Elkins45
Member
I can’t say I know a single person that thought that.
Go visit the political section of Cast Boolits if you would like to meet some. Free Kool-Aid!
I can’t say I know a single person that thought that.
Take the guns first. Go through due process second.
— President Trump
It's gong to be used as precedent for the next president to ban semiautomatics like the AR-15 by a change in regulations. Mark my words. This is especially true if the plans for an AWB are blocked by the filibuster in the Senate.
You can mill and drill an AR-15 lower receiver to accept a regular auto sear in much less than the "8 hours in a well-equipped machine shop" that was referenced in at least one court case. Not to mention improvised solutions such as DIASes, Lightning Links, or the simple removal of the disconnector to allow sporadic hammer follow-down automatic fire.All that would have to be done is to re-interperate the term "readily restored to shoot," WRT to machine guns, to encompass the capacity to accept a lightning link.
The Guedes case has been dismissed by a judge. Details to follow, but the judge says they failed to prove their case.
https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/5750747-BumpStockRuling.html
Edit: Looks like the Judge applied Chevron Deference. IIRC, there is a case before scotus about the bounds of Chevron and Auer deference...
The district court's reliance on Chevron is inexplicable. After the decision was issued by the district cout, these Appellees, in separate cases in other jurisdictions, filed Notices of SUpplemental Authority which invoke the Supreme Court's decision in United States v. Apel, 571 U.S. 359 (2014) and state "Defendants have not contended that the deference afforded under Chevron v. Nat. Res. Def. Council, 467 U.S. 837 (1984) applies in this action. See Apel, 571 U.S. at 369 (the Supreme Court has "never held that the Government's reading of a criminal statute is entitled to any deference")." In the Appellees' Opposition, "deference" is found only twice, and Chevron is not even given a passing mention. Both instances are in the criminal law context where the agency is not entitled to deference. In any event, the district court held that the ATF definition of machinegun was entitled to Chevron deference because the terms included in the definition of machinegun were themselves ambiguous.
Indeed, if the terms are ambiguous, then that ambiguity opens up these provisions to serious attack for vagueness under the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment. See Sessions v. Dimaya, 138 S.Ct. 1204, 1212 (2018) ("the prohibition of vagueness in criminal statutes...is 'essential' of due process, required by both 'ordinary notions of fair play and the settled rules of law.'") quoting Johnson v. United States 135 S. Ct. 2551, 2557 (2015). This is, no doubt, the reason that the government has never claimed that the provisions are ambiguous.
I can easily see a President Biden, for example, ordering the ATF to issue new regulations "correcting" its interpretation to comport with the GCA '68. Millions of AR's would become contraband, with no compensation and no way to legalize them under the NFA. And it wouldn't stop with AR's, but the same rationale could apply to many other semiautomatics.
Ironically, something like H.R. 1263, by explicitly bringing semiautos under the NFA in their own category, would provide a safe haven from this kind of overreaching interpretation.Any other semiautomatic. If the ability to bump fire makes a semiauto a machine gun, that is all semiautos. Sliding plastic stock or not.
Any other semiautomatic. If the ability to bump fire makes a semiauto a machine gun, that is all semiautos. Sliding plastic stock or not.
The NRA has become nothing more than a super PAC for the GOP. The GOP had 2 years of total control and didn't repeal a single gun regulation and the NRA didn't call them on it. They didn’t even vote on the bill to take suppressors off of the NFA. Pathetic.
Nothing pro-gun was done even administratively, such as removing the ban on importation of barrels in parts kits. Trump could have done it with a stroke of a pen.I must have missed it when the GOP had 60 seats in the Senate.
Not at all surprising.Today SCOTUS ruled in favor of the bump stock ban:
On the other hand, I bet you haven't seen any at public ranges, either.Bump stocks have been illegal in Florida since last July IIRC and I have not seen one story on folks turning in or being prosecuted for bump stock possession.
Nothing pro-gun was done even administratively,
The GOP had 2 years of total control and didn't repeal a single gun regulation and the NRA didn't call them on it. They didn’t even vote on the bill to take suppressors off of the NFA. Pathetic.
I must have missed it when the GOP had 60 seats in the Senate.
Nothing pro-gun was done even administratively
That’s SOP for the GOP.