Flashbang Sustainability Question??

[SwifTst]

So hang on.. are these things going to be legally for sale somewhere? If so how much and where?

 

[ShawnC6]

So hang on.. are these things going to be legally for sale somewhere? If so how much and where?

They are for sale right now, on the business members forum this is posted on...

 

[Bad Lieutenant]

ROFL apparently you can't tell the difference between a general statement and a specific request. Here's a hint: I never said that had to prove anything to me.

Yes, hilarious. What's the difference? You still demanded they prove it. I showed you your very own quote and you're still trying to back peddle out?

If you don't want people to put words in your mouth, don't put words in theirs and make it clear what your opinion is. You're just making completely ambiguous statements, claiming not to have any opinion either way yet you seem to be arguing this so strongly that it's almost as if you had a personal financial interest in the whole thing.

I quoted your very words. Not my fault you won't stand by them. (and what's with the "personal financial interest" insinuation?)

First I haven't flip-flopped at all and I keep going because you keep misinterpreting what I actually said in order to dismiss my argument that Lockhart would be better off presenting actual evidence of what they claim instead of just telling people to trust them.

Your words speak for themselves.

I never said they were illegal. Again your comprehension skills are lacking.

Again, see you own words. (and, insults now?)

Again, making #### up and completely misrepresenting what I actually said.

They're called "quotes". Amazing things...

...and yet doubt has been posted in this and every other thread that has discussed this, from the first time it came up all the way to today. You're obviously not a fan of reality and honesty but to claim I'm the only one who has pointed out the ambiguous legal status of these devices is just moronic, considering everybody else can see those posts, including in this very thread. The one thing I'm the only one to have done is propose to Lockhart a way to actually remove all of those doubts and put the matter to rest once and for all. And you're the only one who been so adamant that doubt shouldn't be removed at all. Please tell us, why is it that you think removing all doubts as to the legality of these devices is a bad thing?

I saw some people ask questions. They were answered. Then dozens and dozens of people bought hundreds of these. Now there is just you going on and on their legality and false advertising. If you want YOUR doubts removed, then why don't YOU call NRC? Instead going on and on and on and on and...

(and more insults? is this what this is coming to?)

Like I said, (twice), this isn't about me buying them or not. You can keep making the same stupid, pointless, irrelevant arguments but they won't suddenly become relevant. So tell us, what IS your personal stake in this? You seem particularly interested in Lockhart's business, are you involved in it? Are they aware that you're argumenting on their behalf?

And even more insults. So apparently this is what this has come to. And again with the "personal stake" accusations?

So, what is your interest in trying to suppress my suggestion? You still haven't answered that. What is your motivation? Why do you feel the need to lie about what I say?

"Suppress" what? You posted comments. I replied. In what way have I tried to block or prevent anyone from reading anything you've posted? "Suppress"...? Get a dictionary.

And, again... if I'm posting your very own quotes, how are they "lies"? Sheesh...

Again, I didn't, your grade school comprehension level notwithstanding.

Again, you lowering yourself even further with yet more insults.

I've posted clear proof that they do.

"Clear proof" that Lockhart has "misrepresented their product"...? Somehow many us missed that. Perhaps you could make it clearer?

That's your own misinterpretation of what I said based on the fact that it applies to you.

Ah, so now you claim (somehow) that you weren't calling everyone who bought these a moron, and that you were just calling me one (who didn't buy any). Got it.

Are these constant personal insults really all your capable of?

I completely stand by my comments. I do not stand by your completely moronic misinterpretation of them.

Annnnddd another insult. I guess I shouldn't be surprised.

So, again, what IS your interest in this then? The constant misinterpretation, lies and tirades indicate a much stronger interest than what you've admitted. What else are you hiding from us?

Again, what do you even mean by that? You think that by insinuating that I have some secret agenda by trying make sense of your accusations, will somehow... what? Deflect away from your own comments that you are so desperately trying to disown?

How is posting your. own. quotes. in any way a "lie" or "misrepresentation"...? And "tirade"...? seriously, get a dictionary. The only example of a "tirade" here are your constant, baseless accusations against this vendor and your blatant insults posted towards others here, including myself.

Why don't you me tell what you think I'm "hiding"

Jesus Christ, try to keep up will you?

And some blasphemy now as well. You really don't have any respect for anyone, do you?

from this very thread:

...and you're missing my point, again, unsurprisingly. The point is that they are less than forthwith about the real nature of that product, as I've already said and proven at least twice already. When you publish a specific product spec that says one thing but privately tell people that challenge it something else, never updating the spec that's publicly available, that's being dishonest. Considering that dishonesty, I think that just taking their word that these do not fall under the definitions of Explosives under the Explosives Act is not only moronic but a deliberate attempt at avoiding the law.

All I've done is point out that there is an easy way that they could be ACTUALLY forthwith about the legal nature of those products and get an official statement from the only people whose opinion count and dispel any and all doubts. I hope they're working on that and dispel all doubts and keep that product on the market. Now for some reason, reason that you choose to keep secret, you seem to absolutely not want them to dispel those doubts and to keep the legal nature of that product ambiguous. Unless you know for a fact that those would be determined to be explosives and you have a personal stake in that determination, why would you want that?

"All I've done..." Really? That's what you think? You could've posted that you are concerned about the legality of these and further wished the ad was more detailed, just once, and then left it alone. But you didn't. It seems that until people say; "Gee Gimil, you were sooo right and we were all sooo wrong!", that you will just keep hammering away at this. And the more you don't get want you want, the more petulant and abusive you become, with these now persistent ad hominem attacks.

Do you need to keep misrepresenting what I say? Do you need to keep making straw men arguments? Do you need to keep why this is so important to you that you would go to these lengths secret?

"Straw men [sic] arguments"...? Do you even understand the concept of rhetoric? Explain just how, exactly, that is a straw man fallacy?

I wrote; "You think these might be illegal. You think Lockhart misrepresented them."

That is somehow misrepresentative of what you've been saying? So, you don't think these might be illegal? You don't think Lockhart misrepresented these items? Whew! Good. So, problem solved. We're done now, right?


Somehow I doubt that though. You seem to have a case of must-have-last-word-itis and I'm sure another slew of accusations and insults are to follow. So, since there is rally nothing left to say about this, it's time for this end. I'm going to hit the anti-troll button and add you the ignore list, where you clearly belong. But, please... feel free to post something that I won't see...

 

[Bad Lieutenant]

The above post is quite long, but to sum up, that debate is now over. Hopefully the tread can now carry on in relative peace...

 

[Bad Lieutenant]

So hang on.. are these things going to be legally for sale somewhere? If so how much and where?

You can find them on the Lockhart Tactical website. They're on sale now. Because of the costs, several people here started group-buys and Lockhart gave them group discounts. The groups were from GVRD, Calgary, Winnipeg and the GTA. I believe they are closed now, but you can contact the coordinator of the GTA buy for more info. Send a pm to 'shthousebenny'. He may actually be setting up another buy. I would suggest you read through all the related threads in the Lockhart forum first though and learn as much as you can. Several people will be getting their flashbangs soon and hopefully posting reviews. That is what I'm waiting for...

 

[Gimli]

Yes, hilarious. What's the difference? You still demanded they prove it. I showed you your very own quote and you're still trying to back peddle out?

I demanded nothing. The quote you posted makes absolutely no demand. As I've already explained, it's a general statement about a logical principle.

I quoted your very words. Not my fault you won't stand by them. (and what's with the "personal financial interest" insinuation?)

You quoted something that doesn't say what you say it says. Either you're willingly misleading people or you're just dumb enough to believe what it doesn't say.

Your words speak for themselves.

They do, and they say something different than what you attribute to them. The fact that you don't have the skills to understand that is not a me problem, it's a you problem.

Again, see you own words. (and, insults now?)

You can post my words many times, it doesn't change their meaning and their meaning has nothing to do with what you think it does.

I saw some people ask questions. They were answered. Then dozens and dozens of people bought hundreds of these. Now there is just you going on and on their legality and false advertising. If you want YOUR doubts removed, then why don't YOU call NRC? Instead going on and on and on and on and...

Because I have absolutely no interest in the matter. Again, what's YOUR interest to so fervently oppose a suggestion that would help both Lockhart AND the members of this site interested in purchasing their product? Your silence on your motives is deafening.

(and more insults? is this what this is coming to?)

And even more insults. So apparently this is what this has come to. And again with the "personal stake" accusations?

You started insulting me and the rest of this site's members by completely misquoting me and giving my statements meaning they don't have. If you don't want your comprehension and reading skills to be insulted then get better at them or stop willfully misrepresenting what I said. That's your own doing.

"Suppress" what? You posted comments. I replied. In what way have I tried to block or prevent anyone from reading anything you've posted? "Suppress"...? Get a dictionary.

Your suggestions that I should stop posting because you don't like what I say are attempts at suppressing what I say.

And, again... if I'm posting your very own quotes, how are they "lies"? Sheesh...

The false meaning you attribute to them is a lie. But then again, you can't understand such a "complex" argument.

Again, you lowering yourself even further with yet more insults.

"Clear proof" that Lockhart has "misrepresented their product"...? Somehow many us missed that. Perhaps you could make it clearer?

Not for you, I'm afraid I can't. Again you project your opinion on many people.

Ah, so now you claim (somehow) that you weren't calling everyone who bought these a moron, and that you were just calling me one (who didn't buy any). Got it.

I didn't call anyone a moron. You called yourself a moron by thinking that my statement about Lockhart's thoughts applied to you.

Are these constant personal insults really all your capable of?

Is lying about what I said all you're capable of?

Again, what do you even mean by that? You think that by insinuating that I have some secret agenda by trying make sense of your accusations, will somehow... what? Deflect away from your own comments that you are so desperately trying to disown?

I mean exactly what I said, not that you could ever comprehend it. You're opposing a suggestion that would be in everybody's best interest way too strongly for you not to have a personal stake in it. You should be honest for a change and disclose that stake.

How is posting your. own. quotes. in any way a "lie" or "misrepresentation"...? And "tirade"...? seriously, get a dictionary. The only example of a "tirade" here are your constant, baseless accusations against this vendor and your blatant insults posted towards others here, including myself.

See above.

Why don't you me tell what you think I'm "hiding"

I don't know what you're hiding, you're hiding it. Unlike you, I don't make #### up.

And some blasphemy now as well. You really don't have any respect for anyone, do you?

ROFL I have plenty of respect for those who deserve it. That doesn't include liars.

"All I've done..." Really? That's what you think? You could've posted that you are concerned about the legality of these and further wished the ad was more detailed, just once, and then left it alone. But you didn't.

I didn't because you asked me questions. I answered those questions. If you didn't want to hear more from me you shouldn't have asked me questions, and you certainly shouldn't have gone full retard and started misrepresenting what I said. Before you go on denying asking me questions, here your own quote. See these sentences with a question mark at the end? They're what we call "questions", and they are used when you want someone else to provide you with information.

Even though we are allowed to have these, you want Lockhart to ask an agency of the government - the Liberal controlled government - for permission to have these anyway? Do you contact NRC every time before you buy fireworks? Or bear-bangers? Or ammo? What's the difference?

It seems that until people say; "Gee Gimil, you were sooo right and we were all sooo wrong!", that you will just keep hammering away at this. And the more you don't get want you want, the more petulant and abusive you become, with these now persistent ad hominem attacks.

I just want you to stop bringing up straw man arguments and lying about what I said. I don't give a #### what Lockhart does. Stop lying about what I said and there'll be nothing left for me to say in this thread. As long as you do I'll set the record straight.

"Straw men [sic] arguments"...? Do you even understand the concept of rhetoric? Explain just how, exactly, that is a straw man fallacy?

Lying about what others have said in order to present an argument against a point that they never made isn't rhetoric, it's a straw man. You should keep that dictionary, you need it a lot more than I do.

I wrote; "You think these might be illegal. You think Lockhart misrepresented them."

That is somehow misrepresentative of what you've been saying? So, you don't think these might be illegal?

Whether I think they are illegal or not is irrelevant and I've made no statement either way. The fact is that people have doubts, doubts that have been expressed in this and every other threads about this product. Doubts that remain after Lockhart says "just trust us". I proposed a simple way Lockhart can authoritatively dispel those doubts. You feverishly oppose that for undisclosed reasons.

You don't think Lockhart misrepresented these items? Whew! Good. So, problem solved. We're done now, right?

I don't think it, I know it, and I proved it.

Somehow I doubt that though. You seem to have a case of must-have-last-word-itis and I'm sure another slew of accusations and insults are to follow. So, since there is rally nothing left to say about this, it's time for this end. I'm going to hit the anti-troll button and add you the ignore list, where you clearly belong. But, please... feel free to post something that I won't see...

As long as you stop misrepresenting what I say there is nothing more for me to say. Whatever you think you have to do to make you feel like you've "won" is only a reflection of you, not me.

 

[Baddog377]

In addition to the units themselves, I was interested in finding a few of the raw mechanical tops,used or whatever, as I understand you could it with just a primer to do trip wire signalling device while camping to scare off any over inquisitive bears.

 

[Bad Lieutenant]

post #66

Gimli
HELP! I sold my soul to the internet

This message is hidden because Gimli is on your ignore list.
View Post
Remove user from ignore list

Please tell me he didn't just go and type out another reply to me, after I specifically told him he was now on the ignore list? I guess having the last word is that important to some. I just hope it wasn't another looong, ugly, insult-filled rant like all the rest. I was kinda' hoping the thread could get back on track...

 

[Bad Lieutenant]

In addition to the units themselves, I was interested in finding a few of the raw mechanical tops,used or whatever, as I understand you could it with just a primer to do trip wire signalling device while camping to scare off any over inquisitive bears.

Contact Lockhart and ask them...

 

[CJS9999]

Hmmm

 

[Baddog377]

Contact Lockhart and ask them...

I did , For safety reasons they will not sell used tops , and they do not sell new tops.

 

[Bad Lieutenant]

I did , For safety reasons they will not sell used tops , and they do not sell new tops.

Well, you could always buy a couple of new, complete units...

 

[Paul_1982]

I believe they said the components aren't classified as an explosive at all.

While "normal" flash bangs are a small amount of high explosive.

I guess the flash and bang could be considered a pyrotechnic effect, but I don't know what the specific components are either.

Based on the definition of explosive though:

explosive means any thing that is made, manufactured or used to produce an explosion or a detonation or pyrotechnic effect, and includes any thing prescribed to be an explosive by the regulations, but does not include gases, organic peroxides or any thing prescribed not to be an explosive by the regulations;

I really don't see how calling it a training aid gets out of that definition. I want these, but not at the expense of potentially being arrested. The definition does not distinguish the ignition source as making it an explosive or not....

 

[promac]

Prob give the intruder hearing loss and a lazy eye, and get sued for a cool half MIL lol

I want one just because I can as well. It will be fun to test them out. I don't need a reason haha.

Duff

LMAO! I'm sold.

 

[Bad Lieutenant]

Based on the definition of explosive though:



I really don't see how calling it a training aid gets out of that definition. I want these, but not at the expense of potentially being arrested. The definition does not distinguish the ignition source as making it an explosive or not....

But you would buy fireworks without "fear of being arrested", wouldn't you?

And what about bear-bangers?



(and somehow I find it strange that you, of all people, have a "fear being arrested"... )

 

[ShawnC6]

Based on the definition of explosive though:



I really don't see how calling it a training aid gets out of that definition. I want these, but not at the expense of potentially being arrested. The definition does not distinguish the ignition source as making it an explosive or not....

I commented on the pyrotechnic effect. And said I don't know what the specific components are.

Maybe they are all on the approved list?
Maybe they have components used in fireworks and are no different?

I don't see it as being any different than trusting a store to sell me fireworks that aren't illegal.

 

[Paul_1982]

I commented on the pyrotechnic effect. And said I don't know what the specific components are.

Maybe they are all on the approved list?
Maybe they have components used in fireworks and are no different?

I don't see it as being any different than trusting a store to sell me fireworks that aren't illegal.

That's all I'm looking for... whether or not they are on the approved list.

If they are not.... then...... I'm not too sure (in the GTA anyway) an overzealous officer would agree with others here. It really shouldn't be such a grey area is what I'm getting at.

They are either on the approved list, don't meet the definition of an explosive.... or are restricted by the Explosives Act.

 

[Paul_1982]

But you would buy fireworks without "fear of being arrested", wouldn't you?

And what about bear-bangers?



(and somehow I find it strange that you, of all people, have a "fear being arrested"... )

They will be covered by the "Approved list" attached to the explosives act, therefore I am not worries at all about fireworks or bear bangers.

And why would I not be worried about being arrested in possession of a prohibited item of sort? I put my pants on just like the rest of you -- one leg at a time. Except, once my pants are on, I make gold records!

 

[Bad Lieutenant]

They will be covered by the "Approved list" attached to the explosives act, therefore I am not worries at all about fireworks or bear bangers.

And why would I not be worried about being arrested in possession of a prohibited item of sort? I put my pants on just like the rest of you -- one leg at a time. Except, once my pants are on, I make gold records!

Yeah, but the type of pants you wear sometimes are different than most others here, (most, but not all ), the type of pants where you hand out gold tickets...


I have hard time believing that Lamperd Less Lethal, the wholesaler/middle-man and Lockhart Tactical all managed to manufacture these and get them to market for the public, while somehow not knowing they are prohibited and the government not intervening is their sale, if they were prohibited, despite being well aware of them...

Lockhart had already advised early on that the government was aware of these and had even made some rumblings about them, thus warning people that their status could change, (especially if people do something stupid with them), but as of right now, they are legal.

All that aside, even if some ignorant (of the law) and/or over-zealous officer were to find someone in possession of these, while I could see them possibly being seized (hopefully temporarily), charges being laid would be unlikely. But again, that would depend if the reason the police found them in the first place was if someone was doing something stupid with them...

 

[skypilot]

They removed from industrial explosives or actually gave certain military/police explosives their own Class D, no license required for entry devices in 2013. However those are restricted, considered highly specialized and not for commercial distribution.

Apparently? the above and the NFDDs in question aren't the same under law. I suspect the reality is there is no problem under the Explosive act but maybe something in the CCC.