Standing is whatever a judge wants it to be.  If they don't want to rule on a case, they just whip that out from under their robes.

Universities filed challenges to President's Trumps immigrant restrictions with the idea that they were going to lose out on students coming in from other countries and thereby lose high dollar out of state tuition - a thin reed of standing but good enough for a judge who wanted to say Yes.

Abortion shops have blanket standing to file lawsuits against abortion laws, on behalf on unnamed clients who the court just assumes will be impacted.

You're a dumb ass if you don't understand the standing game that judges play.  

A Texas business could simply say they were going to lose money by not being able to make and sell Texas only suppressors, if not allowed.

No one knows how it'll play out in court, and you're a fool if you think you do.  As before, the most important aspect of gun rulings in court is who's the judge.  Were they appointed by a Dem or a Republican?  Are they conservative if a Republican or a RINO?  We'll see what happens.

Guys in KS never went to jail and the state refused to defend them under the law they made... As of Sept 1 cans are decriminalized as far as TX is concerned. So just be smart about it, like all those pot sellers and smokers that didn't get raided by the feds. The feds do not have unlimited resources and rely heavily on state authorities to bring charges or sniff out law breakers. Don't make the feds job easy like the guys in KS (found by feds on social media).

Unless there is a convention of the states to kick the rabid fed overreach in the teeth, civil disobedience will continue to be key in taking our rights back from the machine. Here's to hoping they decriminalize SBRs and SBSs in TX next session... (doubtful, I know)
Remove:

• (10)  "Short-barrel firearm" means a rifle with a barrel length of less than 16 inches or a shotgun with a barrel length of less than 18 inches, or any weapon made from a shotgun or rifle if, as altered, it has an overall length of less than 26 inches.

from the penal code this time around.

ETA: the manufacturers should be pinned to the Texas forum in a Texas manufacturers post.

Not true on the federal level. If you had read the link above:




And as described above, the plaintiff would have to show they were harmed by the defendant.



Again, the law says the Texas AG is the one to seek the declaratory judgement. Can you show how he would have standing?

Following the previous line of logic for university standing, he could argue suppressor sales would boom in the state and Texas would be the beneficiary of sales tax revenue related to that boom? There is already case law regarding revenue as someone mentioned. I would assume lawmakers already have a 'plan of attack' since they wrote that section into law... But it's hard to bring myself to assume anything good about government.

\


None and it has nothing to do with the new law signing.  The prices demanded by Texas suppressor MFG are outrageously expensive.

I have put off buying suppressors, or any NFA item, because I refuse to give money, and wait months or more to get my product. I guess I have trust issues.
I am told by people in the gun biness that the funds are safe. I am skeptical. Whatever. I will wait for now.

That's the way it is, probably not changing anytime soon; gotta pay to play. Just buy from a reputable dealer, capital armory or silencer shop.

/thread

Don’t be “That” guy unless you have MILLIONS to spend on a court case you won’t win, and in the end will still be a convicted felon.

I wish that would have been part of this bill.  Should have been.

Can be teed up for next session, especially if there's some foolish pistol ban brace rule that ATF comes up with, after years of saying they're OK to make and sell.

No reason for the state of Texas to have the same SBS and SBR laws as the Federal government if ATF changes what's considered those on a whim.

I hope more people can now see (even the low IQ masses) just how stupid NFA laws are.

The BATFE makes them even more laughable every year with arbitrary decisions and contrary "rulings".

Also, the NFA was originally supposed to include handguns as well.  The one of the reasons to put SBR's into NFA status was to prevent a rifle from being shorten and used in the role of a handgun:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Firearms_Act

Originally, pistols and revolvers were to be regulated as strictly as machine guns; towards that end, cutting down a rifle or shotgun to circumvent the handgun restrictions by making a concealable weapon was taxed as strictly as a machine gun.[7]

Conventional pistols and revolvers were ultimately excluded from the Act before passage, but other concealable weapons were not.[7]

So for all of ATF's panic huffing about braced pistols, the original idea behind putting SBR's into NFA status was the unconstitutional idea of putting handguns into that status as well.  

Regardless of the success of the Texas only suppressor idea, it's good for states to move to decriminalize NFA items on a state leve, and say to the Federal government they're out of the business of putting measuring tapes to barrels anymore.  

We can lobby for this in 23.  

I didn't know you made them.  I'll buy one from you if we can agree on a price.

What is the goal of this effort? If it stands the legal mumbo-jumbo test, will we be able to buy a shiny new "Made in Texas" can without waiting for a fed stamp or getting sherrif dept sign-off?

Basically. Buy it like any other firearm accessory.

To show constituents how much their legislator supports the Second Amendment.
Same legislators then disappear when its time to eliminate other restrictive state gun laws that aren't affected by the Supremacy Clause.



The CLEO "signoff" disappeared five years ago this week.

Don't hold your breath waiting for the legal mumbo jumbo. The Hearing Protection Act will be passed any day now.

As hard as this idea gets me, I can only assume you are being facetious...