The type of law that makes me want to pull my hair out...
Except that I don't have any hair.
Arizona Revised Statutes §13-3101(A). Definitions. In this chapter, unless the context otherwise requires:
3. "Explosive" means any dynamite, nitroglycerine, black powder, or other similar explosive material, including plastic explosives. Explosive does not include ammunition or ammunition components such as primers, percussion caps, smokeless powder, black powder and black powder substitutes used for hand loading purposes.
OK, so explosive means black powder except that it doesn't mean black powder.
4. "Firearm" means any loaded or unloaded handgun, pistol, revolver, rifle, shotgun or other weapon that will expel, is designed to expel or may readily be converted to expel a projectile by the action of an explosive.
And firearm means anything that expels a projectile by action of an "explosive." But (3) tells us that ammunition and smokeless or black powder is not an "explosive." So what is a firearm?
At this rate, I wonder how badly they botched the statutory definition of "projectile".
Posted by: Mman at January 21, 2013 04:50 PM
Just like the failure to allow for law enforcement weapons in New York's latest overreach.
The world would be a better place if legislators understood their abysmal ignorance on any number of subjects and didn't try to micromanage that which they fail to understand.
Posted by: Bill at January 21, 2013 05:53 PM
I looks like they *tried* to leave "black powder used for hand loading" out of the explosive definition -- C for effort. But the big contradiction? Er... Making guns vanish via paradox?
Posted by: Roberta X at January 21, 2013 09:01 PM
Dave, I just forwarded this to the AzCDL. Perhaps we can fix it this year!
Posted by: Tom Woodrow at January 22, 2013 12:27 PM
This just in;
See HB 2234 http://www.azcdl.org/html/bill_tracking.html
Posted by: Tom Woodrow at January 22, 2013 12:47 PM