Dump the Trump Bump Ban?

BreechFace said:
If this gets traction this could set precedence over braces I would think as well. The ATF has many approval letters out there stating the brace and shouldering said brace doesn’t change a pistol into an SBR.
Click to expand...

And 80% pistols, as the behavior at issue in Cargill is exactly what ATF did there as well. Multiple letters confirming status, then a reversal based on politics. A regulatory agency taking over the role of making policy, rather than enforcing.
 
I think the case will go to SCOTUS because there are two circuit court ruling upholding the ban and now one striking it down. Only SCOTUS can resolve the differing opinions.
 
Congress has used "deference," a term that transfers the power of assumed law over to another agency that they feel is more qualified to make proper decisions about a topic.
In this case, they gave that power to the ATF and the ATF went bonkers with their newly found authority with little regard to our constitution.
It would be nice if the supreme court gave them a severe wake up call.
 
From the link in the OP

He now challenges the legality of that regulation, arguing that a bump stock does not fall within the definition of “machinegun” as set forth in federal law, and thus that ATF lacked the authority to issue a regulation purporting to define the term as such.
Click to expand...

“He” would be right.

For the purposes of the National Firearms Act the term Machinegun means:

  • Any weapon which shoots, is designed to shoot, or can be readily restored to shoot, automatically more than one shot without manual reloading, by a single function of the trigger
Click to expand...

https://www.atf.gov/firearms/firear...-firearms-national-firearms-act-definitions-0

There is nothing in there about rate of fire, it’s about action or lack there of for subsequent shots. Why the springs in the Akins accelerator, AW-SIM and the like became a no go and the Slidefire was allowed.


GEM said:
A blow to a major part of his legacy!
Click to expand...

He should be so lucky, probably the worst precedent a President has ever set, from a 2A standpoint. It could really be extended to all self loading firearms as they can all be bump fired without a cheap plastic stock.
 
Last edited:
I'm just amazed how the ATF can unilaterally within the span of a couple of months ban something make felons out of some people, and destroy businesses, but it takes several years to have their clear overreach corrected. The damage is done at that point with no compensation for those jailed, put out of business, lost money and property, etc.
 
dweis said:
I think the case will go to SCOTUS because there are two circuit court ruling upholding the ban and now one striking it down. Only SCOTUS can resolve the differing opinions.
Click to expand...

In this case it was the full Appellate court that voted it down after a three judge panel of the court of Appeals upheld the ban.

Circuit courts appeal to the Court of Appeals so the next step would be SCOTUS.

I assume that the Administration will appeal to the SCOTUS, but it would be more practical to simply leave this at the Appellate and be done.

Could SCOTUS refuse to hear it? I don't know, but without them hearing it the bumpstock ban could be done.
 
There's a subtle issue lurking here, too. ATFE has been in the habit of issuing "letters" which wind up having a presumption of having the Force of Law.
Which violates APA rather starkly.
Laws, and their enforcement, cannot be based on bureaucratic whim.

That this will likely kibosh the braces, and the "80%" situation is very likely--but, that's mere opinion on my part. The latest kerfuffle on Polymer 80s can be summarized as a one page "clarification" of the multipage 'definition' created out of just part of one sentence in 18 USC 922. (And is mostly a screed declaring that AFTE thinks Polymer80 and SureFire are Bad! Bad!)
 
Styx said:
I'm just amazed how the ATF can unilaterally within the span of a couple of months ban something make felons out of some people, and destroy businesses, but it takes several years to have their clear overreach corrected. The damage is done at that point with no compensation for those jailed, put out of business, lost money and property, etc.
Click to expand...

I’m just amazed at the number of people that want the .gov even more powerful with even less oversight…
 
lilguy said:
The ban was not found unconstitutional, just that ATF went off the track with regulation. Fed and state legislatures are still free to ban them and then a high court can decide if it’s passes the test.
Click to expand...
Yes, the issue is with the ATF basically creating criminal laws that bypass state legislatures and Congress. They've gotten into the habit of using mental gymnastics to "interpret" and spin the simple plain text of the law into meaning what they want it to mean. They have a predetermined result they want to reach, and they then go about connecting dots and "reinterpreting" the law until they get to where they wanted to be all along.

No debate, no votes, no oversight, and no bills to read so we know the exact text of the law long before it becomes law. We just wake up one day when they finally decide to publish their "interpretations" and in the span of one day what was previously legal is now a felon. For example, we won't know what's exactly in the pistol braces reinterpretation until the day of. Then manufacturers, vendors, LGS, and everyone else will be left scrambling to comply.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

LiveLife
ATF pistol brace rule lawsuits
2 3 4 5
Replies
123
Views
8K
LiveLife
LiveLife
Cavalier Knight
  • Locked
Cheney Joins Congress In Opposing D.C. Gun Ban
Replies
18
Views
966
SWMAN
S
dogtown tom
  • Locked
Bump stocks are not machine guns, despite what Trump believes
Replies
2
Views
382
Robert
Robert
S
  • Locked
Constitutional protections? BWAHAHAHAHA!
2
Replies
38
Views
1K
ArmedBear
A
M
  • Locked
Justices uphold concealed gun ban
Replies
1
Views
301
Standing Wolf
S
Back
Top