Michigan Democrat lawmaker proposed legislation that would ban deceptively colored firearms.

[u/FireFight1234567]

https://davebondy.locals.com/post/6403428/michigan-democrat-lawmaker-proposed-legislation-that-would-ban-deceptively-colored-firearms

[u/UsernameIsTakenO_o]

Gray and green are specifically mentioned as only being allowed if "dark gray" or "dark green". What makes you think brown gets to include everything from chocolate to sand?

[u/PuffPuffFayeFaye → u/UsernameIsTakenO_o]

Well the answer is because it doesn’t specify.

Of course I don’t see how one defines a “dark” color either. But I guess that is what courts are for… to assess if the shade of green on your gun is too light to be permissible.

[u/[deleted] → u/PuffPuffFayeFaye]

I wouldnt expect a Michigan judge to declare fde counts as brown though. The rulings are always going to be the most strict interpretations possible.

[u/PuffPuffFayeFaye → u/[deleted]]

That’s an entirely different question. I’m with u/Live_Rags33 on this. If the law is written to narrow greens and grays to their “dark” variants then excluding the narrowing language to browns makes including tan entirely reasonable. What other color would tan fall under than brown?

[u/[deleted] → u/PuffPuffFayeFaye]

Why wouldn’t any anti gun judge say tan is tan brown is brown? Idk I guess we’ll see but I’m not optimistic on this.

[u/PuffPuffFayeFaye → u/[deleted]]

The asked was question was, “What makes you think brown gets to include everything from chocolate to sand?” and the answer that questions that the law doesn’t place a boundary on how dark of a brown is acceptable. Simple as. I’m not playing the “how stupid can a judge be” game.

[u/[deleted] → u/PuffPuffFayeFaye]

It’s obviously gonna end up to be decided by some dumbass dei judge. The law isn’t interpreted with common sense that’s why specific detailed language is important. Just because me and you think fed is brown doesn’t mean someone else does.