FRTs in Florida? (Page 2 of 3)
|
Originally Posted By Milspec99: It's not RareBreed it's a different company manufacturing a FRT for a specific platform. Originally Posted By Milspec99: Originally Posted By Makarov: I IRC, RareBreed is NOW operating out of Texas or Utah or someplace out west. It's not RareBreed it's a different company manufacturing a FRT for a specific platform. According to the legit RareBreed website, they are located in Wichita Falls, Texas. https://rarebreedtriggers.com/ |
Life is short. If you are waiting for “someday”, it’s here!
|
Originally Posted By Makarov: According to the legit RareBreed website, they are located in Wichita Falls, Texas. https://rarebreedtriggers.com/ This has nothing to do with RareBreed. |
|
Originally Posted By Milspec99: This has nothing to do with RareBreed. Originally Posted By Milspec99: Originally Posted By Makarov: According to the legit RareBreed website, they are located in Wichita Falls, Texas. https://rarebreedtriggers.com/ This has nothing to do with RareBreed. Sorry, I read your original post wrong 
|
Life is short. If you are waiting for “someday”, it’s here!
|
I'm not a lawyer and I'm just throwing this out there, but I would think that manufacturing by a corporation for sale elsewhere would not constitute personal possession. Corporations are run by people but fall under different laws as they are not people or sole proprietorships. |
|
Originally Posted By SystemFailCoreDump: I'm not a lawyer and I'm just throwing this out there, but I would think that manufacturing by a corporation for sale elsewhere would not constitute personal possession. Corporations are run by people but fall under different laws as they are not people or sole proprietorships. In theory that would make sense. However, I saw a video with Shark Coast Tactical and their attorney. They asked him if they could posses FRTs in the shop and sell them exclusively out of state. The attorney advised against it. So I'm thinking whether you manufacture them or not you probably should not posses them as an FFL or SOT. Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to be an S**t bag and out the guy. He's promoting it everywhere. I honestly really want to buy one but obviously that's a no go for us mere mortals. Just trying to figure out how he is able to wiggle through and do this. |
|
I think test cases will becoming along. Glock switches and the printed polymer inserts for AR semi fire control groups are pretty popular in the underworld right now. Typically recovered on search warrants or other searches along with dope and felons. While possibly a good FED case I'd suspect many of these are gonna fall into state court and the bump stock law may be applied to some of them. The test case isnt gonna be a gun hobbyist or you tuber. Its gonna be a convicted felon popped on a traffic stop with MDMA, fentanyl, and a bag of printed auto sears.... I didnt think the AG would render opinions to non government entities. Interesting if they give you something. |
|
Originally Posted By deputygadget: I think test cases will becoming along. Glock switches and the printed polymer inserts for AR semi fire control groups are pretty popular in the underworld right now. Typically recovered on search warrants or other searches along with dope and felons. While possibly a good FED case I'd suspect many of these are gonna fall into state court and the bump stock law may be applied to some of them. The test case isnt gonna be a gun hobbyist or you tuber. Its gonna be a convicted felon popped on a traffic stop with MDMA, fentanyl, and a bag of printed auto sears.... I didnt think the AG would render opinions to non government entities. Interesting if they give you something. It is such a poorly worded, vaguely written broad law I’d like to think it wouldn’t pass any sort of constitutional muster. It would be nice to have a seemingly pro-2a FL AG put out some sort of guidance on the law. Rare breed will ship to Florida, I’ve seen opinions where people say it’s legal. I’ve seen popular Florida based YouTube channels feature them in what appears to be Florida, yet 99.9% of us (including me) aren’t willing to risk being a test case. It’s wild to me that what seems to be a blatantly unconstitutional law has the effect of freezing the populace in exercising their rights out of fear of potential legal troubles. |
|
Guy just got arrested for possession of an FRT in Tallahassee. It didn't make the news. Glock with a Freedom FRT trigger in it. No other associated charges and the guy has zero criminal history of any kind. Also it was a warrant approved by the SAO and judge, not an on view arrest. Don't be fucking stupid and be that guy. Attached File |
|
Originally Posted By TheJudgeHolden: Guy just got arrested for possession of an FRT in Tallahassee. It didn't make the news. Glock with a Freedom FRT trigger in it. No other associated charges and the guy has zero criminal history of any kind. Also it was a warrant approved by the SAO and judge, not an on view arrest. Don't be fucking stupid and be that guy. https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/381243/1000011373_png-3698671.JPG Fuck 
|
Life is short. If you are waiting for “someday”, it’s here!
|
Originally Posted By Makarov: According to the legit RareBreed website, they are located in Wichita Falls, Texas. https://rarebreedtriggers.com/ but I digress |
"the moment you think you got it figured you're wrong"
|
Originally Posted By TheJudgeHolden: Guy just got arrested for possession of an FRT in Tallahassee. It didn't make the news. Glock with a Freedom FRT trigger in it. No other associated charges and the guy has zero criminal history of any kind. Also it was a warrant approved by the SAO and judge, not an on view arrest. Don't be fucking stupid and be that guy. https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/381243/1000011373_png-3698671.JPG Test case/patient zero? |
|
Originally Posted By TheJudgeHolden: Guy just got arrested for possession of an FRT in Tallahassee. It didn't make the news. Glock with a Freedom FRT trigger in it. No other associated charges and the guy has zero criminal history of any kind. Also it was a warrant approved by the SAO and judge, not an on view arrest. Don't be fucking stupid and be that guy. https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/381243/1000011373_png-3698671.JPG Zero criminal history? Seems like a decent candidate to use to challenge this bullshit law. |
|
There was a girl in Sarasota county charged yesterday with 3 counts of possession & sale of a bumpstock. Perp |
Experience is what you get right after you need it.
Originally Posted By CplRick: The line of credit on the Race Card is maxed out, sorry.
Originally Posted By CplRick: The line of credit on the Race Card is maxed out, sorry.
|
Originally Posted By TheJudgeHolden: Guy just got arrested for possession of an FRT in Tallahassee. It didn't make the news. Glock with a Freedom FRT trigger in it. No other associated charges and the guy has zero criminal history of any kind. Also it was a warrant approved by the SAO and judge, not an on view arrest. Don't be fucking stupid and be that guy. https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/381243/1000011373_png-3698671.JPG I’m confused, how would the SAO know what this guy had if there were no police report to document it? 
|
Life is short. If you are waiting for “someday”, it’s here!
|
Originally Posted By Makarov: I'm confused, how would the SAO know what this guy had if there were no police report to document it? The cops got out with him, seized the gun and let him go. They didn't place him under arrest at the scene. Then they submitted a warrant later after the gun was examined by an armorer which was approved by the SAO and judge. I'm saying they didn't just hook him up on the side of the road right there. |
|
Originally Posted By CZRider: Hopefully a multi-front approach of finding and defending the most sympathetic victim of this shit law and pushing that House bill will get us out of this embarrassing mess. The guy arrested in Tallahassee might be a good candidate. No criminal history, arrested on a standalone charge under the ambiguous “bumpstock” ban. His skin tone might play well to any Liberals on a jury that would normally be inclined to automatically convict on ANY “gun” charge. The neck tats won’t help, though. I was trying to find more details to the story. What were the circumstances prompting the initial interaction with law enforcement? QUESTION, not a statement; Is this a case where the guy was otherwise legally target shooting and somebody dropped a dime because he was “shoot’n too fast”??? There was a case in Virginia where the range owner called ATF/D.C.-police over a 3D printed FRT. The guy was an idiot but the range CHOSE to escalate it instead of simply PNGing him. |
Life is short. If you are waiting for “someday”, it’s here!
|
So any test case to change the law is going to most likley require a conviction and post conviction legal wrangling. Maybe a trial judge could dismiss the charge but it wouldnt affect anyone outside that court. 96 to 99% of criminal cases in florida are disposed of pre-trial. It's a solid bet only a shitbag is gonna be a test case. If someone were to go to trial on this and they werent a shitbag a pre-trial offer no conviction would be offered for completion of a hunter safety course and court costs, or similar such shit, case dismissed move on... SAO gets a clearance and a win. The defendant would literally have to be retarded not to take that deal it happens everyday day in day out. Unless Miami fixed it for us at SHOT??? |
|
Originally Posted By Blanco_Diablo: Oh man that's exciting. Is there anything we can do to contribute to victory @Miami_JBT ? Here you go. Join Gun Owners of America |
|
So I'll take that as a "we got him to fast track one of these bump stock cases to the FLSC and then fail to defend it so the law goes away"? 
|
|
In my opinion a gun with an FRT from the start it would be legal under the current law. Because I'm certain I can match the rate of fire from an FRT by bump-firing with nothing more than my thumb and a beltloop. Thus you would not be modifying the gun, or increasing the rate of fire, at all. I think the 1st DCA would support this, given the State v. McDaniels (open carry) ruling. We've got Shark Coast Tactical, Spikes, Keltec, here...... shoot, maybe Knight's Armament will throw their hat in the ring :-) |
Never Forget Those Who Died.
Never Forget Those Who Killed Them.
Never Forget Those Who Killed Them.
|
Originally Posted By Miami_JBT: Good Originally Posted By Miami_JBT: Originally Posted By osprey21: Originally Posted By Miami_JBT: I had a meeting with AG Uthmeier at SHOT Show, FRTs were one of the topics of discussion. Any chance of elaborating on this? News on the horizon? |
|
Originally Posted By legion07: Any chance of elaborating on this? News on the horizon? Inquiring minds sure would like to know
|
The artist formerly known as Blanco_Diablo
What shall we then say to these things? If God be for us, who can be against us? - Romans 8:31
What shall we then say to these things? If God be for us, who can be against us? - Romans 8:31
|
So are FRT's banned outright? Or you just can not add one in because it changes the rate of fire? What if a manufacture - Say - PSA were to offer a AR-15 with a FRT in it from the factory...Would that be legal? Inquiring minds want to know.... Red |
B Double-O M Spells BOOM - BF
|
Originally Posted By badredfish: So are FRT's banned outright? Or you just can not add one in because it changes the rate of fire? What if a manufacture - Say - PSA were to offer a AR-15 with a FRT in it from the factory...Would that be legal? Inquiring minds want to know.... Red Some sites do sell ARs with the FRT, but they won't ship to states like FL. |
TBD
|
Originally Posted By badredfish: So are FRT's banned outright? Or you just can not add one in because it changes the rate of fire? What if a manufacture - Say - PSA were to offer a AR-15 with a FRT in it from the factory...Would that be legal? Inquiring minds want to know.... Red I thought about it but they'd probably make the scummy counter-argument that because it's not permanently installed the FRT would still count as a device since you could theoretically remove it from the kosher AR and corrupt some poor innocent semi-auto AR with its evil presence. Then they'd bump fire them both on semi and charge you for two bump stocks instead of one because they don't know or care about anything except hating gun owners anyway 
|
|
Originally Posted By Miami_JBT: Discussions behind the scenes are ongoing. That's all I can say at the moment. Originally Posted By Miami_JBT: Originally Posted By Blackbeard91: Inquiring minds sure would like to know |
I find life is more enjoyable since I've shunned politics.. y'all should try it.
|
Originally Posted By osprey21: 'nuff said - keep the pressure on 'em. Originally Posted By osprey21: Originally Posted By Miami_JBT: Originally Posted By Blackbeard91: Inquiring minds sure would like to know ditto. We cant be the Gunshine state and NOT have FRT. |
This video just popped up, on Minnesota's ban on binary triggers. How a Minnesota Court of Appeals Just Struck Down Their Binary Triger Ban If i understand correctly, the binary trigger ban was part of a larger omnibus firearms restrictions bill and the court struck down the part of the bill on binary triggers because Minnesota has a "single subject rule", meaning the legislature can't lump multiple subjects together in the same bill. I had never heard of the "single subject rule" or if there was such a thing in Florida, so I looked it up and according to google,... Yes, the Florida Legislature is bound by a single-subject rule. Article III, Section 6 of the Florida Constitution mandates that every law enacted by the legislature must embrace only one subject and matter properly connected to it, and that the subject must be briefly expressed in the title. This restriction is intended to prevent "logrolling," which is the practice of bundling multiple, potentially unpopular provisions into a single bill in order to gain wider support Seems like that's exactly what happened with Florida's "bump stock ban". The legislature banned bumpstocks and included forced reset triggers, binary triggers, manual hand crank devices, and everything else that could possibly be construed as being able to increase the rate of fire. Maybe the courts will be more help than the legislature in getting rid of Florida's absurd "bump stock ban" which clearly included more that just the single subject of bumpstocks. Of course, I don't depend on the court to save us, but it was the court that brought back open carry, no thanks to the worthless legislators. |
|
Originally Posted By FullOtto: This video just popped up, on Minnesota's ban on binary triggers.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b_pmHKmxmxkIf i understand correctly, the binary trigger ban was part of a larger omnibus firearms restrictions bill and the court struck down the part of the bill on binary triggers because Minnesota has a "single subject rule", meaning the legislature can't lump multiple subjects together in the same bill. I had never heard of the "single subject rule" or if there was such a thing in Florida, so I looked it up and according to google,... Seems like that's exactly what happened with Florida's "bump stock ban". The legislature banned bumpstocks and included forced reset triggers, binary triggers, manual hand crank devices, and everything else that could possibly be construed as being able to increase the rate of fire. Maybe the courts will be more help than the legislature in getting rid of Florida's absurd "bump stock ban" which clearly included more that just the single subject of bumpstocks. Of course, I don't depend on the court to save us, but it was the court that brought back open carry, no thanks to the worthless legislators. |
