Armslist FS post: Shady, Pussy or ATF?

Status
Not open for further replies.
atilla said:
everyone posting about the mags deserves the flu and to be pouring liquid out of both holes simultaneously. i'm not a monster, so just one good round of it and you can bounce back--a 24 hour thing.

we're trying to have fun in here, GTFO with your MA paranoia. srsly.



you're doing god's work, sir. i didn't even get a response. [sad]
Click to expand...

I think it's pretty funny every one chumming in on the mags . Wgaf
 
Focusing on the mags makes the hilarity of the ad go away. Whether the mags are legal or not is horse pucky. The punchline is the ad itself along with the follow up emails.
 
The owner of that house is a Joseph Griffin. I bet the scammer lives in the apartment complex next door and waits for his mail
 
Glockster30 said:
Not that I care, but the mags are definitely post ban.
Click to expand...

atilla said:
everyone posting about the mags deserves the flu and to be pouring liquid out of both holes simultaneously. i'm not a monster, so just one good round of it and you can bounce back--a 24 hour thing.
Click to expand...

I made several comments on the mags and one of them I did qualify with, "Not that I care..." in post #26, but what is wrong with informing MA people that do not know how to identify a pre- or post-ban mag?
 
Glockster30 said:
I made several comments on the mags and one of them I did qualify with, "Not that I care..." in post #26, but what is wrong with informing MA people that do not know how to identify a pre- or post-ban mag?
Click to expand...

considering it's an obvious scam we're trying to have fun up in here.

my issue is that you guys and others created a whole system of internet fearmongering for people who care about the mags which glock themselves won't even play ball with.
 
I support this guy. Happy pussy ****ers should sell all their guns to lonely idiotic gun nuts like you guys.
 
Reptile said:
Mag is post ban due to the fact that is has an ambi notch (SF type) that is visible in the mag in the right of the photo.

It also has the "beveled" angles on the sides near the top of the mag. Those bevels only existed on LEO mags, 10 round mags during the ban, and "high caps" (really standard capacity) mags that were made after the LEO mags came into existence and after the ban ended.

Regarding the gun:

I bet if 10 people send an email to this guy and say they want it- he will promise to accept your funds and sell it to all of you.

Why don't you tell him to have his FFL send his license to you by email or get a name of the FFL.
Click to expand...

I mentioned the same thing back in post #35, but others will always question you. However, before making any of my pronouncements that they were post ban, I enhanced the photo prior to this that shows the metal cut out, so that I was sure of what I stated. One can clearly see the cut out in the enhanced photo in the mag on the right:

glock enhanced1.jpg
 
Glockster30 said:
I mentioned the same thing back in post #35, but others will always question you. However, before making any of my pronouncements that they were post ban, I enhanced the photo prior to this that shows the metal cut out, so that I was sure of what I stated. One can clearly see the cut out in the enhanced photo in the mag on the right:

View attachment 149626
Click to expand...

glock will confirm none of this. poster what are you doin'? poster stahp.
 
atilla said:
considering it's an obvious scam we're trying to have fun up in here.

my issue is that you guys and others created a whole system of internet fearmongering for people who care about the mags which glock themselves won't even play ball with.
Click to expand...

I guess that you missed my quote again, "Not that I care..." but again, there is nothing wrong with informing MA people about how to identify Glock magazines, which does not have anything to do with taking away any fun over the scam.
 
if you didn't care you wouldn't have continued posting.

if you didn't care, you wouldn't have repeatedly posted the pics.

if you didn't care you wouldn't have enlarged the picture to get a better view.

you clearly care, and that's unfortunate.
 
atilla said:
if you didn't care you wouldn't have continued posting.

if you didn't care, you wouldn't have repeatedly posted the pics.

if you didn't care you wouldn't have enlarged the picture to get a better view.

you clearly care, and that's unfortunate.
Click to expand...


Not that I care, but it is apparent that you will never understand the point of this, which is unfortunate. Not to mention that the mag discussion does add to the fun of the scam, mostly because it helps in justifying the scam.
 
Sucks that a post full of humor turned into a critical analysis of a bullshit ad with what could be a stock photo from somewhere else. It's like having a debate at a Star Wars convention [rofl].
 
MachineHead said:
Sucks that a post full of humor turned into a critical analysis of a bullshit ad with what could be a stock photo from somewhere else. It's like having a debate at a Star Wars convention [rofl].
Click to expand...

did han shoot first?

was his mag pre-ban?

can you back that up with analysis of pictures of the mag?

oh wait, it's a C96. definitely pre-ban. thank christ.
 
MachineHead said:
Sucks that a post full of humor turned into a critical analysis of a bullshit ad with what could be a stock photo from somewhere else. It's like having a debate at a Star Wars convention [rofl].
Click to expand...

atilla said:
did han shoot first?

was his mag pre-ban?

can you back that up with analysis of pictures of the mag?

oh wait, it's a C96. definitely pre-ban. thank christ.
Click to expand...


It's unfortunate that this thread has to continue with arguing about the type of magazines in the photo. It takes away the fun from the scam factor. [laugh]
 
I'm surprised that no one has pointed out that when he asks people to mail the payment he makes it mail fraud - a felony. Which the local postal inspectors should be interested in.

Just sayin'.
 
Glockster30 said:
I guess that you missed my quote again, "Not that I care..." but again, there is nothing wrong with informing MA people about how to identify Glock magazines, which does not have anything to do with taking away any fun over the scam.
Click to expand...

Yeah but even doing this is still mostly crap because there's no authoritative source on this info. We have a thread about this and it's mind numbing, because there's not source of authority for any of the information in it other than its a bunch of pics based on "hearsay from glock armorers and gun owners" and nothing from the factory itself. The only thing that's really incontrovertible is LE/Gov marked mags, as the ban required. It's kinda obvious those aren't legal, because the law said so. Anything else is based off assumptions created by educated guesses which may or may not be correct.

Maybe if there was a guideline from the Association of Firearm and Tool Mark Examiners (forensics experts) that'd be one thing. But there isn't... or at least nothing I've been able to find that is visible to the general public.

These aren't like AR-15 mags which sometimes have a date code stamped into them, etc.

-Mike
 
MachineHead said:
Sucks that a post full of humor turned into a critical analysis of a bullshit ad with what could be a stock photo from somewhere else. It's like having a debate at a Star Wars convention [rofl].
Click to expand...

This thread is great......

FOR ME TO POOP ON!

 
Last edited by a moderator:
drgrant said:
Yeah but even doing this is still mostly crap because there's no authoritative source on this info. We have a thread about this and it's mind numbing, because there's not source of authority for any of the information in it other than its a bunch of pics based on "hearsay from glock armorers and gun owners" and nothing from the factory itself. The only thing that's really incontrovertible is LE/Gov marked mags, as the ban required. It's kinda obvious those aren't legal, because the law said so. Anything else is based off assumptions created by educated guesses which may or may not be correct.

Maybe if there was a guideline from the Association of Firearm and Tool Mark Examiners (forensics experts) that'd be one thing. But there isn't... or at least nothing I've been
able to find that is visible to the general public.

These aren't like AR-15 mags which sometimes have a date code stamped into them, etc.

-Mike
Click to expand...

Agree, since I have been through those threads ad nauseum. There are still plenty of new gun owners that do not have a clue about Glock magazines or the threads, so I don't see anything wrong by providing them with some information and guidance that assists them in trying to identify pre- or post-ban Glock magazines. Is this not a gun forum where many people try to educate themselves on many other factors/gun issues that are also repetitive? Furthermore, if the threads were that effective, the issue wouldn't come up time and again, but some people either are too lazy to read them or do not have the knowledge that they exist. Sorry, but maybe my hangup comes from being an instructor that covers this issue with new students so that they don't end up with a felony count for each illegal magazine (as defined by MA law) that they possess.
 
Glockster30 said:
Agree, since I have been through those threads ad nauseum. There are still plenty of new gun owners that do not have a clue about Glock magazines or the threads, so I don't see anything wrong by providing them with some information and guidance that assists them in trying to identify pre- or post-ban Glock magazines. Is this not a gun forum where many people try to educate themselves on many other factors/gun issues that are also repetitive? Furthermore, if the threads were that effective, the issue wouldn't come up time and again, but some people either are too lazy to read them or do not have the knowledge that they exist. Sorry, but maybe my hangup comes from being an instructor that covers this issue with new students so that they don't end up with a felony count for each illegal magazine (as defined by MA law) that they possess.
Click to expand...

again, glock hasn't confirmed any of what you've posted as evidence that one would be in possession of an "illegal" magazine.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

ATF Receiver Rule - FPC Granted Cert
Replies
9
Views
491
pastera
pastera
Preban or not
2 3
Replies
65
Views
1K
not new guy
N
ATF new report shows FFLs are not the problem
2
Replies
47
Views
1K
SkilledSovereignty
S
ATF investigates multiple gun purchaser
Replies
7
Views
522
Coda
Coda
ATF Rule Requires Smugglers to Get NICS Checks on Gun Sales
Replies
14
Views
344
powerman
powerman
Back
Top Bottom