You expect the ATF to fully define "scary marketing words"?
:)
My assumption is 'private transfer to known unauthorized individuals' Be it cash, drugs, sex slaves, whatever, or just free. "transfer". Of course now that they basically made it a requirement that everyone gets an FFL ( with all the costs and restrictions and such to go with it ) "private sales" mostly vanishes from the legal realm.
Sort of related, i do wonder now that if you do get an FFL since you want to sell your brother a shotgun that went up in value, does that mean you gave up your rights of privacy and the ATF can invade your home at any time, like they do stores?
Sun Apr 28 2024 20:31:39 EDT from zelgomerWhat exactly does "trafficked" mean here? Knowing the ATF, probably "privately sold completely within the law."
Canadian government is now demanding the postal service collect guns and ship them back as part of the mandated 'buy back program'.
I feel bad for our northern neighbors.
Not read it yet, may not since i dont live there, but sounds like network is working to ban all semi-auto weapons.
Sure, will get struck down eventually. Eventually.
What exactly does "trafficked" mean here? Knowing the ATF, probably "privately sold completely within the law."
It means the same as "assault rifle" -- in other words, it means whatever they want it to mean at any particular moment.
sigh. make that *newyork* stupid auto correct.
Thu May 09 2024 13:42:02 EDT from Nurb432Not read it yet, may not since i dont live there, but sounds like network is working to ban all semi-auto weapons.
Sure, will get struck down eventually. Eventually.
Seems the "if you breathe you are an FFL" rule has been temporarily blocked. Even if it does get struck down, they will try again from another angle. But at least its off, for now.
and they are coming collecting on some "barrel extensions". Tho, while i do think the ATF and NFA are both unconstitutional, these 'extenders' are clearly suppressors in disguise, which until the NFA is struck down require a tax stamp, so i do understand the movement to come confiscate them... Intentionally push the ATFs buttons, they will come looking for you.
"The families of the victims who were slaughtered at a Texas elementary school by a teenage gunman in 2022 are suing Meta, formerly Facebook, and the maker of the “Call of Duty” video game." ( also the maker of the rifle )
And i hope they get counter sued and put into bankruptcy. Sorry that your kids are dead, but that does not give you the right to be ***holes.
to come confiscate them... Intentionally push the ATFs buttons,
they will come looking for you.
Moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws.
Bad thing is they will just kill you, and your dog. They are better armed, and have a large team.
Sun May 26 2024 21:10:49 EDT from zelgomerMoral responsibility to disobey unjust laws.
2024-05-27 11:19 from Nurb432 <nurb432@uncensored.citadel.org>
Bad thing is they will just kill you, and your dog. They are better
armed, and have a large team.
The guy they murdered in Arkansas at least wounded one of them. After enough of those, gun owners are going to wise up and start shooting back with their scary black rifles instead of 9mm.
Or so I hope, anyway.
New bill introduced, ban 50cal, nationwide.
People who want gun control laws deserve to be shot in the head with a 50cal.
...while being filmed in slow motion, to be posted on the Internet for all to enjoy.
Bill re-introduction. Bans every rifle that uses gas, other than 22s. ( for now ).
Exception :
- 22 rimfire rifles.
- Bolt action rifles
- Guns with less than 10 round or less magazines. ( i assume applies to the above.. a 22 with 15 rounds = prison time for you, serf )
Here we go again. Ban it all, in effect. Hope you like that musket, serf.
Perhaps this will piss him off enough to ban laws like this. A non violent felon losing constitutionally protected rights is ludicrous. A violent felon, well, there needs to be a discussion.
"Former President Donald J. Trump will have his license to carry a gun in New York revoked now that he’s been convicted of a felony, opening the door to more Democrat lawfare.
On Wednesday, CNN reported that the NYPD is preparing to revoke the presumptive GOP nominee’s concealed carry permit, citing an anonymous “police official” who told the outlet that the department’s legal bureau is conducting an investigation."
"Uvalde Families sue UPS & FedEx"
These ***holes are suing everyone and their brother, i wonder who is pushing this?
Looks like the bumpstock ban has been overturned by scotus ( i still think they are stupid, but hey, if you want one, great, go get one )
AND the "you are a FFL if you breathe" has had an injunction placed on it. ( not over, but at least its heading the right direction )
AND the pistol brace rule stuck down ( but not by scotus.. so its not over yet either but at least also the right direction )
2024-06-14 14:39 from Nurb432 <nurb432@uncensored.citadel.org>
Looks like the bumpstock ban has been overturned by scotus ( i still
think they are stupid, but hey, if you want one, great, go get one )
That ruling is exactly what their purpose always was, and for that reason, bump stocks are not stupid.
I mean stupid in that they make your rifle inaccurate and wastes ammo. I think its silly to do something to a rifle like that. If you want to just a bullet hose, get a grease gun.
Of course next season congress could just outlaw them outright "bla bla device to increase rate of fire". SCOTUS could have ruled 'its unconstitutional to ban them in the first place' and prevent that from happening, but instead they stuck within the confines of the suit, in relation to it not violating the current 'congressional definition of machine gun'. I can see a law coming eventually that says "anything that is capable of firing more than x rounds per minute, regardless of how its done" like some states have done, so it 'gets around' the definition totally, and is generic. ( which then has its own path to strike down on a constitutional basis, but its harder )
Man, anti-gun groups are freaking out now. "whaaaaa court is rewriting the 2nd amendment" "there is no legitimate use" ( which last i read, was not in the constitution )
Freaking propagandists, in reality the case was about a rule, not a law, and it was about violation of congressional definition, not the actual amendment ( if it was, they would have said 'no, its infringement, bugger off' ). Pisses me off greatly, and the idiot sheep will buy this crap.
Going to be more fuel to pack the courts im afraid. so they can eradicate our rights totally.