This!i am under no obligation to live by their thoughts of what the law should be.......i am only obligated to live by what the law actually says.

Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
To enter, all you need to do is add an image of yourself at the range below! Subscribers get more entries, check out the plans below for a better chance of winning!
Join the contest SubscribeThis!i am under no obligation to live by their thoughts of what the law should be.......i am only obligated to live by what the law actually says.
Which would fit right in with Giffords group not getting their way last weekthis is not intended to stand up in court.....it is a tax payer funded harassment campaign pure and simple.....
It seems pretty clear that they are accusing them of selling unserialized firearms with the belief being that the kit is now a firearm rather than not a firearm. Seems like a bullshit leap to me, but you are putting the emphasis on the wrong syllable. The question is why do we have a system under which an agency can determine something is a firearm without an act of congress.Maybe you know what specific federal statute they are being accused of breaking?
Still haven’t seen anyone that can even point to a specific statute it is they are suspected of violating at this point.
We talk shit about women, gays, lesbians, blacks, Sikhs, etc etc when it comes to firearm ownership and usage.
It doesn't fall to the judiciary, it falls to the agencies. That is current law.Congress enacts the law. The executive, of which the ATF is a part, executed the laws. Unfortunately, Congress passes intentionally ambiguous laws that must be interpreted. That falls on the judiciary. But, to get them to do that, we need a trial.
So, because we haven’t actually covered anything about the law, I did a bit of digging and found this. Note, this is the actual law, not an interpretation of the law... I have bolded the part most pertinent to the
§921. Definitions
...
(3) The term “firearm” means (A) any weapon (including a starter gun) which will or is designed to or may readily be converted to expel a projectile by the action of an explosive; (B) the frame or receiver of any such weapon; (C) any firearm muffler or firearm silencer; or (D) any destructive device. Such term does not include an antique firearm.
Laws like this are fine and dandy until you realize it’s only time before you end up on the prohibited list.. does anyone remember that marine who had his guns taken away for protesting outside a mayors house and saying he will defend himself if attacked by antifa? Did he ever get his guns back? Since he is innocent till proven guilty and all, right?Isn't that the point of the kit? To convert with minimal effort a piece of plastic to house the rest of the parts to make a gun? Isn't everything included in the kit too? So someone can order a kit, and without any additional tools or materials have a gun without having a background check? It is a little troubling that someone who would otherwise be prohibited from owning a gun can with an online order have everything they need to get a gun. And they are doing so. TFB yesterday had in their article of two incidences of P80's products used to kill Americans by otherwise prohibited people.
im sorry freedom is so "troubling" to you.Isn't that the point of the kit? To convert with minimal effort a piece of plastic to house the rest of the parts to make a gun? Isn't everything included in the kit too? So someone can order a kit, and without any additional tools or materials have a gun without having a background check? It is a little troubling that someone who would otherwise be prohibited from owning a gun can with an online order have everything they need to get a gun. And they are doing so. TFB yesterday had in their article of two incidences of P80's products used to kill Americans by otherwise prohibited people.
Shit like this really puts me on the fence.
Part of me says they’re not selling firearms because a firearm kit is not a manufactured firearm even if they sell you everything to put it together. The same part of me is also against any sort of infringement of 2A.
In the same regard I also have no issue with background checks because they do help to keep guns out of the wrong hands and I understand that literally any convicted felon or gang banger can acquire one of these kits and build themselves a gun with a drill and some punches.
To me this kind of stuff falls under “common sense gun control” which I am 100% ok with so long as they leave it at this. Unfortunately they won’t and never will, so fuck them.
^^^This^^^For me, the P80 was a way to get a polymer framed handgun with Glock reliability, but with a noticeably different grip angle and feel. I knew nothing about them until a friend showed me his home built P80. Both of us are lawful gun owners and CC permit holders. I've always preferred 1911's, but the P80 frame had a much better feel to me than a factory Glock. I built two of them, I was able to add custom touches during the build rather than buy a Glock and add on parts after the fact. Not to mention the fact that is was fun as hell to build them up. To prepare the frame properly, a lot of time and effort went into polishing surfaces and drilling holes. I just don't see a felon who wants to commit crimes with one of these going through the trouble, when most likely, they can procure a factory handgun by so many other, much easier means. Just my .02¢
im sorry freedom is so "troubling" to you.
does Home depot also "trouble you".....i can walk in, buy $20 of supplies, and make a 12Gauge shotgun using nothing but a hand drill.....hell, i could arm 30 of my homies for what i can buy a P80 pistol for.
fuck i can make a pipe bomb even easier.....hell, i could have 70-80 pipe bombs for what i would pay for a P80
should the ATF raid Home Depot because prohibited people may get their hands on guns?
I'm pretty sure it is illegal for prohibited people to finish their 80% lowers, no matter what kit they came with. I wonder if it being illegal stops them? Thinking no.
If by freedom you mean your local drug dealers with records should have guns, cause as you say, Freedom
Or the MS-13 illegal immigrant bringing his brand of criminal activity should have unobstructed access to guns...
Or ISIS 'refugee' that is advocating for a global Islamic caliphate and thinks overthrowing the US government is a good start...
Or the sex offender that is eyeballing you family and knows capping you cosplaytriot ass first means easier time having way with your loved ones...
Glad to see you think standing with those people is more important than the majority of America.
I really don't see what you are trying to argue. Whatever it is, pick a different analogy.Safes are not 100% secure. With enough time and determination every gun safe is crack-able. But even the cheapest safe is better than leaving the door wide open and a neon sign pointing to it for thieves to loot. And I think that is what got the ATF's attention. What is the difference between a complete gun and and complete gun kit?
Safes are not 100% secure. With enough time and determination every gun safe is crack-able. But even the cheapest safe is better than leaving the door wide open and a neon sign pointing to it for thieves to loot. And I think that is what got the ATF's attention. What is the difference between a complete gun and and complete gun kit?
If by freedom you mean your local drug dealers with records should have guns, cause as you say, Freedom
Or the MS-13 illegal immigrant bringing his brand of criminal activity should have unobstructed access to guns...
Or ISIS 'refugee' that is advocating for a global Islamic caliphate and thinks overthrowing the US government is a good start...
Or the sex offender that is eyeballing you family and knows capping you cosplaytriot ass first means easier time having their way with your loved ones...
Glad to see you think standing with those people is more important than the majority of America.
Safes are not 100% secure. With enough time and determination every gun safe is crack-able. But even the cheapest safe is better than leaving the door wide open and a neon sign pointing to it for thieves to loot. And I think that is what got the ATF's attention. What is the difference between a complete gun and and complete gun kit?
#metoo.Exactly why I got rid of my AR "pistol".
Plenty of these cretins have called me a commie, but that doesn't mean that your arguments are well formed or that they are convincing in the least. It is possible that both they are idiots (some of them) and that you can't effectively support or even explain what you are trying to get at.Glad to see that preventing pedophiles, ISIS militants, drug dealers, and illegal immigrants from owning a gun is equal to socialism.
But getting called a socialist from the cosplaytriots is the same as getting called a cuck from the InCels.
Wait a minute, the same people who call anyone with an opposing opinion here a socialist are also the same people calling others cucks... I'm seeing something here...
YesLegally, yes I agree with you.
However, I know I'm going to get told to fuck off and every other word in the book for this post but should we allow those who cannot legally obtain a firearm the means to manufacture one for themselves?
b. Show me a company that will ship you a 9" AR upper and an AR lower in same shipment.
b1. There is a reason they do not even risk that BS.....
Glad to see that preventing pedophiles, ISIS militants, drug dealers, and illegal immigrants from owning a gun is equal to socialism.
But getting called a socialist from the cosplaytriots is the same as getting called a cuck from the InCels.
Wait a minute, the same people who call anyone with an opposing opinion here a socialist are also the same people calling others cucks... I'm seeing something here...
Plenty of these cretins have called me a commie, but that doesn't mean that your arguments are well formed or that they are convincing in the least. It is possible that both they are idiots (some of them) and that you can't effectively support or even explain what you are trying to get at.
Is Hassan a free man? Now go and read the Federalist Papers and see what the founders said about free men having arms.Here is a good question for the "Shall not be infringed" crowd. What if Maj Hassan, the Ft Hood shooter, demands he has a right to have a gun right now, even with him in prison, would they support him getting a gun? The minute they say he shouldn't ( and he is an Al Qaeda asshole that should be dead by now for his crimes IMHO) then they are are now allowing infringements on Maj Hassan's rights. So which is it? And where is the line? Can illegals who want to subvert or destroy America be allowed to have guns? How about those 'Autonomous Zones' on Seattle and Portland? Fox News is reporting the new one in Portland is stocking up on arms. Should ANTIFA and BLM have arms to resist law enforcement?
The point is as soon as someone says 'Hey, maybe that guy should not have a gun', then infringement has started. And then we can start a discussion on how legal gun owners can enjoy our hobby and keep those that want to harm others from having guns can start.
I wouldn't consider myself part of the "shall not be infringed" crowd. I'd say I try to understand any issue as it comes. But to speak for myself, I agree with the fellow above who says that you should never be taking rights away from people because of what you think they might do, or what their motives might be. I don't think violent criminals should have guns. Most importantly, I think the most important aspect of legislation is to make sure that a law effects only the intended targets, and has no collateral damage. This last point is, I think, the biggest difference between somebody like me, and apparently somebody like you. I don't think you need to break a few eggs and all.Here is a good question for the "Shall not be infringed" crowd. What if Maj Hassan, the Ft Hood shooter, demands he has a right to have a gun right now, even with him in prison, would they support him getting a gun? The minute they say he shouldn't ( and he is an Al Qaeda asshole that should be dead by now for his crimes IMHO) then they are are now allowing infringements on Maj Hassan's rights. So which is it? And where is the line? Can illegals who want to subvert or destroy America be allowed to have guns? How about those 'Autonomous Zones' on Seattle and Portland? Fox News is reporting the new one in Portland is stocking up on arms. Should ANTIFA and BLM have arms to resist law enforcement?
The point is as soon as someone says 'Hey, maybe that guy should not have a gun', then infringement has started. And then we can start a discussion on how legal gun owners can enjoy our hobby and keep those that want to harm others from having guns can start.
I wouldn't consider myself part of the "shall not be infringed" crowd. I'd say I try to understand any issue as it comes. But to speak for myself, I agree with the fellow above who says that you should never be taking rights away from people because of what you think they might do, or what their motives might be. I don't think violent criminals should have guns. Most importantly, I think the most important aspect of legislation is to make sure that a law effects only the intended targets, and has no collateral damage. This last point is, I think, the biggest difference between somebody like me, and apparently somebody like you. I don't think you need to break a few eggs and all.
People who have a history of violent felony are prohibited by law from finishing an 80% gun, the are prohibited from owning ammunition etc. Are they following these laws? What does that tell you? You can look at where criminals get guns according to DOJ data, and it is rarely legally, but that speaks to their willingness to break the law.And the flip side is how do you stop those that intend to behave badly? Or have a recorded history of crime (AKA felony convictions)? Where is the line between allowing the good guys to buy a gun and grey market ideas that make it to easy for a bad guy to get guns they shouldn't have? Or those the try to create loopholes to get around existing laws? Or technology outpacing the ability of Congress to keep up? Somewhere there is a line. And we as gun owners can either be a part of the debate and shape laws to fit our views, or go scream 'NO' like the NRA and then cry when a law is passed and we all lose.
And the flip side is how do you stop those that intend to behave badly? Or have a recorded history of crime (AKA felony convictions)? Where is the line between allowing the good guys to buy a gun and grey market ideas that make it to easy for a bad guy to get guns they shouldn't have? Or those the try to create loopholes to get around existing laws? Or technology outpacing the ability of Congress to keep up? Somewhere there is a line. And we as gun owners can either be a part of the debate and shape laws to fit our views, or go scream 'NO' like the NRA and then cry when a law is passed and we all lose.
Their culture is what determines the lack of gun crime.
Should we adopt their culture?
No.
Oh go fuck yourself with all your feel good bullshit.My final thoughts on this subject:
1. The ATF reasonably believes that P80 violated the intent and spirit of the GCA and Brady Act with their build kits. It is critical to understand that this belief is reasonable (not necessarily true/correct) because the intent and spirit of the law is what matters.
2. That the GCA and Brady Act are contemptible is irrelevant concerning the ATFs actions. The problem is that the American People somehow got it into their heads that these laws were a good idea, now the Executive Branch is bound to uphold them.
3. @CrabsandFootball 's point is, if I may be so forward as to put in my own words, is that regardless how righteous and honorable one's cause is, if the virtue of courage is not paired with that of prudence then the cause cannot be championed effectively. History is littered with examples of vain martyrdom. He believes the 2A cause would be better served if the company continued to pump 80% frames into the wild instead of being bold with the build kits.
4. I disagree with this point as I don't see how proliferation of unserialized handguns helps the cause, considering that handguns truly are the self defence weapons that many people think the end all and be all of 2A. P80s bold action I reckon will have more consequence.
Crabs also said, quite rightly, that in civil disobedience the first one through the door is bloodied and for the movement to succeed, there must be a wave behind them. I believe at this point there is indeed a wave of people at the ready. The only way however to change people's minds, to strengthen the wave, is through marketing and propaganda. We can have the best ideas in the world but they won't mean shit if we fail at persuasion. That's where I'll be focusing my efforts.
The fact is, whilst so many 2A supporters are out there prepping and stocking up, the Democrats are busy employing the best behavioral psychologists, marketing experts and scientists in the world for the express purpose of convincing our neighbors and communities that it is we who are the idiots.