Search found 3 matches

by bigtek
Mon Dec 10, 2018 2:51 pm
Forum: Federal
Topic: BATFE: Bump-Stock-Type Devices: Notice of proposed rulemaking
Replies: 112
Views: 64118

Re: BATFE: Bump-Stock-Type Devices: Notice of proposed rulemaking

bblhd672 wrote: Sun Dec 09, 2018 9:33 am
Scott Farkus wrote: Sat Dec 08, 2018 11:39 pm Now, you've got "our guy", Trump, doing something administratively that even Obama didn't think he had the legal authority to do. It's going to set a horrible precedent if it stands.
This may cost Trump votes in 2020, not necessarily votes that go to his opponents but aren’t cast at all.
It already cost him mine. I will vote in 2020 but I won't vote for Trump no matter who else is on the ballot.
by bigtek
Tue Dec 04, 2018 4:05 pm
Forum: Federal
Topic: BATFE: Bump-Stock-Type Devices: Notice of proposed rulemaking
Replies: 112
Views: 64118

Re: BATFE: Bump-Stock-Type Devices: Notice of proposed rulemaking

The enemies of the constitution were going to demonize them either way, so I'm not sure what they really gained, but hopefully it will be worth more than they lose in the long run.
by bigtek
Sat Apr 07, 2018 5:02 pm
Forum: Federal
Topic: BATFE: Bump-Stock-Type Devices: Notice of proposed rulemaking
Replies: 112
Views: 64118

Re: BATFE: Bump-Stock-Type Devices: Notice of proposed rulemaking

Soccerdad1995 wrote:But by not adding a grandfather clause, the ATF's proposed rule is creating a separate and distinct violation of the U.S. Constitution through an uncompensated taking. Given the choice of violating a law (the Hughes amendment) or violating the Constitution, the Constitution should win. This all ignores the fact that the ATF isn't even a legislative body in the first place and has no business violating any laws at all.
How is that different than the Akins Accelerator that OP mentioned? You know Bill Akins lost in court, right?

Return to “BATFE: Bump-Stock-Type Devices: Notice of proposed rulemaking”