Protecting the Second Amendment – Why all Americans Should Be Concerned - Page 95

Paslode · 05-01-2021, 04:57

Nicely done Box you have a complete grasp on the situation.

Despite heading in the opposite direction as most every day, and generally taking in the scenery on the side streets to get to wherever, I still end up at the same destination as most. And from there I trade in the freedom of cash for the security of piece of plastic. And the entire time I am wearing a AppleWatch that tracks my health, noise levels, sleep patterns and movements which is linked to a iPhone that transmits all the data to a "Trusted and Secure" cloud somewhere.

All that convenience has become a noose which most fail to realize...

Now for Part II of the mis-use of the NICS by our "Trusted" partner the FBI.

Quote:

Proof FBI’s NICS Firearms-Background-Check is Gathering Our Private Info for INTERPOL

A snippet:

Quote:

NICS, in this case, is used to gather information on a U.S citizen or someone in the country legally who is eligible to buy a firearm. That intelligence is then supplied to a foreign law enforcement agency. It is unclear what INTERPOL does with the FBI-provided information, but it is clear that the target for the snooping is never informed that the FBI handed over their data to INTERPOL.

https://www.ammoland.com/2021/04/pro...#ixzz6tbp7hswb

tom kelly · 05-01-2021, 12:31

REMEMBER, The individual who founded the FBI, was the life-long director, and even has the FBI headquarters building named for him. Everyone should read the biography of J Edgar....That's your FBI today on steroids.

JJ_BPK · 05-07-2021, 15:45

FYI
Just in, ATF rule chamges:

Haven't read completely, yet

Quote:

Definition of “Frame or Receiver” and Identification of Firearms

On May 7, 2021, the Attorney General signed ATF proposed rule 2021R-05, Definition of “Frame or Receiver” and Identification of Firearms. The goal of the proposed rule is to ensure the proper marking, recordkeeping, and traceability of all firearms manufactured, imported, acquired and disposed by federal firearms licensees.

Please note that this is the text of the proposed rule as signed by the Attorney General, but the official version of the proposed rule will be as it is published in the Federal Register.

Download the proposed rule (PDF, 1.3 MB)
https://www.atf.gov/file/154586/download

Summary

This proposed rule would:

Provide new definitions of “firearm frame or receiver” and “frame or receiver”
Amend the definition of:
“firearm” to clarify when a firearm parts kit is considered a “firearm,” and
“gunsmith” to clarify the meaning of that term and to explain that gunsmiths may be licensed solely to mark firearms for unlicensed persons.
Provide definitions for:
“complete weapon,”
“complete muffler or silencer device,”
“privately made firearm (PMF),” and
“readily” for purposes of clarity given advancements in firearms technology.
Provide a definition of “importer’s or manufacturer’s serial number”
Provide a deadline for marking firearms manufactured.
Clarify marking requirements for firearm mufflers and silencers.
Amend the format for records of manufacture/acquisition and disposition by manufacturers and importers.
Amend the time period records must be retained at the licensed premises.

Read the full summary

https://www.atf.gov/rules-and-regula...ceiver/summary

Submit a Comment

ATF is receiving comments on the proposed rule for 90 days from the date the proposed rule is posted in the Federal Register.

You may submit comments by mail, fax or the Federal eRulemaking Portal at www.regulations.gov.

How to submit

link to ATF article

https://www.atf.gov/rules-and-regula...me-or-receiver

Badger52 · 05-07-2021, 18:57

Thanks JJ. I'm trying to think of the last time that "public comments" - even the 80% of comments auto-generated by liberal outfits over the FCC's net neutrality ruling - ever actually did anything that made an alphabet agency stop & rethink its direction. I could be wrong but in my recollection they have about as much import as a "strongly worded letter" from Lindsey Graham to the FBI.

They are bound and determined to pound the 80% receiver and will get to use "we got rid of the Ghost Guns"

for the next SOTU and the mid-terms.

They have also - smartly - left themselves some wiggle room 'to be defined later' regarding their kerfuckery over the AR having 2 receivers, by their own definition, since they took a beat down in a couple of cases over that issue IIRC a few years back.

Plus ca change...

The important thing is the Teriyaki'd chicken I have marinating for tomorrow's gathering. I've found that a good meal tends to increase the enzymes that make me smile & say "No" and display a rather GTFO attitude toward certain authorities. Sometimes ya gotta indulge & channel your inner misfit. Helps the digestion.

Ret10Echo · 05-10-2021, 08:35

On a bit of a positive note:

Quote:

Glock wins (and Biden loses) in major liability suit
by Paul Bedard, Washington Secrets Columnist

Of course, the fact that the suit was even allowed to advance to this point is disturbing. I'm surprised they didn't try to get it moved to Kali-Kourt

Quote:

The suit charged that Glock, the No. 1 firearms manufacturer in U.S. sales, did not have adequate safety features on the gun warning that a live round was in the chamber.

Story here

Badger52 · 05-10-2021, 18:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ret10Echo

On a bit of a positive note:

Thanks for that. It's going into the reverb tank and we'll hear the spinoff from that case in the future, of that I'm certain.

pcfixer · 05-11-2021, 05:16

Quote:

Attorney General signed ATF proposed rule 2021R-05

Proposed Rule? Still lacking completely is authority to sign into law!

Ret10Echo · 05-11-2021, 05:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by pcfixer

Proposed Rule? Still lacking completely is authority to sign into law!

Much of the "rules" are only in statute by reference or covered under broad, blanket authorities granted by statute.

Those agencies with statutory authority do not have to receive permission from elected officials to institute certain rule changes and updates as long as their lawyers feel it is within the scope of the existing statute.

Therefore, there is no "sign into law" that really needs to happen. The courts may stop an activity after a suit is filed...but that is another story.

doctom54 · 05-11-2021, 15:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ret10Echo

Much of the "rules" are only in statute by reference or covered under broad, blanket authorities granted by statute.

Those agencies with statutory authority do not have to receive permission from elected officials to institute certain rule changes and updates as long as their lawyers feel it is within the scope of the existing statute.

Therefore, there is no "sign into law" that really needs to happen. The courts may stop an activity after a suit is filed...but that is another story.

Unfortunately, I agree with your analysis

Badger52 · 05-11-2021, 19:28

It'll end up as "Notice of Proposed Rulemaking" and a comments period published in the Federal Register. I'm still waiting for an historical precedent where peasant (or even kulak) comments swayed a piece of Leviathan from their intended agenda.

I'll just play boomer, as in, "I've got mine and bought it all & stacked it before prices were stupid, you little fiddling grasshoppers."
Harrumph!

GratefulCitizen · 05-20-2021, 12:13

Not much attention from the mainstream media.
Unanimous.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/nicksib...h=25f942de5c1e

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinion...0-157_8mjp.pdf

Badger52 · 05-20-2021, 13:55

Quote:

Originally Posted by GratefulCitizen

Not much attention from the mainstream media.
Unanimous.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/nicksib...h=25f942de5c1e

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinion...0-157_8mjp.pdf

Was very glad to see that & then forgot, thanks for posting it. This is going to play hell with some states' notions of "red-flag" laws and even steps on (not-really-a-Constitution-guy) Trump's notion of "take the guns first, do due-process later."