[Caveman Jim]

Where'd you get your law degree?

didn’t know that I needed one to have an opinion...

 

[Trunk Monkey]

didn’t know that I needed one to have an opinion...

You don't. However, you do need one to have a credible opinion

 

[jigs-n-fixture]

You don't. However, you do need one to have a credible opinion

Elitist! Where did you get your degree? You are a frequent poster, so where did you get yours”.

 

[Trunk Monkey]

Elitist! Where did you get your degree? You are a frequent poster, so where did you get yours”.

Everest College but it wasn't law.

And it doesn't make you an elitist to say that before I'm going to give any weight to your opinion on something as complex as the law I want to see a degree.

I used to do security checks into Colorado Springs Municipal Courthouse.

In the lobby in a glass case they have a copy of the Colorado Revised Code. It's pretty close to three hundred volumes each one as thick as an LA phone book.

 

[Ghost1958]

Everest College but it wasn't law.

And it doesn't make you an elitist to say that before I'm going to give any weight to your opinion on something as complex as the law I want to see a degree.

I used to do security checks into Colorado Springs Municipal Courthouse.

In the lobby in a glass case they have a copy of the Colorado Revised Code. It's pretty close to three hundred volumes each one as thick as an LA phone book.

No doubt.
But the supreme law governing the RTKABA is one succinct, clear sentence barring the RTKABA to be interfered with.

Dont need a degree for one sentence.
Just need a degree to understand all the llegal legalese hot air bastardizing it.

 

[primer1]

It would have been one thing if they never approved the pistol brace. If they did so, most of us never would have known they existed.

So after people go buy oodles of them, they might change their minds and want people to surrender or register them.

It's like they are trying to tick people off.

 

[G66enigma]

No doubt.
But the supreme law governing the RTKABA is one succinct, clear sentence barring the RTKABA to be interfered with.

Dont need a degree for one sentence.
Just need a degree to understand all the llegal legalese hot air bastardizing it.

^ Yup. It really should be that simple.

In short: the BOR is the nation's preemption clause, disallowing fiddling with the liberties individuals hold. (Except for the ones with explicit specified exceptions, as with the 3A and 4A.)

Doesn't allow outright exceptions.
Doesn't allow fiddling.
Doesn't allow infringements that "aren't infringements."

ie: freely speak, but still liable for "fighting" words, slander/libel, fraud.
ie: freely own/carry/shoot arms, but still liable for murder, robbery, battery.
ie: freely gather/assemble, but still liable for looting, rioting, criminal plotting.

And, no, holding people accountable for abuse of such liberties isn't a limit on those liberties. No more than criminal accountability for swinging a fist is about the impact upon another's face, not about the swinging of the fist itself.

Pretty dang simple.

SCOTUS should bloody well say so, in plain language.

 

[Rifling82]

What’s the history on SBR? They don’t like them because why? They’re compact? I can buy a shoulder brace for a Glock pistol... what’s really the big deal?
https://zahal.org/product/recover-tactical-stabilizer-conversion-kit-for-glock-17-19-2/


https://caagearup.com/product/mck-micro-conversion-kit-stabilizer/

 

[Caveman Jim]

You don't. However, you do need one to have a credible opinion

Opinions are like A-Holes, everybody has one...

 

[Trunk Monkey]

^ Yup. It really should be that simple.

In short: the BOR is the nation's preemption clause, disallowing fiddling from the liberties individuals hold. (Except for the ones with explicit specified exceptions, as with the 3A and 4A.)

Doesn't allow outright exceptions.
Doesn't allow fiddling.
Doesn't allow infringements that "aren't infringements."

ie: freely speak, but still liable for "fighting" words, slander/libel, fraud.
ie: freely own/carry/shoot arms, but still liable for murder, robbery, battery.
ie: freely gather/assemble, but still liable for looting, rioting, criminal plotting.

And, no, holding people accountable for abuse of such liberties isn't a limit on those liberties. No more than criminal accountability for swinging a fist is about the impact upon another's face, not about the swinging of the fist itself.

Pretty dang simple.

SCOTUS should bloody well say so, in plain language.

According to the Fifth Amendment a person can be deprived of life liberty or property by due process of law.

I interpret that to mean that a convicted felon can lose his right to own a firearm because of his felonious behavior.

How does that tie into the Second Amendment

 

[G66enigma]

According to the Fifth Amendment a person can be deprived of life liberty or property by due process of law.

I interpret that to mean that a convicted felon can lose his right to own a firearm because of his felonious behavior.

How does that tie into the Second Amendment

For actual abuses upon others, actual harms upon others, yes. Absolutely. For ACTIONS by a person that harm another.

Mere ownership or possession of a product harms nobody. Mere carrying of an item harms nobody. Never has. Can't, given it's inherently not an act against another, let alone a damaging one.


How the destroyers have deemed that's justification for infringements upon liberties in the first place, however, they've never explained and SCOTUS has never clarified. SCOTUS has simply allowed it, time and again. No explanation to speak of. And today, the only real rationalization is: well, they've gotten away with it for so long, it must be justifiable on that sole basis, sidestepping the fact there wasn't authorization to infringe in the first place.

 

[Ghost1958]

According to the Fifth Amendment a person can be deprived of life liberty or property by due process of law.

I interpret that to mean that a convicted felon can lose his right to own a firearm because of his felonious behavior.

How does that tie into the Second Amendment

It doesnt.
If hes to dangerous to posess a gun hez to dangerous to not keep locked up.
But regardless of the made up reasonings to justify violating the RTKABA. once free to walk the street , free to possess weapons.

The thing about free felons is they understand the RTKABA better than some gun owners and arm themselves once released despite the unconstitutional ban on them doing so.

 

[tinbucket]

They do want to make Gun Owners, Second Amendment Advocates,Patriots, Americans mad.
Just as in Venezuela and Cuba, China and coming decrees by Biden/Democrats/Communists/Nazis?.
To establish that they are in control and you will obey: that you have n choice: that they will send their Brown shirts et al and force you to take the harness! That they have taken power and it is theirs to do whatever they desire with it to us and our dead Republic! This outlook is no mistake. We have seen it time and again in history. Them in power is not for the people, by the people, of the people, it is for thee and their power and wealth.
do not observe our Laws, any perceived fairness, morality, our Constitution and Bill of Rights!
They knew Americans would never elect them so they have stolen, bought the vote, for years and now the big heist the prize the Presidency! Ban Private Ownership, Ban cars, Seize and ban our guns, ban Christianity, and kill us if we resist! Open our Borders and make Americans second in our own country, that will show us!The great Reset; Covid the Chinese Communist provided Virus, EXCUSE! They have declared this several times and then kinds sushed it.
Look at who they are and what they have done already. Kerry should have hung. Harris should be behind bars as so should be the Bidens, and everyne of the Democrat proposed Administration! There is not one among them with Honor or fealty or love of our Country and Americans, NOT ONE!They do not pretend they have any notion of serving our Country or us! Their declared, their clear intentions, their agenda is "Change:" THE DESTRUCTION OF OUR REPUBLIC, OUR BILL OF RIGHTS, OUR CONSTITUTION, THE LAST BASTION OF WESTERN CHRISTIAN CIVILIZATION! YES THEY WILL TRY TO RAID US TO TWHOEVER CAN DO WHATEVER THEY WANTAKE OUR FIREARMS..if we let them! JUST LIKE THE NFA, GCA68, AND THE CRIMINALIZING OF "BUMP STOCKS," WHICH WAS TO SHOW THEY OR HE OR CAN DO WHATEVER THEY WANT, THEY DECIDE IF THE CONSTITUTION LIVES AND IS THE LAW!

 

[Missouribound]

If Heir Biden the idiot takes office. He/they will immediately proceed with Executive Orders violating every aspect of the Constitution, our Rights legal or not!

The democrats in government need to be reminded of two things:
1. They work for us, not the other way around.
2. The 2A was created so we could remind them of that if they get out of hand.

 

[Rifling82]

Thought I would share,

 

[Sniper03]

Here is my Email dated 12/11/2020 from SB Tactical about the AR Pistol Brace they made for Sig and still making that model today. (SB-15)


We understand your concern and we’re happy you reached out to us!

What you have seen or read is simply not true. We have been actively engaged in discussions with the ATF and DOJ for years and working tirelessly to encourage them to provide clear and public guidance regarding what constitutes a brace and the standards by which braces are measured. It is patently false that the SB15 and MPX PSB are the only braces that the ATF has “approved.”


The ATF has communicated to us on numerous occasions that as long as the technology of bifurcated flaps and Velcro didn’t change, then there was no requirement to resubmit the brace. Despite that guidance, we decided in May of 2019 to submit all of our braces for review anyway. The ATF has still not issued a binding determination and has unhelpfully stated that they “do not regulate the manufacture, sale or possession of firearm accessories, such as stocks, secondary grips, or Stabilizing Braces.” The ATF’s views remain non-final, and we are attempting to continue discussions with ATF and DOJ about the regulation of Pistol Stabilizing Braces and the need for clear and consistent guidelines, for consumers and manufacturers alike.

Nothing has changed with braces, although we strongly urge you to reach out to your elected officials and make your voice heard on this potential issue.

Kind regards,
The SB Tactical Team

03