H. R. 4901: The “Flamethrowers? Really? Act”
congress.gov
H. R. 4901: The “Flamethrowers? Really? Act”
1–5 of 5 posts
Re: H. R. 4901: The “Flamethrowers? Really? Act”
#2SEC. 2. FLAMETHROWERS TREATED THE SAME AS MACHINEGUNS FOR PURPOSES OF ALL FEDERAL CRIMINAL LAWS RELATING TO FIREARMS.
Why? With a real machine gun you could level a whole crowd in a minute. With a flamethrower, you can mostly make an ass of yourself unless the people you want to harm are in a pillbox. They’re not equivalent threats to others, and frankly a flamethrowers is mostly a threat to the carrier.
Re: H. R. 4901: The “Flamethrowers? Really? Act”
#3The term ‘flamethrower’ means any nonstationary or transportable device designed or intended to ignite and then emit or propel a burning stream of a combustible or flammable substance a distance of at least 6 feet.
This bill is clearly in reaction to The Boring Company flamethrowers (https://www.boringcompany.com/not-a-flamethrower), yet their definition of a flamethrower doesn't even cover those flamethrowers. From the videos that Musk has posted none of the flames from the boring co. flamethrowers shoot out 6 feet...
Re: H. R. 4901: The “Flamethrowers? Really? Act”
#4Sugar cane farmers will not be pleased.
Re: H. R. 4901: The “Flamethrowers? Really? Act”
#5Sugar cane farmers will not be pleased.
Don’t they tend to use drip torches on ATV’s? I’m pretty sure that wouldn’t be covered under this law.