By Lee Williams
A secret cabal of unelected bureaucrats operating in the bowels of the White House is the real architect of Joe Biden’s war on our guns, and none are ever held accountable.
Susan Rice, Barack Obama’s former national security advisor, played a leading role in this Star Chamber of civil rights abuse, until she abruptly left the White House last month. Rice, who served as Joe Biden’s domestic policy advisor, didn’t even bother to hide her frequent meetings with members of the gun-ban industry, such as Giffords, Brady, and Everytown. She was that brazen and unafraid of consequences.
Since its inception, the clandestine group’s work has been used in a myriad of ways. Some became the basis for Biden’s anti-gun platform, speeches and talking points. Other ideas went straight to federal agencies, such as administration’s loyal lapdogs at the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives.
Does anyone believe that the ATF – the most overly politicized law enforcement agency in the country – would take on pistol braces without specific instructions from the White House? Of course not, but this time it backfired.
Gun owners and the courts swiftly rebuked plans to ban the plastic, aftermarket firearm accessory that the ATF twice said was perfectly legal, until they were pressured by Biden’s White House to change their findings.
More than 40 million law-abiding Americans had until last month to register their pistol braces with the ATF or become felons overnight. It’s estimated that less than 1% actually complied and completed a Form 1. That’s an embarrassment national in scope.
U.S. District Judge Jane J. Boyle made matters worse for the Administration in SAF, et.al. v. ATF, et. al, when she ruled that Second Amendment Foundation members who owned pistol braces were protected from ATF enforcement actions by a preliminary injunction. Members of other pro-gun groups received similar protections. SAF, Gun Owners of America and the Firearm Policy Coalition all experienced dramatic upticks in membership as a result. It became clear to everyone involved that ATF issued the rule because they knew a law banning pistol braces would never make it through Congress.
Some have speculated the public flogging would give the White House’s anti-gun zealots reason to rethink or even slow their bans and other actions, but the group is well insulated from public scrutiny. Even after a humiliating loss, no one holds them accountable. And Biden, if pressed, can always blame the “AFT.”
While Biden should face consequences for most of his administration’s unconstitutional gun-control efforts, Joe wouldn’t know a pistol brace if one suddenly appeared at the bottom of his oatmeal bowl. Anymore, his only real purpose is to be led by the hand onstage once or twice a week, armed with a fistful of flashcards that tell him when to sit, stay, roll over and shake hands.
Meanwhile, the real brains behind the White House’s war on guns remain cloaked in anonymity. They’re as ruthless and cunning as mafia hitmen, and completely unanswerable to the public. Their actions are a direct affront to Congressional authority and the separation of powers, since they help ATF write and then enforce its own rules, which carry penalties indistinguishable from actual criminal statutes.
To be clear, when the Biden’s White House calls the tune, the ATF obediently starts to dance, and no one is ever held accountable.
Here’s a little secret…Jim Crow Gun Control democRat joe may be losing his marbles but he knows what public opinion is all about. And as long as the public sees Gun Control as something good ol’ joe knows he has the upper hand. Unfortunately there are some Gun talkers on this forum seeing to it the public remains in the dark about Gun Control and its Roots in Racism and Genocide…ol ‘joe couldn’t ask for better pals.
me and brandon goin’ thwimmin’ i wanna check out his leg hairs and geoff hates trunk you said so.
If we could all only be as up to snuff as Deb.
she’s in film too?
jr. et al…Like I said, “ol’ joe couldn’t ask for better pals.”
yes bore ah, yes you did.
*snicker*
Harsh, but my kind of humor.
don’t encourage him.
Working from domestic, I win $100 each hour. The truth that my closest companion makes $16,000 a month working from a portable workstation is fantastically astounding to me, so she prompted me to deliver it a bv attempt. I had no thought it was truly conceivable.
Presently is the time for everybody to undertake this work by utilizing this site. https://Getmoney012.blogspot.com
So ‘splain to me how we could do better Debbie, lemme guess-tell everyone the history of gun control and its roots in racism and genocide?
Maybe I’ll understand the relevance one day
the ATF is heavily dependent on funding…they do as they’re told and will shift positions with each change of administration
What redefining braced pistols as short barreled rifles really accomplished was to prove that sbrs are not really unusually dangerous or rare and should be removed from NFA. The history of changing barrel length depending on lobbying and what the Feds had to sell shows how arbitrary and capricious barrel length can be.
“What redefining braced pistols as short barreled rifles really accomplished was to prove that sbrs are not really unusually dangerous or rare and should be removed from NFA.”
Now mounting my new, shinny hobbyhorse: while a possible new legal attack on gun control, the idea fosters continuing to nibble at the edges, rather than striking at the heart of infringement. Strike directly at NFA and GCA existence, not attempt to create “carve-outs” for this, or something else.
As we see “Bruen” only leads to forever lawfare over gun control (challenging gun control, one sentence at a time), for every court victory, gun controllers write and enact new gun control legislation.
For now and only in democratic states which can create interesting rifts in circuit court precedent. We have been dealing with status quo for decades before Heller and the decisions are decidedly moving faster so a bit early to say how things are going when quite a lot is in flux.
“We have been dealing with status quo for decades before Heller and the decisions are decidedly moving faster so a bit early to say how things are going when quite a lot is in flux.”
Guess my stance is more Patton, than Montgomery. Brute force, rather than deft nuance. Destroy the citadel, rather prolong the siege.
Sam I agree. If you want to kill the snake you cut off it’s head. All the gun rights organizations need to quit jerkin around with these little lawsuits, not that I don’t appreciate the effort, but go for the jugular and put an end to it .
Both approaches have merit but I would need to ask what exactly would be striking the head from the snake? We have over a century of various gun laws to unravel the unconstitutionality of (not to mention administrative state issues) and have really only started to make major progress on both in the last year (yes some progress on the gun issue almost 2 decades ago but that was a slow build to results). Those that sought to do away with our rights have been willing to fight for decades and if we cannot knock them out immediately we must be prepared for the same.
There is ONE VERY SURE way to get these anti-gun radicals off our backs. When our gun rights are infringed, file a civil rights lawsuit. If I recall correctly, you are entitled to treble damages plus punitive damages. When a State Legislature violates our rights, each and every member of the legislature who voted for the law which infringes, should be included in the lawsuit. It just might give these wannabes pause when they contemplate their villany.
As long as the Doctrine of Qualified Immunity is clung to, it will never happen. I agree with you wholeheartedly that the Legislatures need held to their oaths to support and defend the Constitution, of which the 2nd is part and parcel of. Qualified Immunity though, protects them from the consequences of Breaking Their Oaths.
What really Chaps my Arse, is that you and I, along with many others, Pay, through Membership Dues and Special Donation, to bring suit against Unconstitutional Infringements, while at the same time, we’re paying, through our Taxdollars, to defend the Unconstitutional Infringements, our (S)Elected Legislators dream up.
We pay to Not Get F**ked Over, while simultaneously Paying To Get F**ked Over.
If that isn’t a Kick in the Balls, I don’t know what is.
My balls are getting really sore.
Time to end the atf nfa gca
And as long as they are allowed any semblance of power, they will always be a threat. Something the Founding Patriots understood and dealt with. You deserve the Tyranny you allow.
“Perhaps you and I have lived with this miracle too long to be properly appreciative. Freedom is a fragile thing and is never more than one generation away from extinction. It is not ours by inheritance; it must be fought for and defended constantly by each generation, for it comes only once to a people. Those who have known freedom and then lost it have never known it again.”
― Ronald Reagan
The legal arm of Everytown basically wrote the ATF ‘pistol brace rule’. That much came out in the congressional hearings.
that means some practicing lwyers need to be held to account for wilfully conspiring to violte our civil rights. It would be the same thing as negotiation with Cngess ti implement the “separate but equal” laws perpetuating the old southern style rat schism that got tossed back in the Civil Rights era. Brown vs Board of Education, the Birmingham bus boycotts, etc. These clowns knowingly and wilfully conspire to short-circuit the constitutionaly established proceedures for lawmaking, circumventing Cingress by having BATF make “rules” with the force of law when they HAVE no such ahuthority and know it.
Mayve a newly remidelled Cingress will find some stones and go after such egregious vioation of constitutional mandates. CONGRESS shall make all laws, not unelected unaccountable bureaucrats working in back rooms out of the eye of the public and directing executive branch gencies to make then enforce “laws” violating our rights.
Ever notice Biden’s actions during speeches? An awful lot of fist swinging and yelling. Remind you of anyone you saw in newsreels growing up? Only real difference was German vs. English.
He probably wishes. He’s not anywhere close to that German guy in the oratory department.
Creepy Joe reminds me more of a young child throwing a temper tantrum.
….or just a cranky old bastard…we all know the type…
C’mon Man.
Joe Biden would never falter from upholding, to the best of his ability, the Constitution of The United States.
“To the best of his ability.” You know whoever wrote that was a lawyer, they always leave a loop hole to circumvent the law.
Trumps fck guys, no way is the system going to let him run again. The Jan6 ‘insurrection’ proved to the system that man has a way of bringing people together. No way is .giv ever going to let a president stay in office if he can unite the States.
It’s not called The Fractured States of America for nothing.
Rest in peace George Washington, we did good.
Long Live Dominion
that “best of your ability” concept came from a long-gone era when men had it=ntegrity and moral values that were honourable and ethical. But after decades of God being taken out of the schols, wilful infiltration of those schools by communist operatives, moral decay as result of these things, the whole “if it feels good it must be right” thinking, and kids being raised to never have to deal directly with conflict..instead theyget “timeouts” and “just avoid him” lessins in school. Backbines get weak when they are never exercised.
moderation twice in one morning? What clown bots are running this show today anyway?
Commissar w0rdpress.
“Does anyone believe that the ATF – the most overly politicized law enforcement agency in the country – would take on pistol braces without specific instructions from the White House?” – So we can appropriately blame Pres. Trump for the original redefinition published 18 December 2020?
“Your all in it together, bunch of gawddamn pimps.”
Politically inept nitwits went bump stock bananas much to the pleasure of democRats. And had POTUS DJT did nothing that means congress would have taken the driver’s seat and perhaps done much more than bump stocks. With enough knee jerk votes congress could have overridden a veto.
POTUS DJT did an EO which can be reversed much easier than an act of congress. Really…Things are so disgraceful with biden why would POTUS DJT be a concern for anything other than to go vote for him?
Thats Mister President Joseph Robinett Biden debbie w and dont you forget it ! ! ! 🤬
The pistol brace was flouting the law against short barrel rifles pure and simple. The short barrel rifle is concealable and far more devastating than any pistol caliber and Biden was correct in ordering the ATF to ban them, as they do fall under the category of a short barreled rifle. These are the types of weapons that criminals and maniacs prefer and use. And remember the original Scalia ruling (which the current radical court ignores) stated that the Federal Government did indeed have the right to regulate (ban or restrict) weapons that were a danger to the public. If short barreled concealable rifles are not a danger to the public from maniacs and gang bangers I do not know then what would be!!!!
Trump’s radical supreme court is proving to be an absolute disaster for the American people’s rights to live in a society free from unreasonable gun violence and slaughter.
The right of all American citizens to be protected by and enjoy the rights of the Constitutional, not just a select radical far right minority, which are moving to make LGBT and Gay peoples rights non-existent and force the Christian religion on everyone by turning the U.S. into a radical far right Christian Caliphate operating with the same discrimination as radical Islam does as there is zero difference between the two far right religious groups.
The bump stock and pistol brace battles are far from over in the courts. And remember none of this prevents States from banning these instruments of civilian slaughter either.
Dacian, you said, “The short barrel rifle is concealable and far more devastating than any pistol caliber.”
FYI, putting a pistol brace on a pistol does not change its caliber from pistol caliber to rifle caliber. Tell me how putting a pistol brace on a 9mm pistol changes its caliber from pistol caliber to rifle caliber. I’ll wait.
Also, tell me how a 9mm carbine with a 15″ barrel is somehow “far more devastating” than a 9mm carbine with a 16″ barrel. It’s actually less powerful, because it has a shorter barrel, meaning lower velocity, lower energy, and shorter range.
Now you’ll probably sputter, “Don’t confuse me with facts! I was thinking of .223 caliber, and you know I meant .223 caliber!”
OK, then tell me how a .223 AR-15 pistol (or SBR) with a 15″ barrel and a pistol brace is somehow “far more devastating” than a .223 carbine with a 16″ barrel — it’s actually less powerful because the shorter barrel means less velocity, less energy.
And tell me how on Earth a .223 AR-15 pistol (or SBR) with a 15″ barrel and a pistol brace is somehow “concealable.” Can you put it in a holster? No. Not an IWB holster, not an OWB holster, not a chest holster, not any kind of holster. Can you put it in a pants pocket, vest pocket, coat pocket, or any kind of pocket? Of course not. Can you conceal it in a purse? No.
If you can’t put it in a holster, pocket, or purse, then it’s not “concealable.”
So a pistol with a brace is not more lethal (or “far more devastating”) than a rifle — it’s less lethal, because it has a shorter barrel — and it’s also not concealable.
Why ban it? Just so you can create more crime by creating millions of new criminals overnight?
Notice to T Tag Contributor. I am going to keep sending this over and over until you post it.
to Stuck in NJ
quote——–So a pistol with a brace is not more lethal (or “far more devastating”) than a rifle — it’s less lethal, because it has a shorter barrel — and it’s also not concealable.——quote
Wrong: Rifle calibers are far more devastating than any pistol caliber is, even shortened rifle caliber pistols. And short barrel rifle caliber pistols are concealable as was proven in the massacres listed below
Nice try on trying to distort reality. Short barreled rifle caliber pistols can have barrels way shorter than 15 inches and you damn well know this. They can have barrels as short as 1 inch if one desires.
Fact 2: Three mass murders were done with short barrel rifle caliber pistols using stabilizing braces, a man using a stabilizing brace killed 10 people at a grocery store in Boulder, Colorado. A stabilizing brace was also used in a shooting in Dayton, Ohio, that left nine people dead in 2019 and most recently in a school shooting in Nashville, Tennessee.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/house-passes-resolution-to-overturn-new-federal-gun-regulation-biden-vows-veto/ar-AA1cvits?ocid=hpmsn&cvid=45d332e3e8984c299d9fc58e66c00b60&ei=21
Those were “PISTOLS” not “RIFLES”!!!
Nice try Dacian the “MARXIST PAID BRITISH SUBJECT”!!!!
dacian, the DUNDERHEAD, Pure unadulterated BULL SHI*! A pistol brace provides the shooter of a handgun with a solid base for holding the pistol. Your contention is pure pro-ATF propaganda. One might think that you actually work for the ATF. Scalia’s opinion not in accord with the 2nd Amendment. Maybe you and he disregard the words “shall not be infringed.”
As to state bans, clearly you have disregarded the Bruen Decision which threw out NYS’s Pistol Permit criteria.
But then you are one of those anti-gun radical control addicts.
Another Blatant “LIE” being spread by the “PAID BRITISH SUBJECT”!!!!
dacian, the DUNDERHEAD, Pure unadulterated BULL SHI*! A pistol brace provides the shooter of a handgun with a solid base for holding the pistol. Your contention is pure pro-ATF propaganda. One might think that you actually work for the ATF. Scalia’s opinion not in accord with the 2nd Amendment. Maybe you and he disregard the words “shall not be infringed.”
As to state bans, clearly you have disregarded the Bruen Decision which threw out NYS’s Pistol Permit criteria.
But then you are one of those anti-gun radical control freaks.
dacian the demented dips**t,
Tell us that you know NOTHING about firearms, without saying “I know nothing about firearms”.
Oops, looks like you just did that (TWICE). Is a rifle-caliber “pistol” more powerful than any “pistol” caliber pistol? I dunno, it depends, you brainless quarterwit – which caliber of each??? What barrel length?? What distance???
Now, you f***ing babbling moron, go look at ballistics tables for a .30 carbine cartridge (that’s a “rifle caliber” in case you were unaware) from a 10″ barrel compares to a match-grade .44magnum from an equivalent length barrel at 20 yards.
When you’re finished with that little exercise, p***brain, tell me in WHAT UNIVERSE a 5.56 pistol, with or without a brace, is concealable (under anything but a tarp)????
Or, alternatively, you could just STFU, stop showing your @$$ in public, you babbling buffoon.
You are too stupid to insult.
To the Lamp that is out of his head
You should not have tangled with me on the subject of firearms. You only succeeded in making a complete fool of yourself.
Your lame attempted comparison in regards to the .30 carbine (which is nothing more than a slightly oversize pistol cartridge) is laughable.
I was speaking of the weapon of choice of mass murderers and that is the .223 which is a “true” high velocity centerfire rifle cartridge. The .223 with the 36 gr. HP achieves a stupendous velocity of 3,750 fps and the bullet explodes like an atomic bomb when it penetrates flesh and with the standard 55 grain bullet the .223 easily reaches 3,250 fps (look it up on any loading manual, if you know what that is).
So do the math oh retarded one because if you cut the 20 inch rifle barrel back 10 inches you only lose 250 fps and still have 3,500 fps with the 36gr. HP or 3,000 fps with the 55 grain bullet. This is astronomically more devastating than any pistol caliber or the .30 carbine.
Nice try with the lame ballistic propaganda but you were way out of your league (As usual oh self anointed lawyer with 4 claimed law degrees and who claims he has written numerous books but cannot seem to remember the titles to any of them.
For you folks in Washington, updates on Washington’s Assault Weapon Ban Challenge.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yO7XzZj1LDQ&pp
The citizens right to own assualt weapons is the 2 ammendment.
Wyatt Earp was no hero.
every one of the fourteen thousand armed and trained colonial militiamen who mustered overnight on 18 and 19 April 1775 to repel Thomas Gage’s troops moving uoin Lexington and Cncord carried a “weapon of war”, or “assault weapon”, ne they personally owned and often had owned for years. For Inslee and his related goons to make them “illegal” flies in the face of every principle of liberty imaginable.
Where is the 40 million pistol braces number coming from?
It’s my understanding that there aren’t that many AR-15s and clones in existence, let alone 40 million pistols.
I respectively suggest that you might have a couple of million out there at most.
It behooves us to keep our numbers accurate for credibility purposes. Exaggerations don’t impress anyone and hurt our cause when they’re proven to be false.
Braces can be used on other pistols, not only AR-style. Ruger Charger with a folding brace & silencer makes for a nicely compact small game / plinking gun, and there are a number of bolt-action braced guns intended for suppressed hunting.
Estimate from some congressional study was 10-40 million, but unclear where those numbers came from. Likely 40M is as inaccurate as the ATF’s extreme lowball 3M.
Ronnie
My Daisy Red Ryder is badass with its binary trigger and pistol brace.
They can be installed on AK pistols, TOO!!!!
Thanks JRM!
The original ones had mounts that mounted on AK pistols between the pistol grip and receiver…
Then the later AK pistols came with a thread hole on the back of the pistols to allow them to be screw mounted..
Serpent, many thanks for the clarification.
Out of curiosity, who in D.C. would want to hold the ATF or anyone else in the executive responsible for anything?
That would set a precedent for holding people accountable in D.C. and that might lead to an outbreak of honesty.
And we all know we don’t want that. Think of the children! (Except the ones being trafficked, don’t think of those ones.)
Depends on who you
I want to ride my bicycle I want to ride my bike.
Ice cream anyone? are.
Watch out for sandbags. And stairs. And invisible people stage right…
When talk of an armed uprising comes up, these people should be identified and dealt with with extreme prejudice
Do you think former Australian Prime Minister John Howard’s national firearms law was the result of some quick brainstorming?
It was planned years in advance by a bureaucrat waiting for the ideal moment to be applied. Port Arthur was that moment.
I never could understand Australia giving up its gunms. Being the sons and daughters born from X criminals and all 😋
Carrot and stick well applied. Mostly stick.
subjects of the crown…used to dutifly obeying orders..they’re not the same as us…good people, just more servile…..
Hrm. Weird how they always have pre-packaged solutions that just so happen to enhance their own power.
Even weirder how those solutions are always in want of a problem, right up until they aren’t.
It’s almost like there’s a form of opportunistic predation at work.
Patriot act re when it was written (as well as by what administration) is what convinced me both political wings are part of the same predatory bird which is eying us all.
“Patriot act …is what convinced me both political wings are part of the same predatory bird which is eying us all.”
Yes, one group wants to destroy traditional America quickly, the other slowly. The goal of political parties is expansion of power; just like governments.
The Only Way Those That Seek To Oppress US, Will Ever Be Held Accountable, Is Down The Barrel Of A Gun.
That Was True In 1776, And It’s Still True Today.
@Tired of the bs”…not that I don’t appreciate the effort, but go for the jugular and put an end to it .”
I do understand (which is not endorsing) the reluctance to attack the beast; losing carries grave consequences. But, risk of losing quickly is no more grave than risk of losing slowly. Like arguing with children, so long as you are arguing, they are not complying; they are winning.
@SAFEupstateFML
“…what exactly would be striking the head from the snake? ”
Attack, and defeat NFA and GCA. So much freedom flows naturally after. Cutting off the head of the snake makes all the nibbling carve-outs for this or that part, or firearm unnecessary.
Not saying it’s a bad idea (would absolutely love to see it honestly) but the thorny question would be how to fund it with the market of competing ideas for which is the best starting point? I think after a year or two we will probably arrive to that point but the problem with all or nothing plays is we often give up and stop trying (relatively speaking) if we meet with discouragement.
“…how to fund it with the market of competing ideas for which is the best starting point?”
For some reason, no one is competing on the idea of ending NFA and GCA (as in none of the 2A orgs are even mentioning elimination of NFA and GCA.) Why?
NRA subscribers have no real voice regarding the direction of the org. One would think the smaller 2A orgs would be more sensitive to the input from members.
Suspicion always lurks in the background that 2A orgs are trying to protect their existence, rather than protecting the Second Amendment itself.
That is a possibility and if it turns out to be true their fears will become moot rather quickly. Optimistically many are seizing the opportunity to challenge things close to their interests/knowledge base and will be able to bring well thought out cases to dismantle issues a grain of sand at a time. Getting another supreme court ruling (or a half dozen potential ones just from NY) would go a long way in speeding up the process and allowing us to focus on larger issues with more money available while limiting what power seekers could usurp without ripping the mask all the way off (at which point fuck it)
Sam, BULL! As a Member of the NRA, you do have a voice. It is called letter writing to the Board of Directors, to the administrators of the NRA etc. What are you looking for?
A Congress of the membership? NO other NON-government organization has such a thing. I have found the NRA rather responsive to the membership. But you are an outsider making complaints about an organization with little knowledge except for your own conspiracy theories. To put it bluntly, your accusations seem like regurgitated anti-NRA propaganda. To quote a man I admire, “Perfect is the enemy of good”.
“Suspicion always lurks in the background that 2A orgs are trying to protect their existence, rather than protecting the Second Amendment itself.”
If they case, then those groups should be put down MOST ruthlessly. In lesser cases where it’s a few players within the group, they need to be immediately and permanently purged most ruthlessly.
Not for grifting but for abject stupidity.
There will always be work for 2A groups so long as the Republic exists. Such is the nature of adversarial forms of government. Anyone too stupid to see this should be removed from 2A orgs immediately.
@SAFEupstateFML
“…able to bring well thought out cases to dismantle issues a grain of sand at a time. Getting another supreme court ruling (or a half dozen potential ones just from NY) would go a long way in speeding up the process…”
Just the point I try to make; “one grain of sand at a time” is the result of not putting an end to NFA and GCA (and even then, there will be grains of sand remaining). Hope springs eternal, but hope is not a battle plan.
As to another SC ruling? Heller, Heller, McDonald, Bruen, what is the result? Still more money spent that is nibbling at the grains of sand. An SC ruling short of 2A is absolute will merely open more fields of mischief (as with Bruen). There is no “wearing down” of anti-gun cartels by SC rulings. As with adding more gun control doesn’t prevent crime, how many more SC rulings are necessary to make the anti-gun mob impotent?
The fields post Bruen are far narrower and precarious for those who seek to enforce them. So long as the momentum continues that way they will have a continuously more untenable situation where they will either have to revoke the constitution or abide by it and neither will be wearing them down just limiting their options. That is the long game they played on us. If someone has standing to strike for the head I wish them luck and will do what I can to fund it but for the moment I have to work on where I live.
“The fields post Bruen are far narrower and precarious for those who seek to enforce them.”
Bruen was a win, but the effective result was an explosion in legislation ignoring the decision. There is no end to that tactic; essentially picking up the same grain of sand, over and over.
Shouldn’t the pro-gun orgs have, as a prime goal, the mission of finding “standing” to directly attack NFA and GCA in court? Why are they waiting for someone from the public to file suit?
Where we are living today is that the titular pro-gun activist orgs are simply begging govt for crumbs of exclusions from gun control laws, not seeking to end 2A infringements on the whole.
But, as with returning ineffective political representatives to office, the problem for lack of serious opposition by 2A orgs is that we (subscribers) just sit back and let the orgs do what serves them, rather than the Constitution.
We have been fighting for crumbs for over a century it may take a bit longer than a year to figure out how to go for a slice let alone the whole damned cake. The organizations for better or worse are the largest financial resource we have to fight with so unless some billionaire gets it in his or her head they want unrestricted full auto we have to work with what we have. With that said looking at bigger targets with more aggressive lawsuits is starting to happen and if bolstered with supporting smaller wins I could see a path for what is sought and lessons learned on why the denial of liberty must be brutally crushed at every opportunity.
“Shouldn’t the pro-gun orgs have, as a prime goal, the mission of finding “standing” to directly attack NFA and GCA in court? Why are they waiting for someone from the public to file suit?”
Because when you play dangerous games you try to stack the deck in your favor, unless you’re a fool or entirely overly emotional on the subject at hand.
Since the concept here is, at root, fundamentally defensive in nature, the tactics must be as conservative as reasonably allowable. Therefore you’re looking for as close to you can get in finding the perfect lawsuit.
When you’re fighting defensively, you don’t have the luxury you do in offensive lawfare. You can’t just throw shit against the wall and see what sticks because that’s a great way to get shot down and then have that precedent used against you for the cases that actually would have won had you waited.
And no, you’re not on offense just bEcAusE bRueN!, if anything you need to be more cautious now because your entering another political season and the Left has now shown that they have ZERO compunction about openly intimidating juries and judges.
Strych I should mention that aggressive lawsuits are relative and likely fit your pattern as it is more we are willing to put time and money to try at what “should” be a winning case now that text and tradition is the standard. By the previous standard what we are seeing now would be stupidly reckless and would absolutely wreck our rights with failed precedents.
Sam, I have repeatedly proposed a solution to this problem. File a law suit against any state, governor, their Legislature, member of the state legislature who vote for these bills that violate B ruen and have them cited for contempt of the Supreme Court, as well as civil rights violations of our Constitutional right to bear arms. Have them fined for these violations individually as well as punitive damages which under Federal Civil Rights law is 10 times the amount of the award.
If we hit these people in the pocketbook, it will stop them in their tracks. Each one of these suits I believe must be a class action lawsuit.
“File a law suit against any state, governor, their Legislature, member of the state legislature who vote for these bills that violate B ruen and have them cited for contempt of the Supreme Court, as well as civil rights violations of our Constitutional right to bear arms.”
Ever wonder why that hasn’t happened? Why no pro-2A org has filed such a suit as lead plaintiff for its subscribers? Why would all those organizations be waiting for an unaffiliated person to come up with a “can’t fail” means of further nibbling around the issue?
And (drum roll) why haven’t you, as a card carrying subscriber of NRA, already launched the recommended law suit?
Sam is is really very simple. To file such a law suit, the organization first has to come up with a complainant who is willing to go this route.
Psst. I already made this suggestion to botht he NRA and the NYSRPA. Again, you have to have an actual plaintiff who has had his rights DIRECTLY violated.
“As a Member of the NRA, you do have a voice. It is called letter writing to the Board of Directors, to the administrators of the NRA etc. What are you looking for?”
You are pulling my nose, right?
Yep works really well, tell me TRAITOR LAPPIERE isn’t still head of the NRA!!!!!
If you hate LaPiere, so much, join the NRA, get elected to the Board of Directors and get the rest of the board to think like you do.
No one ever toppled a CEO from outside the organizations.
Walt not for nothing but substantial efforts to do exactly that to improve the NRA were tried and crushed harder than Bernie Sanders by the superdelegate vote in 2016 for similar reasons. He is unassailable at the moment with his allies on the board and the gatekeeping that keeps out leftist infiltrators also keeps out legitimate challenges to his position. Unfortunately he is a shit sandwich we have to work with and thank goodness he has limited influence with the ILA section that is objectively useful.
SAFE, there is so such thing as “unassailable”. The trick is to get the people who support Lapierre off the board when the elections come up each winter. If you can’t get your people elected then you will have to keep trying. Again, you can’t take over the NRA from outside the NRA and the NRA is not going away.
They will never get another “PENNY” from me as long as Traitor Wayne is in there..
He is supported by the “LITTLE DICTATORS” on the Board!!!
Obviously you ignored the last attempt to oust Traitor Wayne, ended up in a purging of the “BOARD”!!!
Show the election to the board is “PHONY”, when you can get kicked out for voting against Wayne or publicly calling for his ouster!!!!
They will never get another “PENNY” from me as long as Traitor Wayne is in there..
He is supported by the “DICTATORS” on the Board!!!
Obviously you ignored the last attempt to oust Traitor Wayne, ended up in a purging of the “BOARD”!!!
Show the election to the board is “PHONY”, when you can get kicked out for voting against Wayne or publicly calling for his ouster!!!!
Well it seems the SPELL NAZI Police don’t like the word “L I T T L E DICTATORS”!!!!!!!
Walt in absolute terms you are correct, in practical terms he is unassailable and if there was a path to do it it has been narrowed considerably after rule changes from the last attempt. I value the NRA for the training it provides and the potential for political clout but ultimately it is functionally a lightning rod to distract from the smaller more focused groups that are hitting at state and local levels (which they can do a great job funding when/if the cases become relevant). For our situation NYSRPA makes way more sense to donate to as well as a few of the smaller organizations that have open lawsuits. For a free state NRA may make the most sense to donate to for keeping the liberal boogeyman active enough to draw their attention. As for Wayne obviously don’t like his management or business practices but in the end he is fairly irrelevant compared to the other issues we face and most of my donations will never head his way past basic membership (range requirement)
Sam, half assed on time efforts to do away with LaPierre and then quitting because it takes time is a copout.
JRM, that is your choice. Why didn’t you run to be a member of the Board of Directors and/or get others of your persuasion run with you? The only way anyone can “purge” the board, is by running your own slate of candidates.
Sam, Funny, how you pick just one of my points and try to make it the entire deal. I suggest you put your nose back into shape.
“Sam, Funny, how you pick just one of my points and try to make it the entire deal.”
I picked only one of your points because about three paragraphs is all I wanted to write; my choice.
Sam, so in other words, you cherry picked what you thought you might have a point?
AGAIN, put your nose back into shape.
“With that said looking at bigger targets with more aggressive lawsuits is starting to happen…”
If I knew what those were, I might be encouraged. As it is, with no definitive attack on NFA and GCA, “bigger targets” sorta seems like more nibbling (as with Bruen).
Admittedly, even if NFA and GCA are struck down by the SC, Bruen is the model; repeat legislation in defiance of the SC.
Assault weapon ban challenges Bianchi v. Frosh, Antonyuk v. Nigrelli root of all the new hyper restrictive cc laws, Frey v Bruen NY permits not good in NYC also at root of whether cities can restrict harder than states. For the ones in theory coming closer to the circuit court decisions (see how long they drag that out) and a SAFE act challenge about 6-8 months behind the above for what I am watching for my region. 9th has a bunch but honestly I lost track when the northeast started to have a variety pack of cases to follow. I think the middle of the country is being overlooked and would not be surprised if they pulled out some more shots across the bow.
Your citation of current (and potential) legal challenges does underscore that the pro-2A movement is nibbling around the edges. Bruen didn’t overturn much, in reality. SC defiance is still strong.
Pull the rug out from under the largest sources of gun control (NFA/GCA), and everyone focuses on the real battle.
Ok then we will see in a year or two as we are currently in hypothetical and uncharted legal territory for either path and I am going to guess your idea will be paved by mine
fundamentally defensive in nature, the tactics must be as conservative as reasonably allowable. Therefore you’re looking for as close to you can get in finding the perfect lawsuit.
@strych9
“And no, you’re not on offense just bEcAusE bRueN!”
‘Zackly
@Walter E Beverly III
“Sam is is really very simple. To file such a law suit, the organization first has to come up with a complainant who is willing to go this route.”
What you seem to be saying is that none of the pro-2A orgs, with 5mil+ members, can find, within their own orgs, no one “who is willing to go this route, and it is somehow up to non-2A org people to provide someone. On top of that, you seem to imply that in the last 23yrs, NRA could not find someone “to go this route”.
@Walter E Beverly III
“Sam, half assed on time efforts to do away with LaPierre and then quitting because it takes time is a copout.”
You are thinking too small. WLP is enabled by the BOD. I don’t care if WLP is run out of NRA; I want NRA itself to go away. Someone else can take over nationwide as the premier training and safety organization. If training and safety are all that important, and profitable, someone else will quickly fill the void, without the self-acquired baggage of being “the oldest civil rights organization in the country”.
If NRA wants to style itself as “the big guy” in politics, than switch mission from whatever it is today, to being the premier fundraiser for all the serious pro-2A orgs.
@Walter E Beverly III
“Sam, so in other words, you cherry picked what you thought you might have a point?”
When husbanding my time, gotta choose one from the many. You don’t?
Nose out of joint??? Really?
If I had my nose out of joint, I might actually initiate a my own group to neutralize NRA. As it is, I am simply waiting for subscribership and income to fall of its own; NRA is doing a much better job of becoming irrelevant than anything I could concoct.
“Ok then we will see in a year or two as we are currently in hypothetical and uncharted legal territory for either path and I am going to guess your idea will be paved by mine”
Oh, definitely “we” will still be picking grains of sand in two years. Too much fundraising, all around, depends on the “nibbling” approach; pro-gunner orgs, and anti-gunner orgs benefit.
Just as in the old Soviet Union, in America solving a problem is a problem; jobs at risk.
Sam, same old complaint but you are unwilling to do something about it.
If so we will just have to do what the left did with taking our rights and eat that elephant one bite at a time. But outside of some additional supreme court rulings that speed things along that was always going to be the case and now there is actually a chance. Good luck on your side of things and if you find a good challenge to the NFA be sure to post links to fund it.
“If so we will just have to do what the left did with taking our rights and eat that elephant one bite at a time.”
Why? Why so slow? What are the pro-2A orgs afraid of? Solving the problem? Losing money because they win?
Every member of every pro-2A org has had standing since NFA and GCA were passed into law (mere legislation, not amendments to the Constitution).
Why keep picking grains of sand?
Sam, all you do is whine. Where is your cheese?
You have a well defined path forward with a better than even chance of success that hits a knockout ready to go? If not then you are about the same as everyone else right now and we will have to muddle through till standing and funding catch up with the idea as was mentioned by numerous other posters way more knowledgeable about the legal system than I am. Wish I had a better answer for you but gotta do the best we can with what we have.
“Sam, same old complaint but you are unwilling to do something about it.”
You are an NRA subscriber. Did you take my action plan before the BOD? Did it get a vote? Did it pass? Why not?
BTW, though I abhor the idea of providing any funds for NRA, I do take NRA developed training, from NRA certified instructors. Part of the hourly fee goes to the LGS for running the classes. The LGS requires annual membership in NRA (I paid $10 for affiliate status about ten years ago; wear my NRA hat when at the LGS). The LGS is a corporate/company “Life Member” of NRA. By helping keep the LGS open, I make involuntary contributions to NRA; but not personally.
I AM doing something, personally: not throwing good money after bad.
Sam, IN a WORD, Yep. I voted for people to the Board who I think are in the best interests of the NRA. To take you plan before the Board would require my agreeing with it. Fact is that I don’t .
It seems you are two faced? LGS requires that you be a member of the NRA and yet you are not. “Involuntary contributions?” LOL. By belong to that organization, you are in fact contributing to the NRA WILLINGLY.
Your doing something “personally” is doing absolutely NOTHING. All you are doing is bitching.
“It seems you are two faced? LGS requires that you be a member of the NRA and yet you are not.”
Not at all. NRA subscribership was required in order to use the shooting range. I paid my affiliate dues. Nothing in the agreement with the LGS required annual, or current dues. If presented with the demand to affiliate annually with NRA, I will do so.
I am not obligated to spend my money with NRA in order to lodge questions, or express opinions.
“Involuntary contributions?” LOL. By belong to that organization, you are in fact contributing to the NRA WILLINGLY.”
Then, by paying taxes, you willingly contribute to the successes of the “woke” agenda (such as child mutilation).
You asked for my “plan” to take bold action to strike at the head of the 2A infringement snake. Now, you say you are opposed to same, and endorse a forever war at the edges of the contest. That makes sense, as you are a subscriber to an organization that is not actually attempting to restore RTKBA, but is dedicated to prolonging the infringements through legal sloth.
“Your doing something “personally” is doing absolutely NOTHING. All you are doing is bitching.”
A swing, and a miss, old bean. NRA is a tool. When a tool fails to serve me, I abandon that tool, exercise my natural, human and civil right to publicly render a negative review to anyone I meet. My “personal” action? Voting with my money,
NRA is simply a tool, not a religion.
Sam, NICE TRY! Wow! What an attempt at deflection! By paying your “affiliate dues”, you are in fact contributing to the NRA no matter how you cut it. Your use of semantics is getting you now where fast. Let me put it this way, a “horse by another name is still a horse”. You have also admitted to taking courses with an NRA instructor. Here’s a NEWS FLASH, The course materials have to be purchased from the NRA and that cost is passed on to you in the form of the fee to take the course. AGain, another deflection?
Your plan is fantastic! When are you going to take the time, money etc to implement it? Or are you still paying lip service to your “plan”?
Fact is I thew a strike right down the pipe!
You have every right to either join the NRA or hate it as you do. Your choice. No, the NRA my “friend” is an organization of many people, not your tool.
@Walter E Beverly
“Sam, all you do is whine. Where is your cheese?”
Now that’s funny; thanx for all the entertainment.
Sam, I am very glad to “entertain you”. Again, with your whine do you supply cheese?
@SAFEupstateFML
“You have a well defined path forward with a better than even chance of success that hits a knockout ready to go?”
To begin, the idea that we must work only with what we have is what the anti-gun mafia wants you to believe.
Bruen was not a knockout blow. Does it seem odd to you that the current brand name 2A orgs don’t have a plan for a knockout blow? There is an unending ability for anti-gunners to keep us tied up in court in perpetuity, challenging gun laws that only have authority because of NFA and GCA? Why all the dillydallying with grains of sand? Same for other 2A orgs.
Why do we gun owners want to believe that we have sufficient time ahead to clear the beach of sand? The SC can apply to Congress to add seats. Congress on its own can expand the number of seats on the SC. We are only a heartbeat from losing the conservative drift of the SC.
The Dims are approaching the end of “the long march”, anti-Dims have barely begun the march to preserve traditional American values, and halt the slide of the Second Amendment into the abyss.
Why all the resistance to urgency?
Sam, the KNOCKOUT blow will be one someone takes the time and the money to get an attorney who will go through my “plan” of suing the members of the state legislature who are violating our civil rights passing these “laws” which violate Bruen.
“Sam, the KNOCKOUT blow will be one someone takes the time and the money to get an attorney who will go through my “plan” of suing the members of the state legislature who are violating our civil rights passing these “laws” which violate Bruen.”
That plan is still a time-consuming drill around the edges. But, why don’t you do that? Why doesn’t NRA do that? Why are you both standing around, waiting for an outsider to do things for you?
Sam, what? Are you one of those guys who wants instant gratification? Law suits take time. You see, that is the way the legal system works.
Resistance to urgency? Still haven’t heard a suggestion on your end or anyone else that is more productive than getting started on using Bruen wherever we can so feel free to add on if you can improve it. Not a challenge just the reality of the present.
“Still haven’t heard a suggestion on your end or anyone else that is more productive than getting started on using Bruen wherever we can so feel free to add on if you can improve it. Not a challenge just the reality of the present.”
You, too? Already put the solution, four times to Walt. The only ones currently benefitting from nibbling around the edges are the 2A orgs, and the firearms industry. Bruen generated unending lawsuits. What is the alleged authority for gun control laws? Get rid of it, now.
Sam, your “solution” is pure unadulterated BULL SHI*. You keep taking about taking on NFA/GCA and then whine when no one does it for you. There was an expression when I was a kid which applies now. PUT UP OR SHUT UP!
So who is filling the case with standing and funding? Everyone gangsta till it’s time to do gangsta shit. Kidding aside let me know when it goes through so we can have a look and see if it’s viable to fund.
@Walter E Beverly III
When are you, or even NRA, going to launch an attack on NFA/GCA? When? “Standing” isn’t an issue for either. I would be highly suspicious of an organization depending on an outsider to do their work.
“No, the NRA my “friend” is an organization of many people, not your tool.”
Therein lies the pseudo-religion of NRA. Any and all organizations are tools for achieving something benefiting “many people”. If an organization does not serve my interests (as would any tool), I discard it.
It is not the internal fraternization that is the measure of organization performance, but specifically the achievements, the output, the success of the mission. Thinking that an organization cannot be assailed, cannot be held accountable, is simply social club, is the hallmark of a religion Note, NRA also feels that it must survive, regardless of usefulness in protecting “civil rights”.
I don’t hate NRA, anymore than I would hate a broken hammer. When a tool fails, get a new one.
Sam, the NRA just might “launch an attack on NFA/GCA, when someone steps up and files a suit. You see that is the way it works. An individual or a group of individuals (class action) files a suit and then requests funding.
So when re you going to file your suit?
“Sam, the NRA just might “launch an attack on NFA/GCA, when someone steps up and files a suit.”
NRA just intervened (with “standing”) in the 5th Circuit case on bump stocks.
Why can it not launch its own case regarding NFA/GCA? per Mock v. Garland”
Why can you not launch such a case, and get NRA to intervene?
Or, why cannot NRA simply name itself as plaintiff on behalf of its subscribers (who all have “standing” per Mock v. Garland)?
If the “oldest civil rights” organization in the country is looking for outsiders to launch a legal action (for which NRA might/maybe join), what does that say about your religious idol?
(Hint: it says your idol is impotent)
Sam, I have no interest in making a case against the NFA/GCA. but you claim to. In order for the NRA to launch such case, it would have to name the members whose civil rights were abridged. In other words, that “dirty word”, standing comes back.
I’m still waiting for you to put your money where your mouth is. But trust me, I won’t hold my breath.
Your hatred for the NRA is showing again. But you have nothing but your whine backing it up.
@Walter E Beverly III
“Sam, what? Are you one of those guys who wants instant gratification? Law suits take time. You see, that is the way the legal system works.”
Exactly; we finally agree. Multiple law suits take multiples of time; time we may not have. A single lawsuit, striking at the heart of legislation, takes time only for itself. Picking up grains of sand requires infinite time to bring each grain before the courts.
Same, I have some very bad news for you. Instant gratification is your thingie. Not mine. Unlike people like you, I understand the the legal system is not perfect and does not operate at your warp speed. So file your lawsuit, and quit whining. I am waiting for your “cheese”.
“SAFEupstateFML
“So who is filling the case with standing and funding?”
There is a renowned national civil rights organization with plenty of money and people with standing to launch a challenge to NFA/GCA. Not sure why they are waiting for an outsider to do what the organization could have done years ago.
Gotcha so no practicable suggestions are this time. Well on to getting what we can going and seeing how we can improve the process later.
Sam, and we are all still waiting for you to put your money where your mouth is. It seems you do not have any faith in your ability to challenge the NFA/GCA?
“Gotcha so no practicable suggestions are this time.”
The “solution” is practical, but risks drastic reduction the money flow to 2A orgs. If the solution is implemented, the fear factor that 2A orgs live on lessens dramatically.
If you go to the local doc-in-a-box with a sucking chest wound, and are told you cannot be treated until all the cuts, bruises, and sprains are resolved, do you sit in the waiting room, or go elsewhere? The 2A orgs are telling us they cannot even think about removing the actual source of infringements, until they have defeated every gun law in the states and nation.
All the pro-2A orgs are waiting on me to initiate the lawsuit to attack/end NFA/GCA. Why would you keep supporting them?
No you just have a different agenda than most people at this stage and it doesn’t fit the situation yet.
“…you just have a different agenda than most people at this stage and it doesn’t fit the situation yet.”
The obvious question is, “Why”? Why the wait? Regardless of what the public wants, the 2A orgs have money to spend on nibbling, why are they not going after a major source of 2A infringements? Every dime wasted on chasing worms cannot be used to kill the snake.
Again no one sees a good path that has not yet been paved with other pending victories. If you do get a proposal together and/or fund your own. Not saying it’s easy or simple (partly why it hasn’t been done just yet probably) but nothing is stopping you or anyone else. For many of the rest of us perhaps we see laying groundwork being the more sensible route to this goal. If you disagree you are free to pursue your own path with our without the criticism of others. The argument of why this or why that is ultimately pointless as nothing gets done when we do nothing but argue so going with what I have been going with since Bruen was still at the circuit level and now the process is substantially faster and easier.
Sam, Again, I challenge you to put put your money where your mouth is?
Sam, we are all still waiting for you to put your money where your mouth is? Don’t you have any faith in your own position?
“For many of the rest of us perhaps we see laying groundwork being the more sensible route to this goal.”
And just what is the culmination of that groundwork? What does How many small victories leads to ending NFA/GCA? How much money must first be spent, before a move to repeal NFA/GCA can begin? Just where is the line that declares, “this is the best we can do”, leaving major sources of 2A infringement in place?
Truth, if the strategy is to repetitiously generate legal challenges that can be stalled forever in the appeals circle, what is the point?
As for any individual launching a personal challenge to NFA/GCA, then what is the point of paying dues to organizations whose stated mission is ending infringements of the Second Amendments? Answer: Delay is a money-maker. Solve the problem, and the money dries up.
I will donate to any organization that is first to declare the intent to repeal NFA/GCA; nothing until.
Then for the foreseeable future you shall donate nothing and be happy with the results I guess. I wish you well and hope you find a good path forward and remember to share it when you do as improvements to the process are always welcome.
“Then for the foreseeable future you shall donate nothing and be happy with the results I guess.”
Your stance seems to be that any 2A supporter is obligated to spend money on a tool that doesn’t accomplish the job.. Or that people must keep an old car on the road, even when the annual expense is greater than payments for a new car.
Bruen should have essentially shut down the anti-gun crowd. Instead, the ruling is a prank generator for the anti-gun crowd. For every “victory” at the edges, 2A opponents generate a new wrinkle that the pro-2A orgs must deal with. There is no end to that tactic, no end to the financial drain on financial resources of pro-2A individuals; we do not have the greater number of billionaires.
Game plan? Already presented. Legal details? The pro-2A orgs have the lawyers to implement challenges to NFA/GCA. Why are they waiting for an unaffiliated individual to lead the movement? Isn’t that their job?
Finally, I (and more) are financially limited. Why should we dissipate our funds on marginal gains, rather than look to the powerful 2A orgs to strike at the heart of the bear?
When the 2A orgs become useful tools for eliminating political tyranny, a tool that accumulates the power to brush aside all the distracting, shiny, new objects, and go all in on removing the source of anti-2A legal authority, only then will the 2A orgs be selling a tool I am willing to pay for. So, yes, until then, I accept the situation as it is, and vote with my cash, i.e. withholding it until the pro-2A orgs are willing to put themselves out of business by removing NFA/GCA.
“Follow the money”. Is an org more likely to be able to collect funds nibbling at the edges of gun control, or ending gun control?
Sam, Why don’t you form your own organization and file suit against the NFA/GCA?
Comments are closed.