That sounds like “holding a lit tobacco product”. You brought a lit, and smoking, cigar into the elevator. The lit, smoking, cigar would not have been in the elevator had you not chosen to bring the lit, smoking, cigar into the elevator. You could also be held responsible for any damage YOUR lit, smoking, cigar caused to the elevator’s interior including the floor, walls, ceiling, and coverings.
And with vapes as the new fad, they’re going to have to entirely replace the signs with something like “No consumption or usage of tobacco or nicotine products, direct or indirect, permitted.”
–G!
Oh, and quit farting, too!
How does the invention of a new item change the meaning of a text previously written? If the text was unambiguous prior to bump stocks being invented, the new item cannot change written words.
Does a bump stock cause automatic fire based upon a single function of the trigger? How do you answer that question any other way that “no”? Where is the ambiguity?
What constitutes a trigger? Prior to the invention, a trigger was fairly obvious, but now there exist weapons which behave like automatic weapons in that they fire multiple rounds from a single user input despite requiring multiple actions of what we thought was the trigger before this invention.
A trigger is “a small device that … sets off a mechanism.” What does it mean to set off a gun? If you fire a burst with a bump stock, have you set off the weapon once or multiple times? I think there’s ambiguity there. Maybe the trigger isn’t just the lever that releases the firing pin, maybe it’s that plus some other components.