Tag: NFA

eTyranny

Earlier this week, the firearms community was rocked by news of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) eForms system shutdown, raising alarms among gun shops and National Firearms Act (NFA) applicants alike. The system, crucial for processing applications for silencers, short-barrel rifles, and other NFA items, reportedly closed due to Congressional budgeting concerns, leaving many to question the timing and reasoning behind the decision. [More]

So, it was a revenge move…?

I have an immediate, cost-free solution, but the government won’t allow it.

[Via Jess]

ATF/FBI ‘Lovers Spat’ Catch-22 on NFA Appeals Resolved

It should be a straightforward enough process and you’d think the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and the Department of Justice would be on the same page, instead of pointing fingers, abdicating responsibilities, and just plain getting things wrong, especially considering how they increasingly hold Federal Firearms Licensees to “zero tolerance standards” over paperwork glitches. [More]

It took fear of getting spanked by the court, but they finally, grudgingly agreed to an appeals process.

Bait and Switch

We’re all about patterns here and when I see the ATF put out three different exposes against local, local and then national, one in Tulsa, one in DC, and now Steve Dettelbach on a national network, NBC around how ineffectual the NFA is because of giggle switches or Glock switches, there’s a hidden motive, I’m telling you, something’s up. [Watch]

Good catch.

Thing is, the NFA has always been ineffective.

[Via Jess]

Much Ado About Nothing

This bill removes short-barreled rifles (barrels of less than 16 inches in length) from the definition of firearms for purposes of the National Firearms Act. [More]

Here’s a truth about every single “pro-gun” bill we see coming out of the House that we then see so many gun owners getting excited about: Without a Senate Republican majority and either a Republican president or enough votes to override a veto, they’ll all go nowhere.

And even so, that makes some big assumptions.

We can appreciate the sentiment, but I’d appreciate it more if they’d acted like this whenever they’ve been in a position to make it so.

[Via Jess]

‘Our Bad’

“The Q&A currently listed on the eforms account is incorrect. In this scenario, the registered owner of the NFA weapon is co-located with the firearm and thus no transfer has occurred… [More]

That’s some review and approval process they must have there…

[Via Jess]

One Bite at a Time?

KILLING THE NFA: The Real World 2nd Amendment Strategy for ATTACKING the NFA [Watch]

Incrementalism. We get it. That’s the correct legal strategy.

But here’s one thing proponents of reverse incrementalism, and in fact, none of the “gun groups” will even acknowledge, let alone seriously address:

What if the clock runs out because the courts have all been taken over by politically unchallengeable majority appointments?

What does anyone with eyes think the enemy has been busy setting up?

Good thing this has nothing to do with that “single issue”. And I have that on good authority.

[Via Jess]

Never on Sunday Guns

The Hunting and Conservation Nexus of the National Firearms Act [More]

I may explore this in more detail. For now, suffice it to say a coalition of elitist Fudds and racist, anamaladjusted environmentalcases screwed posterity.

Tangentially-Related UPDATE

Why Are Short Barreled Rifles Actually Regulated in the US? [Watch]

Because those who do can.

[Via Michael G]

FBI’s Las Vegas Shooter Report Raises Serious Unanswered Questions. What NFA Weapons?

The bottom line is “bump stocks,” which were “legal” at the time, could not have been the “illegally possessed prohibited firearms” referred to in the “Paddock” report. So what weapon/s are they referring to? [More]

Enquiring minds want to know…

Short Story

S. 4986: A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to remove short-barreled rifles, short-barreled shotguns, and certain other weapons from the definition of firearms for purposes of the National Firearms Act, and for other purposes. [More]

Seeing if he gets more than five cosponsors will be a good indicator of which Republicans really are “staunch supporters of the Second Amendment.”

That said, if they don’t take the Senate this is going nowhere, and introducing it now strikes me more as a pre-election publicity stunt than anything– even with Marshall’s term not ending until ’27, this still draws attention to the GOP and co-sponsor Crapo is running now.

Sorry to be so cynical, but I can’t figure out any other explanation.

[Via Jess]

Verified by MonsterInsights