Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Posted: 11/30/2001 7:40:15 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/1/2001 11:16:36 AM EDT by Dave_G]
For the complete information from a BATF letter, see this thread in the Legal Forum:

By the way, this post/thread reflects the opinion of the BATF, not me. The original letter to the BATF was sent as the result of a debate that arose on the Legal Forum last March. The participants wanted to know if the BATF's "Once a machinegun, always a machinegun" policy applied to 922(v)(2) exempted semiautomatic assault weapons. Now we know it doesn't. If you don't like it, complain to the BATF. It's their policy, not mine.
Link Posted: 11/30/2001 8:07:55 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 11/30/2001 8:05:53 PM EDT by SouthernShark]
One thing that has always amazed me about gun owners is their reaction to this type of ruling. This is a letter ruling. It state's ATF's position on something (or at least that agent's position). It has no precedential value. In other words this ruling applies only to this ruling.

In ANY other area of the law, environmental or tax rulings for instance, these letter rulings would be challenged in court. But for some reason gun owner's get one of these and treat it as the LAW.

This is obviously BS. I would demand an appeal on this issue. Court rulings have precedential value. That means that people in the future will give some defference to the court's ruling. Leter rulings from government agency's do not have such defference. These government appointees make these kind of rulings in every field (its not just guns), but in other fields they get hauled into court over it. Yet gun owners just sit by and take whatever they shovel out.

Like I said, demand an appeal.

Link Posted: 12/1/2001 7:04:54 AM EDT
Southern Shark,
Read this and your other posts. You are right on the money. If the liberals played by the same rules we do there would be no gun laws on the books at all.
Link Posted: 12/1/2001 7:13:17 AM EDT
My opinion remains the same as the other tread pointing to this thread.

Prove it!

The government have to prove that I didn't have the parts for a preban in say, a plastic bag buried next to a tree in Thailand.
Link Posted: 12/1/2001 7:41:53 AM EDT
I would think the 'fear' comes from the fact that as far as I know, The EPA.OSHA etc. has never kicked in anyone's door at gunpoint and then burned down their house(yet).
Link Posted: 12/1/2001 7:46:34 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Dave_G:
For the complete information from a BATF letter, see this thread in the Legal Forum:

Does the Shit House School of Law have a football team? Did you join their alumni association? Are you affiliated with an organization like the ACLU that only accept briefs from shit house lawyers? Please post your diploma and CV so we can understand the full potential of a SHS of L grad.
Link Posted: 12/1/2001 8:39:02 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/1/2001 8:53:13 AM EDT by Dave_G]

Somebody suggested that a letter be written to the BATF asking the two questions so we could learn what the BATF position on them is. The BATF took from March 19, 2001 to November 30, 2001 to answer. I provided the BATF response verbatim and added a plain English explanation. If you don't like it, well that's too damn bad.

As Colonel Jessup said, "...YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH!"

By the way, if you have a problem with me or anything I post for the good of the members of the forum, why don't you just send me an email about it and quit typing trollish drivel on the board. Expressing a point of view is one thing. Direct verbal and written attacks on someone's character just because you don't like or understand what he or she writes, ranks as pure childish behavior.
Top Top