrings were machine gun components and thus needed to be registered.

Why a noise control device is so heavily regulated on firearms, but mandated on automobiles, I will never figure out.

The laws on short barreled weapons are so baffling that even I don&#039;t fully understand them. Basically, a weapon with a stock and barrel under the limit for its respective type (rifle or shotgun) is a Short Barreled Rifle (or Shotgun), and needs the same tax stamp and everything that a suppressor does, since they are covered under the same law. Pistols are free to have barrels as long as you want them to, but as soon as you attach a stock or vertical foregrip, you have a rifle, and if the barrel on that pistol is less than 16&quot;, you must undergo the process of SBRing it. Interestingly, shotguns with barrels less than 18&quot; that have never had a stock on them are classified as &quot;Any Other Weapons&quot; and are subject to only a $5 tax.

*Our government firearms regulatory agency, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In the US, suppressors are not really restricted, but they are unusual due to a set of National Firearms Act (Title II), which is also what governs automatic firearms and non-handgun weapons with barrels less than 16&#8243; for rifles and less than 18&#8243; for shotguns (one thing you Canadians have over us&#8230;). All these laws are left over from Prohibition, though they&#8217;ve mutated a bit over the years.</p>
<p>The basic rules for suppressors are that you must be 21, you must get a $200 tax stamp for each one, and I believe they must be registered, though I am not sure of that.</p>
<p>I&#8217;ll just let the BATFE* speak for themselves:<br />
&#8220;As you are aware, the terms &#8220;firearm silencer&#8221; and &#8220;firearm<br />
muffler&#8221; mean any device for silencing, muffling,<br />
or diminishing the report of a portable firearm, including any combination<br />
of parts, designed or redesigned, and intended for use in assembling<br />
or fabricating a firearm silencer or firearm muffler, and any part intended<br />
only for use in such assembly or fabrication. Thus, certain internal<br />
components, intended only for use in a silencer, are silencers as defined.</p>
<p>If an individual made one of these parts, even for use as a<br />
replacement part, the individual would be making a silencer. Under<br />
the provisions of the National Firearms Act, any person must apply<br />
for and receive permission to make a silencer and pay the making<br />
tax for each silencer made. This would require the individual<br />
owner to file an ATF Form 1 application for each silencer part to<br />
be made with the payment of $200.00 for each application prior to<br />
making any replacement part.&#8221;</p>
<p>Yes, theoretically, this could mean you need to register your finger, since it aided you in making the silencer. This is the same agency that declared once that shoestrings were machine gun components and thus needed to be registered.</p>
<p>Why a noise control device is so heavily regulated on firearms, but mandated on automobiles, I will never figure out.</p>
<p>The laws on short barreled weapons are so baffling that even I don&#8217;t fully understand them. Basically, a weapon with a stock and barrel under the limit for its respective type (rifle or shotgun) is a Short Barreled Rifle (or Shotgun), and needs the same tax stamp and everything that a suppressor does, since they are covered under the same law. Pistols are free to have barrels as long as you want them to, but as soon as you attach a stock or vertical foregrip, you have a rifle, and if the barrel on that pistol is less than 16&#8243;, you must undergo the process of SBRing it. Interestingly, shotguns with barrels less than 18&#8243; that have never had a stock on them are classified as &#8220;Any Other Weapons&#8221; and are subject to only a $5 tax.</p>
<p>*Our government firearms regulatory agency, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: mike</title>
		<link>http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2009/01/14/idiot-shows-off-unlicensed-ar-15-on-youtube-video-used-as-evidence/#comment-17099</link>
		<dc:creator>mike</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 26 Oct 2009 04:56:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/?p=4252#comment-17099</guid>
		<description>It ant an assult rifle unless its capible of full auto if not its just a standard semi auto rifle</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It ant an assult rifle unless its capible of full auto if not its just a standard semi auto rifle</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Trav</title>
		<link>http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2009/01/14/idiot-shows-off-unlicensed-ar-15-on-youtube-video-used-as-evidence/#comment-11924</link>
		<dc:creator>Trav</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 12 Jul 2009 01:57:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/?p=4252#comment-11924</guid>
		<description>quite abit late, but basically our rules in canada are simple.  Automatic weapons.. Prohibited.  means only weapons dealers (military) can have them, or they need special goverment permission (we build our own military weapons, and yes, they are automatic).  Semi auto weapons with 160mm or less barrels (ie handguns or carbines) are restricted.  Handguns are limited to a 10 round clip, rifles 5. Un-restricted (a hilarious name because they are hugely restriced) weapons are semi-auto rifles with 5 or less rounds per clip. Bolt action rifles are unlimited clip, greater than 160mm barrel length.  there are some other lame rules about handgun barrel lengths.  Restricted weapons are only allowed in your home, unloaded, stored locked and seperate from your locked ammo.  You must inform the police to transport your weapon.  it must be locked in a case.  Un-restricted weapons (ie you might reasonably use them to shoot a deer or other game) may be stored in the same manner, however you can shoot them almost wherever.  They must be registered and the operator must be licensed. 
Bascially any invasion of Canada would be met with a hail of accurate large caliber rifle rounds.
The rules are imho good, if poorly implemented.  I can imagine what i would want an mp5 for.  But a .308 win, bolt action w/ 10rnds.  If shit hit the fan, i&#039;m not leading a charge, merely protecting and feeding my family.  that would fit the bill damn right.  As opposed to any idiot (im sure lots of idiots fall through the cracks) having an mp5, i&#039;m glad i cant get one.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>quite abit late, but basically our rules in canada are simple.  Automatic weapons.. Prohibited.  means only weapons dealers (military) can have them, or they need special goverment permission (we build our own military weapons, and yes, they are automatic).  Semi auto weapons with 160mm or less barrels (ie handguns or carbines) are restricted.  Handguns are limited to a 10 round clip, rifles 5. Un-restricted (a hilarious name because they are hugely restriced) weapons are semi-auto rifles with 5 or less rounds per clip. Bolt action rifles are unlimited clip, greater than 160mm barrel length.  there are some other lame rules about handgun barrel lengths.  Restricted weapons are only allowed in your home, unloaded, stored locked and seperate from your locked ammo.  You must inform the police to transport your weapon.  it must be locked in a case.  Un-restricted weapons (ie you might reasonably use them to shoot a deer or other game) may be stored in the same manner, however you can shoot them almost wherever.  They must be registered and the operator must be licensed.<br />
Bascially any invasion of Canada would be met with a hail of accurate large caliber rifle rounds.<br />
The rules are imho good, if poorly implemented.  I can imagine what i would want an mp5 for.  But a .308 win, bolt action w/ 10rnds.  If shit hit the fan, i&#8217;m not leading a charge, merely protecting and feeding my family.  that would fit the bill damn right.  As opposed to any idiot (im sure lots of idiots fall through the cracks) having an mp5, i&#8217;m glad i cant get one.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jack</title>
		<link>http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2009/01/14/idiot-shows-off-unlicensed-ar-15-on-youtube-video-used-as-evidence/#comment-6476</link>
		<dc:creator>Jack</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Feb 2009 14:00:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/?p=4252#comment-6476</guid>
		<description>Fidget, Obama will explain that one to you.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Fidget, Obama will explain that one to you.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Fidget</title>
		<link>http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2009/01/14/idiot-shows-off-unlicensed-ar-15-on-youtube-video-used-as-evidence/#comment-6439</link>
		<dc:creator>Fidget</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 16 Feb 2009 04:12:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/?p=4252#comment-6439</guid>
		<description>Whut the heck is a &#039;registration certificate?&#039;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Whut the heck is a &#8216;registration certificate?&#8217;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: jedimarkus</title>
		<link>http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2009/01/14/idiot-shows-off-unlicensed-ar-15-on-youtube-video-used-as-evidence/#comment-5796</link>
		<dc:creator>jedimarkus</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 Jan 2009 16:41:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/?p=4252#comment-5796</guid>
		<description>Interestingly enough, New Zealand has no restrictions on suppressors that I am aware of.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Interestingly enough, New Zealand has no restrictions on suppressors that I am aware of.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Edward</title>
		<link>http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2009/01/14/idiot-shows-off-unlicensed-ar-15-on-youtube-video-used-as-evidence/#comment-5543</link>
		<dc:creator>Edward</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 24 Jan 2009 06:11:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/?p=4252#comment-5543</guid>
		<description>No offense, but how is shooting at a &lt;i&gt;rock&lt;/i&gt; a good thing?? (As opposed to shooting at, say, a steel plate, a sandbag, or another backstop.)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>No offense, but how is shooting at a <i>rock</i> a good thing?? (As opposed to shooting at, say, a steel plate, a sandbag, or another backstop.)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Me</title>
		<link>http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2009/01/14/idiot-shows-off-unlicensed-ar-15-on-youtube-video-used-as-evidence/#comment-5424</link>
		<dc:creator>Me</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 22 Jan 2009 05:04:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/?p=4252#comment-5424</guid>
		<description>FatWhiteMan, Kudos to you!  You made me laugh.  I had to read your post to my wife because it was so funny!  Keep shooting-no matter what the stupid laws may eventually say!  Its your right!  Just don&#039;t use up all of your ammo, you may need some later.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>FatWhiteMan, Kudos to you!  You made me laugh.  I had to read your post to my wife because it was so funny!  Keep shooting-no matter what the stupid laws may eventually say!  Its your right!  Just don&#8217;t use up all of your ammo, you may need some later.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: FatWhiteMan</title>
		<link>http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2009/01/14/idiot-shows-off-unlicensed-ar-15-on-youtube-video-used-as-evidence/#comment-5012</link>
		<dc:creator>FatWhiteMan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 16 Jan 2009 04:21:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/?p=4252#comment-5012</guid>
		<description>I felt so bad about this whole situation. Sure it was pretty dumb to video yourself breaking the law but it is a pretty retarded law. Then I read what the Canadians, Australians and Kalifornians had to say on these comments and I really became distraught. I thought I would go out 100m from my &quot;dwelling&quot; and shoot my AR-15. But it happened to be 7 degrees Fahrenheit this afternoon and I&#039;m pretty fat and lazy being a free American and all. So instead, my unlicensed lazy butt opened the door to the side of my house, pointed my unregistered AR-15 rifle at a rock not on a authorized shooting range and unloaded a 30 round &quot;high&quot; capacity magazine while all the brass landed at my feet within my dwelling. I didn&#039;t have a video camera to put it on YouTube but I could have since I was not breaking one silly law.

My wife was pretty pissed but then you&#039;ll have that from time to time.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I felt so bad about this whole situation. Sure it was pretty dumb to video yourself breaking the law but it is a pretty retarded law. Then I read what the Canadians, Australians and Kalifornians had to say on these comments and I really became distraught. I thought I would go out 100m from my &#8220;dwelling&#8221; and shoot my AR-15. But it happened to be 7 degrees Fahrenheit this afternoon and I&#8217;m pretty fat and lazy being a free American and all. So instead, my unlicensed lazy butt opened the door to the side of my house, pointed my unregistered AR-15 rifle at a rock not on a authorized shooting range and unloaded a 30 round &#8220;high&#8221; capacity magazine while all the brass landed at my feet within my dwelling. I didn&#8217;t have a video camera to put it on YouTube but I could have since I was not breaking one silly law.</p>
<p>My wife was pretty pissed but then you&#8217;ll have that from time to time.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Michael A Grant</title>
		<link>http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2009/01/14/idiot-shows-off-unlicensed-ar-15-on-youtube-video-used-as-evidence/#comment-4979</link>
		<dc:creator>Michael A Grant</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 Jan 2009 15:28:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/?p=4252#comment-4979</guid>
		<description>I have mentioned your Blog to friends and wow I appreciate all the great info and headsup on new and old products (gunsandammo)  It is one of my passions and obviously your too.  Thanks again Mike</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I have mentioned your Blog to friends and wow I appreciate all the great info and headsup on new and old products (gunsandammo)  It is one of my passions and obviously your too.  Thanks again Mike</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Heath</title>
		<link>http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2009/01/14/idiot-shows-off-unlicensed-ar-15-on-youtube-video-used-as-evidence/#comment-4958</link>
		<dc:creator>Heath</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 Jan 2009 05:40:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/?p=4252#comment-4958</guid>
		<description>I bet he doesn&#039;t do that again any time soon.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I bet he doesn&#8217;t do that again any time soon.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Steve</title>
		<link>http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2009/01/14/idiot-shows-off-unlicensed-ar-15-on-youtube-video-used-as-evidence/#comment-4929</link>
		<dc:creator>Steve</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 Jan 2009 22:19:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/?p=4252#comment-4929</guid>
		<description>Kyle, thanks. Would be interesting to know.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Kyle, thanks. Would be interesting to know.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ride Fast</title>
		<link>http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2009/01/14/idiot-shows-off-unlicensed-ar-15-on-youtube-video-used-as-evidence/#comment-4927</link>
		<dc:creator>Ride Fast</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 Jan 2009 21:18:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/?p=4252#comment-4927</guid>
		<description>It&#039;s amazing to me that the level of stupid we keep discovering still amazes me. 

Recently a guy who was videoing himself driving at 120+ MPH speeds on public streets...and....selling the videos online was arrested... and...the video was used as evidence against him. Shocking!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It&#8217;s amazing to me that the level of stupid we keep discovering still amazes me. </p>
<p>Recently a guy who was videoing himself driving at 120+ MPH speeds on public streets&#8230;and&#8230;.selling the videos online was arrested&#8230; and&#8230;the video was used as evidence against him. Shocking!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kyle Huff</title>
		<link>http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2009/01/14/idiot-shows-off-unlicensed-ar-15-on-youtube-video-used-as-evidence/#comment-4923</link>
		<dc:creator>Kyle Huff</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 Jan 2009 20:45:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/?p=4252#comment-4923</guid>
		<description>OK, here&#039;s the deal.  The prohibited weapon in question was a MAC-10 variant.  The couch in the video was shot while on a logging road.  Generally, discharging firearms on or near roads is forbidden here in Canada, though I&#039;m not sure logging roads count.  The incident was about 600 meters from the nearest dwelling, but discharging a restricted firearm (as all AR-15 variants are) anywhere other than a certified range is illegal.

I can&#039;t tell if he&#039;s licensed for restricted firearms (likely he is) or prohibited firearms (likely he is not), but as the MAC-10 has never been legal to own here, it obviously is unregistered and therefore being in possession of it is illegal.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>OK, here&#8217;s the deal.  The prohibited weapon in question was a MAC-10 variant.  The couch in the video was shot while on a logging road.  Generally, discharging firearms on or near roads is forbidden here in Canada, though I&#8217;m not sure logging roads count.  The incident was about 600 meters from the nearest dwelling, but discharging a restricted firearm (as all AR-15 variants are) anywhere other than a certified range is illegal.</p>
<p>I can&#8217;t tell if he&#8217;s licensed for restricted firearms (likely he is) or prohibited firearms (likely he is not), but as the MAC-10 has never been legal to own here, it obviously is unregistered and therefore being in possession of it is illegal.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Crystal</title>
		<link>http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2009/01/14/idiot-shows-off-unlicensed-ar-15-on-youtube-video-used-as-evidence/#comment-4916</link>
		<dc:creator>Crystal</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 Jan 2009 19:07:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/?p=4252#comment-4916</guid>
		<description>I was told that the civvie versions of an AR were legal in Canada? Restricted, but legal. I know this because I was looking into getting one before I got my CX4 storm.  Does anyone know if the one he was shooting was a fully auto?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I was told that the civvie versions of an AR were legal in Canada? Restricted, but legal. I know this because I was looking into getting one before I got my CX4 storm.  Does anyone know if the one he was shooting was a fully auto?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kyle Huff</title>
		<link>http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2009/01/14/idiot-shows-off-unlicensed-ar-15-on-youtube-video-used-as-evidence/#comment-4914</link>
		<dc:creator>Kyle Huff</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 Jan 2009 19:01:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/?p=4252#comment-4914</guid>
		<description>AR-15 is not a prohibited weapon in Canada.  All AR-15 variants are classed &quot;restricted firearm&quot; by diktat.  It is not legal to shoot &quot;restricted&quot; firearms outside of certified firing ranges. An AK-47 variant would have been prohibited.  A Mini-14 is unrestricted, and would have been legal, unless the shooting was within 100 (IIRC) meters of a dwelling place.

Also, it is firearm handlers that are licensed, not the firearms themselves.  Firearms are registered. 

The Times Colonist seems to have grossly misreported the charges.  I&#039;ll see if I can dig up the actual charges.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>AR-15 is not a prohibited weapon in Canada.  All AR-15 variants are classed &#8220;restricted firearm&#8221; by diktat.  It is not legal to shoot &#8220;restricted&#8221; firearms outside of certified firing ranges. An AK-47 variant would have been prohibited.  A Mini-14 is unrestricted, and would have been legal, unless the shooting was within 100 (IIRC) meters of a dwelling place.</p>
<p>Also, it is firearm handlers that are licensed, not the firearms themselves.  Firearms are registered. </p>
<p>The Times Colonist seems to have grossly misreported the charges.  I&#8217;ll see if I can dig up the actual charges.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John H.</title>
		<link>http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2009/01/14/idiot-shows-off-unlicensed-ar-15-on-youtube-video-used-as-evidence/#comment-4901</link>
		<dc:creator>John H.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 Jan 2009 17:05:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/?p=4252#comment-4901</guid>
		<description>Idiot? Depends on what you mean.

If you mean he went and dug his own grave by posting the video online, you&#039;re right. He&#039;s an idiot.

If you mean he went and broke a terrible, life-wrecking law, then no, he&#039;s not an idiot, he&#039;s a better man than most.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Idiot? Depends on what you mean.</p>
<p>If you mean he went and dug his own grave by posting the video online, you&#8217;re right. He&#8217;s an idiot.</p>
<p>If you mean he went and broke a terrible, life-wrecking law, then no, he&#8217;s not an idiot, he&#8217;s a better man than most.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nat</title>
		<link>http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2009/01/14/idiot-shows-off-unlicensed-ar-15-on-youtube-video-used-as-evidence/#comment-4890</link>
		<dc:creator>Nat</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 Jan 2009 13:59:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/?p=4252#comment-4890</guid>
		<description>I have always referred to video or photos as evidence, no matter what they are showing.  If I ever build my own weapons of non-legal status, you sure won&#039;t find any videos of it on the poo-tube.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I have always referred to video or photos as evidence, no matter what they are showing.  If I ever build my own weapons of non-legal status, you sure won&#8217;t find any videos of it on the poo-tube.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ben Hutcheon</title>
		<link>http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2009/01/14/idiot-shows-off-unlicensed-ar-15-on-youtube-video-used-as-evidence/#comment-4888</link>
		<dc:creator>Ben Hutcheon</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 Jan 2009 12:13:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/?p=4252#comment-4888</guid>
		<description>Arn&#039;t Suppressors &quot;restricted&quot; in the USA as well? Its hard for us down here to see what you get to play with there sometimes but I agree if your going to do something that might be breaking the law don&#039;t post it to YouTube. Poor AR-15 it&#039;s going to end up as paper clips now, what a waste.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Arn&#8217;t Suppressors &#8220;restricted&#8221; in the USA as well? Its hard for us down here to see what you get to play with there sometimes but I agree if your going to do something that might be breaking the law don&#8217;t post it to YouTube. Poor AR-15 it&#8217;s going to end up as paper clips now, what a waste.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Danny</title>
		<link>http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2009/01/14/idiot-shows-off-unlicensed-ar-15-on-youtube-video-used-as-evidence/#comment-4887</link>
		<dc:creator>Danny</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 Jan 2009 12:08:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/?p=4252#comment-4887</guid>
		<description>Darn, they took it off. Do you know if the vid&#039;s still available in another website? Thanks.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Darn, they took it off. Do you know if the vid&#8217;s still available in another website? Thanks.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Steve</title>
		<link>http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2009/01/14/idiot-shows-off-unlicensed-ar-15-on-youtube-video-used-as-evidence/#comment-4886</link>
		<dc:creator>Steve</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 Jan 2009 11:39:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/?p=4252#comment-4886</guid>
		<description>Jay.Mac, thanks for the tip!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Jay.Mac, thanks for the tip!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
