Transporting loaded rifles

[gummy jones]

Thank you to Statkowski for posting an actual reference, not just its illegal. That's not answer.

Yea it's an answer

And a wakefield is born

[MTOMPKO]

?

[MTOMPKO]

No it's really not. You sound like a democrat. The first reply had a reference. Not an opinion. Which it sounded like. I give no fucks on opinion. Looking for facts. Which you posted none

[jerkin]

Figured someone should probably post the legal definition of "loaded" since having a loaded magazine in the same container as the rifle is also construed as loaded as far as vehicle transport is concerned.

From 6102:
"Loaded." A firearm is loaded if the firing chamber, the
nondetachable magazine or, in the case of a revolver, any of the
chambers of the cylinder contain ammunition capable of being
fired. In the case of a firearm which utilizes a detachable
magazine, the term shall mean a magazine suitable for use in
said firearm which magazine contains such ammunition and has
been inserted in the firearm or is in the same container or,
where the container has multiple compartments, the same
compartment thereof as the firearm.

[MTOMPKO]

Aware of that hence the first statement

[gummy jones]

No it's really not. You sound like a democrat. The first reply had a reference. Not an opinion. Which it sounded like. I give no fucks on opinion. Looking for facts. Which you posted none

My political affiliations are irrelevant, just like your inflammatory, newbie opinion and English as a third language grammar.

A fact remains a fact, regardless of references. I posted a fact but would have been better served ignoring a stupid thread by someone too lazy to use google or this forums search function.

[MTOMPKO]

No gummy couldn't find the answer hence the blog didn't need dumb comments like most blogs like the one you gave. The political comment was in reference to a statement given without backing like dems do. If you wanted to reply an intelligent comment would have been appreciated based on reference and specific backing not idiocy. A fact was presented by the first perso. That commented not you there was no need for your reply. So quit whining and suck it up cupcake be useful or don't comment

[jerkin]

Aware of that hence the first statement

You may be aware of it but that doesn't mean that someone a year from now searching for "transporting loaded rifles" to see what the regulations are and stumbles across this thread will be aware of it.

[R L Suehr]

[gummy jones]

No gummy couldn't find the answer hence the blog didn't need dumb comments like most blogs like the one you gave. The political comment was in reference to a statement given without backing like dems do. If you wanted to reply an intelligent comment would have been appreciated based on reference and specific backing not idiocy. A fact was presented by the first perso. That commented not you there was no need for your reply. So quit whining and suck it up cupcake be useful or don't comment

i just love reading your nonsensical responses

i typed four words into a google search and each of the links on the first page provided a quick and simple answer to your original question

go figure, the fourth link was to this very site

once again, I'm not sure how my original reply to your little kiddo post was unintelligent, but then again i aint too learned

if you don't want dumb answers, don't ask dumb questions

and especially don't try to puff up your chest afterwards and act condescending when you can't even put a decent sentence together