ATF Issues Ruling

[Vance665 225]

Arm braces and ear plugs for me. I'm not participating in this bull shit.

[Spacehog 2,218]

Interestingly enough, not a single legal action filed to my knowledge to attempt to block this by the NRA, GOA, or any other group. Making / changing law by caveat without a congressional vote. Sure that's not unconstitutional.

[BigChongus 765]

Part of me wants to get another stamp on one of my other lowers really quick.

 

 

The other part of me is done giving the ATF a $200 donation just so they can turn around and fuck me.

[HB of CJ 1,263]

As far as the august NRA not fighting this, please understand that the NRA has not fought a lot of our stuff.  Respectfully.  But the excellent point is why did not the NRA immediately appeal or sue to shop this BATFE non Constitutional nonsense?  I will let each of of you NRA lovers stare in a mirror and answer that question yourselves.

 

Does the NRA turn a blind eye towards NFA stuff?  And if so, why?  Have they chosen to throw us under the NFA bus?  And if that is true, is it possible the NRA has and will throw lots of us Constitutional right exercisers, (the second amendment) under the wheels?  Just another zinger for self critical thinking on all of our parts.

 

Back on subject here, I for one am having trouble getting close friends and family interested enough to join their names to our PROPOSED NFA trust.  Nobody wants to do it.  I am not sure why.  Are they afraid?  They shoot my NFA stuff and sometimes pay for some ammo, but come up short on signing up on the trust people  Edit:  individuals, not people.  Why?

 

Time is getting tight.  Is there a clearing house web site that lists the advantages and disadvantages of a NFA trust membership or sign up person?

 

Linux Mint 17 spell check sucks.  All avenues explored.  I will leave the concealed weapon decision by the 9th for another fresh post.

 

Edited by HB:  w/w

Edited June 10, 2016 by HB of CJ

[XD45 7,124]

There are 4 bad options.

 

Pay the tax.

 

Use the brace with the risk of a federal felony if you touch it to your shoulder.

 

Ignore the unconstitutional law and use a stock with a barrel under 16".

 

Use only 16" and longer barrels.

[XD45 7,124]

My point in resurrecting this thread was a reminder of the deadline.

July 13.
.

Edited June 10, 2016 by Darth Saigus

[HB of CJ 1,263]

Thank You Darth.  One of my buddies uses one of my short barreled suppressed toys to eliminate garden pests.  He does this quite often.  But he does not want to sign up for the NFA trust.  I believe it is time to MAKE him decide.  Legal borrowing of the toys means he MUST be on the trust.  I am getting tired of standing there letting HIM use the NFA toys to shoot the garden varmints.

[Vance665 225]

There are 4 bad options.

 

Pay the tax.

 

Use the brace with the risk of a federal felony if you touch it to your shoulder.

 

Ignore the unconstitutional law and use a stock with a barrel under 16".

 

Use only 16" and longer barrels.

I don't shoot topless so I'm good to go right?

 

This isn't even an issue. No one will ever be prosecuted for shooting a braced pistol off their shoulder. The ATFs opinion is only there to scare the weak. I'll continue to shoot my pistols however I see fit without the slightest fear in my body.

Edited June 10, 2016 by Vance665

[XD45 7,124]

If you're not scared then why bother to call it a pistol and use the bullshit brace instead of a real stock?  Why not build yourself a few machine guns and half a dozen silencers?

 

Because it's not fear.  It's a simple decision we each make about what laws we will or won't follow.  We all change our behavior to one degree or another based on the unconstitutional laws.

 

Do what you want.  Nobody here cares if you touch your shoulder or not.

 

Just like nobody here cares whether I pay the tax or not.

 

The point of this is to let people know that choose to pay the tax.

 

Feel free to simply ignore it since that doesn't apply to you.

[Vance665 225]

Theres a difference. There are laws against building SBRs. There is no law against shouldering a pistol, just some douches opinion. There have been people sent to prison for violating NFA laws. No one will ever go to prison just for shouldering a braced pistol. Its a bullshit scare tactic.

[gunfun 3,931]

Half agree. ATF opinion does not carry the weight of law. It just can no longer be relied upon to support a defense automatically. Now they would still have the burden of proving that you violated the statute, which would subject their opinion or yours to a Judge's ruling. That ruling is law, and would trump any ATF opinions. IMO ATF doesn't want to risk it, because they've been trying to sit on both sides of so many fences. Once they get committed to a few stances, we can work around them and they have to take it. They have more power when the law might be anything.

[poolingmyignorance 2,191]

Half agree. ATF opinion does not carry the weight of law. It just can no longer be relied upon to support a defense automatically. Now they would still have the burden of proving that you violated the statute, which would subject their opinion or yours to a Judge's ruling. That ruling is law, and would trump any ATF opinions. IMO ATF doesn't want to risk it, because they've been trying to sit on both sides of so many fences. Once they get committed to a few stances, we can work around them and they have to take it. They have more power when the law might be anything.

They'll just attempt to cherry pick cases

Dropping charges on anybody they cannot get to accept pleas deal. Should they ever make the move.

[gunfun 3,931]

That creates a circuit split. Also grounds for an ultra vires attack, which they have real cause to fear.

[patriot 7,197]

What is this ATF you're all on about?  Reading the thread, you MUST be discussing the BATFE. They're NOT a 3 letter agency. It REALLY PISSES THEM OFF that they're NOT a 3 letter agency.  JBTs mostly.

[gunfun 3,931]

They aren't worth the effort of typing more letters. Relax. That's not an important thing to get upset about.

[HB of CJ 1,263]

Keeping this train on the tracks, then I see the coming July deadline two ways.  First is that after the deadline, NFA trusts get different and harder?  All new trust members, (people) after that date must be x rayed, fingerprinted, micro fluxed back ground checked and shot peened?

 

Also after that date, individuals doing the nfa tax stamp thing might find it easier since a local law enforcement sign off is not longer necessary?  Is this stuff correct?  Harder for the trust for easier for the individual?  Where can one learn up more on NFA trusts before and after the date?

[gunfun 3,931]

Part harder and part easier.

it's harder to get people on to the trust in a way that they can be able to use the items without you present. You have to get them printed passport photoed and fill out the background forms. 

 

However, this is somewhat offset by speed once they are set up. 

 

All the combination Trustee-Beneficiaries can be printed once and done, with the prints stored electronically. This makes subsequent purchases to the trust faster and easier.

[mancat 2,368]

Interestingly enough, not a single legal action filed to my knowledge to attempt to block this by the NRA, GOA, or any other group. Making / changing law by caveat without a congressional vote. Sure that's not unconstitutional.

 

If you follow some of the threads over on arfcom, there is rumored collusion between NFATCA and the ATF - possible involvement of NRA and other 2A groups, as some of the NFATCA guys are also big NRA donors - unfortunately that does not mean that they think you and I should get to have all of the cool toys that they get to have..

 

Boiling down the thread(s), the NFA Trade & Collectors Association is rumored to be behind a lot of the recent ATF rulings - basically NFATCA saw that there was a possibility that the ATF loosening the process (eForms, etc.) requirements for NFA acquisition could lead to their investments somehow devaluing by simple virtue of more people owning NFA toys. NFATCA was also shitting their pants over recent cases like Hollis vs. Holder that threatened to re-open the MG registry, which would most certainly make most NFATCA members' investments crash through the ground overnight - these are guys with literally millions invested in NFA toys.

 

It's even rumored that the head of NFATCA, who is a former ATF inspector, is actually still "employed" by the ATF and is directly involved in the rulemaking process, despite no longer being an ATF employee.

 

A pro-2A lawyer over at arfcom (NoloContendre) is behind a lot of these lawsuits against the ATF (including Hollis vs. Holder) and is now filing FOIA requests to find out how the NFATCA is involved in all of this - unfortunately he is being stonewalled by history's most transparent administration, and he has to sue the ATF just to get them to apply with FOIA requests - which does not even mean that he necessarily receives useful data, but simply that he has to sue the agency to get them to even respond to requests at all whatsoever.

 

The biggest bombshell that would likely NEVER be revealed by these FOIA requests? The attorneys involved in these lawsuits have allegedly seen more than one mention of post-86 MGs being approved for individuals, which is basically 100% illegal. The approvals generally appear linked to large political donors and possibly even several politicians themselves. One of the biggest names rumored to have been issued post-86 MG stamps is none other than Charles Schumer.

 

Fun reading:  http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_1_5/1865927_.html

Edited June 28, 2016 by mancat