Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
1/25/2018 7:38:29 AM
Posted: 12/2/2002 12:07:31 PM EST
I'm willing to bet that IF the AW ban sunsets without replacement we could possibly see some BS similar to the following: ATF, in their usual arrogant "interpretations" of written law (exactly what the hell is that, anyway?) "rules" that all AW-type firearms made between 1994 and 2004 must remain in perpetual Post Ban status. After all, that law WAS on the books during that period, right? Don't stock up on receivers quite yet, folks. If we can let the damn AW ban die, there will be those who will be as pissy as possible because they didn't get their way (ATF, for example). What say you?
Link Posted: 12/2/2002 12:48:08 PM EST
I don't think that ATF cares enough about the AW ban to try something like this. Now, the State of Chicago OTOH might try to plug the gap left by the sunset.
Link Posted: 12/2/2002 1:10:07 PM EST
[Last Edit: 12/2/2002 1:11:30 PM EST by cc48510]
The ATF cannot make such a ruling because what law was on the book now has no power on what I do after the law is repealed. That would be akin to saying that you cannot own gold that existed in 1933/1934 when Gold (except for gold jewelry) was banned...There is Pre-34 Gold coinage out there and there is nothing they can do about it now because Gold is no longer illegal. Unfortunately, Congress didn't repeal 2 other pieces of shit passed by that same Congress (National Firearms Act and Communications Act) both of which were equally as unconstitutional as the 1933/34 Gold Ban.
Link Posted: 12/2/2002 2:18:19 PM EST
cc48510 While I agree in principle with you, since when has ATF played by the rules. Oh I forgot--they do, but only the "rules" that THEY make up!
Link Posted: 12/2/2002 5:13:32 PM EST
Top Top