This. **** those **** sucking mother ****ing ******* ****s.In my best BigRed voice
**** the ATF!
Well saidThis. **** those **** sucking mother ****ing ******* ****s.
BigRed would be proud. I imagine, if he's reading along, he's all misty.This. **** those **** sucking mother ****ing ******* ****s.
Registration also handcuffs the owner to now need a form 4 to sell along with the wait time for the buyer.
Does INGO auto-censor? I don’t know because I rarely use language this coarse, but let’s find out:
**** the ATF.
Edit: dang, it does lol.
It does, but sometimes it lets things slide through that probably shouldn't. Best practice IMO is to check your post to see if the auto-censor worked. If it didn't (and you think you said something that would've gotten you in trouble), edit the post and use the asterisks where needed.Does INGO auto-censor? I don’t know because I rarely use language this coarse, but let’s find out:
**** the ATF.
Edit: dang, it does lol.
We need a big time slap down.This is even more interesting after the ruling from the 5th circuit against the bump-stock ban. The USSC is going to have to take these cases and straighten it out one way or another. Either an agency can just make law at whim or they cannot.
I guarantee they are coming for the Mossberg Shockwave style "firearms" next.I wonder how short barreled shotguns would play into this ruling. They are different classifications per the NFA but not mentioned from what Inhave read so far.
Holy smokes. 293 pages. I haven't read a quarter of it yet, but the hubris seeps through on every page. They keep repeating "objective design features" with the maniacal obsession of someone who knows their lie is so blatantly obvious that they have to keep repeating it just to try to make themselves believe it. Unless I missed it while skimming through that massive pile of vapid text, they didn't give a single darn objective measurement to go off of.
Why won't they just draw a line for us and be done with it? They ramble on and on about "objective design features" but won't give us any objective features or numbers to go off of. If they want to make a determination, that the least they could do is actually make a determination; tell us exactly how much rear surface area, what length of pull, something we can at least look at and know whether or not something is a brace or a stock.
Of course I know why they won't do that. They love this power they have, and want to hold on to it. It'd be such a shame for them if us common folk could know and figure out for ourselves what's lawful and what isn't. They'd much rather we be left in the dark, sending in every example for them to subjectively determine what is or isn't a stock (and then change that later based on irrelevant factor like "marketing" of the product) and always wondering whether or not they plan on making us felons overnight.
It does, but sometimes it lets things slide through that probably shouldn't. Best practice IMO is to check your post to see if the auto-censor worked. If it didn't (and you think you said something that would've gotten you in trouble), edit the post and use the asterisks where needed.