Walther Forums banner
1 - 19 of 19 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
382 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Alot of folks have asked WHERE Earl's new import marks are...
they used to be on the barrel hood, but he now puts them on the accessory rail...
to this day, i have yet to see anyone post pictures of where he puts them, so i figured i would....

 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,590 Posts
Thanks for sharing that pic......
When I talked to him last he told me that he was requiered to move the import mark per BATF.....
as you know his replacement barrels are not import marked... so if one would change the barrel the gun would not have a import mark.... :rolleyes:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
382 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
yep thats exactly what he told me.


OH!
PS:the above photo has been edited to remove all individual markings....
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,007 Posts
The import markings don't seem to be all that much less unobtrusive than the Smith & Wesson import markings. For the $200 or so difference in price I'll buy more ammo.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
382 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
hmmm little tiny markings on the frame Vs. huge rollmarks on the slide?!!?

personally i must prefer the clean slide look...
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,007 Posts
The Smith & Wesson markings are not accented in gold like the Earl's appear to be.

In any event I botched my last posting anyway. The word should have been obtrusive, not unobtrusive.

Really, you don't think you could spot the Earl's markings sooner than you could the S&W?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
13,914 Posts
FWIW, there is no federal law against the owner's removing ANY mark on a gun except the serial number. State laws, however, may differ. I recall a criminal case many years ago in the District of Columbia, which at that time outlawed the removal of any "manufacturer's mark". DC has since gotten much worse, and I am not even sure it is still mentally part of the USA.

As for the federal marking requirements applicable to licensed importers, the minutae of location, height and depth can be found at 27 CFR 178.92.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
26,071 Posts
FWIW, there is no federal law against the owner's removing ANY mark on a gun except the serial number. State laws, however, may differ. I recall a criminal case many years ago in the District of Columbia, which at that time outlawed the removal of any "manufacturer's mark". DC has since gotten much worse, and I am not even sure it is still mentally part of the USA.

As for the federal marking requirements applicable to licensed importers, the minutae of location, height and depth can be found at 27 CFR 178.92.
Mike:

Things are changing in Washington, D.C., these days after a recent court ruling that struck down the district's handgun laws. Witness:


www.pbs.org/newshour/extra
D.C. GUN BAN APPEAL COULD CHANGE NATIONAL POLICY
September 12, 2007
Washington, D.C. is asking the U.S. Supreme Court to decide whether the city's handgun ban is
legal, setting the stage for a showdown over gun control law in America.
Washington, D.C. filed a petition in September asking the Supreme Court to reverse a lower
court's decision to strike down the city's ban on handgun ownership.
"Having a handgun, whether in the home or outside it, comes at the expense of those who might
be victims. Whatever right the Second Amendment guarantees, it does not require the District to
stand by while its citizens die," the city's petition to the court said.
The 30-year-old law in question makes it illegal to posses a handgun inside the city but allows
citizens to own shotguns or rifles. Most of the shootings in the city are committed with
handguns.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit in March 2007 ruled the ban violates the Second
Amendment to the U.S. Constitution which states: "A well-regulated militia, being necessary to
the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."
A decision would clarify whether the Second Amendment protects private gun ownership (the
"individual" interpretation) or only imparts a civic right related to maintaining state militias (the
"collective" interpretation).
It also would be the first time the highest court in the land considers an important gun rights case
since 1939, according to the Washington Post.
Militia versus individual rights
At issue in the D.C. case, which is named District of Columbia v. Dick Anthony Heller, is
whether the city is allowed to outlaw all handguns while still allowing citizens to own shotguns
or rifles.
The appeals judges decided in a 2-1 vote that the Second Amendment "protects an individual
right to keep and bear arms" and "once it is determined -- as we have done -- that handguns are
'arms' referred to in the Second Amendment, it is not open to the District to ban them."
Most of the other appeals courts -- there are 13 in all -- have ruled that the Second Amendment
concerns militias ("collective") and does not guarantee private gun ownership ("individual").
The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals based in New Orleans agreed with the D.C. Court.
The Supreme Court usually takes cases that have been decided differently at various courts of
appeals because diverse interpretations of the Constitution can lead to confusion.
Impact of a ruling
The issue of gun control is particularly controversial to many Americans.
Gun control advocates want the government to be able to regulate weapons to protect innocent
people, while gun rights proponents argue that the Second Amendment guarantees citizens a
right to own weapons, primarily so that they can protect themselves.
If the Supreme Court sides with Washington, D.C. and upholds the handgun ban, it would
validate the legal arguments of the gun control camp.
If the court sides with the appeals court and declares the D.C. ban unconstitutional, it could
become difficult, but not impossible, for the government to regulate ownership and use of guns,
according to the Legal Times.
New court lineup
One important factor that could influence the outcome is the relatively new makeup of the ninemember
Supreme Court.
President Bush recently replaced the conservative Chief Justice William Rehnquist and the more
moderate Associate Justice Sandra Day O'Connor with two solidly conservative justices: Chief
Justice John Roberts and Associate Justice Samuel Alito.
The court now has four conservative-leaning justices and four liberal-leaning justices, with
Justice Anthony Kennedy straddling the middle.
This new lineup gives conservative judicial decisions, like the D.C. court of appeals' overturning
of the handgun ban, a greater chance of becoming the law of the land.
-- Compiled by Quinn Bowman for NewsHour Extra
? 2007 MacNeil/Lehrer Productions

Interesting stuff for all gun owners, to be sure.

Back to the thread: For what it's worth, the earlier photo gave a clearer indication of the import marks that Earl uses. Unless it's my computer and/or monitor, I can't make heads or tails out of what's going on now. Thanks, though, for the interesting thread.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
26,071 Posts
True enough. Still, getting any court in the nation to take a look at the current D.C. law as written is something that should give us all a little room to at least hope.

The gun law mess in D.C. is a national disgrace. The anti-gun sentiment around the nation is frightening. I would wager that if every forum member did a Google search on the proposed gun laws that were introduced during the most current legislativee sessions in their individual states, they would be horrified. In Oregon, for example, laws were introduced this spring to a) regulate shooting ranges (with the potential of forcing ranges to close) and b) create the crime of unlawful storage of a firearm, providing for imprisonment for one year and/or a $6,250 fine. And, as they say, that ain't the half of it.

Any tilt of the windmill in the opposite direction these days is soemthing to be acknowledged, if not celebrated.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
256 Posts
I prefer to see the Smith & Wesson name my on my pistols. My new PPS has the S&W brand very tastefully shown in relatively small letters, but as far as I am concerned S&W could have made the letters larger and I would be fine with it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
382 Posts
Discussion Starter · #13 ·
I prefer to see the Smith & Wesson name my on my pistols. My new PPS has the S&W brand very tastefully shown in relatively small letters, but as far as I am concerned S&W could have made the letters larger and I would be fine with it.


to each his own....
thats why we have options avalible i guess.... everyone has different tastes...
but if i buy a BMW, i dont want Fords name on it...
same thing with my walthers... if its a walther, then i want walthers name on it
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
99 Posts
The government needs to wake up and smell the coffee. All these anti gun laws they are pressing for are jokes, I mean if a criminal wants to get a gun HE WILL unlawfully aquire a firearm. You cannot control a criminals desire. And if he cannot get a gun he will just reach for another weapon. Armed lawfull citizens make this world a safer place. Now if someone was crawling throu there window trying to harm "them" or there family I bet they would have a whole different outlook on the situation at hand. This is where the word shallow minded comes into play.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
256 Posts
David S, Agree, different tastes for different people, to me, as a car guy, don't see it as that sort of analogy, see the Walther manufacturer partnered with Smith & Wesson Importer more of a BMW with Bentley nameplate sort of analogy !
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,007 Posts
to each his own....
thats why we have options avalible i guess.... everyone has different tastes...
but if i buy a BMW, i dont want Fords name on it...
same thing with my walthers... if its a walther, then i want walthers name on it
Uh....you mean Earl, don't you?
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
7,055 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
489 Posts
"The government needs to wake up and smell the coffee. All these anti gun laws they are pressing for are jokes, I mean if a criminal wants to get a gun HE WILL unlawfully aquire a firearm. You cannot control a criminals desire."
--------------------------------------------------------
True, but it makes more sense when viewed from the perspective of the government trying to disarm the pesky populace for the government's own purposes.
 
1 - 19 of 19 Posts
Top