[ARCHIVED THREAD] - What are the odds one could get the MG registry open again? I'm taking bets. (Page 7 of 10)
|
Quoted: Can you post some laws about weapons completely outlawed in the colonies or early republic? In the Colonies there was only one sort of weapons ban that I have found reference to (theoretically I suppose you could own, trap guns as long as you never actually used them): 1771 New Jersey 1763-1775 N.J. Laws 346, An Act for the Preservation of Deer and Other Game, and to Prevent Trespassing with Guns, ch. 539, § 10 Prohibited the setting of any trap gun intended to discharge by any string, rope, or other contrivance. Punishable by forfeiture of the firearm and fine of 6 pounds. |
|
Quoted: Except with the Bruen standard coupled with Caetano, MGs are in common use with the general public. There are nearly 200k transferable MGs. Roughly the same number as stun guns which Caetano directly stated was sufficient for them to have status as "common use". Correct me if I am wrong, but I think about half those registered MGs are owned by police departments. The problem is, you are assuming the courts are going to be consistent with Bruen and the constitution. They are going to use any mental gymnastics to keep banning MG ("dangerous and unusual!"). Judges don't make decisions based on the law. They make them based on their own ideology and values. If judges decided things based on the Constitution, the NFA would have been strangled in the cradle by US v. Miller. I would be delighted to be wrong here, but I highly recommend that you don't get a felony machine gun possession charge expecting it to be overturned. Because you'll end up like those poor guys who had homemade silencers in Kansas: 2 Kansas men ‘collateral damage’ in gun control dispute Jeremy Kettler and Shane Cox were completely and utterly right, but it didn't do them any good. Because judges detest NFA ownership and don't rule according to the Constitution. |
|
Quoted: Where are you getting that number? Many folks accepted his moronic WAGER (hundreds to thousands of dollars versus bbq? really?), while SOME offered to donate to the fight. OP made it clear that the wager was just that; a bet to line his pockets: Quoted: Quoted: Ben posts that he wants to mess with the ATF, and a day later a couple dozen guys chip in around $15k to help him in the cause. Some quote about great power and responsibility comes to mind. Where are you getting that number? Many folks accepted his moronic WAGER (hundreds to thousands of dollars versus bbq? really?), while SOME offered to donate to the fight. OP made it clear that the wager was just that; a bet to line his pockets: $15k from my eyeball addition on the first post. Looks like its about $16k now, if you convert the offers of beer / ammo / other into $. Most of those offers, mine included were to fund Ben's FuATF(e) shenanigans, which I am quite certain is exactly what he's going to do. IMO, I could donate that $60 to GOA, on top of my lifetime membership and my additional donations from the past few months. Or, I could toss that $60 to annoy the ATF on another front, make them spend more time and resources trying to fight a new thing, look forward to some new entertaining legal reading as the court docs are filed, and maybe, just maybe, when it's all over, be able to legally build a brand new machine gun. A machine gun, which I really had no interest in building until I was told I couldn't. That's $60 well spent in my book. YMMV. |
|
I actually got a transferable machine gun added to the registry about 5 years ago I owned a few '27 semi auto Colt Thompsons One was registered as a short barrel rifle as it fired semi auto only and the guy that owned it in the 70's and 80's lived in a no machine gun state. I sold it and tried to transfer it as a machine gun and was denied After months of back and forth I was able to prove it was the same receiver as 21 or 28 Colt and the ATF changed the registration Not exactly what the OP is doing, but it can be done |
| I would think whatever form of legal gymnastics you will be attempting has been tried before, but with recent court decisions, maybe there is a new hole that has opened up? With this administration you have a hard fight as well, AG that ignores the law, the FATF that makes up shit as they go... But I wish you the best of luck in your pursuit of pew-pew-pew. |
|
Quoted: Correct me if I am wrong, but I think about half those registered MGs are owned by police departments. The problem is, you are assuming the courts are going to be consistent with Bruen and the constitution. They are going to use any mental gymnastics to keep banning MG ("dangerous and unusual!"). Judges don't make decisions based on the law. They make them based on their own ideology and values. If judges decided things based on the Constitution, the NFA would have been strangled in the cradle by US v. Miller. I would be delighted to be wrong here, but I highly recommend that you don't get a felony machine gun possession charge expecting it to be overturned. Because you'll end up like those poor guys who had homemade silencers in Kansas: 2 Kansas men ‘collateral damage’ in gun control dispute Jeremy Kettler and Shane Cox were completely and utterly right, but it didn't do them any good. Because judges detest NFA ownership and don't rule according to the Constitution. Quoted: Correct me if I am wrong, but I think about half those registered MGs are owned by police departments. The problem is, you are assuming the courts are going to be consistent with Bruen and the constitution. They are going to use any mental gymnastics to keep banning MG ("dangerous and unusual!"). Judges don't make decisions based on the law. They make them based on their own ideology and values. If judges decided things based on the Constitution, the NFA would have been strangled in the cradle by US v. Miller. I would be delighted to be wrong here, but I highly recommend that you don't get a felony machine gun possession charge expecting it to be overturned. Because you'll end up like those poor guys who had homemade silencers in Kansas: 2 Kansas men ‘collateral damage’ in gun control dispute Jeremy Kettler and Shane Cox were completely and utterly right, but it didn't do them any good. Because judges detest NFA ownership and don't rule according to the Constitution. Miller was “decided” without Miller or anyone else arguing his case because he died beforehand. During the NFA hearings way back when, they themselves discussed the fact that it would be unconstitutional to ban MGs but rationalized it as being within their ability to *tax* them. Since then it’s been deemed unconstitutional to tax a right such as on voting via a poll tax. And then they then decided to stop accepting that tax altogether, while still requiring it be paid to exercise the right to own them. Infringed is a very clearly defined word, and “shall not be” is a very strong term (as opposed to shouldn’t be for example) and while some courts, politicians and even many citizens believe a little regulation here and a few permit schemes there (SCOTUS’ own term, which they then state can be abused and may be open to being challenged wink wink) are ok, as understood by our Founders at the time of ratification they are all infringements as directed by Bruen. Any interest balancing goes out the window by their own admission that more laws (or any for that matter) won’t stop criminals from getting guns, even automatic guns, and using them in ways already deemed to be illegal by other laws; and when criminals do get them anyway Haynes prevents criminals from even being prosecuted for it.  It is absolutely constitutional to write and enforce laws against committing violent and other crimes, including (if they so desire) making violent crimes using a weapon or firearm subject to harsher punishments, and I don’t think many of us would disagree on that last point. And quite frankly, I think opening the registry would create a line two miles long full of people who’d be excited and quite happy to hand over $200 per…. But- ultimately that $200 still is an unconstitutional poll tax. They wouldn’t say you can only vote in federal elections for free, but it’s ok for states or towns and municipalities to require a poll tax, and this is no different. And, even if they did, there’s no way on earth The Court would allow that state etc to then stop accepting that tax, specifically and intentionally, to prevent more citizens from exercising their right to vote. It’s been baby steps, one step at a time, at the right time, and I for one can’t wait to read every word of what Ben files! Quoted: I would think whatever form of legal gymnastics you will be attempting has been tried before, but with recent court decisions, maybe there is a new hole that has opened up? With this administration you have a hard fight as well, AG that ignores the law, the FATF that makes up shit as they go... But I wish you the best of luck in your pursuit of pew-pew-pew. You’re right, however it helps us when they overstep with mental gymnastics in direct opposition to their most recent directives in Bruen, because it just makes it easier for The Court to grant cert and slap them down, setting a nationwide precedent. Let them overreach! |
|
Quoted: Correct me if I am wrong, but I think about half those registered MGs are owned by police departments. The problem is, you are assuming the courts are going to be consistent with Bruen and the constitution. They are going to use any mental gymnastics to keep banning MG ("dangerous and unusual!"). Judges don't make decisions based on the law. They make them based on their own ideology and values. If judges decided things based on the Constitution, the NFA would have been strangled in the cradle by US v. Miller. I would be delighted to be wrong here, but I highly recommend that you don't get a felony machine gun possession charge expecting it to be overturned. Because you'll end up like those poor guys who had homemade silencers in Kansas: 2 Kansas men ‘collateral damage’ in gun control dispute Jeremy Kettler and Shane Cox were completely and utterly right, but it didn't do them any good. Because judges detest NFA ownership and don't rule according to the Constitution. I'm not assuming what you think i am at all. And just under 200,000 is the number for privately owned transferable guns. With law enforcement it is about 400,000. |
|
Quoted: Of that 200,000 how many are junk like my M-11? How many are un-serviceable historic relics? Quoted: Quoted: And just under 200,000 is the number for privately owned transferable guns. With law enforcement it is about 400,000. Of that 200,000 how many are junk like my M-11? How many are un-serviceable historic relics? No way to know for sure as the ATF doesn't share registry information in any detail. The NFRTR is not only hilariously inaccurate as shown in a handful of court cases and many anecdotes - but likely very incomplete in details. |
|
Quoted: Of that 200,000 how many are junk like my M-11? How many are un-serviceable historic relics? Quoted: Quoted: And just under 200,000 is the number for privately owned transferable guns. With law enforcement it is about 400,000. Of that 200,000 how many are junk like my M-11? How many are un-serviceable historic relics? Does it matter? No. We are talking about a class of weapons, not a specific type/model. The court didn't ask in Caetano how many were shitty Walmart stun guns vs air tasers...it just asked "how many stun guns are in use?" |
|
Quoted: Yes. NYSRPA vs Bruen has changed the landscape. MG restrictions do not have any basis in text, history or tradition - and no amount of mental gymnastics can change that reality. They are simply trying to minimize the blast radius and delay, delay, delay decisions as much as possible until they can alter SCOTUS. Quoted: Quoted: And as far as the Constitution goes, you are correct. But that doesn't matter if the judges don't want to rule in your favor. And the judges, even Conservative ones, don't want people owning machine guns, according to Gura and the others involved in Heller v. DC. I'd love it if Gura and the rest were wrong. No one could wipe the smile off my face for a month. I just don't see any indication that they were wrong. The judges are going to say there is no right to own machine guns because they are "dangerous and unusual," as stupid, historically false, circular and unconstitutional as that argument is. Am I missing something that indicates that federal judges have changed their minds about machine gun ownership? I'll give you $100 if you win, how about that?  (and then go machine gun shopping)  MG restrictions do not have any basis in text, history or tradition - and no amount of mental gymnastics can change that reality. They are simply trying to minimize the blast radius and delay, delay, delay decisions as much as possible until they can alter SCOTUS. Leaked SC deliberations, failure of executive branch to provide them security details, angry mobs of protesters in their lawns…. Some (or all) of the justices might feel like personally owned MGs make more sense now than 4 years ago. They might need ‘em now. |
|
Quoted: To be fair, me pocketing the money would in reality be me giving it to the attorneys. I highly doubt you all will cover the full cost.  Also, if you think I am "lining my pockets" you haven't been paying very close attention given that I've been spending literally hundreds of thousands of dollars over the last few years, mostly here through ARFCOM, supporting charity without reimbursement to provide training opportunities to you yahoos. The reality, is any money leftover after legal expenses will just go to an IRS approved charity to provide training to people for free (to them).  The only reason I said anything about this in a way that might draw monetary support is so that I can simultaneously keep; A) supporting the American Pioneer Corps, B) Dumping money into building a production facility to sell ARs at a price Palmetto State Armory couldn't even hope to match, because they'll sell at cost or below production cost as a non-profit venture, and C) to continue my development of non-NFA, non-regulated anti-tank weapons and long range explosive rockets for public distribution...ones that you could buy cheap or even take the plans and easily make at home. These should be out in the next couple years. Testing phase is just a few months out. Quoted: Quoted: Where are you getting that number? Many folks accepted his moronic WAGER (hundreds to thousands of dollars versus bbq? really?), while SOME offered to donate to the fight. OP made it clear that the wager was just that; a bet to line his pockets: As a reminder, online wagering is still technically illegal. With that and the aforementioned facts in mind, there is no way I would join such a "bet". Would I donate to legal expenses? Sure. Will I lose my ass if the registry is re-opened? Yes, and I would do so gladly. To be fair, me pocketing the money would in reality be me giving it to the attorneys. I highly doubt you all will cover the full cost. Also, if you think I am "lining my pockets" you haven't been paying very close attention given that I've been spending literally hundreds of thousands of dollars over the last few years, mostly here through ARFCOM, supporting charity without reimbursement to provide training opportunities to you yahoos. The reality, is any money leftover after legal expenses will just go to an IRS approved charity to provide training to people for free (to them). The only reason I said anything about this in a way that might draw monetary support is so that I can simultaneously keep; A) supporting the American Pioneer Corps, B) Dumping money into building a production facility to sell ARs at a price Palmetto State Armory couldn't even hope to match, because they'll sell at cost or below production cost as a non-profit venture, and C) to continue my development of non-NFA, non-regulated anti-tank weapons and long range explosive rockets for public distribution...ones that you could buy cheap or even take the plans and easily make at home. These should be out in the next couple years. Testing phase is just a few months out. Holy crap, this makes it sound like you actually believe in the RTKBA in the way the founding fathers intended. My hat is off to you bold sir. |
|
Quoted: No reason to bet. Won’t happen but if it does… I get machine guns So same or better works for me! Good luck! I agree we have the ATF banning and confiscating products that do don't fall under their purview there is no way in hell they allowed any new MGs. I also just don't see any court ruling against the MG ban either. |
|
Quoted: I agree we have the ATF banning and confiscating products that do don't fall under their purview there is no way in hell they allowed any new MGs. I also just don't see any court ruling against the MG ban either. Quoted: Quoted: No reason to bet. Won’t happen but if it does… I get machine guns So same or better works for me! Good luck! I agree we have the ATF banning and confiscating products that do don't fall under their purview there is no way in hell they allowed any new MGs. I also just don't see any court ruling against the MG ban either. You and all the others saying this are going to be very caught off guard when you realize the approach that is being taken. |
|
Quoted: Miller was “decided” without Miller or anyone else arguing his case because he died beforehand. During the NFA hearings way back when, they themselves discussed the fact that it would be unconstitutional to ban MGs but rationalized it as being within their ability to *tax* them. Since then it’s been deemed unconstitutional to tax a right such as on voting via a poll tax. And then they then decided to stop accepting that tax altogether, while still requiring it be paid to exercise the right to own them. Infringed is a very clearly defined word, and “shall not be” is a very strong term (as opposed to shouldn’t be for example) and while some courts, politicians and even many citizens believe a little regulation here and a few permit schemes there (SCOTUS’ own term, which they then state can be abused and may be open to being challenged wink wink) are ok, as understood by our Founders at the time of ratification they are all infringements as directed by Bruen. Any interest balancing goes out the window by their own admission that more laws (or any for that matter) won’t stop criminals from getting guns, even automatic guns, and using them in ways already deemed to be illegal by other laws; and when criminals do get them anyway Haynes prevents criminals from even being prosecuted for it. It is absolutely constitutional to write and enforce laws against committing violent and other crimes, including (if they so desire) making violent crimes using a weapon or firearm subject to harsher punishments, and I don’t think many of us would disagree on that last point. And quite frankly, I think opening the registry would create a line two miles long full of people who’d be excited and quite happy to hand over $200 per…. But- ultimately that $200 still is an unconstitutional poll tax. They wouldn’t say you can only vote in federal elections for free, but it’s ok for states or towns and municipalities to require a poll tax, and this is no different. And, even if they did, there’s no way on earth The Court would allow that state etc to then stop accepting that tax, specifically and intentionally, to prevent more citizens from exercising their right to vote. It’s been baby steps, one step at a time, at the right time, and I for one can’t wait to read every word of what Ben files! You’re right, however it helps us when they overstep with mental gymnastics in direct opposition to their most recent directives in Bruen, because it just makes it easier for The Court to grant cert and slap them down, setting a nationwide precedent. Let them overreach! Quoted: Quoted: Correct me if I am wrong, but I think about half those registered MGs are owned by police departments. The problem is, you are assuming the courts are going to be consistent with Bruen and the constitution. They are going to use any mental gymnastics to keep banning MG ("dangerous and unusual!"). Judges don't make decisions based on the law. They make them based on their own ideology and values. If judges decided things based on the Constitution, the NFA would have been strangled in the cradle by US v. Miller. I would be delighted to be wrong here, but I highly recommend that you don't get a felony machine gun possession charge expecting it to be overturned. Because you'll end up like those poor guys who had homemade silencers in Kansas: 2 Kansas men ‘collateral damage’ in gun control dispute Jeremy Kettler and Shane Cox were completely and utterly right, but it didn't do them any good. Because judges detest NFA ownership and don't rule according to the Constitution. Miller was “decided” without Miller or anyone else arguing his case because he died beforehand. During the NFA hearings way back when, they themselves discussed the fact that it would be unconstitutional to ban MGs but rationalized it as being within their ability to *tax* them. Since then it’s been deemed unconstitutional to tax a right such as on voting via a poll tax. And then they then decided to stop accepting that tax altogether, while still requiring it be paid to exercise the right to own them. Infringed is a very clearly defined word, and “shall not be” is a very strong term (as opposed to shouldn’t be for example) and while some courts, politicians and even many citizens believe a little regulation here and a few permit schemes there (SCOTUS’ own term, which they then state can be abused and may be open to being challenged wink wink) are ok, as understood by our Founders at the time of ratification they are all infringements as directed by Bruen. Any interest balancing goes out the window by their own admission that more laws (or any for that matter) won’t stop criminals from getting guns, even automatic guns, and using them in ways already deemed to be illegal by other laws; and when criminals do get them anyway Haynes prevents criminals from even being prosecuted for it. It is absolutely constitutional to write and enforce laws against committing violent and other crimes, including (if they so desire) making violent crimes using a weapon or firearm subject to harsher punishments, and I don’t think many of us would disagree on that last point. And quite frankly, I think opening the registry would create a line two miles long full of people who’d be excited and quite happy to hand over $200 per…. But- ultimately that $200 still is an unconstitutional poll tax. They wouldn’t say you can only vote in federal elections for free, but it’s ok for states or towns and municipalities to require a poll tax, and this is no different. And, even if they did, there’s no way on earth The Court would allow that state etc to then stop accepting that tax, specifically and intentionally, to prevent more citizens from exercising their right to vote. It’s been baby steps, one step at a time, at the right time, and I for one can’t wait to read every word of what Ben files! Quoted: I would think whatever form of legal gymnastics you will be attempting has been tried before, but with recent court decisions, maybe there is a new hole that has opened up? With this administration you have a hard fight as well, AG that ignores the law, the FATF that makes up shit as they go... But I wish you the best of luck in your pursuit of pew-pew-pew. You’re right, however it helps us when they overstep with mental gymnastics in direct opposition to their most recent directives in Bruen, because it just makes it easier for The Court to grant cert and slap them down, setting a nationwide precedent. Let them overreach! I applaud Ben for doing anything within his ability to push back against the tide. That said, I am skeptical of government in any form, at any level. We're essentially living under the shadow of an organized mafia by another name. They will do what they want, however they want, with no regard for any rules that don't suit them. I have no faith that this crime org will be restrained by law, writ, ruling, or referendum. Simply put, I have no faith that these mafia players will be bound by the rules of the game, nor will they hesitate to use violence against anyone who would put the rules in front of them. It's a lies. All of it. No faith in the uniparty kabuki charade. |
|
Quoted: if and when I see my name in the bbq invitation list.. /media/mediaFiles/sharedAlbum/illallowit-195.gif Scrolling past all the naysayers and barracks lawyers. I'm down for a fifty dollar donation, right now, regardless of how far this goes. Put his name on it on the list lol Send more after the yard sale  |
|
Quoted: Scrolling past all the naysayers and barracks lawyers. I'm down for a fifty dollar donation, right now, regardless of how far this goes. Put his name on it on the list lol Send more after the yard sale Done. Added to OP "Striker (brought to you by high_order1) $50" |
|
All the best to you in this effort. Just wondering, would it be of any value to keep the ATF inundated with machinegun Form 1s? Basically, thousands of people filing a Form 1, then filing another one when it's denied? Keep them absolutely buried in MG forms? Would it help a "common use" argument if they have to answer in court that they deny thousands of machinegun Form 1s? |
|
Quoted: To be fair, me pocketing the money would in reality be me giving it to the attorneys. I highly doubt you all will cover the full cost. Also, if you think I am "lining my pockets" you haven't been paying very close attention given that I've been spending literally hundreds of thousands of dollars over the last few years, mostly here through ARFCOM, supporting charity without reimbursement to provide training opportunities to you yahoos. The reality, is any money leftover after legal expenses will just go to an IRS approved charity to provide training to people for free (to them). The only reason I said anything about this in a way that might draw monetary support is so that I can simultaneously keep; A) supporting the American Pioneer Corps, B) Dumping money into building a production facility to sell ARs at a price Palmetto State Armory couldn't even hope to match, because they'll sell at cost or below production cost as a non-profit venture, and C) to continue my development of non-NFA, non-regulated anti-tank weapons and long range explosive rockets for public distribution...ones that you could buy cheap or even take the plans and easily make at home. These should be out in the next couple years. Testing phase is just a few months out. B) When you succeed in overturning the restriction on the registry, I would consider manufacturing open bolt semiautomatic SMG/PCCs and beltfeds. Cheap ARs are appealing, but the market is glutted... unless these cheap ARs are at the same performance/feature level you'd get out of LMT/KAC/Geissele, etc. |
|
Quoted: B) When you succeed in overturning the restriction on the registry, I would consider manufacturing open bolt semiautomatic SMG/PCCs and beltfeds. Cheap ARs are appealing, but the market is glutted... unless these cheap ARs are at the same performance/feature level you'd get out of LMT/KAC/Geissele, etc. Imagine a world where you could get a bare bones, reliable albeit not pretty, AR complete for $250 dollars. Because that is where I'm sitting right now. |
|
Quoted: I would be interested in an equal protection argument. I was born in 1980. I never had the opportunity to buy or build a new MG. Same. That fuckface Reagan signed that bullshit a month after I was born. Perhaps had a I been a less lazy newborn... who knows? |
|
Quoted: I submitted a Form 1 for a MG today as an individual. I'm currently accepting bets on whether I will manage to get the registry open through what I suspect with good reason will be follow-on legal action. You're betting against a seat in a BBQ at my ranch following final resolution. We will say your seat, for simplicity sake, is worth ten dollars. What odds will you give me? Anyone 100,000 to 1? (That's a million dollar bet, for those mathematically challenged. )10,000 to 1? Resolution to be determined by one of the following: The registry is opened, or A court finds against me and the appeal is denied, or it has been appealed and lost, and no legal remedies remain. Who will put their money where their mouth is? And let's be real. If I lose, I'll feed you. If I win, I'll feed you while you deliver your cash. https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/72384/Form_1_Submitted-2811829.jpg Top 10% of commitments: Anonymous $10000 mnew007 $1001 TxTacticalArms $1000 Kuraki $1000 fish223 $1000 Total list of BBQ attendees: Darkgray $100 LineofDeparture $50 Wizzy $200 in (5.56 for the new M16A1 blast off at the party) mustangduckk $200 Kuraki $1000 FriskyDillo $50 FritzTKatt $20 fish223 $1000 rtlm $100 haveTwo $100 Giltweasel $100 Ranxerox911 $50 1BMF (One PSA/H&R Arms M16 registered as a MG) Apple3_14159 $870 (payable in beer and ammo) mbg0001 $60 DmacRTCo $25 1Tribe $100 bkpkr $100 TxTacticalArms $1000 cyclone (5 pmags) Bophades $100 NY12ga $50 TribunusSanGeorgii $50 Whiteryno $200 lokt $250 GrantS $100 pn9ne $100 xmission $250 Clovis_Chitwood $50 Bellows1 $50 Klay $20 Tortilla-flats $1000 JustinU235 $1000 FJB247 $100 CouncilofDave $250 Mcgiggles $100 d16man $50 wile326 $100 dtux $100 Your1Savior $100 Wizzy $200 (in May 2023 5.56~ about 500 rounds). Cypselus $200 steviesterno16 $1000 4FishLimit $250 Mike327 $400 (plus $1000 more on successful resolution) BLKVooDoo $500 home_alone1 $1000 mnew007 $1001 tReznr $1000 Brawndo $100 trio $100 JimPope $200 DistanceX $100 futurerancher $100 FF208 $50 Miles_Urbanus $100 aplomado $100 Striker (brought to you by high_order1) $50 CleverNickname $200 I mean I'll put 20 bucks on it but you are going to have to remind me because zero fucking chance of me remember this in the 87 years it takes to get an answer and going through the legal system. (or tomorrow if I'm being completely honest. )but chances I give it? Right up there with paying off the national debt, getting social security under control, repealing ACA, the second amendment coalition and gold bricks flying out of my ass.  |
|
I’d like to take the bet, but I hope I lose. $200 to you @Ben if you succeed in making literally any dent of any kind in the Hughes Amendment. If it happens, I’d like to come to the BBQ, and I’ll bring a P90, not a PS90 Let me know if I need to contribute separately for the BBQ. I am a huge fan of your work and I have never hoped to lose a bet so bad in my life! |
|
Quoted: I'm not assuming what you think i am at all. . Can you reveal what you are assuming, or is it a secret for now? I'm not seeing how you are going to get the registry re-opened without the agreement of Federal Judges. I don't believe that the opinions about Judges about machine gun ownership have changed, unless I see some evidence. |
|
Quoted: Can you reveal what you are assuming, or is it a secret for now? I'm not seeing how you are going to get the registry re-opened without the agreement of Federal Judges. I don't believe that the opinions about Judges about machine gun ownership have changed, unless I see some evidence. I hope he doesn’t tell us. Let the Shock & Awe first set in upon whoever he files with for maximum impact… |
|
Quoted: I mean I'll put 20 bucks on it but you are going to have to remind me because zero fucking chance of me remember this in the 87 years it takes to get an answer and going through the legal system. (or tomorrow if I'm being completely honest. )but chances I give it? Right up there with paying off the national debt, getting social security under control, repealing ACA, the second amendment coalition and gold bricks flying out of my ass. Quoted: Quoted: I submitted a Form 1 for a MG today as an individual. I'm currently accepting bets on whether I will manage to get the registry open through what I suspect with good reason will be follow-on legal action. You're betting against a seat in a BBQ at my ranch following final resolution. We will say your seat, for simplicity sake, is worth ten dollars. What odds will you give me? Anyone 100,000 to 1? (That's a million dollar bet, for those mathematically challenged. )10,000 to 1? Resolution to be determined by one of the following: The registry is opened, or A court finds against me and the appeal is denied, or it has been appealed and lost, and no legal remedies remain. Who will put their money where their mouth is? And let's be real. If I lose, I'll feed you. If I win, I'll feed you while you deliver your cash. https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/72384/Form_1_Submitted-2811829.jpg Top 10% of commitments: Anonymous $10000 mnew007 $1001 TxTacticalArms $1000 Kuraki $1000 fish223 $1000 Total list of BBQ attendees: Darkgray $100 LineofDeparture $50 Wizzy $200 in (5.56 for the new M16A1 blast off at the party) mustangduckk $200 Kuraki $1000 FriskyDillo $50 FritzTKatt $20 fish223 $1000 rtlm $100 haveTwo $100 Giltweasel $100 Ranxerox911 $50 1BMF (One PSA/H&R Arms M16 registered as a MG) Apple3_14159 $870 (payable in beer and ammo) mbg0001 $60 DmacRTCo $25 1Tribe $100 bkpkr $100 TxTacticalArms $1000 cyclone (5 pmags) Bophades $100 NY12ga $50 TribunusSanGeorgii $50 Whiteryno $200 lokt $250 GrantS $100 pn9ne $100 xmission $250 Clovis_Chitwood $50 Bellows1 $50 Klay $20 Tortilla-flats $1000 JustinU235 $1000 FJB247 $100 CouncilofDave $250 Mcgiggles $100 d16man $50 wile326 $100 dtux $100 Your1Savior $100 Wizzy $200 (in May 2023 5.56~ about 500 rounds). Cypselus $200 steviesterno16 $1000 4FishLimit $250 Mike327 $400 (plus $1000 more on successful resolution) BLKVooDoo $500 home_alone1 $1000 mnew007 $1001 tReznr $1000 Brawndo $100 trio $100 JimPope $200 DistanceX $100 futurerancher $100 FF208 $50 Miles_Urbanus $100 aplomado $100 Striker (brought to you by high_order1) $50 CleverNickname $200 I mean I'll put 20 bucks on it but you are going to have to remind me because zero fucking chance of me remember this in the 87 years it takes to get an answer and going through the legal system. (or tomorrow if I'm being completely honest. )but chances I give it? Right up there with paying off the national debt, getting social security under control, repealing ACA, the second amendment coalition and gold bricks flying out of my ass. What chances did you think roe v wade had of being tossed? |
|
Quoted: I hope he doesn’t tell us. Let the Shock & Awe first set in upon whoever he files with for maximum impact… Quoted: Quoted: Can you reveal what you are assuming, or is it a secret for now? I'm not seeing how you are going to get the registry re-opened without the agreement of Federal Judges. I don't believe that the opinions about Judges about machine gun ownership have changed, unless I see some evidence. I hope he doesn’t tell us. Let the Shock & Awe first set in upon whoever he files with for maximum impact… Yeah, it isn't generally advisable to reveal legal strategies ahead of time. Sorry folks. |
|
Quoted: @Bama-Shooter I know man...that is what I am counting on (at least for starters!). Do try to keep up... Are you coming to the BBQ? Quoted: Quoted: Denied. @Bama-Shooter I know man...that is what I am counting on (at least for starters!). Do try to keep up... Are you coming to the BBQ? BBQ? |
