MikedaddyH Posted January 31, 2023 Report Share Posted January 31, 2023 3 minutes ago, 98Z5V said: An example of $10,000 that gets seized, when they fuk you over and 88-day you, and take your hardware... Change My Mind... Do the math ... That's $40,000 and 10 years.... But you cannot self incriminate by filling out a gov't form. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
98Z5V Posted January 31, 2023 Author Report Share Posted January 31, 2023 1 minute ago, MikedaddyH said: But you cannot self incriminate by filling out a gov't form. Let's see what happens to some of these people that jumped on the "Free SBR" bandwagon... time will tell... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikedaddyH Posted January 31, 2023 Report Share Posted January 31, 2023 Just now, 98Z5V said: Let's see what happens to some of these people that jumped on the "Free SBR" bandwagon... time will tell... Yeah . Let the court case begin. So much easier to comply. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shooterrex Posted January 31, 2023 Report Share Posted January 31, 2023 They haven't published the rule on the federal register yet. Can't sue till the actually publish this $hit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikedaddyH Posted January 31, 2023 Report Share Posted January 31, 2023 7 minutes ago, shooterrex said: They haven't published the rule on the federal register yet. Can't sue till the actually publish this $hit. 60 minutes.or less .... 1-31-2023 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikedaddyH Posted January 31, 2023 Report Share Posted January 31, 2023 It's published. I was reading it until my brain got numb. It's too ambiguous for this to be legal. The TAX CODE is easier to read. Noticed four Executive orders in it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dpete Posted January 31, 2023 Report Share Posted January 31, 2023 Another good development. https://www.breitbart.com/2nd-amendment/2023/01/30/rep-andrew-clyde-to-use-congressional-review-act-to-override-atf-stabilizer-brace-rule/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikedaddyH Posted January 31, 2023 Report Share Posted January 31, 2023 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jtallen83 Posted January 31, 2023 Report Share Posted January 31, 2023 9 hours ago, MikedaddyH said: It's too ambiguous for this to be legal. You have to work hard to be this ambiguous! They are not even trying to be reasonable, cause they don't have to. What are they after that isn't here, they gotta be using this like a first bargaining position or something...... or could it just be as stupid as it looks? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikedaddyH Posted February 1, 2023 Report Share Posted February 1, 2023 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikedaddyH Posted February 1, 2023 Report Share Posted February 1, 2023 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
98Z5V Posted February 1, 2023 Author Report Share Posted February 1, 2023 Here's all 66 pages of the filing - it's pretty good. https://assets.nationbuilder.com/firearmspolicycoalition/pages/6710/attachments/original/1675196674/Mock_v_Garland_1_Complaint.pdf?1675196674 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikedaddyH Posted February 1, 2023 Report Share Posted February 1, 2023 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikedaddyH Posted February 1, 2023 Report Share Posted February 1, 2023 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikedaddyH Posted February 1, 2023 Report Share Posted February 1, 2023 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikedaddyH Posted February 1, 2023 Report Share Posted February 1, 2023 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikedaddyH Posted February 1, 2023 Report Share Posted February 1, 2023 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikedaddyH Posted February 1, 2023 Report Share Posted February 1, 2023 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikedaddyH Posted February 1, 2023 Report Share Posted February 1, 2023 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
98Z5V Posted February 1, 2023 Author Report Share Posted February 1, 2023 (edited) 1 hour ago, 98Z5V said: Here's all 66 pages of the filing - it's pretty good. https://assets.nationbuilder.com/firearmspolicycoalition/pages/6710/attachments/original/1675196674/Mock_v_Garland_1_Complaint.pdf?1675196674 I'm on page 55 right now, and it's very damn well written, and it's filed in 5th Circuit. This will be the one that destroys the "Final Rule." I encourage everyone here to read it. It's a goldmine of information. I just hit this part on page 55, paragraph 198: 198. The government “may not impose a charge for the enjoyment of a rightgranted by the federal constitution.” Murdock v. Pennsylvania, 319 U.S. 105, 113 (1943). But that is what the Agencies’ laws, regulations, policies, and enforcement practices do. The NFA fee operates as a charge for the privilege of exercising a fundamental right. As such, the NFA is unconstitutional for this reason alone. EDIT - just finished it. Pages 60 through the end are pretty damn good. Paragraph 210 is stellar. After that, it just gets better, all the way to the end. It's a great argument, and I think it's gonna fly through 5th Circuit with positive results. Edited February 1, 2023 by 98Z5V Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
98Z5V Posted February 1, 2023 Author Report Share Posted February 1, 2023 (edited) Here's another good view on all this giant shiitshow... https://gatdaily.com/brace-rule-in-effect/?utm_source=GATdaily&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=2_1 Brace Rule in Effect By Keith Finch - January 31, 2023 Brandon’s video does a good job navigating the bull$hit, and there is no other way to describe the 293 page behemoth that seeks to end the ‘brace menace’ once and for.. yeah, it’s not going to do that. The ATF’s attempt to turn pistols into SBRs because *wink* ‘the shoulder things that go up’ is a mess from a bunch of angles. One of the most common things I’ve been asked is, “Should I register?” The Legal Answer By a strict interpretation of the law, yes. You should, because it is now the law. Despite this not being debated and passed through the House, the Senate, or signed by the President, it is the ‘Law’ now. Is the law made up and the points matter less than the final score of Whose Line is it Anyway? Also, yes. Your actual answer… Is ultimately up to you. Plenty of folks have declared their intent to not register anything and ride out the legal battle, and in their defense the likelihood this gets the great judicial ban hammer the way the bump stock ban did is high. Ultimately this is day 1 of 120, you don’t have to decide anything today. You can see if the rule gets stayed by the courts or congress in the interim. If you decide to free stamp a gun or two, go for it. If you want to ride it out and decide in May what to do and see what happens in the meantime, cool. As long as the initiation date on your Form 1 is May31st, 2023 or earlier I’d love to see the ATF try and prosecute that case. A first year public defender could wipe the floor with that case and add a win against the ATF to their resume early. My opinion… Is only an opinion, I am not an attorney. I know a few though. I, personally, already own NFA items, have an FFL/SOT, and had a few guns I wanted to stamp when I got around to it. So I got around to those on the EForms site, it’s pretty easy. But if you don’t want NFA items, you have at least until May 31st before anything else will be or can be done about it. That assumes that none of the lawsuits I expect to see immediately filed don’t get the rule boxed up and/or stayed in the 120 days, or thrown out completely because its entirely overstepping the authority of the ATF even if the Administration told them to do it. Remember, this is rule ATF2021R-08, it took them two years just to get it into a state that could be published as a final rule to even attempt to survive the gauntlet of legal challenges heading its way. Sit back and enjoy the shitshow, ladies and gentlemen. Edited February 1, 2023 by 98Z5V Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
98Z5V Posted February 2, 2023 Author Report Share Posted February 2, 2023 This looks pretty positive. It's good to see. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
98Z5V Posted February 2, 2023 Author Report Share Posted February 2, 2023 Check it: posted this one earlier... Watch this vid: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
98Z5V Posted February 2, 2023 Author Report Share Posted February 2, 2023 Check it - I've stated this exact thing here for years, and I've stated the opposite of this here for years. Sounds confusing. I'll explain. Does the BATFE have ANY AUTHORITY to inspect ANY NON-NFA ITEM that you own? NO. THE BATFE'S PURVIEW IS NFA ITEMS. ONLY. Their purview is nothing more than that, ever, hasn't, never has been. Don't give consent. No search can happen. That's my one side. Now my other side. You're at the range, you have a legal Tax-Stamped Suppressor. Local PD show up and asks you if you have a Tax Stamp for that Suppressor... Not their purview. Lot their legal authority to even ask. Not the local Sheriff, not the head of State Police, just not their purview. It's BATFE's purview. ONLY. "Son, heard you firing that fully automatic firearm - you got a license for that? Local PD asking you. You - "I'm sorry, are you Local PD, or are you a BATFE Agent? -Oh, Local? You don't have the authority to determine that..." Yeah, it goes that way. However, if you were fucking up, acting stupid, caused some harm, etc... I.E. not doing what you were supposed to be doing as a responsible gun owner... then Local PD can detain you until BATFE Agents arrive. These guys are everywhere, too, BATFE - every single large city in every single state, has an office. You might be sitting for awhile, if you were a shiithead. That can get real. However, you don't have to show a Tax Stamp to ANYONE that asks for it, ever. You only have to show it to an actual BATFE Agent. If you get to that point, you already fucked up. Or, Local was REALLY being stupid, and you were legal. That won't happen often, real world. You had to have being doing something... You gotta watch this vid: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikedaddyH Posted February 2, 2023 Report Share Posted February 2, 2023 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.