User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 8/17/2016 10:39:08 AM EDT
[#1]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By JBowles:
What about the whole due process issue with the ATF just yanking approved forms? "Due process" is for the courts. ATF is NOT the Court. The ATF stands alone, makes their own rules, reinterprets them at a whim, and have darn near no oversight whatsoever. The epitome of big gubmint run amok. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/17/2016 10:48:19 AM EDT
[#2]
 |
|
|
|
NY, USA
|
Posted: 8/17/2016 11:06:49 AM EDT
[#3]
Does that mean an appeal to (the hopefully newly Trump-appointed-member) SCOTUS is the next step?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/17/2016 12:50:14 PM EDT
[#4]
I got mines.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/17/2016 1:04:16 PM EDT
[#5]
shitty
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/17/2016 1:16:49 PM EDT
[#6]
In on page 223!
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/17/2016 1:43:01 PM EDT
[#7]
Okay.....
Nolo, if you take all your prepared documents. All .govs bullshit arguments. Rangle's video of the bullshit pulled on the floor of the House in the middle of the night. Dias is a machine gun. String is a machine gun. May 18 is legal, May 20 is illegal... Would a presentation to Donald Jr., Everyone mad at the BATFE over Fast and Furious, and the new director of ATF be a reasonable push after Hillary goes to the Old Folk's Home on November 9th? Hey, some body has to change those diapers 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/17/2016 1:47:23 PM EDT
[#8]
Well its been a long ride.
Just posting in to thank nolo for fighting hard and keeping the Faith. It has been appreciated. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/17/2016 2:54:04 PM EDT
[#9]
So that's it??.....
No other recourse?
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/17/2016 2:58:27 PM EDT
[#10]
Posting on 223 to say thanks to Nolo for fighting the good fight!
What's the status of the other case? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/17/2016 3:02:19 PM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Diesel_Maximus_2992:
So that's it??..... No other recourse?This
|
|
|
|
OH, USA
|
Posted: 8/17/2016 3:05:33 PM EDT
[Last Edit: mp9fan]
[#12]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By BladedRonin:
This Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By BladedRonin:
Originally Posted By Diesel_Maximus_2992:
So that's it??..... No other recourse?This Tyranny sucks. Get used to it. Edit: Big thanks to Nolos hard work and everyone who donated. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/17/2016 3:05:40 PM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Diesel_Maximus_2992: So that's it??..... No other recourse? |
|
|
|
NH, USA
|
Posted: 8/17/2016 3:09:12 PM EDT
[#14]
Thank you, Nolo.
Isn't there an angle here re: improvement for "firearms safety" re: drop-in parts upgrades? "Safety" seems to be all the buzz.... |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/17/2016 3:14:59 PM EDT
[#15]
Sad day.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/17/2016 3:16:39 PM EDT
[#16]
if only they treated NFA and hughes like medical marijuana
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/17/2016 3:18:01 PM EDT
[#17]
Everyone is acting like this is over. It is just an intermission for now until the SCOTUS looks better. If you want to see this, go vote against HRC (code words for vote Trump even when you don't like him).
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/17/2016 3:28:09 PM EDT
[#18]
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/17/2016 3:46:16 PM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By ar15eric:
Everyone is acting like this is over. It is just an intermission for now until the SCOTUS looks better. If you want to see this, go vote against HRC (code words for vote Trump even when you don't like him). this. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/17/2016 3:52:48 PM EDT
[Last Edit: MKSheppard]
[#20]
Sad, but you did us all a service Nolo, by letting us know where exactly the courts stand.
We've confirmed that they are still pretty much in their Guns are evil and icky mode, which defaults to: You'll take it, and you'll like it! in which logic is thrown out the window, and standards which apply to other things don't apply to firearms, because...Guns are evil and icky. This, combined with the recent shenanigans in Massachusetts, are further proof that once a ban gets into place, it's staying, no matter what, as the courts will slow roll things (look at how long the Courts have appeased DC in their CCW case, it's nearly ten years and going that the litigation has been going on for DC CCW). EDIT: I also think that part of the reason you were turned down is because the court(s) evaluated your monetary capabilities (how much money you can bring to this) and found them insufficient (something that doesn't apply to liberal pet causes). Unfortunately, the kind of clients who could afford the huge piles of money for lawfare have capabilities not open to HOLLIS and will just get their post-86 MG through shenanigans with the authorities, rather than wage a protracted legal battle (why spend X amount in the courts, when you can just donate Y to a politician, and then get a favorable waiver?) EDIT II: Keep at it with your FOIA requests and legal battles to get those released. That's the key to winning the NFA battle, IMHO. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/17/2016 7:15:28 PM EDT
[#21]
Thank you for your efforts Nolo... you're still a hero in my book!
- Clint |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/17/2016 10:29:50 PM EDT
[#22]
Disappointing but I am glad to hear you are throwing in the towel in the face of a hostile supreme court.
Thank you very much for all of your efforts Mr. Stamboulieh. I doff my cap to you. If you are ever in Salem, the first round is on me. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/17/2016 10:38:01 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Alaskacajun:
Thank you for your efforts Nolo... you're still a hero in my book!
- Clint |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/17/2016 10:42:41 PM EDT
[#24]
FUCK.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/18/2016 12:16:43 AM EDT
[#25]
Fucking hell
|
|
|
|
OR, USA
|
Posted: 8/18/2016 12:26:30 AM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By MKSheppard:
Sad, but you did us all a service Nolo, by letting us know where exactly the courts stand. We've confirmed that they are still pretty much in their Guns are evil and icky mode, which defaults to: You'll take it, and you'll like it! in which logic is thrown out the window, and standards which apply to other things don't apply to firearms, because...Guns are evil and icky. This, combined with the recent shenanigans in Massachusetts, are further proof that once a ban gets into place, it's staying, no matter what, as the courts will slow roll things (look at how long the Courts have appeased DC in their CCW case, it's nearly ten years and going that the litigation has been going on for DC CCW). EDIT: I also think that part of the reason you were turned down is because the court(s) evaluated your monetary capabilities (how much money you can bring to this) and found them insufficient (something that doesn't apply to liberal pet causes). Unfortunately, the kind of clients who could afford the huge piles of money for lawfare have capabilities not open to HOLLIS and will just get their post-86 MG through shenanigans with the authorities, rather than wage a protracted legal battle (why spend X amount in the courts, when you can just donate Y to a politician, and then get a favorable waiver?) EDIT II: Keep at it with your FOIA requests and legal battles to get those released. That's the key to winning the NFA battle, IMHO. I supported NOLO's goals, and even contributed some money, but I figured this was about how it would end. Expecting judges to rule against those who sign their paychecks, and the paychecks of those who guard them from all the people they've screwed over, is folly. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/18/2016 12:41:12 AM EDT
[#27]
Thank you for your efforts good Sir.
|
|
|
|
UT, USA
|
Posted: 8/18/2016 12:52:21 AM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By lovecraftfan:
I supported NOLO's goals, and even contributed some money, but I figured this was about how it would end. Expecting judges to rule against those who sign their paychecks, and the paychecks of those who guard them from all the people they've screwed over, is folly. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By lovecraftfan:
Originally Posted By MKSheppard:
Sad, but you did us all a service Nolo, by letting us know where exactly the courts stand. We've confirmed that they are still pretty much in their Guns are evil and icky mode, which defaults to: You'll take it, and you'll like it! in which logic is thrown out the window, and standards which apply to other things don't apply to firearms, because...Guns are evil and icky. This, combined with the recent shenanigans in Massachusetts, are further proof that once a ban gets into place, it's staying, no matter what, as the courts will slow roll things (look at how long the Courts have appeased DC in their CCW case, it's nearly ten years and going that the litigation has been going on for DC CCW). EDIT: I also think that part of the reason you were turned down is because the court(s) evaluated your monetary capabilities (how much money you can bring to this) and found them insufficient (something that doesn't apply to liberal pet causes). Unfortunately, the kind of clients who could afford the huge piles of money for lawfare have capabilities not open to HOLLIS and will just get their post-86 MG through shenanigans with the authorities, rather than wage a protracted legal battle (why spend X amount in the courts, when you can just donate Y to a politician, and then get a favorable waiver?) EDIT II: Keep at it with your FOIA requests and legal battles to get those released. That's the key to winning the NFA battle, IMHO. I supported NOLO's goals, and even contributed some money, but I figured this was about how it would end. Expecting judges to rule against those who sign their paychecks, and the paychecks of those who guard them from all the people they've screwed over, is folly. so how do we fix this? and thank you to NOLO. You da' man. |
|
|
VA, USA
|
Posted: 8/18/2016 12:54:03 AM EDT
[Last Edit: Beach]
[#29]
Thanking Nolo for all the fine work he did AND getting on page .223!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/18/2016 1:01:28 AM EDT
[#30]
Thank you NOLO for all that you have done.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/18/2016 1:08:43 AM EDT
[#31]
Thank you, Nolo, I was unable to contribute, but am very grateful for your efforts on all of our behalf.
This fight is far from over, and it is due to the efforts of people like Nolo that I still have hope that my grandchildren will live at least as free as I am today. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/18/2016 1:11:37 AM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By crashburnrepeat: so how do we fix this? and thank you to NOLO. You da' man. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By crashburnrepeat: Originally Posted By lovecraftfan: Originally Posted By MKSheppard: Sad, but you did us all a service Nolo, by letting us know where exactly the courts stand. We've confirmed that they are still pretty much in their Guns are evil and icky mode, which defaults to: You'll take it, and you'll like it! in which logic is thrown out the window, and standards which apply to other things don't apply to firearms, because...Guns are evil and icky. This, combined with the recent shenanigans in Massachusetts, are further proof that once a ban gets into place, it's staying, no matter what, as the courts will slow roll things (look at how long the Courts have appeased DC in their CCW case, it's nearly ten years and going that the litigation has been going on for DC CCW). EDIT: I also think that part of the reason you were turned down is because the court(s) evaluated your monetary capabilities (how much money you can bring to this) and found them insufficient (something that doesn't apply to liberal pet causes). Unfortunately, the kind of clients who could afford the huge piles of money for lawfare have capabilities not open to HOLLIS and will just get their post-86 MG through shenanigans with the authorities, rather than wage a protracted legal battle (why spend X amount in the courts, when you can just donate Y to a politician, and then get a favorable waiver?) EDIT II: Keep at it with your FOIA requests and legal battles to get those released. That's the key to winning the NFA battle, IMHO. so how do we fix this? and thank you to NOLO. You da' man. Convert every AR in the country to full-auto. Problem is, no one wants to go first. |
|
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 8/18/2016 2:37:34 AM EDT
[Last Edit: Master_Blaster]
[#33]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By eric10mm:
That means "because we said so and you can't make us". Basically a HUGE raised middle finger. Say NO to lifetime appointments! Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By eric10mm:
Originally Posted By irishtech:
Originally Posted By NoloContendere:
The 5th circuit said no today to rehearing en banc. Not even a dissent. Disappointing. What does that mean for those of us that don't speak legal? That means "because we said so and you can't make us". Basically a HUGE raised middle finger. Say NO to lifetime appointments! I'm sure that would just be ruled unconstitutional. 
At some point, it needs to be acknowledged that pursuing legal recourse is only feeding the beast that would consume us. I'm reminded of a small article I read once about 15 yrs back, concerning some uprising going on in one of the African nations. The individual being interviewed was talking about the rampant corruption throughout the govt; that justice was a fantasy, & when asked about pursuing legal remedy, he said the corruption of the judges made justice unassailable, & as such, "We don't want to hear any talk about going to court." |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/18/2016 8:22:18 AM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Alaskacajun:
Thank you for your efforts Nolo... you're still a hero in my book!
- Clint Indeed! |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/18/2016 8:33:42 AM EDT
[#35]
Well.....fuck.
Reason # 5997231 why Hillary can't possibly win in Nov. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/18/2016 8:47:27 AM EDT
[#36]
Nolo, I applaud all your efforts. Thank you. This result is disappointing, but unfortunately not all that surprising.
|
|
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 8/18/2016 8:55:02 AM EDT
[#37]
Another Dredd Scott class decision (just like Obamacare mandate). Thank you for giving it your all Nolo, your filings were poetry and should be required reading for America's youth (so they can see first hand what mental gymnastics the various branches of government will go through to deny our rights).
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/18/2016 9:12:33 AM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Diesel_Maximus_2992: So that's it??..... No other recourse? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/18/2016 11:23:52 AM EDT
[#39]
The boxes of freedom are being exhausted.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/18/2016 12:13:58 PM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By semiautomatic:
The boxes of freedom are being exhausted. Pretty soon there will only be one box left to open. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/18/2016 1:02:23 PM EDT
[#41]
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/18/2016 1:19:51 PM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Repairman_Jack:
Pretty soon there will only be one box left to open. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Repairman_Jack:
Originally Posted By semiautomatic:
The boxes of freedom are being exhausted. Pretty soon there will only be one box left to open. pretty soon? 
|
|
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 8/18/2016 1:33:33 PM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By MKSheppard:
Sad, but you did us all a service Nolo, by letting us know where exactly the courts stand. We've confirmed that they are still pretty much in their Guns are evil and icky mode, which defaults to: You'll take it, and you'll like it! in which logic is thrown out the window, and standards which apply to other things don't apply to firearms, because...Guns are evil and icky. This, combined with the recent shenanigans in Massachusetts, are further proof that once a ban gets into place, it's staying, no matter what, as the courts will slow roll things (look at how long the Courts have appeased DC in their CCW case, it's nearly ten years and going that the litigation has been going on for DC CCW). EDIT: I also think that part of the reason you were turned down is because the court(s) evaluated your monetary capabilities (how much money you can bring to this) and found them insufficient (something that doesn't apply to liberal pet causes). Unfortunately, the kind of clients who could afford the huge piles of money for lawfare have capabilities not open to HOLLIS and will just get their post-86 MG through shenanigans with the authorities, rather than wage a protracted legal battle (why spend X amount in the courts, when you can just donate Y to a politician, and then get a favorable waiver?) EDIT II: Keep at it with your FOIA requests and legal battles to get those released. That's the key to winning the NFA battle, IMHO. Well said. These cases were valuable if for no other reason than to let people know that our Federal Judiciary will not provide relief to us on this issue. We must seek "other" alternatives at this point. Good luck gentlemen. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/18/2016 1:39:15 PM EDT
[Last Edit: orpheus762x51]
[#44]
The battle may have been lost, but the war rages on.
Thanks for all your efforts Nolo, Mr. Watson & Mr. Hollis. "If a law is unjust, a man is not only right to disobey it, he is obligated to do so." -Thomas Jefferson |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/18/2016 1:40:02 PM EDT
[Last Edit: eric10mm]
[#45]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Jeremy2171:
No there is..but I'm not gonna say it Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Jeremy2171:
Originally Posted By Diesel_Maximus_2992:
So that's it??..... No other recourse?I wonder where Walter and Cindy are these days. |
|
|
|
FL, USA
|
Posted: 8/18/2016 3:11:33 PM EDT
[Last Edit: TheSpaniard]
[#46]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By lovecraftfan:
I supported NOLO's goals, and even contributed some money, but I figured this was about how it would end. Expecting judges to rule against those who sign their paychecks, and the paychecks of those who guard them from all the people they've screwed over, is folly. This is ignorant on a number of levels. First, federal courts rule against the federal government routinely, and the phenomenon you describe never happens. Second, if it ever did happen, it would violate the Constitution. Under Article III of the Constitution, federal judges have lifetime tenure and salary protection. That means their paychecks are constitutionally guaranteed, and may not be diminished during their tenure. These tenure and salary protections were designed precisely to eliminate the potential bias that you alluded to in your post. Third, while USMS services are budgeted, it is folly to suggest that any modern Congress or presidential administration (save perhaps a Trump administration) would slash (or refuse to pay) USMS appropriations as retaliation for a ruling that invalidates a federal statute. Part of the ACA was struck down, and that statute is a much higher priority to this administration than 922(o). By your theory, we should have seen a huge backlash then. But we didn't. |
|
|
FL, USA
|
Posted: 8/18/2016 3:16:12 PM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By fla556guy:
Short barreled rifles ARE though. Yet the process for obtaining a SBR and a SBS are the same. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By fla556guy:
Originally Posted By TheSpaniard:
Doesn't matter anymore. Heller put its own gloss on Miller, reasoning that historically, militia service involved bringing privately owned arms that were in common use, and SBSs and MGs are not in common use. Basically, Heller re-read Miller as an application of Heller's newly announced common use test. What you and I think Miller meant doesn't matter; Heller is the Supreme Court's definitive interpretation of Miller. Short barreled rifles ARE though. Yet the process for obtaining a SBR and a SBS are the same. Unlike with MGs and SBSs, that issue is still left open because Heller failed to address it. Even so, I'd bet you $100 that if SCOTUS ever confronts the issue, it will hold that SBRs are not in common use either, regardless of the stats that you throw at them. |
|
|
FL, USA
|
Posted: 8/18/2016 3:21:16 PM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By HappyCamel:
What the fuck. What the fuck is the point of the courts if they won't even let issues travel through them as intended. The legal process, not even the outcome, was the last piece of America I thought might still be intact. The only avenue through which we had recourse considering the soap box is suppressed and the ballot box corrupt. Well then. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By HappyCamel:
Originally Posted By NoloContendere:
The 5th circuit said no today to rehearing en banc. Not even a dissent. Disappointing. What the fuck. What the fuck is the point of the courts if they won't even let issues travel through them as intended. The legal process, not even the outcome, was the last piece of America I thought might still be intact. The only avenue through which we had recourse considering the soap box is suppressed and the ballot box corrupt. Well then. Your post makes no sense. Denying en banc doesn't mean failing to let the issue travel through the court. By denying en banc, the court makes the panel opinion the final word of the court and allows Nolo to petition for cert. from SCOTUS. No one has a right to en banc review, and very few cases get it. En banc is denied routinely for cases, like this one, that the SCOTUS has foreclosed (whether it be in a directly controlling holding, or in unmistakably clear dicta). As the panel opinions from the Third and Fifth Circuits explain, Nolo's beef is with what the Supreme Court said about MGs in Heller, and if he wants a different outcome, he needs to get SCOTUS to switch course. And of course, hell will freeze over before SCOTUS does that. |
|
|
FL, USA
|
Posted: 8/18/2016 3:22:17 PM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By rb889:
They refused to hear it? So what, they can deny any further appeal because they're lazy and corrupt? 
No. They denied it because they can read Heller without the extraordinarily rose colored glasses that some of us are wearing. |
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 8/18/2016 3:26:38 PM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By TheSpaniard:
No. They denied it because they can read Heller without the extraordinarily rose colored glasses that some of us are wearing. Pure nonsense. Heller may have been cited in their opinions however only a fool actually believes their ruling(s) had anything to do with following the letter or the intent of Heller. This outcome was brought about because it involves the 2A and machine guns and those two concepts don't square with the reality of the majority of Federal jurists. |
|
|
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.
