CanadianGunNutz.com logo, Firearms News and Classifieds in Canada

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 26 of 26

Thread: 80% lower receiver?

  1. #21
    CGN Ultra frequent flyer Aniest's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    I work in Edmonton, AB
    Posts
    2,813
    Quote Originally Posted by Youzawhale View Post
    ...I should point out.
    You did.

    I'd rather be wrong and see you buy the policy and have it protect you... than be right and you don't buy the policy and have you on CGN giving us your Patreon / GoFundMe / other means to pay the lawyer's bills.
    " The 'Strategies of Wu' says: 'When the world is at peace, [it is because] a gentleman keeps his sword by his side.' " - Commentary by Ho Yen-hsi in "The Art Of War" by Sun Tzu, 544 to 496 B.C. (traditional)

    My view on Gun Control: "It is a case of the willingly blindfolded leading those they've convinced to gouge out their own eyes." Brian Birtles, Vue Magazine

  2. #22
    Uber Super GunNutz CoonT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    OTTAWA's shed
    Posts
    3,805
    Hmm. "deliberately"

    Now, there's a word...



    2 kids under 2? Wow, congrats. "Busy" to say the least, haha!
    just happy

  3. #23
    CGN Regular
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Posts
    541
    Quote Originally Posted by Aniest View Post
    You did.

    I'd rather be wrong and see you buy the policy and have it protect you... than be right and you don't buy the policy and have you on CGN giving us your Patreon / GoFundMe / other means to pay the lawyer's bills.
    I fail to see how you or any other random person making wrong statements helps me decide to buy the policy? How does that help at any point in the process?

    As I said, these issues don't affect me directly anyway, I was just curious after seeing the Beowulf thread.

    Youza.

  4. #24
    CGN Regular LeadMonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Off The Radar
    Posts
    856
    Quote Originally Posted by Capri Insurance View Post
    To answer your question, the policy does not specifically state that the 80% receiver issue is covered. When something isn't specifically covered or excluded in a policy I look at the wording to find you the best answer and that answer is this: The program would not cover you if you deliberately broke a law set out in the Firearms Act. As aspects of the 80% receiver, Beowulf magazine and 10/22 issue, to mention a few, are all interpretation issues and not actual law changes then we can say that the policy does not exclude it.

    I always recommend that you contact legal council for these situations as I'm not a lawyer nor do I claim to be an expert on the intricacies of the Firearms Act. As a broker I can only confidently tell you what the wording says.

    Regards,
    Zach Schwingenschloegl
    Quote Originally Posted by Aniest View Post
    There we are: the answer from the one who has to prove to the masses the value of the policy.
    Quote Originally Posted by Youzawhale View Post
    This is why I ask for answers from official sources, and don't really care for heresay and assumptions from random people.
    Quote Originally Posted by Capri Insurance View Post
    The coverage was designed to protect gun owners who follow the law and are charged regardless as we see happen time and time again. I would recommend using the telephone legal advice service to speak with a lawyer directly on the matter and they can advise you.
    You do realise an answer from Zach, another broker, or any random dude on CGN is exactly the same when it comes to actually holding any weight when it's time to actually cash in on that statement...

    At that point if the underwriter tells you 'no, sorry it's not covered under your policy'... the words 'but Zach said' and 'but LeadMonkey on CGN said' and 'but Prime Minister Trudope said' will all hold exactly the same weight.

    The ONLY way to know is to read the wording for yourself and then actually test it, then all the world will know for sure the supreme value (or lack thereof) of the policy they purchased.

    To the broker's credit, I am glad Zach did what we asked of him and checked the policy wording and tried to apply the policy for the given scenarios... that's really all we were asking of the broker selling this policy.

    He's right though when he says "When something isn't specifically covered or excluded in a policy I look at the wording to find you the best answer [...] As a broker I can only confidently tell you what the wording says."
    Verba volant, scripta manent!


  5. #25
    CGN Regular
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Posts
    541
    LOL i'm so done with this pointless pissing contest.

    I had a very simple question for Capri, and Zach gave me an adequate, informative answer. Coverage for this issue is not explicitly excluded. Done. Anyone with a pulse and half a brain can understand what that means, not sure why the armchair lawyers feel they have to chime in and explain the obvious as if we were some 5-year-old illiterate r*tards.
    Hopefully it makes them feel important because it doesn't do much else.

    Capri/Zach, feel free to clean and lock this thread before it gets out of hand. I can see the usual CGN trainwreck on the horizon.

    Youza.

  6. #26
    Business Member Capri Insurance's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Posts
    263
    Quote Originally Posted by Youzawhale View Post
    LOL i'm so done with this pointless pissing contest.

    I had a very simple question for Capri, and Zach gave me an adequate, informative answer. Coverage for this issue is not explicitly excluded. Done. Anyone with a pulse and half a brain can understand what that means, not sure why the armchair lawyers feel they have to chime in and explain the obvious as if we were some 5-year-old illiterate r*tards.
    Hopefully it makes them feel important because it doesn't do much else.

    Capri/Zach, feel free to clean and lock this thread before it gets out of hand. I can see the usual CGN trainwreck on the horizon.

    Youza.
    Haha thanks Youza.

    I cant bring myself to delete comments but I will take your recommendation and lock the thread. Besides, ending the thread on that note is sure to give some people a chuckle as I know I did.

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •