User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 8/20/2021 2:19:24 PM EDT
[#1]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I'm not a lawyer, but based on my reading of the docs, it's all going to come down to how a "single function of the trigger" is defined and interpreted by the court for this case. ATF seems to indirectly acknowledge that if you use a literal definition of that phrase, then this is not a MG because every time they mention the phrase, they deliberately include this language that shows how they and courts have allowed for an expanded meaning of that rather than the literal meaning: https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/42132/Screen_Shot_2021-08-20_at_9_37_28_AM_png-2059578.JPG The former ATF employees opinions that Kevin Maxwell (who is an attorney himself, apparently) provided appear to only go by the literal meaning of the "single function of the trigger" and are not using ATF's 'expanded' meaning like the above - so naturally, they come to a different conclusion and determine that it doesn't meet the definition of a MG. Bottom line is that I think that the lynchpin here will be: How will a court in this case interpret the meaning of that one phrase "single function of the trigger"? Considering the law definitively states "function" of the trigger, but the AFT deliberately used "pull/function" every time they mentioned it in their test report, I think they may anger a few judges before the case even begins. I can't imagine any judge takes kindly to someone thinking they are smarter than the judge, and that the judge is that ignorant and gullible. Trying to pull a fast one in court by adding creative words to the law might not go the way the AFT thinks it will. Judges aren't stupid (most, anyway), and are capable of reading the verbiage of the law for themselves. Trying to add words that aren't there might just get their dander up. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/20/2021 2:21:24 PM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I think this gets appealed regardless of the outcome of the case. That's why I asked before if the FATF is known to continuously appeal all such cases all the way to the Supreme Court. You were the only response and even that was to share that the bump stock case is ongoing. So doesn't seem to be a lot of precedent on the bigger cases. Just FATF vs. John Q Gun-Owner. Problem with it going all the way to the Supreme Court is they seem to want to run and hide from pretty much anything resembling a gun case, with rare exception. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/20/2021 2:23:23 PM EDT
[#3]
https://vimeo.com/589573539
This company needs our support. I still think this was a trap for the ATF, this was all planned. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/20/2021 2:31:48 PM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I'm thinking this is the point to consider as to why this needs to go in front of judge that basically has a hard on against the NFA! Otherwise, even a fudd judge is going to fuck it up, bypass the letter of the law, and only pay attention to video clips and how fast the shells are coming out of the gun. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Unclutch your pearls. Pretty much the only people who know anything about this are 2A people. The general public could not care less about this case. If you polled 1000 people on the street, I would be surprised if 1 knew what you were talking about. I'm thinking this is the point to consider as to why this needs to go in front of judge that basically has a hard on against the NFA! Otherwise, even a fudd judge is going to fuck it up, bypass the letter of the law, and only pay attention to video clips and how fast the shells are coming out of the gun. I think you're wrong. I doubt there's any judge out there that doesn't pride themselves on being able to read and interpret the law. It is their job, after all. The law very clearly defines what is and is not a machine gun, as has been spelled out many times by RBT. AFT has tried to change the verbiage to "pull/function" in their report, which does not match the verbiage of the law. Do you really think a judge won't notice that?  From what I've heard, judges often tend to be a bit haughty (even arrogant), and thinking you can pull the wool over their eyes is a quick way to get on their bad side. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/20/2021 2:40:59 PM EDT
[#5]
Did the owner or whomever is in the videos have a stroke or suffer from Bell's Palsy?
Not being critical, I know people who've had one or the other and they looked like that with mouth movements. Just curious, no disrespect intended. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/20/2021 2:44:02 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted: That's why I asked before if the FATF is known to continuously appeal all such cases all the way to the Supreme Court. You were the only response and even that was to share that the bump stock case is ongoing. So doesn't seem to be a lot of precedent on the bigger cases. Just FATF vs. John Q Gun-Owner. Problem with it going all the way to the Supreme Court is they seem to want to run and hide from pretty much anything resembling a gun case, with rare exception. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: I think this gets appealed regardless of the outcome of the case. That's why I asked before if the FATF is known to continuously appeal all such cases all the way to the Supreme Court. You were the only response and even that was to share that the bump stock case is ongoing. So doesn't seem to be a lot of precedent on the bigger cases. Just FATF vs. John Q Gun-Owner. Problem with it going all the way to the Supreme Court is they seem to want to run and hide from pretty much anything resembling a gun case, with rare exception. The thing that gives me some hope on that is the SCOTUS has a few justices now that are itching to get rid of Chevron deference especially where it has criminal law implications. Something like this case where they could clearly say, “No ATF, the law says unambiguously that this is not a machine gun. You don’t get to make a bunch of people felons by changing the law.’” It wouldn’t require them to go that far out on a limb. Could be a PR win for them also: “We saved American citizens from being made felons overnight by executive fiat. Communities of color overwhelmingly feel the impact of law enforcement arbitrarily changing the rules to suit their political goals. We felt it was time to affirm to the American people that their legislators make the laws and unelected racist bureaucrats like Dave Chipman aren’t allowed to change them at whim.” So on and so forth. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/20/2021 2:57:22 PM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I think you're wrong. I doubt there's any judge out there that doesn't pride themselves on being able to read and interpret the law. It is their job, after all. The law very clearly defines what is and is not a machine gun, as has been spelled out many times by RBT. AFT has tried to change the verbiage to "pull/function" in their report, which does not match the verbiage of the law. Do you really think a judge won't notice that? From what I've heard, judges often tend to be a bit haughty (even arrogant), and thinking you can pull the wool over their eyes is a quick way to get on their bad side. I certainly HOPE I'm wrong! |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/20/2021 2:58:48 PM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The thing that gives me some hope on that is the SCOTUS has a few justices now that are itching to get rid of Chevron deference especially where it has criminal law implications. Something like this case where they could clearly say, “No ATF, the law says unambiguously that this is not a machine gun. You don’t get to make a bunch of people felons by changing the law.’” It wouldn’t require them to go that far out on a limb. Could be a PR win for them also: “We saved American citizens from being made felons overnight by executive fiat. Communities of color overwhelmingly feel the impact of law enforcement arbitrarily changing the rules to suit their political goals. We felt it was time to affirm to the American people that their legislators make the laws and unelected racist bureaucrats like Dave Chipman aren’t allowed to change them at whim.” So on and so forth. I see what you mean specific to Chrevron deference. But for gun cases by themself, not the best track record in the last few years. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/20/2021 3:58:39 PM EDT
[#9]
Such bullshit.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/20/2021 4:12:21 PM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I'm thinking this is the point to consider as to why this needs to go in front of judge that basically has a hard on against the NFA! Otherwise, even a fudd judge is going to fuck it up, bypass the letter of the law, and only pay attention to video clips and how fast the shells are coming out of the gun. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Unclutch your pearls. Pretty much the only people who know anything about this are 2A people. The general public could not care less about this case. If you polled 1000 people on the street, I would be surprised if 1 knew what you were talking about. I'm thinking this is the point to consider as to why this needs to go in front of judge that basically has a hard on against the NFA! Otherwise, even a fudd judge is going to fuck it up, bypass the letter of the law, and only pay attention to video clips and how fast the shells are coming out of the gun. Speaking of video clips, there was a video posted earlier in this thread showing a guy shooting a RBFRT and a REAL machine gun. The slow motion video showed the obvious difference in trigger movement - or lack thereof. What they need to do is set up the video camera so it is on the ejection port side of the gun and fire it left handed so they can capture the trigger movement, bcg movement, and shell ejection. Then they need to do it with the REAL machine gun, the RBFRT, AND a semiauto. Slow the video down so that each one is firing, trigger moving, and ejecting at the same time. Put all three videos on the screen at the same time and see which movement the RBFRT matches the most. Problem solved for that part. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/20/2021 4:20:48 PM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Speaking of video clips, there was a video posted earlier in this thread showing a guy shooting a RBFRT and a REAL machine gun. The slow motion video showed the obvious difference in trigger movement - or lack thereof. What they need to do is set up the video camera so it is on the ejection port side of the gun and fire it left handed so they can capture the trigger movement, bcg movement, and shell ejection. Then they need to do it with the REAL machine gun, the RBFRT, AND a semiauto. Slow the video down so that each one is firing, trigger moving, and ejecting at the same time. Put all three videos on the screen at the same time and see which movement the RBFRT matches the most. Problem solved for that part. Maybe. But a cutaway of how the trigger mechanism works would also prove what it needs to. A cutaway, not a cartoon/animated clip. Sacrifice the $30 for an Anderson lower and gorilla tape a piece of plexiglass over the cutout. Not sure what the technical/legal debate could be after that. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/20/2021 4:43:58 PM EDT
[#12]
Now for the real problem, judges aren't hermits. Imagine the judge is out golfing or doing whatever else judges do. Now, another 'golfer' hits an errant shot near where hizonner has hit one in the rough. The other golfer walks over and says 'hey Judge Trigger Case, you know, it wouldn't look too good if you don't ban these triggers and somebody uses one on your son/daughter/grandchildren living at 123 Dead End St. Anywhere, USA.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/20/2021 4:47:12 PM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Maybe. But a cutaway of how the trigger mechanism works would also prove what it needs to. A cutaway, not a cartoon/animated clip. Sacrifice the $30 for an Anderson lower and gorilla tape a piece of plexiglass over the cutout. Not sure what the technical/legal debate could be after that. Linked earlier, but relevant. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/20/2021 4:50:59 PM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Maybe. But a cutaway of how the trigger mechanism works would also prove what it needs to. A cutaway, not a cartoon/animated clip. Sacrifice the $30 for an Anderson lower and gorilla tape a piece of plexiglass over the cutout. Not sure what the technical/legal debate could be after that. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Speaking of video clips, there was a video posted earlier in this thread showing a guy shooting a RBFRT and a REAL machine gun. The slow motion video showed the obvious difference in trigger movement - or lack thereof. What they need to do is set up the video camera so it is on the ejection port side of the gun and fire it left handed so they can capture the trigger movement, bcg movement, and shell ejection. Then they need to do it with the REAL machine gun, the RBFRT, AND a semiauto. Slow the video down so that each one is firing, trigger moving, and ejecting at the same time. Put all three videos on the screen at the same time and see which movement the RBFRT matches the most. Problem solved for that part. Maybe. But a cutaway of how the trigger mechanism works would also prove what it needs to. A cutaway, not a cartoon/animated clip. Sacrifice the $30 for an Anderson lower and gorilla tape a piece of plexiglass over the cutout. Not sure what the technical/legal debate could be after that. Firing cutaway models like I outlined above would be perfect! |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/20/2021 4:54:49 PM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Now for the real problem, judges aren't hermits. Imagine the judge is out golfing or doing whatever else judges do. Now, another 'golfer' hits an errant shot near where hizonner has hit one in the rough. The other golfer walks over and says 'hey Judge Trigger Case, you know, it wouldn't look too good if you don't ban these triggers and somebody uses one on your son/daughter/grandchildren living at 123 Dead End St. Anywhere, USA. True that, but my experience is that law enforcement doesn’t take too kindly to being threatened. Federal judges tend to have friends that are also law enforcement. I can’t see some random AFT agent in Florida threatening a judge over a trigger. It just doesn’t seem like it would be worth having people with access suddenly develop an interest in you. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/20/2021 5:01:51 PM EDT
[#16]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/20/2021 6:50:17 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The thing that gives me some hope on that is the SCOTUS has a few justices now that are itching to get rid of Chevron deference especially where it has criminal law implications. Something like this case where they could clearly say, “No ATF, the law says unambiguously that this is not a machine gun. You don’t get to make a bunch of people felons by changing the law.’” It wouldn’t require them to go that far out on a limb. Could be a PR win for them also: “We saved American citizens from being made felons overnight by executive fiat. Communities of color overwhelmingly feel the impact of law enforcement arbitrarily changing the rules to suit their political goals. We felt it was time to affirm to the American people that their legislators make the laws and unelected racist bureaucrats like Dave Chipman aren’t allowed to change them at whim.” So on and so forth. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/20/2021 7:03:53 PM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted: A member here did exactly that, was in the older 'Convince me not to buy......' IIRC. Showed how it works and also as an aid to trouble shooting. Hopefully someone OR the OP will remember it and post. As far as the verbiage and the ftatf we're the minority, 50,000 triggers (according to a members order number, he purchased one and another later and the p.o. number followed suit) VS 350 Million US legal citizens. Maybe. But a cutaway of how the trigger mechanism works would also prove what it needs to. A cutaway, not a cartoon/animated clip. Sacrifice the $30 for an Anderson lower and gorilla tape a piece of plexiglass over the cutout. Not sure what the technical/legal debate could be after that. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Speaking of video clips, there was a video posted earlier in this thread showing a guy shooting a RBFRT and a REAL machine gun. The slow motion video showed the obvious difference in trigger movement - or lack thereof. What they need to do is set up the video camera so it is on the ejection port side of the gun and fire it left handed so they can capture the trigger movement, bcg movement, and shell ejection. Then they need to do it with the REAL machine gun, the RBFRT, AND a semiauto. Slow the video down so that each one is firing, trigger moving, and ejecting at the same time. Put all three videos on the screen at the same time and see which movement the RBFRT matches the most. Problem solved for that part. A member here did exactly that, was in the older 'Convince me not to buy......' IIRC. Showed how it works and also as an aid to trouble shooting. Hopefully someone OR the OP will remember it and post. As far as the verbiage and the ftatf we're the minority, 50,000 triggers (according to a members order number, he purchased one and another later and the p.o. number followed suit) VS 350 Million US legal citizens. Maybe. But a cutaway of how the trigger mechanism works would also prove what it needs to. A cutaway, not a cartoon/animated clip. Sacrifice the $30 for an Anderson lower and gorilla tape a piece of plexiglass over the cutout. Not sure what the technical/legal debate could be after that. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/20/2021 7:18:03 PM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Speaking of video clips, there was a video posted earlier in this thread showing a guy shooting a RBFRT and a REAL machine gun. The slow motion video showed the obvious difference in trigger movement - or lack thereof. What they need to do is set up the video camera so it is on the ejection port side of the gun and fire it left handed so they can capture the trigger movement, bcg movement, and shell ejection. Then they need to do it with the REAL machine gun, the RBFRT, AND a semiauto. Slow the video down so that each one is firing, trigger moving, and ejecting at the same time. Put all three videos on the screen at the same time and see which movement the RBFRT matches the most. Problem solved for that part. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Unclutch your pearls. Pretty much the only people who know anything about this are 2A people. The general public could not care less about this case. If you polled 1000 people on the street, I would be surprised if 1 knew what you were talking about. I'm thinking this is the point to consider as to why this needs to go in front of judge that basically has a hard on against the NFA! Otherwise, even a fudd judge is going to fuck it up, bypass the letter of the law, and only pay attention to video clips and how fast the shells are coming out of the gun. Speaking of video clips, there was a video posted earlier in this thread showing a guy shooting a RBFRT and a REAL machine gun. The slow motion video showed the obvious difference in trigger movement - or lack thereof. What they need to do is set up the video camera so it is on the ejection port side of the gun and fire it left handed so they can capture the trigger movement, bcg movement, and shell ejection. Then they need to do it with the REAL machine gun, the RBFRT, AND a semiauto. Slow the video down so that each one is firing, trigger moving, and ejecting at the same time. Put all three videos on the screen at the same time and see which movement the RBFRT matches the most. Problem solved for that part. Excellent idea but the AFT and this Admin are not interested in logical arguments or facts. They like their law by decree power and this very well could threaten that power. Keeping in mind the Chipman nominee is their idea of an ideal candidate to further their goals. An impartial judge is needed. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/20/2021 8:58:06 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted: FRT owners aren't the only ones who don't think they are machine guns. There are a lot more than 50,000 |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/20/2021 9:02:44 PM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted: FRT owners aren't the only ones who don't think they are machine guns. There are a lot more than 50,000 50k is just how many ORDERS of them they've had. Think of those who ordered 10-20 or 100, think of how many of those are going to find their way into stockings this Christmas or raffled off at club pig roasts. It'd be a logistical nightmare to try and track them all down if not an impossibility. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/20/2021 9:09:51 PM EDT
[#22]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/20/2021 9:24:12 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted: 50k is just how many ORDERS of them they've had. Think of those who ordered 10-20 or 100, think of how many of those are going to find their way into stockings this Christmas or raffled off at club pig roasts. It'd be a logistical nightmare to try and track them all down if not an impossibility. Yep  ATF is lazy though. They just want to bully people and make a few examples to make everyone afraid. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/20/2021 9:25:11 PM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted: FRT owners aren't the only ones who don't think they are machine guns. There are a lot more than 50,000 Thanks, I do recall them being sold for 20% over the 'sticker price' when they were tougher to get. You made a great point. Far less than bump stocks though, these ftatf won't listen to a reasonable argument, just make shyt up along the way. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/20/2021 9:33:57 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Thanks, I do recall them being sold for 20% over the 'sticker price' when they were tougher to get. You made a great point. Far less than bump stocks though, these ftatf won't listen to a reasonable argument, just make shyt up along the way. Bumpstock companies didn't fight, and they certainly weren't prepared like this. Mr. Maxwell has been watching previous instances, and it is readily apparent that he has learned from the experience of others how the ATF operates-in detail-not just generalities about how they willy nilly change their minds and then back it with the weight of law. Learning is occurring, and it's a good thing. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/20/2021 9:47:57 PM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted: A .22 version would be great considering the cost of ammo.  Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: A 9mm version would be pretty cool (I'll be waiting) A .22 version would be great considering the cost of ammo. If they make a dedicated 9mm and .22 version, I’ll buy a second and third RBT. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/21/2021 11:06:17 AM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted: If they make a dedicated 9mm and .22 version, I’ll buy a second and third RBT. Should this all shake out well and the FRT remain legal as it should - I'm going to make a dedicated semi MG42 and RPD to use them. Probably a DPM as well. My FRT Sten is almost done. I'll even do the work and redesign each around using an AR FCG as-is. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/21/2021 2:28:54 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Considering the law definitively states "function" of the trigger, but the AFT deliberately used "pull/function" every time they mentioned it in their test report, I think they may anger a few judges before the case even begins. I can't imagine any judge takes kindly to someone thinking they are smarter than the judge, and that the judge is that ignorant and gullible. Trying to pull a fast one in court by adding creative words to the law might not go the way the AFT thinks it will. Judges aren't stupid (most, anyway), and are capable of reading the verbiage of the law for themselves. Trying to add words that aren't there might just get their dander up. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: I'm not a lawyer, but based on my reading of the docs, it's all going to come down to how a "single function of the trigger" is defined and interpreted by the court for this case. ATF seems to indirectly acknowledge that if you use a literal definition of that phrase, then this is not a MG because every time they mention the phrase, they deliberately include this language that shows how they and courts have allowed for an expanded meaning of that rather than the literal meaning: https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/42132/Screen_Shot_2021-08-20_at_9_37_28_AM_png-2059578.JPG The former ATF employees opinions that Kevin Maxwell (who is an attorney himself, apparently) provided appear to only go by the literal meaning of the "single function of the trigger" and are not using ATF's 'expanded' meaning like the above - so naturally, they come to a different conclusion and determine that it doesn't meet the definition of a MG. Bottom line is that I think that the lynchpin here will be: How will a court in this case interpret the meaning of that one phrase "single function of the trigger"? Considering the law definitively states "function" of the trigger, but the AFT deliberately used "pull/function" every time they mentioned it in their test report, I think they may anger a few judges before the case even begins. I can't imagine any judge takes kindly to someone thinking they are smarter than the judge, and that the judge is that ignorant and gullible. Trying to pull a fast one in court by adding creative words to the law might not go the way the AFT thinks it will. Judges aren't stupid (most, anyway), and are capable of reading the verbiage of the law for themselves. Trying to add words that aren't there might just get their dander up. From 2018:  |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/21/2021 3:01:04 PM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: I'm not a lawyer, but based on my reading of the docs, it's all going to come down to how a "single function of the trigger" is defined and interpreted by the court for this case. ATF seems to indirectly acknowledge that if you use a literal definition of that phrase, then this is not a MG because every time they mention the phrase, they deliberately include this language that shows how they and courts have allowed for an expanded meaning of that rather than the literal meaning: https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/42132/Screen_Shot_2021-08-20_at_9_37_28_AM_png-2059578.JPG The former ATF employees opinions that Kevin Maxwell (who is an attorney himself, apparently) provided appear to only go by the literal meaning of the "single function of the trigger" and are not using ATF's 'expanded' meaning like the above - so naturally, they come to a different conclusion and determine that it doesn't meet the definition of a MG. Bottom line is that I think that the lynchpin here will be: How will a court in this case interpret the meaning of that one phrase "single function of the trigger"? Considering the law definitively states "function" of the trigger, but the AFT deliberately used "pull/function" every time they mentioned it in their test report, I think they may anger a few judges before the case even begins. I can't imagine any judge takes kindly to someone thinking they are smarter than the judge, and that the judge is that ignorant and gullible. Trying to pull a fast one in court by adding creative words to the law might not go the way the AFT thinks it will. Judges aren't stupid (most, anyway), and are capable of reading the verbiage of the law for themselves. Trying to add words that aren't there might just get their dander up. From 2018: https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/55482/ftb-2060798.jpg https://beldar.blogs.com/beldarblog/2017/10/2017-06-02%20FOMI's%20SJ%20brief.pdf That case submitted several other instances where the ATF tech branch had classified devices that move the operator’s finger forward as not machine guns. The ATF interprets the statute in whatever way is convenient for them at the time. Also, I’m not a lawyer, but it looks like Freedom Ordnance Mfg submitted a sample to the ATF for classification and then tried to contest their classification. The judge then deferred to the ATF and dismissed Freedom Ordnance’s claim. Rare Breed didn’t make that mistake. I’m not saying they won’t lose, but the situation isn’t hopeless. ETA: More info about that case: https://beldar.blogs.com/beldarblog/2017/10/2017-08-31%20FOMI's%20SJ%20response%20%26%20reply.pdf |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/21/2021 6:07:22 PM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted: If Rare Breed manages to win the case, I will buy their products for having balls to fight back against AFT. Should have bought one to support the fight now. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/22/2021 12:58:55 AM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted: https://beldar.blogs.com/beldarblog/2017/10/2017-06-02%20FOMI's%20SJ%20brief.pdf That case submitted several other instances where the ATF tech branch had classified devices that move the operator's finger forward as not machine guns. The ATF interprets the statute in whatever way is convenient for them at the time. Also, I'm not a lawyer, but it looks like Freedom Ordnance Mfg submitted a sample to the ATF for classification and then tried to contest their classification. The judge then deferred to the ATF and dismissed Freedom Ordnance's claim. Rare Breed didn't make that mistake. I'm not saying they won't lose, but the situation isn't hopeless. ETA: More info about that case: https://beldar.blogs.com/beldarblog/2017/10/2017-08-31%20FOMI's%20SJ%20response%20%26%20reply.pdf Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: I'm not a lawyer, but based on my reading of the docs, it's all going to come down to how a "single function of the trigger" is defined and interpreted by the court for this case. ATF seems to indirectly acknowledge that if you use a literal definition of that phrase, then this is not a MG because every time they mention the phrase, they deliberately include this language that shows how they and courts have allowed for an expanded meaning of that rather than the literal meaning: https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/42132/Screen_Shot_2021-08-20_at_9_37_28_AM_png-2059578.JPG The former ATF employees opinions that Kevin Maxwell (who is an attorney himself, apparently) provided appear to only go by the literal meaning of the "single function of the trigger" and are not using ATF's 'expanded' meaning like the above - so naturally, they come to a different conclusion and determine that it doesn't meet the definition of a MG. Bottom line is that I think that the lynchpin here will be: How will a court in this case interpret the meaning of that one phrase "single function of the trigger"? Considering the law definitively states "function" of the trigger, but the AFT deliberately used "pull/function" every time they mentioned it in their test report, I think they may anger a few judges before the case even begins. I can't imagine any judge takes kindly to someone thinking they are smarter than the judge, and that the judge is that ignorant and gullible. Trying to pull a fast one in court by adding creative words to the law might not go the way the AFT thinks it will. Judges aren't stupid (most, anyway), and are capable of reading the verbiage of the law for themselves. Trying to add words that aren't there might just get their dander up. From 2018: https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/55482/ftb-2060798.jpg https://beldar.blogs.com/beldarblog/2017/10/2017-06-02%20FOMI's%20SJ%20brief.pdf That case submitted several other instances where the ATF tech branch had classified devices that move the operator's finger forward as not machine guns. The ATF interprets the statute in whatever way is convenient for them at the time. Also, I'm not a lawyer, but it looks like Freedom Ordnance Mfg submitted a sample to the ATF for classification and then tried to contest their classification. The judge then deferred to the ATF and dismissed Freedom Ordnance's claim. Rare Breed didn't make that mistake. I'm not saying they won't lose, but the situation isn't hopeless. ETA: More info about that case: https://beldar.blogs.com/beldarblog/2017/10/2017-08-31%20FOMI's%20SJ%20response%20%26%20reply.pdf |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/22/2021 1:41:26 PM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Bumpstock companies didn't fight, and they certainly weren't prepared like this. Mr. Maxwell has been watching previous instances, and it is readily apparent that he has learned from the experience of others how the ATF operates-in detail-not just generalities about how they willy nilly change their minds and then back it with the weight of law. Learning is occurring, and it's a good thing. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Thanks, I do recall them being sold for 20% over the 'sticker price' when they were tougher to get. You made a great point. Far less than bump stocks though, these ftatf won't listen to a reasonable argument, just make shyt up along the way. Bumpstock companies didn't fight, and they certainly weren't prepared like this. Mr. Maxwell has been watching previous instances, and it is readily apparent that he has learned from the experience of others how the ATF operates-in detail-not just generalities about how they willy nilly change their minds and then back it with the weight of law. Learning is occurring, and it's a good thing. We had just elected a Republican President that talked up the 2nd Amendment non stop, that put together a 2nd Amendment Coalition headed by his pro gun son, and the House and Senate were held by the Republicans. Gun control was pretty much the last thing on our fucking minds.  |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/22/2021 2:24:16 PM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted: https://beldar.blogs.com/beldarblog/2017/10/2017-06-02%20FOMI's%20SJ%20brief.pdf That case submitted several other instances where the ATF tech branch had classified devices that move the operator's finger forward as not machine guns. The ATF interprets the statute in whatever way is convenient for them at the time. Also, I'm not a lawyer, but it looks like Freedom Ordnance Mfg submitted a sample to the ATF for classification and then tried to contest their classification. The judge then deferred to the ATF and dismissed Freedom Ordnance's claim. Rare Breed didn't make that mistake. I'm not saying they won't lose, but the situation isn't hopeless. ETA: More info about that case: https://beldar.blogs.com/beldarblog/2017/10/2017-08-31%20FOMI's%20SJ%20response%20%26%20reply.pdf Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: From 2018: https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/55482/ftb-2060798.jpg https://beldar.blogs.com/beldarblog/2017/10/2017-06-02%20FOMI's%20SJ%20brief.pdf That case submitted several other instances where the ATF tech branch had classified devices that move the operator's finger forward as not machine guns. The ATF interprets the statute in whatever way is convenient for them at the time. Also, I'm not a lawyer, but it looks like Freedom Ordnance Mfg submitted a sample to the ATF for classification and then tried to contest their classification. The judge then deferred to the ATF and dismissed Freedom Ordnance's claim. Rare Breed didn't make that mistake. I'm not saying they won't lose, but the situation isn't hopeless. ETA: More info about that case: https://beldar.blogs.com/beldarblog/2017/10/2017-08-31%20FOMI's%20SJ%20response%20%26%20reply.pdf Constant pressure, mechanical reset, multiple shots, no reloading. Any semi easily falls into that category, even non semi can.  Chiappa tripple threat bumpfire |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/22/2021 3:35:56 PM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted: This is the crux, if the courts don't stop AFT, they can\will change and apply it to more firearms. Constant pressure, mechanical reset, multiple shots, no reloading. Any semi easily falls into that category, even non semi can.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P1zzdB66G4sThat's "evidence" IMHO. RBT should be good to go. Oh! AND FAFT! |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/22/2021 4:04:52 PM EDT
[#35]
Is there any chance the entire thing gets thrown? If the Tampa office presents the letter initially served to Rare Breed as evidence, isn't the fact they had not yet done testing but said they did in a submitted document essentially lying to the court?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/22/2021 4:12:08 PM EDT
[#36]
I never wanted one of these things until now. I'm perfectly happy with my Geissele triggers.
But now I want to buy one and build a whole new gun for it. Just because. AFT might be the best gun salesman since Barack Obama. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/22/2021 4:12:55 PM EDT
[#37]
Since when did an alphabet agency lying to a court really matter???
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/22/2021 4:15:15 PM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Is there any chance the entire thing gets thrown? If the Tampa office presents the letter initially served to Rare Breed as evidence, isn't the fact they had not yet done testing but said they did in a submitted document essentially lying to the court? I doubt it. AFT will have their paperwork in order before they go to court. They have government funded lawyers and lots of experience taking companies to court over this kind of thing. Rare Breed will need to bring their best game, which it appears they are. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/22/2021 6:18:07 PM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I never wanted one of these things until now. I'm perfectly happy with my Geissele triggers. But now I want to buy one and build a whole new gun for it. Just because. AFT might be the best gun salesman since Barack Obama. FRT-15, D60 and Bipod is my "mini-lmg". It's stupid how fun it is. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/22/2021 7:15:10 PM EDT
[#40]
Very cool.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/22/2021 8:47:46 PM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted: FRT-15, D60 and Bipod is my "mini-lmg". It's stupid how fun it is. I’ve thought that the FRT-15 in a piston-driven rifle with a 16” CHF heavy barrel, FF tube w/ bipod, and a few beta mags would be an interesting LMG/SAW for the lowly peasants. A Fightlite MCR with an FRT-15 would be a fun combination. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/22/2021 9:43:34 PM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted: We had just elected a Republican President that talked up the 2nd Amendment non stop, that put together a 2nd Amendment Coalition headed by his pro gun son, and the House and Senate were held by the Republicans. Gun control was pretty much the last thing on our fucking minds. Maybe that was why, but it doesn't change the fact they weren't nearly as prepared. And if anyone is clueless enough to think that AFT is going to stop being AFT merely because they get a new boss for 4 years I don't know what to tell them. Their entire existence is an affront to the Constitution, and their whole mission is to fuck law abiding Americans. The deeply entrenched bureaucracy can afford to ride out an administration. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/23/2021 8:07:17 AM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I’ve thought that the FRT-15 in a piston-driven rifle with a 16” CHF heavy barrel, FF tube w/ bipod, and a few beta mags would be an interesting LMG/SAW for the lowly peasants. A Fightlite MCR with an FRT-15 would be a fun combination. The MCR would be AMAZING I just wish they were a bit cheaper. If RB ends up winning in court It would be on the future buy list. I mean who DOESNT want a belt fed? |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/23/2021 8:54:25 AM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The MCR would be AMAZING I just wish they were a bit cheaper. If RB ends up winning in court It would be on the future buy list. I mean who DOESNT want a belt fed? I agree. My buddy has one and it’s kickass. I passed on one in 2019 that I could have bought for $3,800, and I could kick myself now for not buying it. I’m watching gunbroker and elsewhere, and will likely buy one if I can get it under $5,500. I’m also planning on buying an M240SLR, which I hope to do by the end of the year. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/23/2021 12:05:43 PM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I’ve thought that the FRT in a piston-driven rifle with a 16” CHF heavy barrel, FF tube w/ bipod, and a few beta mags would be an interesting LMG/SAW for the lowly peasants. A Fightlite MCR with an FRT-15 would be a fun combination. When I got my FRT I felt the best way to put it to use would be to build a poor man's SAW. I originally thought the same thing as you, but after a good amount of research I decided to go a different route. When it comes to the Fightlite, I've heard you really have to coat the links in lube to get the MCR to run, which could be a hassle in a combat situation. In addition a replacement barrel, handle, and front sight will run another ~$1000. I also think if I ever need a weapon to fill the role of a SAW, we're probably looking at TEOTWAWKI where backup parts would be impossible to acquire. Then I started looking at piston uppers and the only one I could find that had a CHF and chrome lined barrel was the HK416 which as most of us know is pretty much unobtanium. In addition I watched the video below with the armorers at Battlefield Vegas and they pretty much said the HK416 is the only piston upper that is as reliable as a DI AR. With this info I opted to build my own and went with a 16" Noveske CHF with M249 spec chrome lined barrel, a V Seven Inconel gas tube, Colt BCG, and VLTOR MUR upper. I'm still debating on the handguard as I've got a PRI Carbon Fiber Handguard which I think will be good for the heat, but I'm skeptical that the resins in the handguard will survive. I also bought a dozen D-60s to run it off of. Once I get this upper built I'll probably build a second that is identical and plan to just swap uppers as a replacement for doing barrel swaps. What I am surprised at, and hope with all of these FRT's hitting the market will change, is that I couldn't find anyone that makes a super heavy duty AR or upper designed around high rates of fire. This makes sense because most ARs aren't expected to be ran like a SAW or LMG. I think if a manufacturer came out with a 16-18" upper with a heavy profile, CHF, M249 spec chrome lined barrel with a reliable piston or an Inconel gas tube and sold it as such they could make a killing.  Battlefield Vegas Visit & Extreme Round Count Failure Points (AR-15, AK-47s, 1911s, Glocks....) (HD) |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/23/2021 12:15:07 PM EDT
[#46]
@robotears
Sig516 is Piston/Chrome lined Most of them didn't have a FA carrier though Under $1k if you find it  Gets hot as the sun, high temp/burn proof can cover didn't really burn, but it was smoking like it was on fire Sandman K was fine though
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/23/2021 12:26:40 PM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted: @robotears Sig516 is Piston/Chrome lined Most of them didn't have a FA carrier though Under $1k if you find it https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/490290/20210624_151935-1990532.jpg Gets hot as the sun, high temp/burn proof can cover didn't really burn, but it was smoking like it was on fire Sandman K was fine though That is very good info, I didn't even think to look at Sig. Just did a little research and supposedly the LWRC FA BCGs work in it too. I've got a couple of LWRCs so adding that to the mix wouldn't be too big of a deal when it comes to parts commonality. The only other gun that I saw that had Piston and Chrome lined was the LMT MARS. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/23/2021 4:02:05 PM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted: That is very good info, I didn't even think to look at Sig. Just did a little research and supposedly the LWRC FA BCGs work in it too. I've got a couple of LWRCs so adding that to the mix wouldn't be too big of a deal when it comes to parts commonality. The only other gun that I saw that had Piston and Chrome lined was the LMT MARS. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: @robotears Sig516 is Piston/Chrome lined Most of them didn't have a FA carrier though Under $1k if you find it https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/490290/20210624_151935-1990532.jpg Gets hot as the sun, high temp/burn proof can cover didn't really burn, but it was smoking like it was on fire Sandman K was fine though That is very good info, I didn't even think to look at Sig. Just did a little research and supposedly the LWRC FA BCGs work in it too. I've got a couple of LWRCs so adding that to the mix wouldn't be too big of a deal when it comes to parts commonality. The only other gun that I saw that had Piston and Chrome lined was the LMT MARS. I have a LMT piston AR. Bought it as a complete rifle. Carrier tilt appears to be an issue, since I have some small gouges in the upper after a thousand or so rounds. I’m not sure how bad it would get. LMT said it’s self limiting, and they eventually settle down. I haven’t run enough rounds through the gun to validate that. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/23/2021 4:06:22 PM EDT
[#49]
What about a T-91for your poormans SAW?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/23/2021 4:08:16 PM EDT
[#50]
ProTip: This thread is about FRT Triggers and the AFT.
Thank you. |
|
|
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.
Attached File