User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
LA, USA
|
Posted: 4/22/2024 11:28:25 AM EDT
[#1]
Toothless dinosaurs
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/22/2024 11:28:50 AM EDT
[#2]
thats good news.
even if it goes the right way, commie states will just ignore it like they did Bruen. i hate to be so pessimistic but i dont have any faith that these rulings will be heeded. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/22/2024 11:29:20 AM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By buck19delta: What gun case has scotus ever settled “ for good “ ? Every issue we had before their cases is still on going today as either scotus ruled so weakly and narrowly it was basically useless for the average citizens second amendment rights or democrats simply ignore their ruling as they please and simply pass whatever anti second amendment laws they want anyway, knowing there are never any consequences, that it will take many years to ever reach scotus, ( Biden gave a speech on this , so why not pass unconstitutional laws ? he said ) if they even take the second amendment case to begin with, which they usually don’t in second amendment cases. You need to read Bruin. It’s settled now that I’d it wasn’t illegal at the writing of the constitution, it isn’t illegal now. |
|
|
|
CO, USA
|
Posted: 4/22/2024 11:31:34 AM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Jacon: My body is ready |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/22/2024 11:34:39 AM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By StevenH: https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/rcna147065 Supreme Court to decide if Biden administration can regulate 'ghost guns' Of course it would probably be written in some much more elegant way. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/22/2024 11:39:12 AM EDT
[#6]
Even if SCOTUS rules in our favor the blue states will just ignore it anyway.
There's ZERO consequences for just ignoring SCOTUS. Put your self in the shoes of a blue state court - if they just rule whatever they want then EVERY 2A case will have to go to SCOTUS, and not everyone can afford to take it that far. They have effectively destroyed rule of law, and now, even more than ever, only wealthy people get justice. Unless SCOTUS can somehow reprimand these courts (start disbarring judges or something) nothing will change. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/22/2024 11:41:13 AM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Kuraki: That's the chance in every case. But it's a sure thing that we don't like the final rule as is, much less the ATF's apparently perceived power to write laws themselves. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Kuraki: Originally Posted By chase45: Yeah we might not like the ruling on this one That's the chance in every case. But it's a sure thing that we don't like the final rule as is, much less the ATF's apparently perceived power to write laws themselves. Our big wins tend to occur with a good decision at circuit court, which the ,gov appeals to SCOTUS and gets spanked. Much tougher to appeal a loss for our team to SCOTUS and get heard. |
|
|
|
CO, USA
|
Posted: 4/22/2024 11:43:18 AM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By TW52: Aweaome, but would rather see them take up the state AWB's first. |
|
|
CO, USA
|
Posted: 4/22/2024 11:47:44 AM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Pallas: We will lose and this will turn into all sorts of parts requiring serial numbers, just watch. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/22/2024 11:49:30 AM EDT
[#10]
Until there is any consequences to intentionally passing laws that are in violation of the US Constitution we'll continue to get hundreds of them a year and expect to raise millions do fight them in court.
 The socialist don't give a fuck. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/22/2024 11:49:56 AM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By chase45: Yeah we might not like the ruling on this one Yep, I can see them saying SNs aren't an infringement |
|
|
|
AZ, USA
|
Posted: 4/22/2024 11:50:51 AM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By StevenH: Time to settle it for good lol That’s not stopping democrats. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/22/2024 11:52:05 AM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Fullautoguy: I believe it will go our way, whether the states or the feds go along with it is a different matter. That being said if it were “not” to go our way I wonder what would happen to all of the stuff already in the wild since milling and bending receiver flats have been a thing for quite some time. Also what about commercial guns that are pre 68? Would they need to be serialized thus destroying some of their value? I have some family guns that are definitely pre 68 like a bolt action 22 smooth bore that was my grandfather’s he used to shoot tweety birds out of his trees that would poop on his car. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Fullautoguy: Originally Posted By Pallas: Originally Posted By StevenH: https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/rcna147065 Supreme Court to decide if Biden administration can regulate ‘ghost guns’ We will lose and this will turn into all sorts of parts requiring serial numbers, just watch. I believe it will go our way, whether the states or the feds go along with it is a different matter. That being said if it were “not” to go our way I wonder what would happen to all of the stuff already in the wild since milling and bending receiver flats have been a thing for quite some time. Also what about commercial guns that are pre 68? Would they need to be serialized thus destroying some of their value? I have some family guns that are definitely pre 68 like a bolt action 22 smooth bore that was my grandfather’s he used to shoot tweety birds out of his trees that would poop on his car. MA is in the process of passing a sweeping anti-gun law that will require all guns and most parts to be serialized including pre 1968 firearms and they must be serialized by a federally licensed person authorized to serialize guns. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/22/2024 12:03:29 PM EDT
[Last Edit: Kharn]
[#14]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Mach: MA is in the process of passing a sweeping anti-gun law that will require all guns and most parts to be serialized including pre 1968 firearms and they must be serialized by a federally licensed person authorized to serialize guns. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Mach: Originally Posted By Fullautoguy: Originally Posted By Pallas: Originally Posted By StevenH: https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/rcna147065 Supreme Court to decide if Biden administration can regulate ‘ghost guns’ We will lose and this will turn into all sorts of parts requiring serial numbers, just watch. I believe it will go our way, whether the states or the feds go along with it is a different matter. That being said if it were “not” to go our way I wonder what would happen to all of the stuff already in the wild since milling and bending receiver flats have been a thing for quite some time. Also what about commercial guns that are pre 68? Would they need to be serialized thus destroying some of their value? I have some family guns that are definitely pre 68 like a bolt action 22 smooth bore that was my grandfather’s he used to shoot tweety birds out of his trees that would poop on his car. MA is in the process of passing a sweeping anti-gun law that will require all guns and most parts to be serialized including pre 1968 firearms and they must be serialized by a federally licensed person authorized to serialize guns. MD requires everything post 1968 to be serialized by a manufacturer or importer. 80% receivers must transfer as firearms, but 0% receivers (ie, you made it from scrap metal or filament) have 30 days after creation to be serialized before becoming contraband. So you can at least range test your toy before deciding to pay an FFL to engrave it. Or, you can print a new receiver before each range trip and destroy it afterward. Kharn |
|
|
|
IL, USA
|
Posted: 4/22/2024 12:26:37 PM EDT
[#15]
I want my cake back.
|
|
|
NJ, USA
|
Posted: 4/22/2024 12:31:19 PM EDT
[#16]
While this is important I fail to see how it’s moving so quickly. There are issues which are almost 100 years old. And decades old issues which IMO should be ahead in the queue.
This is just strange. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/22/2024 12:32:52 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By JimBobJersey: While this is important I fail to see how it’s moving so quickly. There are issues which are almost 100 years old. And decades old issues which IMO should be ahead in the queue. This is just strange. The feds lost below. That's almost an automatic cert grant. Kharn |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/22/2024 12:41:36 PM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By StevenH: Time to settle it for good Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By StevenH: Originally Posted By BlackTuono: I thought we already had a win on that in the 5th, SCOTUS taking it up isn't necessarily a good thing. I won't hold my breath for a Bruen-like opinion excoriating the ATF and gutting Chevron deference. The Court should be taking up the cases from state laws and state courts expressly sticking their thumb in Bruen's eye. Time to settle it for good Like Bruen did? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/22/2024 12:43:25 PM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Kuraki: That's the chance in every case. But it's a sure thing that we don't like the final rule as is, much less the ATF's apparently perceived power to write laws themselves. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/22/2024 12:45:18 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Wobblin-Goblin: Like Bruen did? Bruen settled the question asked for good. No state is may issue with good cause statements anymore. |
|
|
|
PA, USA
|
Posted: 4/22/2024 12:49:42 PM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By jd2395: it does not matter. the states are ignoring everything they don't like (NY, NJ, CA, etc) as well as soon-to-be converted to commie states (ex. VA dems passed 35+ bills that directly violate not only the 2A but also Heller, Miller, Bruen - all vetoed, but coming back). Another Bruen ruling will lead to simply more of the same. The big mistake in our Founding or somewhere is the AJ is appointed by the President. So, commie Garland would be who would/should be suing the crap out of states for these violations and you see how that is going. "AJ?" Did you mean AG? How else would you want to handle Cabinet nominations? |
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 4/22/2024 1:01:34 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By TW52: Aweaome, but would rather see them take up the state AWB's first. Yep, as my state has been full on draconian for over a decade and I am not getting any younger and realizing I cannot move. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/22/2024 1:03:45 PM EDT
[Last Edit: Fullautoguy]
[#23]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Kharn: MD requires everything post 1968 to be serialized by a manufacturer or importer. 80% receivers must transfer as firearms, but 0% receivers (ie, you made it from scrap metal or filament) have 30 days after creation to be serialized before becoming contraband. So you can at least range test your toy before deciding to pay an FFL to engrave it. Or, you can print a new receiver before each range trip and destroy it afterward. Kharn Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Kharn: Originally Posted By Mach: Originally Posted By Fullautoguy: Originally Posted By Pallas: Originally Posted By StevenH: https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/rcna147065 Supreme Court to decide if Biden administration can regulate ‘ghost guns’ We will lose and this will turn into all sorts of parts requiring serial numbers, just watch. I believe it will go our way, whether the states or the feds go along with it is a different matter. That being said if it were “not” to go our way I wonder what would happen to all of the stuff already in the wild since milling and bending receiver flats have been a thing for quite some time. Also what about commercial guns that are pre 68? Would they need to be serialized thus destroying some of their value? I have some family guns that are definitely pre 68 like a bolt action 22 smooth bore that was my grandfather’s he used to shoot tweety birds out of his trees that would poop on his car. MA is in the process of passing a sweeping anti-gun law that will require all guns and most parts to be serialized including pre 1968 firearms and they must be serialized by a federally licensed person authorized to serialize guns. MD requires everything post 1968 to be serialized by a manufacturer or importer. 80% receivers must transfer as firearms, but 0% receivers (ie, you made it from scrap metal or filament) have 30 days after creation to be serialized before becoming contraband. So you can at least range test your toy before deciding to pay an FFL to engrave it. Or, you can print a new receiver before each range trip and destroy it afterward. Kharn How would they know how "old" a firearm made from a 0% chunk of metal is? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/22/2024 1:15:50 PM EDT
[#24]
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/22/2024 1:29:14 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By TW52: Aweaome, but would rather see them take up the state AWB's first. Seems like they keep dancing around the gun issue but will never go after the big issue of AWBs and mag bans. |
|
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 4/22/2024 1:34:39 PM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Kharn: Or, after circulating draft decisions saying Chevron is toast in Loper Bright/ Relentless, the SC is tired of ATF's bullshit. The SC decided previously, and the Solicitor General already conceded that it was the proper decision, that the DOJ is not afforded Chevron deference in situations with criminal penalties. So then under what authority does ATF have to make all of these off-the-wall determinations, flip flopping their position based on political whims? This case is a great venue to decide that question. Kharn Not if chevron is reversed and Congress codifies "all existing rules" rendering the issue moot. |
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 4/22/2024 1:43:16 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Cypher15: Opinion: "Listen you dumb motherfuckers, Bruen outlined exactly what we said could be done... ATF.. youre illegal now fuck off" Of course it would probably be written in some much more elegant way. Sometimes plain English which can be understood by a high-school dropout is required... like "the right of..." |
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 4/22/2024 1:46:33 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Mach: MA is in the process of passing a sweeping anti-gun law that will require all guns and most parts to be serialized including pre 1968 firearms and they must be serialized by a federally licensed person authorized to serialize guns. Remember that questionnaire sent out by the ATF about FFL's ability to engrave? All part of the plan... UN is about to have a big gun control push too... |
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 4/22/2024 1:48:16 PM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By macros73: "AJ?" Did you mean AG? How else would you want to handle Cabinet nominations? With a senate majority confirming... |
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 4/22/2024 1:49:33 PM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By CTM1: Yep, as my state has been full on draconian for over a decade and I am not getting any younger and realizing I cannot move. Sure you can... some states are very reasonably priced. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/22/2024 2:14:03 PM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Paul: Until there is any consequences to intentionally passing laws that are in violation of the US Constitution we'll continue to get hundreds of them a year and expect to raise millions do fight them in court. The socialist don't give a fuck. When I run for office (HAHA) my first proposal would be to hold any lawmaker accountable for treason who directly violated the US Constitution and Bill of Rights. Then a massive order of lamp post and trees on the front lawn....... |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/22/2024 2:16:09 PM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Not_so_Clever: I want my cake back. At this point...what cake....  
|
|
|
|
MA, USA
|
Posted: 4/22/2024 2:24:39 PM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By TheOtherDave: You need to read Bruin. It’s settled now that I’d it wasn’t illegal at the writing of the constitution, it isn’t illegal now. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By TheOtherDave: Originally Posted By buck19delta: What gun case has scotus ever settled “ for good “ ? Every issue we had before their cases is still on going today as either scotus ruled so weakly and narrowly it was basically useless for the average citizens second amendment rights or democrats simply ignore their ruling as they please and simply pass whatever anti second amendment laws they want anyway, knowing there are never any consequences, that it will take many years to ever reach scotus, ( Biden gave a speech on this , so why not pass unconstitutional laws ? he said ) if they even take the second amendment case to begin with, which they usually don’t in second amendment cases. You need to read Bruin. It’s settled now that I’d it wasn’t illegal at the writing of the constitution, it isn’t illegal now. Bruen basically said every gun law is unconstitutional, yet here we are still litigating. At minimum SCOTUS needs to make a flat ruling on what is legal, not a ruling on a process as any process can be usurped. Bruen was pretty stupid, asking courts to look at history when they already knew there wasn't any. They could have and should have just ruled on what the history was. |
|
|
CHN
|
Posted: 4/22/2024 2:30:20 PM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By buck19delta: What gun case has scotus ever settled “ for good “ ? Every issue we had before their cases is still on going today as either scotus ruled so weakly and narrowly it was basically useless for the average citizens second amendment rights or democrats simply ignore their ruling as they please and simply pass whatever anti second amendment laws they want anyway, knowing there are never any consequences, that it will take many years to ever reach scotus, ( Biden gave a speech on this , so why not pass unconstitutional laws ? he said ) if they even take the second amendment case to begin with, which they usually don’t in second amendment cases. The problem is that the Dems don't respect rule of law and will do as they wish. However the court did settle a number of things from a legal perspective: 1) It's an individual right. 2) Can't ban handguns outright. 3) It applies to the states. 4) It applies to modern firearms and other weapons. 5) Can't ban carry. 6) Text and tradition is the basis for understanding the 2nd. |
|
|
CHN
|
Posted: 4/22/2024 2:32:57 PM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By jd2395: it does not matter. the states are ignoring everything they don't like (NY, NJ, CA, etc) as well as soon-to-be converted to commie states (ex. VA dems passed 35+ bills that directly violate not only the 2A but also Heller, Miller, Bruen - all vetoed, but coming back). Another Bruen ruling will lead to simply more of the same. The big mistake in our Founding or somewhere is the AJ is appointed by the President. So, commie Garland would be who would/should be suing the crap out of states for these violations and you see how that is going. It's culture that's the issue. In order to have a rule of law culture, you have to respect rule of law. The Democrats don't. They just want to impose their will. They don't care about the Constitution. |
|
|
CHN
|
Posted: 4/22/2024 2:38:02 PM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By FunYun1983: Bruen basically said every gun law is unconstitutional, yet here we are still litigating. At minimum SCOTUS needs to make a flat ruling on what is legal, not a ruling on a process as any process can be usurped. Bruen was pretty stupid, asking courts to look at history when they already knew there wasn't any. They could have and should have just ruled on what the history was. As I posted above, it's the culture. The Dems simply don't care about rule of law, they just want to impose their will. |
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 4/22/2024 2:52:16 PM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Scoobysmak: When I run for office (HAHA) my first proposal would be to hold any lawmaker accountable for treason who directly violated the US Constitution and Bill of Rights. Then a massive order of lamp post and trees on the front lawn....... Guillotines aren't raciss... ropes? I'm gonna say that will cause you some trouble. |
|
|
NY, USA
|
Posted: 4/22/2024 2:57:25 PM EDT
[#38]
As I read it the decision challenged is that atf exceeded their authority.
Nothing about gun rights as such. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/22/2024 3:00:53 PM EDT
[#39]
 HUGE 2A SCOTUS CASE NEWS RIGHT NOW: HUGE WIN INCOMING FOR 2A! |
|
|
|
AL, USA
|
Posted: 4/22/2024 3:02:41 PM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By chase45: Yeah we might not like the ruling on this one Should be clean and tidy. Already decided really. There is no "history and tradition " of serializing guns until the very recent past. This is really a no brainer. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/22/2024 3:41:24 PM EDT
[#41]
 Supreme Court Takes Up MAJOR 2A Case That Will Change Everything |
|
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 4/22/2024 3:44:43 PM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By BlackTuono: I won't hold my breath for a Bruen-like opinion excoriating the ATF and gutting Chevron deference. There's literally a (non-firearm) case being decided this term that is likely to gut Chevron. And another regarding bumpstocks. We'll know on both of them within the next 2 months. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/22/2024 3:44:53 PM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Kharn: MD requires everything post 1968 to be serialized by a manufacturer or importer. 80% receivers must transfer as firearms, but 0% receivers (ie, you made it from scrap metal or filament) have 30 days after creation to be serialized before becoming contraband. So you can at least range test your toy before deciding to pay an FFL to engrave it. Or, you can print a new receiver before each range trip and destroy it afterward. Kharn Nothing more than a backup copy of an existing firearm you already own 
|
|
|
|
NC, USA
|
Posted: 4/22/2024 3:47:22 PM EDT
[#44]
We either have rights or we don’t. I am allowed to make a gun. If I start with bar stock or something closer to final form, it should not make a difference.
If the ruling is that I cannot start with something that isn’t a gun and make a gun, then I never had the right anyway. If you can’t have a gun, you are just a subject. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/22/2024 3:50:52 PM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By kzin: As I read it the decision challenged is that atf exceeded their authority. Nothing about gun rights as such. Yep. It’s not a 2A case. |
|
|
|
NY, USA
|
Posted: 4/22/2024 4:27:06 PM EDT
[#46]
Won't change anything for me, since NY thumbs its nose at the SCOTUS. But I hope it goes our way anyway.
|
|
|
CA, USA
|
Posted: 4/22/2024 4:27:51 PM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By chase45: Yeah we might not like the ruling on this one The statute is pretty clear. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/22/2024 4:32:30 PM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By madmacs69: Not if chevron is reversed and Congress codifies "all existing rules" rendering the issue moot. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By madmacs69: Originally Posted By Kharn: Or, after circulating draft decisions saying Chevron is toast in Loper Bright/ Relentless, the SC is tired of ATF's bullshit. The SC decided previously, and the Solicitor General already conceded that it was the proper decision, that the DOJ is not afforded Chevron deference in situations with criminal penalties. So then under what authority does ATF have to make all of these off-the-wall determinations, flip flopping their position based on political whims? This case is a great venue to decide that question. Kharn Not if chevron is reversed and Congress codifies "all existing rules" rendering the issue moot. They won’t. I very much think this is the case SCOTUS will use to reign in the ATF’s abuse of Chevron Deference. |
|
|
|
PA, USA
|
Posted: 4/22/2024 4:36:29 PM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By madmacs69: With a senate majority confirming... Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By madmacs69: Originally Posted By macros73: "AJ?" Did you mean AG? How else would you want to handle Cabinet nominations? With a senate majority confirming... You mean like this? https://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_votes/vote1171/vote_117_1_00114.htm |
|
|
CA, USA
|
Posted: 4/22/2024 4:42:59 PM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By gearsmithy: 1000% THIS I've been saying it for a long time, if we want SCOTUS to weigh in on AWBs then get Texas to pass one with the intention of striking it down in the 5th and the state appealing to SCOTUS. We need to start generating circuit splits to force SCOTUS's hand. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By gearsmithy: Originally Posted By StevenH: Get Texas to pass one 1000% THIS I've been saying it for a long time, if we want SCOTUS to weigh in on AWBs then get Texas to pass one with the intention of striking it down in the 5th and the state appealing to SCOTUS. We need to start generating circuit splits to force SCOTUS's hand. How'd that work out for Plessy? |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
