Thanks. Bookmarked and confused lol.
Think Iāll see what those in the know on my state forums come up with, here in the land of the āotherā.
Our āothersā are 26" minimum, 12" barrel minimum. Not pistol nor rifleā¦
The whole ākeeping us saferā comment by Garland makes me upchuck a bit.
Itāll be humorous seeing the servers crash when roughly 20,000,000 forms get filed.
Should get tossed by the Supreme Court before it even takes effect. The fact the court just said last week the ban on bump stocks was illegal and unconstitutional this ban should get settled in no time
But the Supreme Court didnāt say the bump stock ban was illegal, did they?
The bump stock ban was enacted at the end of 2018. As far as I am aware you still canāt buy a bump stock despite the recent court ruling, which was not a final ruling by SCOTUS. Not to mention this whole silly short barrel/long barrel, rifle/pistol mess is due to the unconstitutional NFA act of 1934. Iām not so sure Iād bet on this getting resolved in āno timeā.
There is a chance SCOTUS jumps in quickly because this ruling criminalizes millions of people who made purchases that were deemed legal at the time. But since there is no monetary or criminal penalty for those purchasers who willingly volunteer to be registered, tracked and have their property subjected to additional legal limitations by the government, SCOTUS may choose to let this work itās way through the courts for the next several years.
Bear in mind that āOtherā is a federal classification here. Or, is it lack of a classification
2A Foundation already has a lawsuit filed.
Not an aowā¦ Iāve seen āCT otherā on a lower receiver and heard Aero Precision just has āotherā on their lower receiver paperwork, not sure if thatās a national or regional thing. Just seeing pistol and rifle in the ruling.
Local forum has over 60 comments, itās all confusing. We have an AWB,and it looks like the aft wouldnāt take a form 1 or whatever to register these, so seems like itās up to our state to decide what to do or not doā¦whatever.
Even the expert on our local forum is speculating.
Seems like all the places Iām looking at for another house are sanctuary zones. Pure coincidence, but no complaints.
Just watched Guns and Gadgets and think I heard Jared mention 8 lawsuits already.
I say, 
'emā¦crash the servers 
An administrative agency making laws ā specifically criminal law. How about Congress passing laws instead of passing the buck to the DOJ. Oh, yeah, I forgot, Congress is populated by swamp creatures, not lawmakers.
Other refers to a category of firearm on the 4473, itās a federal thing. Rifle/Shotgun (long gun), handgun, SBR, SBS, machine gun, AOW, Other, are examples of these types of āthingsā
Keep in mind there is no such thing as a location in the US that is safe from federal law violations being enforced by the federal government, or for state law violations (states often adopt laws mirroring feds) enforced by the state police
*I am not a lawyer
Main point being, this is a federal thing so, it might be MORE restrictive in various local jurisdictions but the states/locals canāt supercede the federal government
Marijuana has entered the chat 
Exactly what I was thinking of. Still federally illegal (at a serious level) and thatās before you combine it with firearms.
When the shoe drops, thatās it
Found this
Information regarding the application of State law to a particular weapon would be within the jurisdiction of the State agency responsible for the enforcement of the State firearms laws or other State legal authority.
Yes, of a state law.
But this isnāt a state law, this is a federal ālawā
The federal government is unlikely to enforce state laws, per my non-lawyer understanding. But we are talking about a federal law/statute/regulation here
Iāll have to kick back with a joint and think about that 
Just kidding, totally straight these days. No smoke, no drink.
Yes they said the ban was illegal and against the US Constitution. They based it on the laws of lenity which sides with the people over the government
Itās my understanding that it was the 5th circuit court that just ruled the bumpstock ban unconstitutional not the Supreme Court. But 3 other circuit courts have ruled the ban constitutional. SCOTUS will eventually have to make a final decision since the lower courts are no longer in agreement. But who knows when that will happen??
I missed where the Supreme Court said this. Would you mind linking or referencing the case?
Best I could find last I looked was more like Shamrock is saying, which is unfortunately in this case rather different than if SCOTUS had said so
Tell me who didnāt see this coming from day one?