National Fifth circuit injunction against the ATF pistol brace rule.

[RX-79G]

Making an anecdotal comment as an example to illustrate a point along the same lines of the main topic of his post is not an invitation to dive head first over the cliff of the political spectrum.

IOW, no need to Hilary it.




Just like "that" is not an invitation to delve into the whole hidden server issue.

I tend to correct misinformation, and doing so takes up much less bandwidth than you complaining about it.

 

[nwslopoke]

Delete

 

[RX-79G]

You've utterly and completely changed my view. Impeaching someone twice and not providing enough evidence to make your accusations stand is a perfect use of our tax dollars and abuse of powers. Much like several other alphabet agencies are doing.

I get that some people don't mind because, hell, they did it in 1802. But I do.

I don't know why you're complaining to me about WHY Trump was impeached. That has nothing to do with my post.

 

[Flopsweat]

If you were not an FPC member when the suit was filed (or when the injunction invoked), or you are not in the fifth district, then none at all?

Outside the fifth district, the gov can still arrest someone (after June 1st) and take them to court for violation of the ban.

Basically, until the issue goes to the SCOTUS, it is still something that you should be very careful about - IMO.

Unless you have a tax stamp.

Several attorney channels on YT have stated that in their opinion, the injunction protects all FPC members, regardless of when they join/joined. Viva Frei and Armed Scholar for sure, and a couple others I don't immediately recall.

 

[Yarome]

I tend to correct misinformation, and doing so takes up much less bandwidth than you complaining about it.

Complaining about it isn't against the rules. See the difference??

 

[Yarome]

Several attorney channels on YT have stated that in their opinion, the injunction protects all FPC members, regardless of when they join/joined. Viva Frei and Armed Scholar for sure, and a couple others I don't immediately recall.

That's the impression I've gotten too. Although, rough reading it by analyzing the language... which "should" work... doesn't always when those in power get a bug in their shorts to do whatever the heck they want.... and they probably won't tell us about it. Declaring citizens guilty of crimes they already committed and had no opportunity to have knowledge of seems to be the flavor of the day.

 

[Flopsweat]

That's the impression I've gotten too. Although, rough reading it by analyzing the language... which "should" work... doesn't always when those in power get a bug in their shorts to do whatever the heck they want.... and they probably won't tell us about it. Declaring citizens guilty of crimes they already committed and had no opportunity to have knowledge of seems to be the flavor of the day.

Yep, when they are essentially unaccountable, some folks get a little sloppy with rules, ethics, reason etc.

 

[CamoDeafie]

Yep, when they are essentially unaccountable, some folks get a little sloppy with rules, ethics, reason etc.

And the best we can expect are weeks to months of Congressional hearings where the accused/defendants are able to deflect or not answer any questions and stay out of jail whereas were it the peons/"citizens" before a a Judge; they'd be indicted and laid into a jail cell for contempt of court and perjury

 

[RX-79G]

Complaining about it isn't against the rules. See the difference??

That's dumb. My post wasn't political, the one I quoted was. So be a good boy and report that guy.

Then you can report yourself for all the personal attacks that are against the rules

 

[American123]

View attachment 1428066





This is the one where everyone piles on you about hOw hE wAs tReAteD uNfAirly and i kNeW yOu hAtEd tRuMp! and all of that just because you pointed out WHY they did it but offered up absolutely no opinion of your own on IF they should have done it

I'll just be sitting here waiting for the inevitable

I'd still like to know what Trump did that was against the law. I mean, did he secretly install an unprotected internet connection at his place so he could access secure government information on an unsecured network? Or did order Iran to receive pallets of cash to fund their nuclear program? Did he coerce a foreign country to stop investigating his son's involvement in corrupt business dealings by threatening to withhold financial aid?

I mean, surely if he did anything they'd have hung him with his own ballsack if they could have made anything stick. They sure tried nonstop for years.

 

[ilikegunspdx]

What does that have to do with the brace injunction?

 

[Yarome]

What does that have to do with the brace injunction?

If you can't indict em, pistol whip em... but remove the brace first?

I got nothin....

 

[nwslopoke]

What does that have to do with the brace injunction?

It was about someone not answering a question and redirecting to an example used. The original comment was about where you live in comparison to brace enforcement.

 

[Rkangel]

Been an FPC member for a while. Just renewed early to give them a little help in this fight.

Another injunction was granted in another case as well. Let's keep up the momentum.

These are the first two dominos, we need to make sure the rest fall, too.

 

[ilikegunspdx]

Been an FPC member for a while. Just renewed early to give them a little help in this fight.

Another injunction was granted in another case as well. Let's keep up the momentum.

These are the first two dominos, we need to make sure the rest fall, too.

Does the second one cover SAF members?

SAF WINS PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION IN ARM BRACE RULE CHALLENGE - Second Amendment Foundation

BELLEVUE, WA – A federal judge in Texas has issued a preliminary injunction in a Second Amendment Foundation challenge to the Biden administration’s new “Arm Brace Rule,” granting in part our motion. The case is known as SAF, et.al. v. ATF, et. al. SAF is joined in the case by Rainier Arms, LLC...

www.saf.org

 

[Flopsweat]

Does the second one cover SAF members?

SAF WINS PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION IN ARM BRACE RULE CHALLENGE - Second Amendment Foundation

BELLEVUE, WA – A federal judge in Texas has issued a preliminary injunction in a Second Amendment Foundation challenge to the Biden administration’s new “Arm Brace Rule,” granting in part our motion. The case is known as SAF, et.al. v. ATF, et. al. SAF is joined in the case by Rainier Arms, LLC...

www.saf.org

Seems like. SAF is one of the plaintiffs.

SAF is joined in the case by Rainier Arms, LLC and two private citizens, Samuel Walley and William Green.

"The Court grants in part the Motion and issues a preliminary injunction as to Plaintiffs in this case only, pending resolution of the expedited appeal in Mock v. Garland, No. 23-10319 (5th Cir.). Upon resolution of the appeal in Mock, the Court will address the remaining relief Plaintiffs request in their Motion. If necessary, the Court will order additional briefing at that time."

(Emphasis mine)

 

[Tony617]

I renewed my SAF membership a few months ago now, It is for a good cause, I should also renew my GOA membership but I forgot this year.

 

[ilikegunspdx]

I renewed my SAF membership a few months ago now, It is for a good cause, I should also renew my GOA membership but I forgot this year.

Goa also had an injunction pending from what I understand but I don't know in what court.

 

[Flopsweat]

Goa also had an injunction pending from what I understand but I don't know in what court.

They don't mention which courts here:

GOA Vows to Sue over ATF’s Pistol Ban | GOA

The ATF just officially published Biden’s pistol ban in the federal register on Tuesday. MILLIONS of gun owners like YOU now have a 120-day “amnesty” period to send your personal information – including your address, your social security number, your FINGERPRINTS, and a photo of your firearm –...

www.gunowners.org

 

[ilikegunspdx]

Looks like SAF asked for brace rule to be enjoined nationwide (as I'm sure FPC also did) but court only awarded to the plaintiffs (just like in the FPC case).