Second Amendment/ATF related issues (Discussion thread)

[Live Life]

Migrating "discussion" posts from "informative" thread - https://armedpolitesociety.com/index.php?topic=70249.msg1462278#msg1462278

I'd be interested in looking at a CA XR920.  I'm pretty familiar with a Glock trigger mechanism, and I'd be interested in how they engineered and installed a mag disconnect.  I also wonder what that does to the trigger pull.

It might not be a true disconnect (note: I know nothing about them). Jackass Trevor posted a short video on it from SHOT bragging about it, and it shows him working the trigger without a mag. It acts the same way a trigger does when a manual safety is engaged, i.e, barely moves. I've seen the disconnect on M&Ps, and the trigger seems to move a lot more.

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/VoaL5Fd4X6k?feature=share

[Live Life]

Migrating "discussion" posts from "informative" thread - https://armedpolitesociety.com/index.php?topic=70249.msg1462313#msg1462313

Yes, I know. You were clear.  You quoted the blurb from the XR920 page about being "Born out of a custom request for Law Enforcement". The pistol they are talking about on that page is not the CA compliant one, as that pistol, and webpage, have been out for three years.


I wonder if they have some sort of vertical sliding lock on the trigger bar, that the mag moves.  I'd li,e to handle one and see, but not bad enough to set foot in Cali

[Live Life]

Migrating "discussion" posts from "informative" thread - https://armedpolitesociety.com/index.php?topic=70249.msg1462396#msg1462396

Dogmush - Shadow Systems actually did a video on the mechanics. It's not a standard disconnect and it sounds like your guess was right.

https://youtu.be/ZSKVnj9Q5pc

Ben, You look younger and more...Asian then I expected.

ETA:  That looks nicely easy to defeat as well.  Good to see.

[Live Life]

Migrating "discussion" posts from "informative" thread - https://armedpolitesociety.com/index.php?topic=70249.msg1462401#msg1462401

And I thought he was joking about being 30 ...

[Live Life]

Migrating "discussion" posts from "informative" thread - https://armedpolitesociety.com/index.php?topic=70249.msg1463189#msg1463189

I have seen no indication that the Pistol Brace rule is even on Trump's RADAR as something to intervene on, have you?

With NAGR board chairman/chief legal counsel David Warrington appointed to serve as White House Counsel and Assistant to President Trump overseeing over 30 attorneys, I am quite certain what NAGR aimed to work on with 119th Congress will have President Trump's ear - https://armedpolitesociety.com/index.php?topic=70249.msg1461878#msg1461878

These are NAGR's agenda for 2025 which includes, "Rescind the ATF’s bans on ... pistol braces" - https://armedpolitesociety.com/index.php?topic=70249.msg1461806#msg1461806

- Pass National Constitutional Carry

- Pass the SHUSH Act to Deregulate Suppressors - The “Silencers Help Us Save Hearing Act” (S.4825, 118th Cong.) proposes to deregulate suppressors at the federal level, removing them from restrictions under the NFA and NICS system.

- Abolish the ATF President Trump and Congress can start right now by:
- Firing Anti-Gun ATF Director Steve Dettelbach on day one, and;
- Reducing the ATF’s budget to Pre-Obama Levels — cut at least $1 Billion (50%) for FY25.

- Overturn / Defund Biden’s Executive Gun Controls - The incoming administration and Congress must act immediately, using every available tool — including executive actions, budgetary control, legislation, the Administrative Procedures Act, and the Congressional Review Act — to:

- Repeal the ATF’s “Engaged in the Business” Rule (Final Rule 2022R-17F).

- Rescind the ATF’s bans on homemade firearms, pistol braces, and forced-reset triggers. ... now that the Supreme Court has overturned the Chevron Defense. This includes ATF final rules 2021R-05F, 2021R-08F, 2018R–22F, and the ATF’s letter dated 3/22/22. Congress should repeal these bans and pass bills like the PISTOL Act (H.R.381, 118th Cong.) to prevent similar overreach in the future.

- Eliminate Biden’s Office of Gun Violence Prevention and reinstate the Dicky Amendment.

- Direct the Justice Department not to defend any gun control law or regulation in court. (What previous post talked about)

- End Federal “Red Flag” Gun Confiscation Support

- Repeal the Red Flag Justice Assistance Grants authorized under the “Bipartisan Safer Communities Act.” Taxpayer dollars should not fund states that violate Americans’ rights.

- Pass the Federal Agent Responsibility Act (H.R.1243, 118th Cong.) to hold federal agents accountable and prevent them from participating in these unconstitutional gun grabs.

- Destroy the ATF’s Illegal Gun Registries

- End multi-gun purchase reporting.

- End Unconstitutional Name Dumps into the NICS “Prohibited Persons” List

- Restore gun rights to veterans

- Pass the Protecting Gun Rights and Due Process Act (S. 2802 / 114th Cong. & H.R.1258 / 118th Cong.) to ensure that no one is placed on a federal “no guns” list without a proper judicial process.

- Repeal the “Sporting Purpose” Clause and Firearm Import Bans (Bill already introduced - https://armedpolitesociety.com/index.php?topic=70249.msg1461220#msg1461220)

- Repeal the Federal Gun Tax

- Repeal the NFA of 1934, GCA of 1968, and Hughes Amendment of 1989

[Live Life]

Migrating "discussion" posts from "informative" thread - https://armedpolitesociety.com/index.php?topic=70249.msg1463199#msg1463199

Uh huh.  You'll have to forgive me if that line doesn't fill me with confidence at the author's grasp of federal rule making and unmaking.

To this layperson, 30+ attorneys working under NAGR's David Warrington are likely to increase as Trump's administration fulfills campaign promises made.  We do not know all the work that's going on behind the scenes but indications we have seen so far is that Trump administration is hitting the ground running for "We the People" who elected Trump.

BTW, these are FPC attorney Anthony Miranda's comments on Trump administration's options regarding pistol brace Rule and ATF wanting to still enforce pistol brace Rule - https://armedpolitesociety.com/index.php?topic=70249.msg1463184#msg1463184

... there are plenty of options Trump administration has to cure this issue so let's talk about some of those options:

- First option ... Trump administration can direct the ATF to actually withdraw or amend their existing Rule on pistol braces ... This could potentially involve something kind of a longer process of initiating a new rule making process, including a public comment period and potentially reverse or alter the current regulations ... So that is a longer process but that would be more permanent and it would be a clear statement that no braced pistols are in fact SBRs and would set a stronger precedent going forward

- Second one of the options ... Trump administration could simply cease to actually defend any of the ongoing litigation on the pistol brace issue ... His administration may just choose to stop defending the pistol brace Rule or tell the courts that no, they're no longer of the position, the ATF position, no longer is that they want to defend these lawsuits ... That they agree with the courts that have multiple times in preliminary injunction reviews and final merits decisions found that this Rule is invalid

... - The third option is Trump administration could simply issue new guidance ... We've seen ATF issue guidance and guidance letters multiple times on not just the pistol brace issue but other issues as well ... ATF could release new guidance clarifying that stabilizing braces do not convert pistols into SBRs, effectively nullifying their previous rules and the impacts of that Rule ... The issue with this option ... is ... we've seen guidance letters and guidance in general by the ATF kind of been thrown aside, you know when ATF wants to do something new

... - I like one of the other options because I think those would be a little bit more concrete and would have more effect on this issue going forward
- All those options that I mentioned would directly impact these current lawsuits against the pistol braces Rule

[Live Life]

Migrating "discussion" posts from "informative" thread - https://armedpolitesociety.com/index.php?topic=70249.msg1463204#msg1463204

... whomever at NAGR decided that Congress needed to be involved in rescinding rules

Of course, I have no idea what is happening at the White House regarding what Trump administration is working on and 30+ attorneys but NAGR having that list of agenda to work with 119th Congress with NAGR senior counsel now appointed at White House Counsel and President Trump's Assistant gives me a lot of hope that much of that agenda list will be expressed to the President/administration.

I ain't reading all that

Here's shorter bulleted list of what Trump/administration can do regarding ATF and pistol brace Rule:

- First option ... Trump administration can direct the ATF to actually withdraw or amend their existing Rule on pistol braces

- Second one of the options ... Trump administration could simply cease to actually defend any of the ongoing litigation on the pistol brace issue

- The third option is Trump administration could simply issue new guidance

[dogmush]

Couple of things before you blast me with another wall of someone else's thoughts:

First, My initial "uh huh" was the NAGR agenda confused Chevron "Defense" with Chevron "Deference".  Probably a simple typo that autocorrect failed to catch, but that combined in the same bulletpoint with calling for Congress to rescind the CFR's in question makes me think whomever wrote that, be it NAGR intern, public affairs wonk, or internet "layperson" doesn't know what the *expletive deleted*ck they are talking about.  Indeed, "Congress rescinding rules they are not involved in the passage of" is noticeably absent from Mr. Miranda's options for the Trump administration.

Second, We all have no idea what is happening in Trump's mind until it comes out as a Tweet or an Executive Order, and sometimes not even then.  Sure one guy from NAGR hired into the WH staff is better than nothing, but Trump *does* tend to telegraph the issues he wants to work on: i.e. Trade Imbalances, Wars, The Southern Border, Domestic Energy production etc.  I reiterate: I have seen no indication Trump plans on spending any political capitol moving the needle on gun rights, much less specifically these rules.  I ask again: Have you seen anything?  (I guess other than the hiring of that one lawyer, which is something)  Unless you have some reason to think that's forthcoming your other thread is less informative than in might be because it puts forth your hopes as info.  (Much like you did with the PARTS bill and the origin of the Shadow Systems XR920)

Which brings us to:

Third: I strongly disagree with your thinking that somehow that other thread is better off for only having your "informative" posts rather than back and for discussion of the cases and their progress.  Starting this thread and repeating everyone's posts that you deem to be "discussion" smacks me pretty hard of hubris.  This ain't THR where threads are tightly controlled for fear of being nuked. In the 8 pages of that thread you have been (or reposted something that was) factually wrong at three times that I counted, and I confess, I skimmed a bunch of that quoted copy/paste.  So maybe pump the brakes a little on culling the "discussion" that actually adds context and information to your thread.

That said:  I'm just one guy, I could be misinterpreting your typing as nuance is hard to convey in text, and even if I'm not, I am not the boss of you.  We've had two interactions now about the way you choose to carry your posting on here as a continuation of THR.  At this point my piece has been said. 

[Live Life]

Third: I strongly disagree with your thinking that somehow that other thread is better off for only having your "informative" posts rather than back and for discussion of the cases and their progress.  Starting this thread and repeating everyone's posts that you deem to be "discussion" smacks me pretty hard of hubris.  This ain't THR where threads are tightly controlled for fear of being nuked.

Believe it or not, I am actually in agreement with you in many aspects.

Hear me out.

When I decided to leave THR, it was coinciding with unexpected passing of a friend and shortly after, passing of our dog of almost 14 years.  I initially planned on just lurking on APS as a distraction as I find many thread topics interesting.

Only reason why I migrated the 2A/ATF related thread was due to many requests by THR members who some of them are also APS members.  2A related threads in THR "General" category were informational threads primarily as any discussion remotely approaching politics is not allowed on THR.  And I told THR/APS members when I joined APS that I needed to run by APS admin/mods of my method of posting bulleted, redacted, paraphrased articles so posts are not "exact" copy of published articles (I do copy/paste into quotes press releases of pro-2A organizations and elected representatives as exceptions) like YT videos posting mirrored/flipped videos to get around copyright issues (Which was allowed on THR for not violating copyright concern).

Since copyright concern was raised AGAIN recently, I ran my method of posting by administrator Ben AGAIN who gave me the green light to continue (I ran the copyright issue by Ben when I joined APS who gave me the green light to post).

BTW FWIW, THR has an entire subcategory where multiple threads "copy/paste" entire articles fully without any bulleting, redaction or paraphrasing and no expressed concern for "copyright" issues by admins/mods - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?forums/activism.46/

So at this point, if you have an issue with me maintaining an informative thread on 2A/ATF related cases to keep THR/APS members updated, perhaps taking the issue to APS admin/mods is the next step as I am going by what was communicated by APS administrator.

Other than 22LR lowest price shipped thread, I plan to casually participate on APS threads for retirement - https://armedpolitesociety.com/index.php?topic=70241.msg1460076#msg1460076

... I confess, I skimmed a bunch of that quoted copy/paste.  So maybe pump the brakes a little on culling the "discussion" that actually adds context and information to your thread.

That said:  I'm just one guy, I could be misinterpreting your typing as nuance is hard to convey in text, and even if I'm not, I am not the boss of you.  We've had two interactions now about the way you choose to carry your posting on here as a continuation of THR.  At this point my piece has been said.

And administrator Ben did mention something to that effect where the "informative" 2A/ATF related cases thread did not facilitate "discussion" on a forum meant for discussion.  And I agree with both of you pointing that out.  (I told you I was in agreement with you in many aspects  )

That's why I mentioned starting a "discussion" thread for 2A/ATF related discussion on previous posts and eventually decided to start this "discussion" thread and transferred all the discussion posts to be transparent with links to original posts.

So members can review the posts and if so inclined, resume discussion of posts/topics.  And of course, like in "spirit" of other APS threads, I anticipate and expect thread drift and even hijacking. 

I could be misinterpreting your typing as nuance is hard to convey in text, and even if I'm not, I am not the boss of you.

And I share your sentiment as my mind and memory is not what it used to be (I used to have near photographic memory and now, I can't even remember my/wife's phone numbers half the time and need to look it up).

And absolutely, you are not boss of me but my wife of 30 years sure is.

Couple of things before you blast me with another wall of someone else's thoughts:
My initial "uh huh" was the NAGR agenda confused Chevron "Defense" with Chevron "Deference".  Probably a simple typo that autocorrect failed to catch, but that combined in the same bulletpoint with calling for Congress to rescind the CFR's in question makes me think whomever wrote that, be it NAGR intern, public affairs wonk, or internet "layperson" doesn't know what the *expletive deleted*ck they are talking about.

I can't speak for mistakes NAGR made on their press releases/public articles, etc.  You would need to take that up with NAGR. (They will probably appreciate it  )

Indeed, "Congress rescinding rules they are not involved in the passage of" is noticeably absent from Mr. Miranda's options for the Trump administration.

I just shared what Anthony Miranda posted on his YT video so those are his options he came up with.  You could ask him that question on his video link.

I have seen no indication Trump plans on spending any political capitol moving the needle on gun rights, much less specifically these rules.

Now, we could absolutely talk about that in this thread.

Yes, I would agree with you that I have not seen Executive Orders signed that were directly related to Second Amendment.

But, it's been only seven days and he is still signing EOs.

He apparently has some high priority issues he campaigned on and promised he would do and I am mildly pleasantly surprised his administration has hit the ground running with pardoning J6 capitol "tourists", securing the border, mobilizing the military, rounding up and deporting illegals, pushing for ending birthright citizenship for illegals, visiting NC and Los Angeles while negotiating with world leaders and pushing through cabinet confirmations.  He's been busy.

Have you seen anything?  (I guess other than the hiring of that one lawyer, which is something) Unless you have some reason to think that's forthcoming your other thread is less informative than in might be because it puts forth your hopes as info.

Several bills were introduced and reintroduced in House/Senate that directly speak to bulleted listings by NAGR and GOA in these threads:

https://armedpolitesociety.com/index.php?topic=70249.msg1459450#msg1459450

https://armedpolitesociety.com/index.php?topic=70249.msg1461724#msg1461724

And yes I am aware of probability some of these bills have in becoming signed into laws.  But the way I see it and "hope", now may be the best opportunity we may have in recent years/decades in getting some of these bills passed into laws so "We the People" could have some permanent enforcement. I sure am hoping.

And do remember the "informative" thread disclaimer in the OP that it's ALL my "subjective opinions and personal thoughts" posted in that thread  - https://armedpolitesociety.com/index.php?topic=70249.msg1456139#msg1456139

Disclaimer:  I am not a lawyer, just a "layperson". 

Subjective opinions expressed in this thread by me are my personal thoughts and by no means objective factual "legal" explanation of case rulings and lawyers/attorneys' expressions posted (So obviously, there will be disagreements/arguments why I may/could be wrong, likely what is "proper" interpretation ...

[Live Life]

From SAF X page regarding CRPA v. Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Dept. (CA non-resident carry permit) ruling - https://x.com/2AFDN/status/1883676842634444821
 

This past Friday January 24th a district court in California granted SAF’s request for an injunction requiring the state to process non-resident permit applications for SAF members who live in the U.S. but outside of California (and who aren’t prohibited). Such folks will be able to start applying 90 days from the date of the order.

[Live Life]

Regarding AW/Magazine ban update - https://armedpolitesociety.com/index.php?topic=70249.msg1463393#msg1463393

To this layperson, after Supreme Court posted the order list on Monday, there's been two more "Miscellaneous Orders" posted on 1/27 and 1/28 with "CERTIORARI GRANTED"
for MARTIN, CURTRINA, ET AL. V. UNITED STATES - https://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/ordersofthecourt/24

So to me, Supreme Court justices and their law clerks could be going through the cases that have not been denied, including Snope and Ocean State Tactical?

Yes, I am hoping.

[Live Life]

Regarding NAGR forced reset trigger case ruling 5th Circuit denying second request by states to reconsider the ruling against ATF - https://x.com/NatlGunRights/status/1885019276135776707
 

[Live Life]

Is Giffords Law Center predicting the future? https://x.com/gunpolicy/status/1885360395835035743

[MechAg94]

Regarding NAGR forced reset trigger case ruling 5th Circuit denying second request by states to reconsider the ruling against ATF - https://x.com/NatlGunRights/status/1885019276135776707
 

Good.  One of these days I will find one at a gun show.

[Live Life]

Supreme Court posted "Miscellaneous orders" ... on 1/27, 1/28 ... [and 1/30] - https://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/ordersofthecourt/24

... justices and their law clerks could be going through the cases that have not been denied, including Snope and Ocean State Tactical?

Another "Miscellaneous order" but not for 2A cases - https://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/020325zr_q861.pdf

[Live Life]

Guns.com - https://x.com/Guns_com/status/1886417079709925736

If passed, the bill will deregulate suppressors as firearms under both the National Firearms Act and the Gun Control Act.

[Live Life]

Senate confirms Pam Bondi as US attorney general - https://apnews.com/article/pam-bondi-justice-department-trump-confirmation-7a37ef0b42964f9476776559379f48bd

Pam Bondi at her confirmation hearing - https://thereload.com/trump-ag-pick-i-am-an-advocate-for-the-second-amendment-but-i-will-enforce-the-laws-of-the-land/

“I am pro-Second Amendment. I have always been pro-Second Amendment”

Here's to hoping expedited reversal of DOJ/ATF's anti-gun agenda and policies ... Despite her past positions

[Ben]

Guns.com - https://x.com/Guns_com/status/1886417079709925736

Those who paid a transfer tax for such safety accessories in the two years before the bill's enactment would get a refund.

Man, I'd love me that refund.

[Angel Eyes]

A federal judge in Mississippi (5th Circuit) just ruled that the federal machine gun ban is inconsistent with the text, history, and tradition of the Second Amendment - while making it clear he disagrees with Heller and Bruen

https://x.com/hannahhill_sc/status/1886900582537220278

Thread at the link.

[Live Life]

5th Circuit ... ruled ... federal machine gun ban is inconsistent with the text, history, and tradition of the Second Amendment

This could get real interesting  ...

[MechAg94]

Makes me wonder if that Judge thinks his ruling might get Bruen and other cases overturned. 

[Live Life]

This could get real interesting  ...

Makes me wonder if that Judge thinks his ruling might get Bruen and other cases overturned.

Hannah Hill (Vice President of @NFGR_Official, the official legal arm of NAGR @NatlGunRights) - https://x.com/hannahhill_sc/status/1886900582537220278

A federal judge in Mississippi (5th Circuit) just ruled that the federal machine gun ban is inconsistent with the text, history, and tradition of the Second Amendment - while making it clear he disagrees with Heller and Bruen.

This is an as-applied challenge. The ruling dismisses a criminal charge of possession of a machine gun under the federal statute, because the government didn't meet its burden under the Bruen test ... fascinating 12-page ruling. The judge here very much disagrees with the history, and tradition approach, but he faithfully applies every single aspect of the Bruen test and reaches the correct conclusion - one, ironically, the Supreme Court would NOT endorse.

Honestly, it makes me wonder if this is malicious compliance. The Supreme Court's blessing of the machine gun ban in Heller and its test in Bruen are fundamentally at odds, and that's why leftist judges so gleefully equate AR/AKs and machine guns.

The judge accurately dismisses the government's public safety arguments as interest-balancing precluded by Bruen.

And he closes by saying the Supreme Court's lack of trust in the legislative branch to uphold the Second Amendment is in turn undermining public trust in the judicial branch - "but I have to apply the law, so here you go. Case dismissed."

My own conclusion: His application of Bruen is refreshingly correct. I just can't help noticing that this brutal frankness brings him into direct conflict with the Supreme Court's golden calf of gun control - the machine gun ban. Coincidence?

Oh - one more thing. I don't know if the 5th Circuit will uphold this, but the Supreme Court as it stands certainly will not. If this makes it up to SCOTUS, you're getting another Rahimi-type ruling. That alone will make the 5th more gunshy if this gets appealed.

This is an as-applied challenge. This is the judge saying the government can't prosecute Mr. Brown. The machine gun ban is still standing for the rest of us.

[Pb]

Makes me wonder if that Judge thinks his ruling might get Bruen and other cases overturned.

I agree that the judge is probably operating on bad faith.

The ruling is correct though- machine gun ownrship is protected by the Second Amendment.  Tht seems to be unthinkable for most people.   

[Live Life]

Representative Thomas Massie adds three more cosponsors (32) to HR 645, the National Constitutional Carry Act - https://x.com/RepThomasMassie/status/1887184159732334988

Thank you to @RepRonnyJackson for cosponsoring HR 645, the National Constitutional Carry Act.   

No one should have to beg the government to exercise a constitutionally protected right anywhere in the country.

[Live Life]

Supreme Court posted "Miscellaneous orders" ... on 1/27, 1/28, 1/30 and 2/4 - https://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/ordersofthecourt/24

Another "Miscellaneous order" but not for 2A cases - https://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/020525zr_6j37.pdf