Clay Pigeon
Shooter
This is disgusting honestly. How democratish of you.
You need to step away for a bit... You're not thinking rational, more like a petulant child.
This is disgusting honestly. How democratish of you.
The shooting was in October 2017. The ATF wrote the notice on the redefinition December 26, 2017. At that time both houses were controlled by Republicans. If we're going to believe that with Republicans in control of both houses of congress that they would override Trump's veto on an issue of importance to Republican voters, I think we'd also have to believe that the President was as incompetent as his detractors claimed. I think the House may have had enough Republicans to side with Democrats on some kind of AWB. But I doubt there would be 60 Senators that would make it filibuster-proof. And I seriously doubt that either the House would have had 2/3s to override a veto.
I think this whole scenario repeated often by ardent Trump supports is not much more than a rationalization of Trump's actions because they don't want to believe that Trump can actually do bad ****. Everything Trump does that's questionable is rationalized as such. But c'mon. It's okay to admit it. You can still be ardent Trump supporters while acknowledging that he did something bad. And this was pretty bad.
There's no guarantee the 10th circuit will overturn it. And if it ever does make it to SCOTUS, which is isn't at all sure, I think Gorsuch, Alito, and Thomas would be solid votes to overturn the bump stop ban. Maybe Kavanauigh, but that's not certain. I have no idea how Barret would rule if she even makes it to the court. I have serious doubts that Roberts would overturn it. So I think we'd have to rely on Barret, Kavanaugh, Gorsuch, Alito, and Thomas to save the legitimate worry about President Harris ordering the BATFE to redefine "machine gun" to enforce a defacto AWB. I think if there's a doubt of which way things would go, the most uncertainty is with the courts, not with the Republican led House and Senate and Trump's veto power.
My research shows the department of justice banned them in December of 2018.
We will never know which of us is right because the only thing that matters going forward is stopping further gun grabs...
If the USSC gets this case it will be because it is a challenge to Chevron not a gun case. That improves the odds a little I think.The shooting was in October 2017. The ATF wrote the notice on the redefinition December 26, 2017. At that time both houses were controlled by Republicans. If we're going to believe that with Republicans in control of both houses of congress that they would override Trump's veto on an issue of importance to Republican voters, I think we'd also have to believe that the President was as incompetent as his detractors claimed. I think the House may have had enough Republicans to side with Democrats on some kind of AWB. But I doubt there would be 60 Senators that would make it filibuster-proof. And I seriously doubt that either the House would have had 2/3s to override a veto.
I think this whole scenario repeated often by ardent Trump supports is not much more than a rationalization of Trump's actions because they don't want to believe that Trump can actually do bad ****. Everything Trump does that's questionable is rationalized as such. But c'mon. It's okay to admit it. You can still be ardent Trump supporters while acknowledging that he did something bad. And this was pretty bad.
There's no guarantee the 10th circuit will overturn it. And if it ever does make it to SCOTUS, which is isn't at all sure, I think Gorsuch, Alito, and Thomas would be solid votes to overturn the bump stop ban. Maybe Kavanauigh, but that's not certain. I have no idea how Barret would rule if she even makes it to the court. I have serious doubts that Roberts would overturn it. So I think we'd have to rely on Barret, Kavanaugh, Gorsuch, Alito, and Thomas to save the legitimate worry about President Harris ordering the BATFE to redefine "machine gun" to enforce a defacto AWB. I think if there's a doubt of which way things would go, the most uncertainty is with the courts, not with the Republican led House and Senate and Trump's veto power.
If the USSC gets this case it will be because it is a challenge to Chevron not a gun case. That improves the odds a little I think.
You need to step away for a bit... You're not thinking rational, more like a petulant child.
Those colonists are all like that. They should just shut up and pay the tax if they want to drink the tea.
I just saw a video from Q about a cease and desist letter over the Honey Badger. They claim after thousands of them have been sold that they are now reclassifying it as an SBR. Never mind that SB Tactical has an approval letter for the brace. Q has been trying to work with the ATF to resolve the issue and get it changed to be compliant, but the ATF has refused to say why it was reclassified or what they need to do to make it compliant. They have been trying to resolve this since August. The ATF also wanted Q to send in one of their Sugar Weasel pistol which used the SB3 brace. So far they have not sent a letter to the major manufactures yet, but I’m sure if they can set precedence they will be along shortly. To all those thinking “If you want to play in the NFA world just pony up your $200” it will be too late to stop once they continue to erode the 2nd amendment. In my opinion all the NFA is an illegal attempt to chip away at the second. What if the tax stamp was $2000. Would you be as willing to say that then.
Everything I transfered before 1986-7 the 200 dollar stamp was a huge deal. It doubled the cost on a Ingram for starters.
It was a third of the cost of a M16 and on and on..... This tax is nothing new, you want to play you gotta pay.
How about when a MG was 20 bucks with a 200 dollar tax stamp.... Today the stamp is the cheap part....
You dont want to pay, change the Federal Laws....
Those colonists are all like that. They should just shut up and pay the tax if they want to drink the tea.
A shining example of Crabs in a Bucket mentality. And complete disregard for liberty.
Disgusting.
Hey, what are you 11 years old.....I'm certainly entitled to my opinion.
Oh and thanks for the negative rep big tough internet killer guy.......
Your original comment is wrong
You're welcome. You richly deserve it.
And whining about how unfair it is that someone in enjoying a firearm freedom when "I hAd To pAY fOr a STaMp!" is a hell of a lot closer to an 11 year old's mentality.
I suppose the founding fathers should have just waited until the laws changed, eh?
You claim to be a Marine? Ok. I like Marines that don't whine on the internet.
You're no friend of liberty. May your chains rest lightly...
Its really simple... If its an SBR, it needs a stamp.... And its an SPR so it needs a stamp... So simple a Sol ******,
Marine can understand it...