Categories
All About Guns Anti Civil Rights ideas & "Friends"

Comments on ATF’s New “Frame or Receiver” Rule Now Open From The NRA

Comments on ATF’s New “Frame or Receiver” Rule Now Open

On May 21, ATF published a new proposed rule in the Federal Register entitled Definition of “Frame or Receiver” and Identification of Firearms. That publication triggered the opening of the proposed rule to public comments. The comment period will remain open until August 19, 2021.

While the Justice Department has focused on the impact that this new rule would have on privately made firearms, and the proposed rule would destroy that unique aspect of American freedom, the proposal goes well beyond privately made firearms.

The proposed rule would create new definitions for the terms “firearm frame or receiver,” “frame or receiver,” “firearm,” “gunsmith,” “complete weapon,” “complete muffler or silencer device,” “privately made firearm,” and “readily.” The new definitions make it possible for firearms to have more than one “frame or receiver.” A conclusion that is both at odds with the controlling federal statute and could disrupt the entire industry.

In addition to these changes, ATF is seeking to create an entirely new process for licensed firearm dealers to apply serial numbers to unserialized firearms that come into their possession and to require the indefinite storage of firearm records by licensees. That requirement likewise has no basis in federal statutes.

In effect, the rule would mean that many manufacturers would need to get pre-approval from ATF for new firearm designs.

Due to the discretionary scheme created by the rule, the ATF Director would be given an incredible amount of power over the firearm industry. This comes at a time when President Biden has nominated anti-gun lobbyist and gun ban proponent David Chipman to head the ATF. This draft rule is just one more reason why it’s extremely important for all gun owners to contact their Senators and ask that they vote against Chipman’s confirmation.

NRA-ILA will provide more detailed explanations of the many problems with this proposed in the coming weeks as well as filing comments on this terrible rule on behalf of all NRA members.  If you wish to comment in the meantime, please keep the following in mind.

These are ATF’s instructions for submitting comments:

You may submit comments, identified by docket number ATF 2021R-05, by any of the following methods—

  • Federal eRulemaking Portal: www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
  • Mail: Andrew Lange, Office of Regulatory Affairs, Enforcement Programs and Services, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives, 99 New York Ave. NE, Mail Stop 6N-518, Washington, DC 20226; ATTN: ATF 2021R-05.
  • Fax: (202) 648-9741.

Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency name and docket number (ATF 2021R-05) for this notice of proposed rulemaking (“NPRM” or “proposed rule”). All properly completed comments received will be posted without change to the Federal eRulemaking portal, www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided.

ATF also provided the following contact information for any questions regarding the proposed rule:

Andrew Lange, Office of Regulatory Affairs, Enforcement Programs and Services, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives, U.S. Department of Justice, 99 New York Ave. NE, Mail Stop 6N-518, Washington, DC 20226; telephone: (202) 648-7070 (this is not a toll-free number).

In addition to these technical requirements, it’s important to keep the following in mind when submitting comments.

  • Comments must be professional and respectful. While it is extremely frustrating, to say the least, that the Biden Administration is attempting to blame law-abiding gun owners for the actions of criminals, making comments that include profanity will make it easy for ATF to summarily reject those comments.
  • Comments should focus on the arbitrary nature of the proposed rule. The fact that it is essentially impossible to determine when a piece of metal or plastic becomes a firearm under the proposed rule and leaves such an important determination to administrative fiat makes the proposed rule incompatible with American principles of due process of law.
  • Comments should be individualized and focus on how the proposed rule would impact the commenter. ATF will treat all identical comments as a single comment, so it is important to avoid using a form comment.

Comments can be submitted directly through regulation.gov. Please check back to www.nraila.org soon for more information on this burdensome, arbitrary, and unconstitutional proposed rule.

Categories
Anti Civil Rights ideas & "Friends"

Gun Gripes #301: “Cuomo’s New Executive Orders | SAFE Act 2.0?”

Categories
Allies Anti Civil Rights ideas & "Friends"

The Man is a Prophet!

Categories
All About Guns Anti Civil Rights ideas & "Friends"

Remington Reaches Historic $33 Million Settlement With Families Of Sandy Hook Victims Tyler Durden’s Photo BY TYLER DURDEN

Remington and the families of nine victims from the Sandy Hook school massacre, the second-deadliest school shooting in US history, have reached a settlement that was years in the making: the gun-maker and manufacturer of the Bushmaster AR-15 used by shooter Adam Lanza will pay a total of $33MM. Divided up among the families, that comes to $3.66MM each (before the lawyer’s cut). The families insist the money is no substitute for the brutal killing of their loved one.

According to Reuters, the settlement must still be approved by the Alabama judge overseeing the Remington bankruptcy case. The plaintiffs allege that Remington’s marketing contributed to the shooting. In a February court filing, the plaintiff’s legal team  argued that the value of their claims could exceed $1 billion, including punitive damage – a pretty obvious negotiating tactic.

The case attracted national headlines when it as first filed in 2014, nearly two years after the shooting. Lanza killed 6 adults and 20 students using a Remington Bushmaster rifle, shooting his way into the elementary school after murdering his  mother at home. The massacre ended when Lanza committed suicide as police approached.

Only nine families joined the lawsuit, and many joined for political reasons, as the goal is to increase the financial pressure on companies that sell “assault weapons”, a label popular among proponents of gun control.

Josh Koskoff, one of the families’ lawyers, on Tuesday said his clients would “consider their next steps” in response to the offer from Huntsville, Alabama-based Remington.

“Since this case was filed in 2014, the families’ focus has been on preventing the next Sandy Hook,” Koskoff said in a statement. “An important part of that goal has been showing banks and insurers that companies that sell assault weapons to civilians are fraught with financial risk.”

The families initially claimed that Remington knowingly marketed the gun for use by people to “carry out offensive, military style combat missions against their perceived enemies.”

While the families would certainly love to squeeze all the money, Remington has now filed for bankruptcy twice since the shooting, most recently in July 2020, as restrictions on gun sales in some states ate into gun sales.

Whether the settlement will ultimately be accepted remains to be seen, though it’s pretty likely given that both parties have reportedly agreed to all the terms. It marks the first legal setback for gun makers in a year where a California judge overturned the Golden State’s ban on assault weapons.

Categories
All About Guns Anti Civil Rights ideas & "Friends"

Sure enough!

Categories
Anti Civil Rights ideas & "Friends"

Joe Biden Says He Wants to Push to Ban 9mm Pistols

Categories
Anti Civil Rights ideas & "Friends"

No not quite

Categories
Anti Civil Rights ideas & "Friends" Born again Cynic! California

How my California Tax Money is spent – California’s Gun Confiscation Program Has Been an Abject Failure by JORDAN MICHAELS on JULY 21, 2021

Newsom hasn’t been able to turn the 20-year failure around. (Photo: Wikimedia Commons)

In 2001, California passed a first-of-its-kind law to create a database of residents who had become prohibited from owning firearms. Whether through criminal conduct or mental health issues, these individuals would be included on a list dubbed the “Armed and Prohibited Persons System” (APPS).

The database is made possible by the state’s firearm registration and universal background check systems, and the California Department of Justice hoped local law enforcement and state agents would be able to use APPS to confiscate firearms from those deemed unfit.

Unfortunately for Golden State gun grabbers, the program has been an abject failure—and its problems are only getting worse.

The news outlet CalMatters published this week a lengthy article highlighting the program’s worst failings, and they sum it up like this: “…what seemed at the time like a straight-forward approach to the enforcement of existing gun laws has instead become mired in chronic shortcomings, failing for years to make good on its potential.”

The full piece is worth a read, but CalMatters revealed (sometimes unintentionally, it seems) how the APPS system is used to harass gun owners and violate their privacy rights.

Since government agencies maintain the APPS list, CalMatters was able to obtain personal information of some of the current and former gun owners included in the database. But as CalMatters admits, not everyone on the list is supposed to be there.

SEE ALSO: New California Law Imposes Court Process for Confiscating Guns

Some people who appear in the APPS database have already surrendered their firearms. Others are only there due to administrative errors.

“Even when the information is correct, some people might be on the list because of an apparent misunderstanding or paperwork issue, not because they’re trying to illegally keep their guns,” the outlet reports.

Law enforcement agents sometimes devote time and resources to confiscating firearms only to find that the database has given them faulty information.

“The work-intensive process and outmoded technology has led some in law enforcement to question the database’s reliability. They say they’ve discovered errors during field operations and that investigations based on the list are a waste of resources,” according to CalMatters.

And then there’s simple bureaucratic incompetence. Some officials estimate that there are 24,000 people in the APPS database who have not surrendered their firearms. But CalMatters reports (towards the bottom of the article) that even this number is mostly guesswork.

“As it stands now, the department can’t even determine the precise breadth of the backlog, including how many cases have remained unresolved for more than six months,” they say.

There are multiple causes for the backlog. CalMatters discovered that many local police departments do not even know about the database. They also note that judges often do not ensure that their gun confiscation orders are carried out, and agents at the California DOJ can’t keep up with the constant stream of new prohibited persons.

SEE ALSO: CA Gov. Gavin Newsom: ‘We have the ability to do martial law…if necessary’

What many gun owners may not know is that just being on the list doesn’t give law enforcement the right to confiscate firearms. According to CalMatters, agents must acquire probable cause that a person still possesses a gun in order to obtain a search warrant. If an individual simply denies owning a firearm, the investigation may end right there.

One agency told CalMatters that they gave up on confiscating firearms after one night of work, calling it “a waste of resources that could be directed toward more pressing violent crime problems.” Some people provided proof that their guns had been sold long ago, while others claimed they had gotten rid of them but could provide no evidence.

“There was just no way to verify,” one agent said, adding that the state “has no idea who has guns and who’s turned them in.”

The program’s sorry track record has made it difficult for anti-gun advocates to justify its continued existence. According to CalMatters, “Gun control advocates struggled to identify shootings that might have been prevented had authorities successfully retrieved firearms,” and the outlet did not report on any specific instances.

One spokesperson for the anti-gun group Giffords may have unintentionally summed up how most law-abiding gun owners feel about gun control efforts.

“It’s very frustrating to see that we have such a hard time implementing firearms removals in situations where we have all the information in front of us,” she said. “It doesn’t give the public a lot of confidence in our ability to tackle a lot of these more complex firearm issues.”

Categories
All About Guns Anti Civil Rights ideas & "Friends"

Biden Just Said He Wants to Ban Handguns by Leah Barkoukis

Biden Just Said He Wants to Ban Handguns

During a CNN town hall on Wednesday, President Biden said he is “continuing to push” for a ban on weapons that can fire multiple rounds, including handguns.

The statement came after an audience member asked how he planned to address gun violence at the federal level “to actually bring about change and make our local cities safer.”

“I’m the only guy that ever got — passed legislation when I was a senator to make sure we eliminated assault weapons,” Biden responded. “The idea you need a weapon that can have the ability to fire 20, 30, 40, 50, 120 shots from that weapon, whether it’s a, whether it’s a 9mm pistol or whether it’s a rifle, is ridiculous.”

“I’m continuing to push to eliminate the sale of those things, but I’m not likely to get that done in the near term,” Biden added.

House Republicans vowed to never let Biden get away with stripping Americans’ Second Amendment rights.

_____________________________________________________

Now usually I take this with a huge grain of salt. But this timeI am getting nervous about this issue. Grumpy

Categories
All About Guns Anti Civil Rights ideas & "Friends" California

The Report from behind Enemy Lines

NEWSOM RECALL PUTS
RIGHTS OF THE LAWFUL CENTER STAGE
With less than 60 days until the special election, the recall of Governor Gavin Newsom is the biggest political story in California, if not the country.  Sure, legal fights and several anti-2A bills are still pending, but there is no question that the recall represents a historic opportunity.

Gavin Newsom took office promising to go further than Jerry Brown in curtailing gun rights and he has done just that.  In the wake of his election, multiple legislators whose anti-gun rights bills were vetoed by Brown were more than happy to re-introduce those measures.  These attacks on the rights of safe and responsible gun owners will only continue if the recall fails.

In a special installment of CRPA TV, Kevin and Rick discuss the reasons behind the recall.  Spoiler alert: it is not just the Governor’s record on gun rights that has brought him to the brink of losing his seat.

Click here to watch “Let’s Talk About The Recall” on CRPA TV