Better late than never...if/when the Shiff hits the fan...you are on your own.

First-Time Buyers Explain Why Coronavirus Drove Them to Gun Stores in Record Numbers

Stephen Gutowski - APRIL 19, 2020 5:00 AM
Washington Free Beacon

Aaron Eaton learned how to shoot in the Army back in 2006 but holstered a pistol for the last time when he left in 2009 and took a job as a technician for a sewer company. That all changed on March 26 when the father of four walked out of an Alabama gun store with a Beretta 92FS, the same gun he handled as a military policeman at the height of the Iraq war.

"Simply put: I wanted peace of mind when it comes to the safety of my family," Eaton said.

Eaton's pistol was one of 2.3 million firearms to fly off the shelves in March, the single busiest month for gun sales ever. The Washington Free Beacon spoke to half a dozen new gun owners who purchased a total of six handguns and two shotguns. All of the new gun owners provided proof of purchase, though some asked not to have their last names published because of potential career backlash.

"To me, it's all about protecting my family, and if a gun makes that easier, so be it," Scott, a California tech worker with a wife and daughter, said.

Many of the new gun owners cited concerns about personal protection as states began emptying jail cells and police departments announced they would no longer enforce certain laws. Jake Wilhelm, a Virginia-based environmental consultant and lacrosse coach, purchased a Sig Sauer P226 after seeing Italy enact a nationwide lockdown on March 9.

"[My fiancée and I] came to the conclusion in early March that if a nation like Italy was going into full lockdown, we in the U.S. were likely on the same path," Wilhelm said. "Given that, and knowing that police resources would be stretched to the max, I decided to purchase a handgun."

***********

The fear extended past the disease to how communities would bear the strain of job loss, lockdown orders, and law enforcement policies adopted in the wake of the spread. One Tampa inmate who was released over coronavirus concerns has now been accused of murder, according to the TampaBay Times. Brian, a 40-year-old living near Tampa, lost his full-time bartending job in March but was concerned enough about deteriorating public safety that he dipped into his savings to purchase a Smith & Wesson M&P Shield.

"My biggest fear is that our local police force comes down with the virus," he said. "If the good guys are all out sick, who is going to stop the bad guys? When people have no hope, they get desperate. And we fear the worst is to come."

Scott, the California tech worker, said he is preparing not just for thinned policing, but for a potential uptick in hate crimes against his family. While he is not Asian, his wife and daughter are. He said they have already faced racial harassment during the outbreak.

"Just walking on the street, folks have honked and yelled at us [for] wearing masks," he said. "And robberies are common in Asian communities. I worry about them."

Matthew Rosky, a North Carolinian who bought a Benelli 12-gauge shotgun for himself and a 20-gauge shotgun for his wife on April 4, said he doesn't "plan on being relieved of my property or my life if it comes to that." He said the couple lost their home to a landslide in 2019 and the threat of a national emergency pushed them to follow through on the purchase they had already been considering.

"I am not real enthused with politicians letting criminals out of jails, nor will I be surprised to see crime go up since many police departments are not responding to anything but the worst emergencies," Rosky said. "Obviously, this is a pessimistic outlook but, ‘Hope for the best, prepare for the worst,' seems like a good mantra at the moment."

Andrew, a federal contractor living in Virginia who bought a Heckler & Koch VP9 for himself and one for his wife on March 21, said he had already experienced societal breakdown firsthand. He was a student at the University of Southern California during the Los Angeles riots and witnessed some of the destruction. He recalled "the acrid smell of smoke and the ceaseless police and fire sirens and LAPD choppers" as "the most poignant and searing memories" of his lifetime.

"The sad reality [is] that civil order can break down in less than 12 hours and the overwhelmed police can't help you," he said. "As I explained to my wife, I've seen things go sideways quickly—and with unpredictable results."

Some of the new gun owners now find themselves caught in the political battles that have emerged in the wake of the coronavirus. Santa Clara County shut down gun stores before Scott could pick up his Smith & Wesson .357 revolver.

"To me, it's better to have it and not need it than need it and not have it," he said. "That's why it's frustrating to have that right taken away."

<snip>

https://freebeacon.com/coronavirus/f...ecord-numbers/

The trend continues > than 3 million NICs background checks in the month of May 2020.

With widespread rioting, ANTIFA, and irresponsible calls for defunding the police - over 3,091,455 is another record for May.

NICS Firearm Background Checks:
Month/Year
November 30, 1998 - May 31, 2020

https://www.fbi.gov/file-repository/...month_year.pdf

Pennsylvania - Castle Doctrine Act 10 of 2011

Article 1, Section 21, Pennsylvania Constitution



Burglary suspect shot, killed by homeowner during home invasion, coroner says
WJAC Staff

We and most of our 'within earshot' neighbors have our own ranges or are close to a wash that can serve as one. I've heard no shooting in the past month or so. My guess is that everyone is conserving ammo. I know that I am.

Something to ponder with your coffee this Sunny Saturday morning..

Another challenge to the ATF "taxing" suppressors.

Net Net:

The ATF (acting as a private seller) sold a man a can without properly filing the required form and paying the tax.

The man was then arrested by the ATF and charged with buying & possession of an unregistered can without appropriate ATF permission (form nor tax)

The argument: "it was the ATF's responsibility to file the form and pay the tax, NOT the person who purchased the can from the ATF.

If the article is factual, there seems to be some concurrence that the conviction may be flipped by the 11th Circuit Judge??

BUT, this is a narrowly formed challenge and may not reach SCOTUS. :munchin

If an executive order can prevent illegals from being deported why not an EO to let law abiding citizens purchase, manufacture or otherwise transfer suppressors?

The Letter of the LAW:
 

Suppressors are strictly regulated by Law, But can you have a device that has sound mitigation, not suppression for instance a muffler that decreases the decibel level, or wrapping a large bath towel around the weapon, how about pressing the muzzle into a large MY Pillow to reduce the noise....Most firearms laws are a joke e g a short barrel rifle length of barrel less than 16 inches needs a tax stamp, BUT, if you change the butt stock you can designate the short barrel rifle a pistol and eliminate the Tax Stamp....

One of the major issues with the ATF is they define suppressor. If they have some reason to investigate you and your noise blocker, they can "define" your blocker an ATF item, with ZERRO recourse on your part. With the exception of a long court battle.

No so. The serialized part has to be registered by the manufacture as a pistol, rifle, or other. This is recorded at the point of sale on the AFT form 4473, section B Question 18. A rifle can not become a pistol by changing the stock.

An "adequate" (but not great, or correct) outcome would be that they add this to the very long list of cases they've had to abandon once they play the tape to the end and realize they have opened up a Pandoran box of their own making, most often from cases they've made up out of whole cloth in the first place. This happens in the courts, as well as "squabbles" between "rule maker vs. his supervisor" in the same office with contradictory letters.

The great or correct outcome would be that they simply go away but that needs more...
:munchin

If you buy a receiver conceivably you could build either? (Asking for a friend)

The form requires you to enter pistol, rifle, shotgun, receiver, frame or other....blah blah blah and NFA ya da ya da

Honestly, I’m not sure how doing a build legally would require you stating which when you buy the receiver. Not trying to be facetious, honestly I never gave it much thought and just never understood the form.

A rifle built as a rifle by a manufacturer cannot be made into pistol; that receiver was "built" as a rifle and transferred as such. The practical matter for those assembling at home is that, simply buying the stripped lower to start with, it is transferred on the 4473 as 'Other'. You don't have to state anything; it can be a paperweight. You can then build a pistol, using one of the many pistol braces as the 'stock' - which it isn't, it's a 'brace' and the ATF evaluates them as such and issues letter to manufacturers about that. (Arfcom has a whole sub-forum on this subject.)

One can then pull that, say, 10.3" upper off, attach a 20" upper, and go back to the pistol later when done with your coyotes or whatever. If one isn't going to go through the SBR nutroll, building the pistol first conceptually is the most versatile. But once a rifle (initially, by you or a licensed manufacturer) always a rifle unless you register as a SBR.

Edit: Sorry for diverging from the original intent of the thread but hope that helps some.

I don't either. It's held by the FFL holder and no one knows what's on it until there is a criminal investigation. But, how does that investigation proceed? If a weapon is reported stolen, that's one thing, but if the original owner committed the crime or didn't report it stolen, how does law enforcement proceed from there?

The Form
 

You as the Purchaser are present when the form is filled out. You’re there when it’s completed and you don’t SIGN it unless it’s complete and accurate.

With a lower receiver, as stated previously, you have the FFL mark it off as “pistol” or “other”.

There are some lowers that are manufactured as “rifle”, but almost all today are gender neutral until the form is filled out. Yeah, my tribute to diversity this month. :p

If the business where you are purchasing over the counter or conducting the transfer (the FFL) says he will not mark it as pistol or other, then you do not complete the sale. Don’t say “I don’t know” when it’s time to fill out the form.

Can we defund the ATF please
 

https://breaking911.com/rep-gaetz-ca...m-brace-usage/

Rep. Gaetz Calls on ATF to Cease Plans Restricting Arm Brace Usage
June 16, 2020

Congressman Matt Gaetz announced today on his podcast he is sending a letter to the ATF demanding they cease any plans to restrict lawful possession of arm braces, which are pistol stabilizing accessories, by American citizens.

“We understand that ATF is currently considering restricting one arm brace model owned by over 700,000 Americans,” Congressman Gaetz writes along with six other members of Congress. “We strongly urge ATF to cease taking any actions and reconsider or rescind any secret determinations which call into question the legality of firearms owned by millions of law-abiding Americans.”

“There is always a need to vindicate our Second Amendment rights,” Gaetz says on his podcast, “Hot Takes with Matt Gaetz.”

He explains that even during very conservative administrations, like President Trump’s, some do “try to make it more difficult to acquire things that shooters need and gun owners need, for safety and for the unique circumstances that an individual may have.”

The congressman emphasizes that Americans must remain proactive in defense of their Second Amendment Rights.

“But now, what we find, is that the ATF is making it very difficult for people to have arm braces. They’re changing standards and changing rules.” Gaetz continues: “And I am particularly frustrated when our government, at the administrative and executive level, goes beyond their grant of authority in our Constitution and in our Federal Statutes. Nothing gives anyone at ATF the ability to constrain the use of arm braces.”

“So the breaking news is this – I’ll be sending a letter to the Department of Justice, asking for a review of the decisions made by ATF and asking that ATF stop, in this crazy effort to limit access to arm braces for people who seek to have them.”

Congressman Gaetz addresses Attorney General William Barr and Acting Director of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) Regina Lombardo in his letter, and says that he is concerned about the ATF’s practice of creating secret regulation, which could have devastating impacts on law-abiding citizens.

Gaetz and his colleagues pose three specific questions to the Attorney General and the Acting Director:

1. What specific criteria does ATF use to determine whether a firearm is designed and intended to be fired from the shoulder?

2. What specific ATF publications are available for Americans to determine whether their firearm is designed and intended to be fired from the shoulder?

3. How many firearms with affixed arm braces have been evaluated by the Firearms and Ammunition Technology Division in support of other law enforcement agencies or criminal prosecutions?

“This practice not only burdens the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding American citizens,” Gaetz concludes, “but has recently been used by ATF to stifle innovation within the firearms industry and prosecute unwitting firearm owners.”

as is the current phrase de jour "Unfund the ATF"


:lifter:D:lifter