|
National 2nd Amend. Political & Legal Discussion Discuss national gun rights and 2A related political topics here. All advice given is NOT legal counsel. |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#43
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
11 d. Are you a fugitive from justice? (See Instructions for Question 11.d.) e. Are you an unlawful user of, or addicted to, marijuana.... 12.c. Are you an alien illegally or unlawfully in the United States? Logic would require our representatives to actually use their brains. Stuart |
#44
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
You got the full guestapo treatment. That sounds worse than the US Anodizing story. What's the significance of a triangle on an upper? How long ago did this happen? Last edited by AKSOG; 10-15-2019 at 7:09 AM.. |
#45
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
In the US Anodizing case they had an FFL and were subject to inspections so there was no need to get a warrant. In my case they (as you said) "went full gestapo". The triangle is a proof mark on Colt uppers. A few of my customers like to build retro rifles. Most of them are veterans that want a replica of the rifle they served with. There are entire websites dedicated to retro builds. I don't think the triangle is copyrighted, but a lot of engravers (myself included) were engraving COLT retros. I engrave 80% lowers only. The ATF called them blanks and have determined that they are NOT firearms so how do they even have Jurisdiction??? The ATF has no business enforcing copyright laws as the are strictly a civil matter, and I don't know that Colt cares. A few engravers were sent cease and desist letters but the ones that I heard of were not sent by Colt. They were sent by an air-soft company that did have a license to make replicas. My understanding is that even then they must prove damages and make a similar product. Right or wrong I thought the worst that would happen would be a cease and desist letter at which point I would cease and desist. The ATF told me that some of these "retro rifles" are making there way into the hands of drug cartels. I asked if that was through Eric Holder. They were not amused. It seems as though the drug cartels see Colts as status symbols so the ATF has taken it onto themselves to put a stop to engraving blanks (80% lowers) with ANYTHING Colt. To that end the ATF has arbitrarily determined that engraving ANYTHING Colt makes even a blank a "Counterfeit Machine-gun". The case in the OP make that seem like a bad joke. Last edited by VaderSpade; 10-15-2019 at 7:58 AM.. |
#47
|
|||
|
|||
I wish I had the money to fight them. This is backdoor gun control through intimidation.
|
#48
|
||||
|
||||
Did you reach out to somebody like Michels and assiciates to see if they would be interested help you pro bono or through donated money?
|
#49
|
|||
|
|||
I tried but because a copyright is involved no one will get involved, even though the larger case does not hinge on the copyright issue.
|
#50
|
||||
|
||||
Very interesting, does anyone have a link to these decisions or at least a case number and jurisdiction?
Quote:
__________________
|
#51
|
|||
|
|||
I read an article from another source that said this line of argument could be bad for gun owners. If the old definition is untenable then it opens the door for new legislation to provide an updated one... that we might not like at all. Because the receiver is the firearm standard has not been too big a mess for us to deal with.
|
#52
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
__________________
All posts were written by a multi-ped robot that stole my phone. |
#53
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
They are using a law that says (Paraphrasing) any "part" when added to a firearm that allows it to fire more than one round per pull of the trigger makes that firearm an illegal machine-gun. It is an unbelievable stretch to say that ANY engraving can do that. The case would be best fought using just the upper they took over a simple triangle engraving AND the US Anodizing case where an engraved sear marking was said to make those firearms machine-guns. The ATF did not have an answer when it was pointed out that Troy industries and one other major manufacture engraved that fake sear without issue. |
#54
|
|||
|
|||
Do we really need a ruling and “like-minded” judge? The law is clear, and ATF’s rule making process is, as well. The law states what constitutes a firearm and a lower receiver does not constitute a firearm according to that definition. Whether or not the judge made a ruling is beside the point; what the judge did was point out an obvious conflict in the law that cannot be enforced. Has there EVER been a case where someone was charged with manufacturing firearms without a license for finishing lowers?
We should be taking action, instead of pondering. This may be a short window like Freedom Week. Is there any way to get a clarification from ATF? If a manufacturer decided to host build parties and is subsequently raided by ATF for ONLY manufacturing lowers, would that be grounds for a lawsuit based on an unconstitutional search and seizure? The judge did not make a ruling, but pointed out an obvious and glaring flaw. What are the implications of this flaw, and how can it be legally exploited? The loophole (if one exists) WILL BE CLOSED, we should be EXPLOITING it while we can. Freedom Week 2.0
__________________
WTB Oakhurst stamped CZ firearms WTB 12 gauge Wingmasters |
#55
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
That is why they are probably careful about prosecutions in this area. They don't want to risk a court throwing the whole GCA into the trash bin. |
#56
|
|||
|
|||
Bump for the quote. It would be interesting to know.
__________________
WTB Oakhurst stamped CZ firearms WTB 12 gauge Wingmasters |
#58
|
||||
|
||||
National Review article exposing the whole debacle - https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/...oes-not-exist/
__________________
Active Army 1976-1986, Army Reserve 2005-2015, Afghanistan 2010-2011 http://www.thepolemicist.net/2013/01...t-for-gun.html https://www.thereligionofpeace.com/ “This decision is a freedom calculus decided long ago by Colonists who cherished individual freedom more than the subservient security of a British ruler. The freedom they fought for was not free of cost then, and it is not free now.” - Hon. Roger T. Benitez, United States District Judge, March 29, 2019 |
#59
|
|||
|
|||
So if I put a whale tail, a coffee can muffler, front spoiler and get a non op registration from DMV on a Honda Civic.....drive it on PCH ...does it make it an illegal car to be on the roadway because it looks like a Formula 1 race car? Asking for a friend.....
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|