Michael’s Behavior Runs Counter to His Own Benefit
(and the benefit of the AG community as a whole)
He doesn’t want to loose “eyeballs” as they are his product. He is not a bad man and I have never known him to lie before. He has been watching these conversations about the construction of moderators on his web site for a year and a half now. None of this makes sense. Therefore there is something we do not know.
Three different AGN members with multiple year, low post accounts approached me one evening earlier this winter. They all wanted a moderator I had posted in the classified ads. Something just didn’t feel right. I flagged Michael on the issue when one of them wanted to make the transaction off line.
One of them was @s~~n. I had sold him a resin printed moderator with 1/2 x 20 threads which was capable of perhaps a maximum of 90 foot pounds and made it crystal clear that it was not going to run safely on a firearm. I also told him 70 foot pounds was the highest I tested it. If you look at @s~~~~n 's posts you will find one where I replied that he was a government employee. When he paid, PayPal gave me a government address to ship it. He quickly sent a text or email (don't recall) saying it was his work address and provided his home address. After that he wanted to talk about moderators capable of higher power levels. I refused. When @s~~~n started asking for high power capable moderators and sending links to videos on youtube of people resin printing firearms silencers, I told him it stank of law enforcement and made it damn clear I had no interest in breaking the law. I did not want to hear from him again so I routed all his calls to voice mail. I did not ask, and he did not offer information regarding his position with the government.
NOTE: His name is obscured here as there is no proof he is “setting people up”. He may just be an eager fellow who isn’t as careful about clarifying his intentions as he should be.
However; Last night, after all this “kerfluffel” at AGN, he tried to call me again wanting information about what happened on AGN. I was not in the mood for it. I blocked his call and sent this text: "Everything you need to know is on the web site. Keep watching." He is now blocked and routed to spam.
Here is one of many possible theories: Michael has received a subpoena which requires his co-operation, gags him and includes access to the website to use as a "honey pot". My confrontational behavior has placed that operation in jeopardy. Steps were taken to tighten up the ship and push the "targets" of the operation underground (to the PM system) while protecting the legal position of the web site. An alternative would have someone on Michael's staff cooperating with law enforcement without Michael's knowledge. I personally favor that theory. I have an exceptionally vivid imagination. Those theories are exactly that, theories, there is no proof the smoke I observe is actually attached to that particular fire. These are just scenarios (some would say conspiracy theories) which pull all the pieces together. I can come up with half a dozen more like it if you give me an hour to work on it.
However, the most likely theory is almost always the correct answer. Someone (Michael's lawyers, his friends, vendors with an ax to grind, people I have pissed off, who knows) has probably reread the Crooker v. BATF ruling, as I suggested in my status post, and figured out that it can be interpreted differently from the way that we have been openly interpreting it on the forum. They have put a bug in Michael’s ear and it scared him. Everyone would do well to read the Courts decision very carefully for themselves. I can at least thank @LDP for leading me to that water as I now believe I had it at least partially wrong. I can’t thank him for making me drink, because he didn’t. Whomever changed that poll forced me to reread that decision.
======================================================================================================================
What follows here is an unqualified opinion by a lay person who has no education in the law. IOW it is worth what you paid for it.
==================================================================================================
That “new” interpretation goes something like this:
It does not say the sole criteria is intent, but intent is an indicator which should be considered.
It says if it can be attached to a firearm WITHOUT MODIFICATION it is a regulated device whether or not the intent is to use it thus.
It also says if the intent is to use it thus, even if it must be modified, it is a regulated device. If you are in possession of a sack of potatoes to use them as firearms silencers you have broken the law.
By exclusion that leaves you with the one case; If it is not intended to be used as a firearms silencer AND IT WOULD REQUIRE MODIFICATION to be used as one (e.g. as by the attachment of an adapter or by cutting a hole in a potato🙄). Yes, if I read it correctly, when you cut a hole in a potato with the purpose of using it on a airgun, you would have broken the law because it would not need to be modified to be attached to a firearm but if you cut a hole in a potato in order to butter it, you would not have broken the law.
Printing "Airgun Use Only" on it does not preempt point #2 above.
======================================================================================================================
What you see above is an unqualified opinion by a lay person who has no education in the law. IOW it is worth what you paid for it.
==================================================================================================
That is correct. It is about as clear as mud. I think the prudent thing is to just be damn careful and that is what I believe Michael is doing.
There is no law which precludes studying silencer technology for airguns and/or building them for your own use on airguns but that is about as far as the solid ground runs. As soon as you get into thread patterns which are used on firearms you are treading on quicksand because a thread pattern can indicate intent, although even then there is no preclusion of that discussion. Nothing is illegal until you build it, not even STL files (although there are those who would curtail that First Amendment right).
This is what I got out of it but I am not a lawyer. That means you take accept my opinion at your OWN RISK. I don’t claim my reading of the decision is suitable for ANY purpose.
Michael is probably trying to protect the community and the web site from something the vendors (and he) already know or fear is coming down the road. Have you noticed how many vendors have big discounts on moderators these days?
One wonders when the AG industry as a whole will adopt a standard pitch and diameter thus precluding the INEVITABLE regulation of their products. If the owner could say, “It is the standard pitch and thread for the airgun industry as a whole”, NOBODY would pursue him and the small shop producing new airgun specific technology would be in a much more secure position WRT the law. The industry needs to spend more time working together and less time selling 25 dollars worth of aluminum and plastic for ten times that. Truthfully, they should be ashamed. The “poll” which precipitated this fiasco indicated that 19 out of 20 airguns which have threaded barrels are threaded at ½ x 20 UNF. That is a pretty solid defense when talking “intent” so long as you are not in possession of a PB which is configured with that thread pattern. Had that “poll” been left alone we might have discovered that no firearms have that thread pattern… Props to @LDP, @gendoc, and whom ever else feels the need to control everyone else’s speech, now we will never know.
All of that said, in response to Michael’s assertion that I refused to provide information he required of me:
I do not and never did have that information. I told him as much repeatedly.
He does have and always did have that information, and he knows it.
@LDP and @gendoc were the members complaining about the thread patterns. They responded to the user who suggested the PB thread patterns ~ Michael should ask them, don’t you think?
There never was a need to demand information from me which I do not have but which exists in the sites logs.
I have a packet of information and screen dumps which documents our conversations. If Michael, any LEA or anyone else wants a copy it is available upon request. Ten cents a page plus shipping.
I think we are done here. Michael, you really should not have lied about what I said and did. That is what prompted this post. You now know everything that I know and I have therefore met every promise of loyalty I have ever made you. If you want a copy of that packet LMK you know where I live, you have my phone number and my email addresses. You have had for a very long time. By the way check your spam folder then figure out who put that there.
Keep watching and keep the faith.
God Bless America