US Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals has determined in a ruling that bump stocks are not machine guns in the case the United States v. Ali Alkazahg.
In an earlier judgment, Marine Corp Private Ali Akazahg was convicted for the possession of 2 “machine guns” in violation of articles 83, 107, and 134 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ).
It was ruled that these “machine guns” owned by Akazahg did not meet the federal definition of the machine gun.
“Bump Stocks Are Not Machine Guns”
The three-judge panel agreed with the arguments made by the defense and unanimously ruled that bump stocks do not meet the definition of a machine gun.
The panel referred to a case that anti-gun activists pressured Congress to act on following the mass shooting in Las Vegas where 60 died. A bill was advanced by Congress, “Closing the Bump Stock Loophole” seeking to treat bump stocks as machine guns.
However, it rightfully failed to pass either chamber of Congress.
I Support Donald Trump, But This is His Fault
In its ruling, the judges pointed out that following the bill’s failure in Congress, there was considerable political pressure on former President Trump to act against bump stocks.
The panel also said that they don’t believe that President Trump had the authority to make de facto law banning bump stocks.
Here’s a quote from the ruling:
[T]he President directed the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives [ATF] to issue a new interpretation of a rule—that contradicted the ATF’s previous interpretation—governing legislation from the 1930s. This Executive-Branch change in statutory interpretation aimed to outlaw bump stocks prospectively, without a change in existing statutes
The judges have looked through the history of bump stocks and came to the conclusion that the ATF never considered bump stocks to be machine guns until Trump directed the bureau to reclassify bump stocks as machine guns.
The panel also inferred to the letter issued to William Akins in 2002 for his “Akins Accelerator” where the original version was used a spring.
Missouri Governor Mike Parson (R) pardoned Mark and Patricia McCloskey on Tuesday, the Associated Press reported.
The McCloskeys, both lawyers, will not lose their law licenses or their rights to own firearms.
In June, Mark and Patricia McCloskey, the St. Louis couple who sought to protect their property and lives from the rabid BLM mob marching down their private street pleaded guilty to misdemeanor charges and agreed to forfeit the firearms they used in the showdown last year.
A livestream of the militant mob clearly showed they entered through a gate into a private community.
Mr. McCloskey explained during his on-camera interview last year that he announced to the Marxist mob that they were on private property and that’s when they became enraged.
“Somebody forced the gate, and I stood up and announced that this is private property. Go back. I can’t remember in detail anymore. I went inside, I got a rifle. And when they … because as soon as I said this is private property, those words enraged the crowd,” he said.
McClosky said one of the militants pulled out a loaded pistol magazine and clicked them together and said ‘you’re next.’
“We were threatened with our lives, threatened with a house being burned down, my office building being burned down, even our dog’s life being threatened. It was, it was about as bad as it can get,” McCloskey said.
McCloskey believes that the only thing that stopped the crowd from approaching his home was his rifle.
Watch Rand Paul Destroy Fauci… then Grab Your New Targets
Then Grab Your Fauci Targets and Start Plinking Away at Your Frustration!
The spike in new gun purchases has led to a shortage of ammunition leading to raging concerns among local police departments and civilians alike.
Several Washington D.C.-area police departments have stated that the supply of ammunition sold by manufacturers and distributors is lingering on scarcity that can lead to problems for agencies buying ammunition for officer training and certification.
The ammunition shortage also creates hurdles and headaches for private gun shops and owners, some of whom report skyrocketing prices.
“I talk to Police departments ranging from federal, state and local departments who tells about their daily struggle in finding ammunition to even qualify officers,” told departments — daily. They are struggling to find ammunition to even qualify the officers,” said Curt Sebastian, co-owner of SSG Tactical gun shop in Fredericksburg, Virginia.
The shortage, he adds has led to a quadruple in the price of some ammunition and drained his supply. “There will come a point if things keep going the way they are, I don’t and won’t have enough inventory to be open six days a week,” he said.
Sebastian said that a box of ammo traditionally selling for $9 to $14 now costs about $50.
The FBI records assessed by News4 I-Team reveals a surge in new gun purchase background checks coupled with the number of people applying for firearms background jump has leaped by almost 1 million on a monthly average, starting from the pandemic start. This wave of new buyers led to a drain in the ammunition supply, according to Sebastian
He said that 85 percent of his customers have been first-time gun owners together with clients stocking up during the past year as the result of civil unrest, election and the transition of power in DC and you have the perfect storm for a shortage, according to Sebastian.
Joe Biden nominee – the former ATF agent turned gun control activist – is set to be in charge of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives.
The new ATF boss will be appointed in a few weeks while the administration is engaging in what is called “pre-hearing spins” relying on New York Times.
A long piece in the publication describes the agency in charge of our firearms industry as the “whipping boy” for NRA in years past. The NRA has long had a pretty decent history of influence over the agency.
The President ordered a ban on the homemade-firearm kits defined as “ghost guns”, expected to be implemented by the A.T.F. For fleshing out gun policy, Biden has demanded the A.T.F. spearhead the first comprehensive federal survey of weapons-trafficking patterns since 2000.
In all likelihood, it is expected to be shouldered by the nominee, former A.T.F. agent and gun-control activist, David Chipman.
It was at the N.R.A.’s instigation that Congress limited the bureau’s budget and have limited leeway on collection and usage of gun ownership data.
It is also marked by limited unannounced inspections of gun dealers. It was 15 years back that the N.R.A. successfully lobbied for the director’s appointment subject to Senate confirmation and subsequently helped block all but one nominee from taking office.
Chipman didn’t respond when asked for a comment through an official with Ms. Giffords’s gun-control group. In the event that Congress doesn’t confirm Chipman’s appointment, the other way is for Biden to appoint him as the “acting director” – which would give him limited power and authority.
It is expected that gun owners should lobby their senators to oppose Chipman’s nomination with gun control activities.
One thing The New York Times ignored is that Democrats have offered up multiple candidates that couldn’t pass the floor with a majority of the US Senate.
In 2020, President Obama Barack Obama nominated A.T.F. agent Andrew Traver as the permanent director but failed to receive a vote because several senators spoke out over Traver’s anti-gun attitudes. The second nominee, B. Todd Jones was ultimately confirmed but remained in office for less than two years, retired in 2015 and took a job with the NFL.
Chipman boasts 25 years at the A.T.F. while spending nearly a decade with gun control groups such as Mayors Against Illegal Guns and Giffords. The New York Times stated that Chipman may not get the votes for confirmation.
Former top N.R.A official says:
The Chipman pick “is poking people in the eye. I think the president would be better served by appointing a more apolitical person and building more bridges to bipartisanship.
Following the holding of an “illegal” church service on Saturday, police surrounded and arrested the Pastor of the Cave of Adullam Church in Calgary, Alberta, Canada named Artur Pawlowski.
He was described as the brave pastor who shouted down cops who interrupted his church service during Holy Week.
He yelled to cops: “Out of this property you Nazis! Gestapo is not allowed here! Out, Nazi! Out! Nazis are not welcome here! Do not come back here you Nazi psychopaths!” Pawlowski kicked out the Gestapo this weekend. Adam Soos of @RebelNewsOnline tweeted: “Artur Pawlowski’s supporters have ejected Calgary Police from the church. We expect they will return in force.”
Pawlowski’s fellow pastor Henry Hildebrandt posted the picture of the suspect being arrested by the Canadian Gestapo.
He told: “Earlier this afternoon, my fellow pastor Artur Pawlowski was arrested in Calgary for the crime of holding a church service, as he does every Saturday morning. Are you awake yet? The Gestapo in Canada has been gunning for Pastor Pawlowski ever since and they arrested him this weekend.”
In a new proposed rule late on Friday, the Biden administration is seeking to impose new restrictions on home-built firearms and aiming to redefine the “receiver”.
The latter strives to deliver the first new rules in what is expected to be a barrage of anti-gun regulations aimed at restricting the firearms industry and law-abiding gun owners.
A press release by the Department of Justice, Attorney General Merrick Garland spins the new proposal as an attempt to “update the definitions of ‘firearm’ and related parts for the first time since 1968.”
Attorney General Garland neglected to mention that the definitions that will be changed were part of the Gun Control Act of 1968; legislation passed by Congress – not imposed by executive action.
The new rules would require that manufacturers include a serial number on the firearm “frame or receiver” in easy-to-build firearm kits.
Moreover, it aims to cut the number of “ghost guns on streets” while setting out requirements for federally licensed firearms dealers to have a serial number added to 3D printed guns or other un-serialized firearms they take into inventory.
Even unfinished frames and receivers need to be serialized if they are sold as part of a kit,, though the Department of Justice (DOJ) has kept silent on whether or not the unfinished gun parts must be serialized if they are sold by themselves.
“These courts’ interpretation of ATF’s regulations, if broadly followed, could mean that as many as 90 percent of all firearms now in the United States would not have an identifiable frame or receiver,” the document said. “Those firearms would include numerous widely available models, such as Glock-type and Sig Sauer P32013 pistols, that do not utilize a hammer – a named component – in the firing sequence.”
The ATF spoke on the necessity to revise the definition of a receiver in ensuring it won’t “be misinterpreted by the courts, the firearms industry, or the public at large to mean that most firearms in circulation have no part identifiable as a frame or receiver.”
The proposed receiver definition calls on the need for one fire control component – such as a trigger mechanism, cylinder, or firing pin – instead of requiring multiple parts as the current definition does.
The ATF announced plans to keep in place the determinations on which specific parts would qualify as receivers for guns currently on the market and create a voluntary process for gun makers to submit new designs for determinations.
On the other hand, courts are not lending a misinterpretation to the ATF’s regulations and remain correct in the definition of what constitutes a firearm. Now, the DOJ wants to declare the words “frame” and “receiver” now mean something entirely different than what they’ve meant since 1968.
One reason as to why the ATF and DOJ didn’t make an effort to update the definitions before now is considered as a real stretch in coming up with something which isn’t a receiver and suddenly reversing 50 years of existing regulations.
Lawrence G. Keane, senior vice president and general counsel of the National Shooting Sports Foundation, says that the firearms industry trade group will “carefully look at the proposed rule and will gather input from our members. The details will matter. We are fully aware of the impact that this proposed rule could have on the firearm industry and gun owners in general. We are interested to know if the proposed rule is consistent with what we saw in the leaked draft documents or if it has changed and what those changes might be. NSSF will file comments concerning the rule.”
The proposed rule is expected to wait for the 90-day public comment phase and once it is published at the Public Register website, comments would be made.
In the past, there has been overwhelming opposition that helped stop a bad draft from turning into a bad reputation. However, it is expected that Biden is prepared to move ahead, irrespective of the public feedback.
Grab Your Hell No Joe Decal
It’s about time!
For the first time in 10 years, the Supreme Court has decided to take up a major lawsuit that challenges a New York law restricting individuals from carrying concealed handguns in public.
The National Rifle Association (NRA) is backing the lawsuit.
It’s been more than 10 years since the Supreme Court weighed in on a significant case involving the Second Amendment.
This case comes in the wake of Biden’s recent push for more gun-control initiatives, including bans on so-called ghost guns, proposing models for “red flag” laws, and expanding and lengthening background checks.
“The petition for a writ of certiorari is granted limited to the following question: Whether the State’s denial of petitioners’ applications for concealed-carry licenses for self-defense violated the Second Amendment,” reads a brief order (pdf) from the high court on April 26.
Over the years, the NRA and other gun rights groups have criticized the Supreme Court for not taking up any major lawsuits relating to the Second Amendment. In 2008, the court stated for the first time that the Second Amendment protects Americans’ rights to keep and bear arms for self-defense at home.
The Sad Reality of the Supreme Court’s 2nd Amendment Views
Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, considered possibly the most conservative justice, wrote several years ago that courts have engaged in a “general failure to afford the 2nd Amendment the respect due an enumerated constitutional right.”
“If a lower court treated another right so cavalierly, I have little doubt that this court would intervene. … The 2nd Amendment is a disfavored right in this court,” he wrote.
Justice Brett Kavanaugh, after the court dismissed a gun case last term, wrote in early 2020 he hopes the court will take up a Second Amendment-related challenge in the near future. “The Court should address that issue soon, perhaps in one of the several Second Amendment cases with petitions for certiorari now pending before the Court.”
On April 26, the NRA praised the court for taking up the legal challenge, describing it as a case that challenges “New York’s restrictive concealed-carry-licensing regime,” noting that it sets up the stage “for the Supreme Court to affirm what most states already hold as true, that there is an individual right to self-defense outside of the home.”
Here’s What the Case is About
The case, New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Keith Corlett, challenges New York state’s requirement for applicants for pistol permits show “proper cause” to carry a gun, which they argue violates the Second Amendment to keep and bear arms.
“The NRA believes that law-abiding citizens should not be required to prove they are in peril to receive the government’s permission to exercise this constitutionally protected right,” the group wrote, noting that if the Supreme Court rules favorably, it will “affect the laws in many states that currently restrict carrying a firearm outside the home.”
Robert Nash and Brandon Koch, the two men who brought the lawsuit, both applied for licenses to carry handguns in New York state for self-defense but were denied. A district court later said that neither had proper cause to carry a handgun because they didn’t face “any special or unique danger to [their] life.”
New York Attorney General Letitia James, a Democrat, wrote in a legal brief calling on the Supreme Court not to grant the case, saying the state law is consistent with prior rulings.
James said New York’s law was “supported by a centuries-old tradition of state and local measures regulating the carrying of firearms in public” and that it has existed in the same essential form since 1913. “New York’s law directly advances the State’s compelling interests in protecting the public from gun violence.”
The court is expected to take up the case during the next term.
Grab Your Hell No Joe Decal Now:
A father pulled out his concealed carry gun in a “gun free zone” inside a Nebraska mall.
He was shopping there with his family when a fatal shooting unfolded.
“Every indication said our lives were in danger, and I was going to do everything in my power to make sure we got out of there OK,” Scott Tafoya said.
The Omaha Westroads Mall is a gun-free zone, but Tafoya said he had to pull out his legal concealed carry gun and “deal with the consequence later.”
“I knew that if I ever pulled that out, it would truly be a life-and-death situation, and I would deal with the consequences later,” he said.
The scene unfolded on Saturday while Tafoya was trying on a new suit for his daughter’s baptism and his wife and two daughters were shopping upstairs in the mall.
He saw a group of people running and made eye contact with a man who yelled, “Shooter!”
He ran to his family while unholstering his gun, and his wife told him she heard gunfire.
He then stood guard outside of a bathroom where mall officials had people shelter.
“I said I have a permit, I’m legal,” he said.
He later moved toward the escalators to draw any danger away from his family.
“Everyone else on the third floor just got added into that because the best way to keep my family safe was to make sure nobody with ill intentions came up that escalator,” Tafoya said, mentioning that he didn’t feel any fear during the shooting situation. “I was sad. Because I wasn’t expecting to. If it was real, I didn’t think I was going to come home.”
Police soon arrived on the scene, and Tafoya unloaded the bullets of his gun and put his hands up.
“I unloaded my weapon. I put it back in the holster where it was very visible that the slide was locked open. I put my permit in my hands and my hands above my head,” he said.
Law enforcement officers also did not charge him for having a gun in a gun-free zone, and he added that those zones put people at risk.
“I don’t condone anyone breaking the law. I made the decision that was right for my family, and I stand behind it. I may still get in trouble for it. If I do, it was worth it,” he said.
Two brothers, both teenagers, were arrested in connection to the suspected “gang-related” shooting, which left one person dead and another injured.
“The investigation indicates this was an isolated incident and not a random attack,” Omaha police said.