User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 8/13/2021 12:16:30 PM EST
[#1]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I always thought it would be easy to argue binarys were MGs. Although they follow the 1 pull of the trigger=one shot that argument only works for the first pull of the trigger. If 1 pull = 1 shot then 5 pulls should mean 5 shots but we know 5 pulls of the binary trigger gets you 9 shots if you dont release the trig. Probably should go to the original source material instead of quoting guncounter bs: "(b)Machinegun The term “machinegun” means any weapon which shoots, is designed to shoot, or can be readily restored to shoot, automatically more than one shot, without manual reloading, by a single function of the trigger. The term shall also include the frame or receiver of any such weapon, any part designed and intended solely and exclusively, or combination of parts designed and intended, for use in converting a weapon into a machinegun, and any combination of parts from which a machinegun can be assembled if such parts are in the possession or under the control of a person." |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/13/2021 12:17:01 PM EST
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted: No. But I'm still happy I won't be hassled like the people who bought the FRT's. They looked like a ton of fun, and the last thing I need is for the government to take away yet another thing I enjoyed (like the good old days of drones circa 2015). So yeah. I'm happy as fuck I didn't drop hundreds of dollars on something that was so obviously going to be banned. Magazine fed semiautos have been legally bought and sold in the US ever since they were invented over a hundred years ago, so your comparison doesn't hold water. They are in "common use". The FRT is not. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: When they put guns with a detachable magazine on the NFA are you gonna be happy that you never got one? No. But I'm still happy I won't be hassled like the people who bought the FRT's. They looked like a ton of fun, and the last thing I need is for the government to take away yet another thing I enjoyed (like the good old days of drones circa 2015). So yeah. I'm happy as fuck I didn't drop hundreds of dollars on something that was so obviously going to be banned. Magazine fed semiautos have been legally bought and sold in the US ever since they were invented over a hundred years ago, so your comparison doesn't hold water. They are in "common use". The FRT is not. Does the government grant you freedom? |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/13/2021 12:20:36 PM EST
[#3]
Rare Breed made a big point in all of their promotional material that they had an army of lawyers on standby for this exact circumstance. With the bumpstock ban getting hammered hard, I'll sit by and watch all of this play out. Now where the fuck is that popcorn...
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/13/2021 12:21:00 PM EST
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Rare breed's response from another thread: https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0255/0484/1762/files/PDFtoJPG.me-1_1024x1024.jpg?v=1628863705 https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0255/0484/1762/files/0471233435371024_2_1024x1024.jpg?v=1628863260 https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0255/0484/1762/files/0471233435371024_3_1024x1024.jpg?v=1628863278 https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0255/0484/1762/files/0471233435371024_4_1024x1024.jpg?v=1628863294 Well isn't that fun! Someone listened in class and did their homework |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/13/2021 12:22:38 PM EST
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted: /media/mediaFiles/sharedAlbum/laugh-29.gif That right there is why you should not ever be taken seriously. You better turn all your guns in now because eventually all of them will be banned. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: I support the 2A, but I'm not going to jail for breaking an unconstitutional law. /media/mediaFiles/sharedAlbum/laugh-29.gif That right there is why you should not ever be taken seriously. You better turn all your guns in now because eventually all of them will be banned. You still haven't answer the question asked earlier. Do you have an Illinois FOID? |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/13/2021 12:23:38 PM EST
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted: 13 days into your life here and I have now grey barred you because your font color is irritating. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Ooooooh! So when other people pick their battles they should turn in all their guns now, but YOU are smart enough not to get tangled up in anything that skirts the line. Troll. No they should do what they feel is best for themselves and I don't pay with anything other than cash for controversial items that could be contraband in short notice. Me too |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/13/2021 12:25:08 PM EST
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I always thought it would be easy to argue binarys were MGs. Although they follow the 1 pull of the trigger=one shot that argument only works for the first pull of the trigger. If 1 pull = 1 shot then 5 pulls should mean 5 shots but we know 5 pulls of the binary trigger gets you 9 shots if you dont release the trig. But the law doesn't say anything about a single pull of the trigger, it says single funtion of the trigger. Back is one single function, forward is another single function. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/13/2021 12:26:49 PM EST
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted: But the law doesn't say anything about a single pull of the trigger, it says single funtion of the trigger. Back is one single function, forward is another single function. Right, but what the law says seems to have just been edited by the FATF because FRT's are far more EFFECTIVE than binaries. At least that's my guess. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/13/2021 12:28:29 PM EST
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I always thought it would be easy to argue binarys were MGs. Although they follow the 1 pull of the trigger=one shot that argument only works for the first pull of the trigger. If 1 pull = 1 shot then 5 pulls should mean 5 shots but we know 5 pulls of the binary trigger gets you 9 shots if you dont release the trig. The bumpstock ruling put ATF in position* to determine what constitutes a trigger pull. IMHO binary triggers are only legal because of big money shotguns. Under the bumpstock rulings, binary and semis are MG, because their operation does not qualify as ATF trigger pulls. *formally, they were already doing it, now it's super double official. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/13/2021 12:30:33 PM EST
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Rare Breed made a big point in all of their promotional material that they had an army of lawyers on standby for this exact circumstance. With the bumpstock ban getting hammered hard, I'll sit by and watch all of this play out. Now where the fuck is that popcorn... ATF cannot, in their current state, win this. Word is that tech branch knows this isn't a machinegun, which is why they don't have a tech branch determination and instead just ambiguously stated the ominous, undefined figurative "they" have decided it is a machinegun. ATF hoped to scare Rarebreed into complying with the desires of ATF. Even if it were a machinegun, which it is not, they'd not win this as it sits now- because once in a while bureaucracy wins. They've not gone through the motions. If ATF had a leg to stand on, every trigger sold after that letter could be prison time. But ATF does not have a leg to stand on, because they fucked up by not following even the process already slanted in their favor. If ATF does get a determination from tech branch, this might be the nail in the coffin of Chevron deference for criminal matters. Rarebreed knows this, which is why they are still selling triggers. It is pretty well preplanned and executed. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/13/2021 12:32:01 PM EST
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Rare breed's response from another thread: https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0255/0484/1762/files/PDFtoJPG.me-1_1024x1024.jpg?v=1628863705 https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0255/0484/1762/files/0471233435371024_2_1024x1024.jpg?v=1628863260 https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0255/0484/1762/files/0471233435371024_3_1024x1024.jpg?v=1628863278 https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0255/0484/1762/files/0471233435371024_4_1024x1024.jpg?v=1628863294 That is freaking awesome. I'm tempted to order another one as a donation to their legal fund just to give them money to fight this. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/13/2021 12:34:43 PM EST
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted: That is freaking awesome. I'm tempted to order another one as a donation to their legal fund just to give them money to fight this. Makes you wonder how low their production costs are, and how much of the price goes straight to the legal slush fund. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/13/2021 12:36:17 PM EST
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Right, but what the law says seems to have just been edited by the FATF because FRT's are far more EFFECTIVE than binaries. At least that's my guess. It was plainly obvious that the ATF wouldn't like them, but they have no actual basis from which to argue that these are illegal. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/13/2021 12:37:07 PM EST
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Does the government grant you freedom? They certainly have the power and ability to take it away. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/13/2021 12:37:53 PM EST
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted: If you think about it, taking this to court could destroy Chevron, put ATF in its place and bring back "letter of the law" and not this squishy gey area stuff based on who is in charge of the ATF. Or it could bring to plain to see daylight that the fed.gov is REALLY out of control and may spur some changes in the people. Not sure. At some point, the legal battle (and resulting clarifications) needed to be had. These things sure as fuck were good bait. Very good points. These guys came ready to brawl within days of getting that letter from the AFT. It will be interesting to see what happens on August 18th. Does the ATF drop the BS like they do every time they know they're going to lose or do they continue on this course and fuck everything up for the other agencies by allowing this to go to SCOTUS who is chomping at the bit to get rid of Chevron Deference? |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/13/2021 12:40:35 PM EST
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Very good points. These guys came ready to brawl within days of getting that letter from the AFT. It will be interesting to see what happens on August 18th. Does the ATF drop the BS like they do every time they know they're going to lose or do they continue on this course and fuck everything up for the other agencies by allowing this to go to SCOTUS who is chomping at the bit to get rid of Chevron Deference? The AFT can't afford to let this one drop. It is too close a simulation of full-auto. Unfortunately they also can't make their position work. Sucks to be them. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/13/2021 12:40:46 PM EST
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted: It was plainly obvious that the ATF wouldn't like them, but they have no actual basis from which to argue that these are illegal. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Right, but what the law says seems to have just been edited by the FATF because FRT's are far more EFFECTIVE than binaries. At least that's my guess. It was plainly obvious that the ATF wouldn't like them, but they have no actual basis from which to argue that these are illegal. "Function of the trigger" has been "trigger pull", and now "trigger manipulation ATF approves of". |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/13/2021 12:40:59 PM EST
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Makes you wonder how low their production costs are, and how much of the price goes straight to the legal slush fund. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/13/2021 12:41:17 PM EST
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted: It was plainly obvious that the ATF wouldn't like them, but they have no actual basis from which to argue that these are illegal. Right. So they had to cheat with the wording (ex. continuous vs. function). Otherwise, RBT has made it abundantly clear on all levels possible that these are within the law as currently/actually written. Kinda wonder if Biden just called one of the ass-kissing head honchos up and said "Hey, I don't care if it's legal or not, just scare/ban them!!" I don't know why but I'm imagining that in a Jeff Dunham 'Walter' voice. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/13/2021 12:42:07 PM EST
[#20]
Fuck the atf and b/s laws shall not be infringed.
Drill the hole any fucking gun people that would say something are ass holes 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/13/2021 12:42:25 PM EST
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Very good points. These guys came ready to brawl within days of getting that letter from the AFT. It will be interesting to see what happens on August 18th. Does the ATF drop the BS like they do every time they know they're going to lose or do they continue on this course and fuck everything up for the other agencies by allowing this to go to SCOTUS who is chomping at the bit to get rid of Chevron Deference? The August 18th hearing was cancelled and rescheduled for the 27th. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/13/2021 12:42:28 PM EST
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The bumpstock ruling put ATF in position* to determine what constitutes a trigger pull. IMHO binary triggers are only legal because of big money shotguns. Under the bumpstock rulings, binary and semis are MG, because there operation does not qualify as ATF trigger pulls. *formally, they were already doing it, now it's super double official. What ruling? They made up an administrative rule that doesn't in anyway reasonably reference or clarify statutory definitions. They have been using these rules to proactively shut down the sale of these items through threats... they on the other hand have stayed far away from brining any consumers to trial... they don't want this shit in the courts for a reason. Administrative rules aren't the burden of proof in a court room, the statute is. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/13/2021 12:43:26 PM EST
[#23]
Tag just to see where this goes. I don't have a dog in this hunt so to speak but do have several binaries. FATF for already trying to make me a felon one time!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/13/2021 12:46:34 PM EST
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The AFT can't afford to let this one drop. It is too close a simulation of full-auto. Unfortunately they also can't make their position work. Sucks to be them. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/13/2021 12:46:53 PM EST
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The August 18th hearing was cancelled and rescheduled for the 27th. ATF needed extra time to do homework? Maybe the tech branch is still on summer break. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/13/2021 12:48:31 PM EST
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The August 18th hearing was cancelled and rescheduled for the 27th. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Very good points. These guys came ready to brawl within days of getting that letter from the AFT. It will be interesting to see what happens on August 18th. Does the ATF drop the BS like they do every time they know they're going to lose or do they continue on this course and fuck everything up for the other agencies by allowing this to go to SCOTUS who is chomping at the bit to get rid of Chevron Deference? The August 18th hearing was cancelled and rescheduled for the 27th. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/13/2021 12:48:59 PM EST
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Rare breed's response from another thread: https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0255/0484/1762/files/PDFtoJPG.me-1_1024x1024.jpg?v=1628863705 https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0255/0484/1762/files/0471233435371024_2_1024x1024.jpg?v=1628863260 https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0255/0484/1762/files/0471233435371024_3_1024x1024.jpg?v=1628863278 https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0255/0484/1762/files/0471233435371024_4_1024x1024.jpg?v=1628863294  Attached File |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/13/2021 12:49:22 PM EST
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted: OR they pull the magic rabbit from their collective anus and create some newfound rule that they get to make all the rules, the courts go with it (paid off/threatened) and we just officially ditch the rule of law for bureaucratic whimsical dictatorship, which should hopefully stir The People's collective pot. Possible, but that path just accelerates the coming storm anyway. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/13/2021 12:50:56 PM EST
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Has the ATF filed a response yet? I'd like to see what they come up with. I'm tempted to get a PACER account just to follow this shit. I don't think you need to. This is pretty big and will likely continue to be all over GD, ARF.com, and youtube until someone wins/loses. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/13/2021 12:51:36 PM EST
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted: OR they pull the magic rabbit from their collective anus and create some newfound rule that they get to make all the rules, the courts go with it (paid off/threatened) and we just officially ditch the rule of law for bureaucratic whimsical dictatorship, which should hopefully stir The People's collective pot. Administrative rules are opinions, and not a bar set by law. You can be charged for violation of the "rules", but you have to be convicted based on statutory language. Hence why the ATF is scared to bring anyone to trial over lower recievers, bumbp stocks and braces. The only people fucked by these admin rules so far have been manufactures, by threat of losing their ffl or businesses. Until now, this is the first manufacturer to truly say "fuck off", see your ass in court. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/13/2021 12:53:44 PM EST
[#31]
Came to remind that 922o is unconstitutional
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/13/2021 12:58:18 PM EST
[#32]
Very interesting.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/13/2021 1:08:15 PM EST
[#33]
Does anyone have a source of taxidermy german shepherds by chance?
And perhaps some tannerite on sale? |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/13/2021 1:08:30 PM EST
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted: You still haven't answer the question asked earlier.Do you have an Illinois FOID? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: I support the 2A, but I'm not going to jail for breaking an unconstitutional law. /media/mediaFiles/sharedAlbum/laugh-29.gif That right there is why you should not ever be taken seriously. You better turn all your guns in now because eventually all of them will be banned. You still haven't answer the question asked earlier.Do you have an Illinois FOID? Made it easier for him to see the question.  @Chiefkeefdeltateam |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/13/2021 1:09:12 PM EST
[#35]
@Removed_californian
You should update the title and OP to reflect that ATF didn't decide the FRT15 is a MG. The local field division did. Unilaterally. Without concurrence from the Firearms Technology Branch. And without providing a required period for public comment as required by the APA (if that is really the route ATF wants to go...ok then). Aka..."Rouge field division of ATF declares FRT15 a MG without authority to do so." |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/13/2021 1:09:46 PM EST
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted: OR they pull the magic rabbit from their collective anus and create some newfound rule that they get to make all the rules, the courts go with it (paid off/threatened) and we just officially ditch the rule of law for bureaucratic whimsical dictatorship, which should hopefully stir The People's collective pot. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: The AFT can't afford to let this one drop. It is too close a simulation of full-auto. Unfortunately they also can't make their position work. Sucks to be them. Yeah, I wouldn't get your hopes up about that happening... |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/13/2021 1:10:19 PM EST
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Administrative rules are opinions, and not a bar set by law. You can be charged for violation of the "rules", but you have to be convicted based on statutory language. Hence why the ATF is scared to bring anyone to trial over lower recievers, bumbp stocks and braces. The only people fucked by these admin rules so far have been manufactures, by threat of losing their ffl or businesses. Until now, this is the first manufacturer to truly say "fuck off", see your ass in court. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: OR they pull the magic rabbit from their collective anus and create some newfound rule that they get to make all the rules, the courts go with it (paid off/threatened) and we just officially ditch the rule of law for bureaucratic whimsical dictatorship, which should hopefully stir The People's collective pot. Administrative rules are opinions, and not a bar set by law. You can be charged for violation of the "rules", but you have to be convicted based on statutory language. Hence why the ATF is scared to bring anyone to trial over lower recievers, bumbp stocks and braces. The only people fucked by these admin rules so far have been manufactures, by threat of losing their ffl or businesses. Until now, this is the first manufacturer to truly say "fuck off", see your ass in court. If they get a list of purchasers the next step will be voluntary surrender because it might be a machine gun. They won’t want to go to court. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/13/2021 1:11:43 PM EST
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted: If they get a list of purchasers the next step will be voluntary surrender because it might be a machine gun. They won’t want to go to court. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: OR they pull the magic rabbit from their collective anus and create some newfound rule that they get to make all the rules, the courts go with it (paid off/threatened) and we just officially ditch the rule of law for bureaucratic whimsical dictatorship, which should hopefully stir The People's collective pot. Administrative rules are opinions, and not a bar set by law. You can be charged for violation of the "rules", but you have to be convicted based on statutory language. Hence why the ATF is scared to bring anyone to trial over lower recievers, bumbp stocks and braces. The only people fucked by these admin rules so far have been manufactures, by threat of losing their ffl or businesses. Until now, this is the first manufacturer to truly say "fuck off", see your ass in court. If they get a list of purchasers the next step will be voluntary surrender because it might be a machine gun. They won’t want to go to court. I know a few people willing to go to court who have called the ATF on their shenanigans before.  |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/13/2021 1:12:46 PM EST
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Well isn't that fun! Someone listened in class and did their homework Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Rare breed's response from another thread: https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0255/0484/1762/files/PDFtoJPG.me-1_1024x1024.jpg?v=1628863705 https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0255/0484/1762/files/0471233435371024_2_1024x1024.jpg?v=1628863260 https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0255/0484/1762/files/0471233435371024_3_1024x1024.jpg?v=1628863278 https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0255/0484/1762/files/0471233435371024_4_1024x1024.jpg?v=1628863294 Well isn't that fun! Someone listened in class and did their homework  |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/13/2021 1:13:29 PM EST
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted: @Removed_californian You should update the title and OP to reflect that ATF didn't decide the FRT15 is a MG. The local field division did. Unilaterally. Without concurrence from the Firearms Technology Branch. And without providing a required period for public comment as required by the APA (if that is really the route ATF wants to go...ok then). Aka..."Rouge field division of ATF declares FRT15 a MG without authority to do so." Do you have the ATF's response to the letter then or know something nobody else seems to? Until they respond to that letter we have no way of knowing what you're saying is true and nobody else seems to be drawing the same conclusion you are. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/13/2021 1:15:53 PM EST
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I know a few people willing to go to court who have called the ATF on their shenanigans before. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: OR they pull the magic rabbit from their collective anus and create some newfound rule that they get to make all the rules, the courts go with it (paid off/threatened) and we just officially ditch the rule of law for bureaucratic whimsical dictatorship, which should hopefully stir The People's collective pot. Administrative rules are opinions, and not a bar set by law. You can be charged for violation of the "rules", but you have to be convicted based on statutory language. Hence why the ATF is scared to bring anyone to trial over lower recievers, bumbp stocks and braces. The only people fucked by these admin rules so far have been manufactures, by threat of losing their ffl or businesses. Until now, this is the first manufacturer to truly say "fuck off", see your ass in court. If they get a list of purchasers the next step will be voluntary surrender because it might be a machine gun. They won’t want to go to court. I know a few people willing to go to court who have called the ATF on their shenanigans before. A request to see the determination would be fun. How about a warrant? |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/13/2021 1:17:01 PM EST
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I know a few people willing to go to court who have called the ATF on their shenanigans before. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: OR they pull the magic rabbit from their collective anus and create some newfound rule that they get to make all the rules, the courts go with it (paid off/threatened) and we just officially ditch the rule of law for bureaucratic whimsical dictatorship, which should hopefully stir The People's collective pot. Administrative rules are opinions, and not a bar set by law. You can be charged for violation of the "rules", but you have to be convicted based on statutory language. Hence why the ATF is scared to bring anyone to trial over lower recievers, bumbp stocks and braces. The only people fucked by these admin rules so far have been manufactures, by threat of losing their ffl or businesses. Until now, this is the first manufacturer to truly say "fuck off", see your ass in court. If they get a list of purchasers the next step will be voluntary surrender because it might be a machine gun. They won’t want to go to court. I know a few people willing to go to court who have called the ATF on their shenanigans before. Oh - so do I.  Quoted: Quoted: @Removed_californian You should update the title and OP to reflect that ATF didn't decide the FRT15 is a MG. The local field division did. Unilaterally. Without concurrence from the Firearms Technology Branch. And without providing a required period for public comment as required by the APA (if that is really the route ATF wants to go...ok then). Aka..."Rouge field division of ATF declares FRT15 a MG without authority to do so." Do you have the ATF's response to the letter then or know something nobody else seems to? Until they respond to that letter we have no way of knowing what you're saying is true and nobody else seems to be drawing the same conclusion you are. Did you miss the ATF C&D [below] and the response?   It's all right there. From the Tampa Field Division. Nothing more - just that letter. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/13/2021 1:25:18 PM EST
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted: @Removed_californian You should update the title and OP to reflect that ATF didn't decide the FRT15 is a MG. The local field division did. Unilaterally. Without concurrence from the Firearms Technology Branch. And without providing a required period for public comment as required by the APA (if that is really the route ATF wants to go...ok then). Aka..."Rouge field division of ATF declares FRT15 a MG without authority to do so." Maybe I'm mis-remembering....but didn't that happen with Q and the HB brace as well? Some "person" decided the Honey Badger pistol was an SBR? FATF |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/13/2021 1:35:26 PM EST
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Do you have the ATF's response to the letter then or know something nobody else seems to? Until they respond to that letter we have no way of knowing what you're saying is true and nobody else seems to be drawing the same conclusion you are. I probably know a lot of things other people don't. My profession is one of the worst kept secrets on ARFCOM or in the gun community in general. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/13/2021 1:36:42 PM EST
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Made it easier for him to see the question. @Chiefkeefdeltateam No!!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/13/2021 1:36:47 PM EST
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I probably know a lot of things other people don't. My profession is one of the worst kept secrets on ARFCOM or in the gun community in general. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Do you have the ATF's response to the letter then or know something nobody else seems to? Until they respond to that letter we have no way of knowing what you're saying is true and nobody else seems to be drawing the same conclusion you are. I probably know a lot of things other people don't. My profession is one of the worst kept secrets on ARFCOM or in the gun community in general.  You gave me the perfect opening.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/13/2021 1:45:53 PM EST
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Yeah, I wouldn't get your hopes up about that happening... Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: The AFT can't afford to let this one drop. It is too close a simulation of full-auto. Unfortunately they also can't make their position work. Sucks to be them. Yeah, I wouldn't get your hopes up about that happening...  |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/13/2021 1:49:45 PM EST
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I know a few people willing to go to court who have called the ATF on their shenanigans before. Len Savage for sure. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/13/2021 1:52:18 PM EST
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Oh - so do I. Did you miss the ATF C&D [below] and the response? https://i.imgur.com/MN3Z7B1.jpg https://i.imgur.com/7I4dj1F.jpg It's all right there. From the Tampa Field Division. Nothing more - just that letter. That also doesn't make it a "fake" letter that is unenforceable, I also read the response which requested how they drew the conclusions they did. I'm asking if we have any response from the ATF about that because I don't see how you can conclude they acted unilaterally without approval if they haven't yet responded. For all we know the tech branch told them to go ahead and send it to try and stop manufacturing/shipping as soon as possible as the determination was coming right behind it and that's the closest field office. To me that's as much of a guess as saying it's an agent going rogue. ETA: Cross posting sheds more light on the subject making this a little less confusing. Go to the bottom. https://www.ar15.com/forums/general/Rarebreed-Trigger-VS-M16-Full-auto-for-the-masses-/5-2457111/?r=-1&page=5&anc=94267612#i94267612 |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/13/2021 2:10:59 PM EST
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Administrative rules are opinions, and not a bar set by law. You can be charged for violation of the "rules", but you have to be convicted based on statutory language. Hence why the ATF is scared to bring anyone to trial over lower recievers, bumbp stocks and braces. The only people fucked by these admin rules so far have been manufactures, by threat of losing their ffl or businesses. Until now, this is the first manufacturer to truly say "fuck off", see your ass in court. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: OR they pull the magic rabbit from their collective anus and create some newfound rule that they get to make all the rules, the courts go with it (paid off/threatened) and we just officially ditch the rule of law for bureaucratic whimsical dictatorship, which should hopefully stir The People's collective pot. Administrative rules are opinions, and not a bar set by law. You can be charged for violation of the "rules", but you have to be convicted based on statutory language. Hence why the ATF is scared to bring anyone to trial over lower recievers, bumbp stocks and braces. The only people fucked by these admin rules so far have been manufactures, by threat of losing their ffl or businesses. Until now, this is the first manufacturer to truly say "fuck off", see your ass in court. I believe Sig did on at least 1 thing (the monocore muzzle brake). |
|
|
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.
