[syntaxerrorsix]

Bull pups FTW.

If you like that kind of trigger, sure. I've hemmed and hawed on something ambidextrous.

 

[Namvet146]

"Calm Down, the ATF Has Not Ruled That Your AR or AK Pistol is an NFA Regulated Item"

https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/c...our-ar-or-ak-pistol-is-an-nfa-regulated-item/

Ditto.

 

[G19Gilly]

This is an interesting turn that I didn't expect, personally, and I've given it a lot of thought over the past few years. What I expected was simply a ruling that "if you have a brace, you've created a SBR and must thus register it as NFA". For the common AR pistol, all this means is "remove the brace and leave the buffer tube", which I could live with. But to say that these pistols are not pistols is ridiculous. Have you ever held a Sig MPX Copperhead? I haven't weighed them, but my guess is that it's no heavier than a 50AE Desert Eagle, which no one would argue is not a handgun.

 

[G19Gilly]

I just looked it up. The Desert Eagle Mark XIX weighs 4.5 lbs empty. The Sig Copperhead weighs 4.5 lbs empty AND with the brace. Without the brace, the Copperhead weighs less than a Desert Eagle. It's a pistol with a 3.5" barrel.

 

[kahrcarrier]

As usual, gun owners turn on each other.

 

[quantico]

You can agree or disagree with it but you will pay a consequence if you want to test it. We would lose in SCOTUS over bump stocks IF congress passed a law on it as opposed to an EO or an administrative rule.
Remember Heller standard of in common use. Bump stocks aren’t in common use.

Ten different brands. Yes they are in common use. Sold tens of thousands of them at least

 

[walkinguf61]

These “ handguns” are illegal in my state so I don’t have a horse on this race. I hope they don’t make pistol braces illegal but I definitely see them changing the regulations on it such making it less able to use at the shoulder like a stock.

 

[1cm]

"Calm Down, the ATF Has Not Ruled That Your AR or AK Pistol is an NFA Regulated Item"

How did remaining calm work out for Bump Stock owners?

 

[walkinguf61]

Ten different brands. Yes they are in common use. Sold tens of thousands of them at least

Tens of thousands out of how many guns? We are having a hard enough time trying to convince the court the most popular rifle in America is in common use.
Convincing a court that they are in common use when they have only been on the market less than 10 years is a difficult sell compared to the number of firearms in America. Heck, just proving that AR pistols are common is going to be a tough sell.
I’m not telling you this out of joy but just explaining the reality of it.

 

[1cm]

Remember Heller standard of in common use. Bump stocks aren’t in common use.

That standard came from United States v. Miller, 307 U. S. 174, and was referenced in Heller.

 

[walkinguf61]

The good news on this the DACA ruling. It basically said they didn’t follow a procedure on rule changes therefore the change was constitutional. It applies to any future BATF ruling. There is also that case with the AG of Massachusetts changing the interpretation of the law being challenged. All should go in our favor .

 

[walkinguf61]

That standard came from United States v. Miller, 307 U. S. 174, and was referenced in Heller.

Please note that machine guns and SBRs are more common than bump stocks or pistol braces. They are not considered common use by the courts.
I think the successful challenge will be on how the rule/law was made rather than on the 2nd admendment.

 

[slackercruster]

That standard came from United States v. Miller, 307 U. S. 174, and was referenced in Heller.

The standard is just an opinion. Not set in concrete.

 

[slackercruster]

The good news on this the DACA ruling. It basically said they didn’t follow a procedure on rule changes therefore the change was constitutional. It applies to any future BATF ruling. There is also that case with the AG of Massachusetts changing the interpretation of the law being challenged. All should go in our favor .

So is MA behind this ****?

 

[walkinguf61]

So is MA behind this ****?

Yes and no. It’s not the AG of Massachusetts but it is someone in BATF out of the Boston office who is .

 

[1cm]

Please note that machine guns and SBRs are more common than bump stocks or pistol braces.

There are about 150K Machine Guns civilian hands after 100 years of making them, there were over 500K bumps stocks, and none were over 10 years old.

They are not considered common use by the courts.

No court has ruled such and if they did it would be irrelevant. Bump stocks are not banned. I legally have one. The current challenge in the 10th is about authority to change a Final Rule.

I think the successful challenge will be on how the rule/law was made rather than on the 2nd admendment.

Yup, that is what they are pursuing.

 

[MrGlock21]

Bull pups FTW.

For the time being. Eventually they'll go after bullpups too.
I m not worried now though.
Echo trigger is next.

 

[1bigK]

While I don’t support it, this day was both obvious and inevitable. When you bought these things you knew it was precarious (or you should have).

If this goes to the Supreme Court I can only hope it fixes the whole thing, i.e. removes SBRs and certain “pistols” from NFA. I couldn’t care less about keeping this loophole alive.

I agree with everything he said except that last sentence.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[1bigK]

I want NFA repealed, but I’m a Fudd? Face it.. You don’t like what you’re hearing but I say again, you knew, or should have known, that what the ATF giveth (via memo) can certainly be taken away. Well that’s today sport.

The only hope is that the Supreme Court can help and I say again, I want them to go after the NFA, not a loophole-by-memorandum.

Do not mistake how the Supreme Court operates. They don’t go after gov’t agencies who stop outside the law except as a response to some court case that has been filed and worked it’s way up thru the system. Even then the SC will only rule (perhaps) on the merits and legality of what is being argued in that case that is before them.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[walkinguf61]

There are about 150K Machine Guns civilian hands after 100 years of making them, there were over 500K bumps stocks, and none were over 10 years old.



No court has ruled such and if they did it would be irrelevant. Bump stocks are not banned. I legally have one. The current challenge in the 10th is about authority to change a Final Rule.



Yup, that is what they are pursuing.

Yes, I agree the ban should be overturned just on how it was in acted.

As far as common place, Bump stocks are not that common place compared to the number of guns in America. 500,000 is a drop in the bucket compared to common place items. Are AR pistols common place as well? Again, we are having a hard time to get them to recognize that the AR platform is common place, do you think bump stocks are common place compared to the AR?

I’m just tell you the reality of what we face in the courts.