Anti-Ivory Groups Take Aim at WA, IA & CA (Mammoth Included) + Fed Update

I also lost my right to keep my old ballistic knife. Life goes on. It was a silly product to begin with, but really, really interesting for a while.
 
RedLynx said:
I had no idea those were ever legal in the first place.
Click to expand...

According to the knife rights app Ballistic knives are legal in my state :confused: I always thought they were illegal and have never actually seen one for sale.

Seems kind of stupid for it to be illegal, I mean it only fires on shot while there are several hand guns available for carry that can be loaded with 10, 15, even 20 rounds...
 
RX-79G said:
I know where you come down on this issue, but I think that viewing any fresh ivory as a "resource" is a part of the problem. It needs to stop being something that anyone thinks of as a raw material to feed any sort production.
Click to expand...

Your opinion. I view every material that is valued as a resource. The utilization may be restricted, but it is still a resource. I have never agreed with you that old ivory contributes to poaching.

The new rules do not make ownership illegal. It deals with the sale of ivory. I would think that it is primarily intended for the people who routinely sell ivory or ivory products (essentially dealers of some sort) as opposed to selling your piano that is 75 years old and no longer wanted in the house or family. The rules allow for the gifting of ivory, but not selling. I view everything I own as something that might be potentially sold and that would include ivory, firearms, art objects, or musical instruments. A practical mechanism needs to be created to eliminate this issue.

That 4" rule in Canada has proven to be mostly pain in the butt. That's why Ruger is making their 4" guns now, 4.2" to skirt that length. Like in the US and the anti-gun folks, it is all about concealling a handgun and using it to commit a crime. Does not work because the criminals don't pay any attention to the law and the same would apply to ivory or ivory products. That's why it is all about enforcement as far as I'm concerned. How many average people ever buy anything made from ivory in their lifetime except perhaps a piano? There are other materials that are used now.
 
22-rimfire said:
Your opinion. I view every material that is valued as a resource.
Click to expand...
Same reason many Personnel Departments were changed to Human Resource Departments. Not surprisingly many with that mind set then moved away from proper talent management to bean counting.
 
22-rimfire said:
The new rules do not make ownership illegal.
Click to expand...

Not at present time. But all it will take is a modification at some point down the line by a different administration, and then owned ivory can be considered contraband in need of forceful confiscation.

It will also depend not just on what the proposed change says, but how it's interpreted by the various organizations tasked with enforcing it.
 
Charlie_K said:
Not at present time. But all it will take is a modification at some point down the line by a different administration, and then owned ivory can be considered contraband in need of forceful confiscation.

It will also depend not just on what the proposed change says, but how it's interpreted by the various organizations tasked with enforcing it.
Click to expand...

Just like that would require legislation today, it would require legislation tomorrow.
 
Charlie_K said:
Not at present time. But all it will take is a modification at some point down the line by a different administration, and then owned ivory can be considered contraband in need of forceful confiscation.

It will also depend not just on what the proposed change says, but how it's interpreted by the various organizations tasked with enforcing it.
Click to expand...

Impossible. They going to arrest the curators of the Natural History Museum? Don't think so. It will always be available for science and research. Wanna play with ivory, become a scientist! Language as such is already in the most recent legislation regarding ESA permits. You're still allowed to kill two elephants a year as trophies for import. Crazy when you think we are only allowed 1 bear a year in CA, and nothing can be sold commercially. So it's not something that isn't already in practice. You just can't profit from the ivory in any way, but you certainly get to keep your possesions without any 4th amendment encroachments.

I do understand your point, and am not making light of it, but in CA we've had some whacky bans get overturned in two years, for instance, the foie gras ban.

FAQ is here from FWS: http://www.fws.gov/international/travel-and-trade/ivory-ban-questions-and-answers.html
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top