SCOTUS to hear Ghost Gun case

Jmoser

Jmoser

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 18, 2020
Messages
1,628
Location
Greater Charlotte Area
Rating - 100%
10   0   0
Jerzsubbie said:
The fact that they’re accepting it makes me concerned the Chevron ruling will be too narrow.
Click to expand...
Makes me think they’re gonna say Chevron is too restrictive and therefore the “ghost gun” regulation is also going to be thrown out.
 
Tim said:
Makes me think they’re gonna say Chevron is too restrictive and therefore the “ghost gun” regulation is also going to be thrown out.
Click to expand...
i'd say i love the optimism - but looking back, they really havent given me a lot of reasons to be optimistic.
 
While I wish otherwise, I have a hard time thinking they will not keep the ATF regulation.
Honestly, I'm as pro-gun as anyone, but to make the argument that's it's NOT a gun because it's not completely finished is tough to believe.
a "firearm" has been for quite some time been defined as the receiver right? It's why we can order mags, barrels, sights etc, as they ARE NOT the firearm, so can't have it both ways.
 
yellolab said:
While I wish otherwise, I have a hard time thinking they will not keep the ATF regulation.
Honestly, I'm as pro-gun as anyone, but to make the argument that's it's NOT a gun because it's not completely finished is tough to believe.
a "firearm" has been for quite some time been defined as the receiver right? It's why we can order mags, barrels, sights etc, as they ARE NOT the firearm, so can't have it both ways.
Click to expand...


You are officially off my Christmas card list.
 
yellolab said:
While I wish otherwise, I have a hard time thinking they will not keep the ATF regulation.
Honestly, I'm as pro-gun as anyone, but to make the argument that's it's NOT a gun because it's not completely finished is tough to believe.
a "firearm" has been for quite some time been defined as the receiver right? It's why we can order mags, barrels, sights etc, as they ARE NOT the firearm, so can't have it both ways.
Click to expand...
Ehh, I don't agree with that line of reasoning. What arbitrary "percentage of completion" should be placed on it? If it is not capable of being used - 100% complete - where is that line it crosses to become a "firearm"? Until the receiver is ready for assembly, it is just a raw material.
 
Cape Fear said:
Ehh, I don't agree with that line of reasoning. What arbitrary "percentage of completion" should be placed on it? If it is not capable of being used - 100% complete - where is that line it crosses to become a "firearm"? Until the receiver is ready for assembly, it is just a raw material.
Click to expand...
I hope I’m wrong I am often! And yeah, good point on the percent complete question 🤷‍♂️
 
smithnwesley said:
i'd say i love the optimism - but looking back, they really havent given me a lot of reasons to be optimistic.
Click to expand...
ehhhhhh, I dunno. I would say the USSC has been the ONE branch of gov that has given some degree of hope for liberty.
 
The whole "ghost gun" is a POS thing in the first place.

It all hinges around guns not having a serial number, which magically makes them "untraceable".

Know what else makes a gun "untraceable"? A gun that's never found. A gun that's acid bathed to the point of removing forensic evidence. A gun that's ground to iron filings. A gun that's thrown overboard in thousands of feet of ocean water. A gun that's been the subject of some high school kid's thermite experiment.

Any number of things makes a gun "untraceable".

It's BS for the government.


Manufacturers put serial numbers on firearms long before Uncle Sam decided to make it illegal NOT to do so.

Why?

Because for manufacturers, it's a quality control issue. It tells them things like when it was made, what materials went into its making, tracks trends, etc.
 
smithnwesley said:
i'd say i love the optimism - but looking back, they really havent given me a lot of reasons to be optimistic.
Click to expand...
That’s where I am. I’d of course love it if Tim were right, and from a procedural perspective it would make sense, but we’ll see.
 
yellolab said:
but to make the argument that's it's NOT a gun because it's not completely finished is tough to believe.
Click to expand...
So is your wife / girlfriend pregnant before your sperm fertilizes her egg?

Seems to me that a bunch of gun parts that are not capable of being immediately assembled into a shooting firearm do not constitute a firearm. Now, if they are fully machined, all parts included and only need assembly, then it could be construed differently.

But having a pile of lumber and sheetrock in my driveway does not mean that I have a house...
 
Walkabout Dan said:
Politicians and unelected bureaucrats assault on the constitution is the same way you eat an elephant. One bite at a time.
Click to expand...
FIFY

Unfortunately, there are an awful lot more than just Ds out to shred and flush it!
 
Last edited:
tanstaafl72555 said:
ehhhhhh, I dunno. I would say the USSC has been the ONE branch of gov that has given some degree of hope for liberty.
Click to expand...
i hear you - but that's such a low bar, it's no sign that they can ever be relied upon. and the folks there are continuing to age, and things could look very different just a couple years from now

that's not even bringing up all punt back, refuse to hear, procedural excuse BS we've been witness to. im sure if i looked hard enough, i could even find some example of a squad member getting a vote right somewhere along the line, but the overall history would definitely paint a different story.

or at this point, maybe im just jaded after all of the kraken releases i've been promised.
 
I'm not optimistic on this one. I read earlier the 3 progressive wing judges plus Roberts and Barrett voted to hear the case.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 92G
yellolab said:
While I wish otherwise, I have a hard time thinking they will not keep the ATF regulation.
Honestly, I'm as pro-gun as anyone, but to make the argument that's it's NOT a gun because it's not completely finished is tough to believe.
a "firearm" has been for quite some time been defined as the receiver right? It's why we can order mags, barrels, sights etc, as they ARE NOT the firearm, so can't have it both ways.
Click to expand...
Well under federal law 80% receivers don't meet the definition of a frame or receiver and neither does an ar15 lower.

www.snipershide.com

Judge Rules AR-15 Lower Receiver Is Not a Firearm

https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/the-atfs-definition-of-an-ar-15-lower-as-a-firearm-is-in-serious-trouble/ The ATF’s Definition of an AR-15 Lower as a ‘Firearm’ Is In Serious Trouble BY DAN ZIMMERMAN | OCT 12, 2019 | 107 COMMENTS Courtesy ATF and CNN First, credit where it’s due. CNN’s...
www.snipershide.com www.snipershide.com
 
You know whats fun to think about?

American gun laws are just that, American. SBR, Pistol, frame, etc are all constructs of a definition.

That definition is not universal around the world.

It took me a bit when conducting international sales of firearms to understand that the GCA and NFA are both constraints of legal words that we invented after two criminal acts in the US.

John
 
smithnwesley said:
i'd say i love the optimism - but looking back, they really havent given me a lot of reasons to be optimistic.
Click to expand...
I think that's a 'forest for the trees' problem.
Think about it, lets take everything since 1980:

Bad:
banning new machine guns
parts kits rules got more strict
suing gun companies
temporary 10 year 'assault weapons' ban
restrictions on 'armor piercing' ammo

Good:
Interstate travel with guns protected
Concealed carry went from almost nonexistent to required.
Constitutional carry now in the majority of states
SC protections on firearms ownership and use, before then, there was almost no 'gun law' to study and try to use to help you, now there's tons of it.
SC ruling that no restrictions can be made on guns that can't be tied to laws present during founding, meaning what when we get around to start doing the lawsuits, pretty much all gun restrictions will be going away.
Castle doctrine
Moving guns to the public conscious, so guns can't be backdoor banned without causing major outrage and response.
Rise of political action groups that *will* actually sue to protect our rights, unlike the NRA in previous decades.

I think we've had win after win, personally.
 
Last edited:
The whole question is what does “readily converted” mean. Does it mean you just need to assemble the parts with no machining of the receiver or perform some machining. If the latter what level of “machining needs to be done. Who defines what that percentage is or what constitutes that level. It is arbitrary and needs to be defined by a legislative body.
 
Well...
The real problem is acronym agencies expanding and broadening powers not bestowed upon them by law (Congress).

The upstaging of PARTS being labeled as a FIREARM is problematic as any piece of steel or aluminum could soon receive the same designation!

The Chevron Ruling won't come soon enough, but this my very well play into that ruling here.

Real problem is how the States have shown that they know SCOTUS has no teeth behind their rulings! Exhibited by NY post Bruen ruling with it's CCIA... Reprehensible exhibition of a State ignoring the SCOTUS ruling and doubling down on their malfeasance towards any of it's residents exercising their 2A Rights!

Acronym Agencies shouldn't be controlling constitutional activity outside specific law or powers granted by Congress!

I wonder if they'll ever require training in order to Vote!? Lol...
 
Cooolone said:
Acronym Agencies shouldn't be controlling constitutional activity outside specific law or powers granted by Congress!
Click to expand...
This is core of the Chevron case. And it goes far beyond 2A.

- EPA
- TSA
- IRS
....they'll all be challengeable.
 
AR10ShooterinNC said:
This all stems from congress giving up power to the administration state. Congress is to busy trying to get re-elected and insider trading.
Click to expand...

That's a fact.

They enacted a law requiring themselves to actually do their constitutionally mandated job of passing a budget on time in 1974, they've managed to accomplish this ONLY 4 TIMES.

1977, 1989, 1995, and 1997.

Four times, out of going on 50 years now. Half a century.

And that's just passing the 12 appropriations bills, without having to have a balanced budget in the process. That's right...THEY CAN PASS ANY BUDGET THEY WANT WITHOUT REGARD TO STAYING WITHIN AN "EARNED INCOME" LIMIT AND THEY STILL CAN'T PASS THE BUDGET ON TIME.

But Heaven help us peons who might be a day late on getting our taxes done on time.
 
Parts is parts... And the power grab of the ATF labeling something that it isn't in order to effectuate control over it is EXACTLY the issue at place I'm Chevron. Where acronym agencies institute rules and codes, not placed by law and treat it as such, even with punitive measures, fines and more!

THAT is what will bing Chevron down, and rightfully so!!!

Can't happen soon enough! And what's the problem? Those part time employees called legislators in both the Senate and House might actually have to work for a living and create laws and codify what these agencies have done, but can't do because they don't know anything about the subjects!? Oh my? What would Congress ever do...

I can only hope the SCOTUS fixes this as Chevron needs to be taken down, should never have been there in the 1st place. And what, why and how acronym agencies currently act and do the bidding of the Executive branch bypassing Congress is exactly why!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom