Pennsylvania Firearm Owners Association
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 25
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Stevens, Pennsylvania
    (Lancaster County)
    Posts
    354
    Rep Power
    11122912

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Douglassville, Pennsylvania
    (Berks County)
    Posts
    6,993
    Rep Power
    21474851

    Default Re: GOA Alert: VICTORY: COURT RULES A BUMP STOCK IS NOT A MACHINE GUN

    That's good to hear.
    If you're afraid of the people you represent, you might be doing something wrong

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Chippewa, Pennsylvania
    (Beaver County)
    Posts
    4,905
    Rep Power
    21474851

    Default Re: GOA Alert: VICTORY: COURT RULES A BUMP STOCK IS NOT A MACHINE GUN

    Someone clarify. Are they legal yet?
    Life has a melody. Don't wrestle with pigs, don't argue with idiots.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Glen Mills, Pennsylvania
    Posts
    8,523
    Rep Power
    21474854

    Default Re: GOA Alert: VICTORY: COURT RULES A BUMP STOCK IS NOT A MACHINE GUN

    From the decision, this is what we need more of. Hopefully most of the federal Judges Trump appointed follow this philosophy better than Trump and the ATF did when they decided bump stocks were machine guns.

    But as judges, we cannot amend 5845(b). See Henson v. Santander Consumer USA Inc., 137 S. Ct. 1718, 1726 (2017) (*[T]he proper role of the judiciary . . . [is] to apply, not amend, the work of the People*s representatives.*). And neither can the ATF. See Dodson, 519 F. App*x at 349 (*The ATF does not have the ability to redefine or create exceptions to Congressional statutes.*). This is because the separation of powers requires that any legislation pass through the legislature, no matter how well-intentioned or widely supported the policy might be. See INS v. Chadha, 462 U.S. 919, 954 (1983) (*Amendment and repeal of statutes, no less than enactment, must conform with Art. I.*). To allow otherwise would put individual liberty at serious risk. Id. at 950 (citing THE FEDERALIST NO. 51 (James Madison or Alexander Hamilton)).
    In sum, based on the text and context of 5845(b), and further supported by the Supreme Court*s interpretation in Staples, we conclude that the phrase *the single function of the trigger* refers to the mechanical process of the trigger, not the shooter*s pulling of the trigger. Consequently, a bump stock cannot be classified as a machine gun under 5845
    I hope criminals with ghost guns shoot you and your family. (Abner13 in deleted thread)

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Dec 2019
    Location
    York, Pennsylvania
    (York County)
    Posts
    252
    Rep Power
    5815579

    Default Re: GOA Alert: VICTORY: COURT RULES A BUMP STOCK IS NOT A MACHINE GUN

    Yes, the news came in earlier today. Glad it got posted here. Thanks.
    Val W. Finnell, MD, MPH | Pennsylvania Director, Gun Owners of America | 717-220-3380

  6. #6
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Chambersburg, Pennsylvania
    (Franklin County)
    Age
    50
    Posts
    11,591
    Rep Power
    21474861

    Default Re: GOA Alert: VICTORY: COURT RULES A BUMP STOCK IS NOT A MACHINE GUN

    Quote Originally Posted by Justin///M View Post
    Someone clarify. Are they legal yet?
    My interpretation is that the matter is far from complete. A preliminary injunction was originally sought and denied ("Don't make them illegal until the court makes a final judgement.")

    THAT decision was struck down, so best case, the injunction will be issued to keep them legal (or make them legal again) until the full legal battle is complete, so my non-lawyer answer to your question, is:

    Yes, for now, but only after the lower court takes the action it has been ordered to - ie - issuing the injunction.

    IANAL
    Get your "Guns Save Lives" stickers today! PM for more info.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    E-Fray-Tuh, Pennsylvania
    (Lancaster County)
    Posts
    178
    Rep Power
    17797597

    Default Re: GOA Alert: VICTORY: COURT RULES A BUMP STOCK IS NOT A MACHINE GUN

    Quote Originally Posted by Justin///M View Post
    Someone clarify. Are they legal yet?
    Please. I may need to go fishing in the lake.....

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Chippewa, Pennsylvania
    (Beaver County)
    Posts
    4,905
    Rep Power
    21474851

    Default Re: GOA Alert: VICTORY: COURT RULES A BUMP STOCK IS NOT A MACHINE GUN

    Quote Originally Posted by internet troll View Post
    From the decision, this is what we need more of. Hopefully most of the federal Judges Trump appointed follow this philosophy better than Trump and the ATF did when they decided bump stocks were machine guns.

    But as judges, we cannot amend 5845(b). See Henson v. Santander Consumer USA Inc., 137 S. Ct. 1718, 1726 (2017) (*[T]he proper role of the judiciary . . . [is] to apply, not amend, the work of the People*s representatives.*). And neither can the ATF. See Dodson, 519 F. App*x at 349 (*The ATF does not have the ability to redefine or create exceptions to Congressional statutes.*). This is because the separation of powers requires that any legislation pass through the legislature, no matter how well-intentioned or widely supported the policy might be. See INS v. Chadha, 462 U.S. 919, 954 (1983) (*Amendment and repeal of statutes, no less than enactment, must conform with Art. I.*). To allow otherwise would put individual liberty at serious risk. Id. at 950 (citing THE FEDERALIST NO. 51 (James Madison or Alexander Hamilton)).
    In sum, based on the text and context of 5845(b), and further supported by the Supreme Court*s interpretation in Staples, we conclude that the phrase *the single function of the trigger* refers to the mechanical process of the trigger, not the shooter*s pulling of the trigger. Consequently, a bump stock cannot be classified as a machine gun under 5845
    I came to post that and other relevant info.


    I'm thinking NO, we can't just assume they're legal across the land yet.


    "However, we do not decide the scope of the injunction, except to say that the scope may
    not exceed the bounds of the four states within the Sixth Circuit*s jurisdiction and, of course,
    encompasses the parties themselves. Though we disagree with the ATF*s position, the ATF
    prevailed before the Tenth Circuit, as well as the D.C. Circuit Court, from which decision the
    Supreme Court denied certiorari. See Guedes, 920 F.3d at 6, cert. denied 140 S. Ct. 789 (2020).
    If we were to permit a universal injunction (also frequently called a *nationwide injunction*), we
    would create an absurd situation in which the ATF must prevail in every single case brought
    against the Final Rule in order for its interpretation to prevail. We do not think that it is within
    our authority to overrule the decision of a sister circuit (or for a district court within our circuit to
    do so). See Nixon, 76 F.3d at 1388 (holding that we are not bound by *the views of our sister
    circuits*). "
    Life has a melody. Don't wrestle with pigs, don't argue with idiots.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Chippewa, Pennsylvania
    (Beaver County)
    Posts
    4,905
    Rep Power
    21474851

    Default Re: GOA Alert: VICTORY: COURT RULES A BUMP STOCK IS NOT A MACHINE GUN

    Quote Originally Posted by gnbrotz View Post
    My interpretation is that the matter is far from complete. A preliminary injunction was originally sought and denied ("Don't make them illegal until the court makes a final judgement.")

    THAT decision was struck down, so best case, the injunction will be issued to keep them legal (or make them legal again) until the full legal battle is complete, so my non-lawyer answer to your question, is:

    Yes, for now, but only after the lower court takes the action it has been ordered to - ie - issuing the injunction.

    IANAL
    Yep an it appears it would be only for the 6th circuit.
    Life has a melody. Don't wrestle with pigs, don't argue with idiots.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
    (Allegheny County)
    Posts
    29,320
    Rep Power
    21474880

    Default Re: GOA Alert: VICTORY: COURT RULES A BUMP STOCK IS NOT A MACHINE GUN

    Quote Originally Posted by Justin///M View Post
    Someone clarify. Are they legal yet?
    Imma write a letter to the ATF and axe 'em...
    LOVE - It's what makes AR15s SO DARNED SNUGGLY! :)

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 9
    Last Post: November 8th, 2019, 07:43 AM
  2. Federal Court Victory
    By clarencecoffee in forum National
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: April 5th, 2014, 12:13 PM
  3. Replies: 0
    Last Post: May 17th, 2010, 10:29 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •