Bumpstock deadline date in 24 hours March 26 midnight March 25

[Justin///M]

Not the hill to die on.

[gnbrotz]

Check the classifieds....I'm still looking to buy!

[Mr_Gixxer]

Check the classifieds....I'm still looking to buy!

I thought about starting my own thread and offering $51.

[unclejumbo]

None of the above.

[Emptymag]

Don’t worry guys once they take the bump stocks they will back off with the other 50 anti gun bills that are currently pending and then we can all sleep soundly with our AR’s and AK’s in our arms.

Don't forget national reciprocity. It may not be too late to get that too, now that we're giving up "stupid range toys".

[Hodgie]

Don't forget national reciprocity. It may not be too late to get that too, now that we're giving up "stupid range toys".

You know they did just reintroduce the hearing protection act this week, and I know how much you love suppressors.

[spacemanvic]

That Trump Train jumped the track and is running full steam for the edge of the cliff. What a shit show...

[Emptymag]

You know they did just reintroduce the hearing protection act this week, and I know how much you love suppressors.

Maybe we can trade legality of sub-sonic ammo in order to get suppressors?!!!

[Justin///M]

That Trump Train jumped the track and is running full steam for the edge of the cliff. What a shit show...

Oh hush now, there's no way this holds up in court.

[spacemanvic]

George Bush appointed judge Paul L Maloney just denied a preliminary injunction that GOA was pursuing regarding the bumpstock ban:

The Court concludes that Plaintiffs have not demonstrated a likelihood of success on the merits of their APA challenges to ATF's Final Rule. With this determination, Plaintiffs' motion for a preliminary injunction will be denied. Defendants concede that Plaintiffs will suffer irreparable harm without an injunction. (Pl. Resp. at 27 n.16 PageID.279.) The two remaining factors do not weigh heavily in favor of Plaintiffs, if at all. Congress restricts access to machine guns because of the threat the weapons pose to public safety.

5
Restrictions on bump stocks advance the same interest. All of the public is at risk, including the smaller number of bump stock owners. Most of Plaintiffs' arguments on the final two elements are merely extensions of the first and second elements of a preliminary injunction. Plaintiffs identify the adverse impact on the liberty and property interests of bump-stock owners as supporting the public's interest in a preliminary injunction. The property interest identified overlaps completely with the second element for a preliminary injunction, irreparable harm. Plaintiffs contend that the Final Rule jeopardizes a bump-stock owner's right to bear arms. That assertion overlaps with the merits element; Plaintiffs' assume bump stocks are protected by the right to bear arms. At least one circuit court, post Heller, has found that machine guns are not protected bearable arms under the Second Amendment.

Hollis v. Lynch, 827 F.3d 436, 451 (5th Cir. 2016). Plaintiffs also assert that the public has an interest in the proper exercise of legislative power and that the Final Rule exceeds ATF's statutory authority. Again, that interest overlaps entirely with the merits of Plaintiffs' claim. Accordingly, the balance of the four factors weighs against Plaintiffs and the Court declines to issue a preliminary injunction.

ORDER
For the reasons provided in the accompanying Opinion, Plaintiffs' motion for a preliminary injunction (ECF No. 9) is DENIED. IT IS SO ORDERED.

Date: March 21, 2019

/s/ Paul L. Maloney Paul L. Maloney United States District Judge

Case 1:18-cv-01429-PLM-RSK ECF No. 48 filed 03/21/19 PageID.470 Page 18 of 18

DC case was whittled down to apply to one person only.

Pending appeals after the 26th, we are done.