Внимание товарищи: Заказы из ЧК

[Nukes]

[KentuckyBuddha]

Well, now I don't know what to believe.

[bwaites]

Attaching a foregrip to any pistol moves it into the AOW class, as does attaching a butt stock. However, there is a decision that states that using the SigTac forearm grip in that manner does not, so long as there isn't something changing the classification like a vertical foregrip. I am astounded at how the ATF has walked around and around this issue and allowed that forearm grip, but the ATF is regularly getting beat in court now, and it appears that Sig is carrying a great deal of the fight.


This letter is pertinent ONLY to shotguns, as the question was posed by a shotgun manufacturer. Interestingly, it points out that it is only illegal if used as a shoulder stock, and then only if the ATF actually caught you using it that way! I seriously doubt that long term that will stand in court, particularly as judges are becoming less and less tolerant of ATF's "now it isn't, now it is" stances on accessories and weapons. As another person has put it, you can use a toothbrush as an icepick, but it still is legally a toothbrush!


And it shows that the ATF REALLY has not a clue!


But I don't want to be the test case with them with the current administration in power, either. I'm glad Sig is carrying the flag!

[Nukes]

Attaching a foregrip to any pistol moves it into the AOW class... I seriously doubt that long term that will stand in court, particularly as judges are becoming less and less tolerant of ATF's "now it isn't, now it is" stances on accessories and weapons. As another person has put it, you can use a toothbrush as an icepick, but it still is legally a toothbrush!

Remember the HK SP89? The knurled fore end certainly indicated that the SP89 was intended to be fired using two hands, but was never treated as an AOW. These cases certainly exemplify the dangers of administrative "law," especially when the administrative commissars make, change, and interpret the law... differently and at whim. What FFL has not received conflicting advice/interpretations from BATF(E)? The problem of administrative law[lessness] is not restricted to firearms law.

Evidence that the brace was brought to the shoulder? What court needs genuine evidence when courts regularly accept fabricated evidence (e.g., the FBI Crime Lab) and lies from prosecutors and enforcers?

As should be readily apparent to the most casual of observers, the mission of the courts is to justify whatever the oligarchs dictate whether by pen or phone. How about the pilpul that asset forfeiture is constitutional, guilty until proven innocent, because the property seized is being prosecuted, not the owner? How about the Supreme Court allowing judges to misinform juries about jury nullification? taxing firearms protected under the Second Amendment?

As for "legally a toothbrush," who here is familiar with prosecutions under California's "capable of ready use as a stabbing weapon" dirk and dagger (and pencil) law?