signal_4 Posted August 28, 2024 Report Share Posted August 28, 2024 (edited) hopefully Christmas comes early !! Edited August 28, 2024 by signal_4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
APEXgunparts Posted August 28, 2024 Report Share Posted August 28, 2024 Looks like click bait. There is decades of US Federal court rulings stating that NFA firearms / items are not protected by the second amendment. One district court ruling won't overturn all that precedent. Richard Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Got Uzi Posted August 29, 2024 Report Share Posted August 29, 2024 Not to mention that one court ruling won’t overturn legislation passed in 1934, 1968, and 1986…..it would and will take an act of Congress to overturn the Hughes Amendment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
timkel Posted August 29, 2024 Report Share Posted August 29, 2024 The pieces are moving closer to reopen the registry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Got Uzi Posted August 29, 2024 Report Share Posted August 29, 2024 Ain’t gonna happen….whatll happen is people will realize civilians can own MG’s and call for an out right ban/collection of them and then we have nothing….dont think it could happen? Don’t think the US Gov’t wouldn’t confiscate privately owned property? Look of FDR and the gold confiscation situation where it was literally illegal for civilians to own gold….don’t think something like that can’t or won’t happen again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1gewehr Posted August 29, 2024 Report Share Posted August 29, 2024 This is not the first time that lower courts have ruled against the NFA. Each time, it has always been over-ruled by a higher court, or in some cases, just ignored. Sylvia Daniels won in court on those grounds initially, but a higher court reversed the decision. Likewise, I can't remember the name, but a well-known NFA dealer who specialized in MP% conversion prior to 1986 had a similar case IIRC. The Feds have a choice here. They can contest it, with a chance of losing the whole NFA in a higher court. Or, they can ignore it and it has no impact on anyone other than the defendant unless other courts rule the same way. My bet is that they will not prosecute for MG possession unless they are certain that the court will agree with them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colt21a Posted August 29, 2024 Report Share Posted August 29, 2024 FRED VOLLMER. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rekraps Posted August 29, 2024 Report Share Posted August 29, 2024 6 hours ago, Got Uzi said: Ain’t gonna happen….whatll happen is people will realize civilians can own MG’s and call for an out right ban/collection of them and then we have nothing….dont think it could happen? Don’t think the US Gov’t wouldn’t confiscate privately owned property? Look of FDR and the gold confiscation situation where it was literally illegal for civilians to own gold….don’t think something like that can’t or won’t happen again. I hate FDR for doing that! I remember the day when we found out and everyone had to take their stashes down the to the Bank and get a measly $35 per ounce. What a great investment by the government. UHG. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
signal_4 Posted August 29, 2024 Author Report Share Posted August 29, 2024 Here’s a second video that came out last night. It is definitely worth the watch. these people are out of Houston Texas 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
signal_4 Posted February 7 Author Report Share Posted February 7 A 2nd Federal court has made the same ruling Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
timkel Posted February 7 Report Share Posted February 7 Time to open the registry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1gewehr Posted February 7 Report Share Posted February 7 These lower court rulings only apply to the individual named in the case. For it to have wider application, the DOJ would have to appeal to District Court and have it upheld there. Then, it only applies to that District unless DOJ appeals to the Supreme Court. Only then would it have national application. And, even with our new DOJ, I doubt that we will see that sequence of events. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
signal_4 Posted February 7 Author Report Share Posted February 7 (edited) 26 minutes ago, 1gewehr said: These lower court rulings only apply to the individual named in the case. For it to have wider application, the DOJ would have to appeal to District Court and have it upheld there. Then, it only applies to that District unless DOJ appeals to the Supreme Court. Only then would it have national application. And, even with our new DOJ, I doubt that we will see that sequence of events. Didn’t The 5th circuit out of Texas do a national injunction on the pistol brace. Also in this court ruling many important highlights were made by the court ex. that MG can no longer be considered unusual and a few other important highlights. The video does a great job breaking it down. These ruling might not matter anyway depending on the new ATF director. Seems Brandon Herrera is seriously up for consideration !!!!! Edited February 7 by signal_4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Got Uzi Posted February 7 Report Share Posted February 7 Again it’s an act of Congress not the ATF on this people….so until you get people in line with that, doesn’t matter what loud mouth showboat jack@SS is being considered for head of the ATF….it won’t mean a damn thing….ATF didn’t create and pass the Hughes amendment….so unless you can get the courts to completely throw out or overturn a law that’s been on the books for nearly 39 years, I highly doubt anything will happen here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeRanger Posted February 7 Report Share Posted February 7 ..And the new USAG Pam Bondi is not especially gun-friendly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
signal_4 Posted February 7 Author Report Share Posted February 7 (edited) 1 hour ago, Got Uzi said: Again it’s an act of Congress not the ATF on this people….so until you get people in line with that, doesn’t matter what loud mouth showboat jack@SS is being considered for head of the ATF….it won’t mean a damn thing….ATF didn’t create and pass the Hughes amendment….so unless you can get the courts to completely throw out or overturn a law that’s been on the books for nearly 39 years, I highly doubt anything will happen here. All it takes is the right ATF director to open an Amnesty period. Roe vs Wade was on the books for a long time and was overturned. Edited February 7 by signal_4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Got Uzi Posted February 8 Report Share Posted February 8 An amnesty is one thing, but throwing open the books to new “mill and drill” is something totally different. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeRanger Posted February 8 Report Share Posted February 8 And the ATF Director tajes his orders from the AG. And don't count on Trump to overrule her; he got your vote, he doesn't need you any longer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
signal_4 Posted February 8 Author Report Share Posted February 8 (edited) 11 minutes ago, StrangeRanger said: And the ATF Director tajes his orders from the AG. And don't count on Trump to overrule her; he got your vote, he doesn't need you any longer. Oh did you see what Trump and the AG did today regarding the 2A and the agencies, ATF included, through the new executive orders ? https://www.tampafp.com/trump-signs-executive-order-to-protect-second-amendment-rights/ Edited February 8 by signal_4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeRanger Posted February 8 Report Share Posted February 8 (edited) He's rescinding everything that Biden did and only what Biden did. That's revenge on Biden disguised as protecting the Second Amendment. Edited February 8 by StrangeRanger Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now