Loophole LaRue, SASS #51438 3,232 Posted October 14, 2019 Share Posted October 14, 2019 Very intriguing.... https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/11/us/ar-15-guns-law-atf-invs/index.html LL Link to post Share on other sites
Subdeacon Joe 25,835 Posted October 14, 2019 Share Posted October 14, 2019 That case should have gone forward. Link to post Share on other sites
The Original Lumpy Gritz 7,343 Posted October 14, 2019 Share Posted October 14, 2019 Look at Ruger 22 pistols. The removable barreled section has the serial #. Not the firing mechanism that holds all of the 'controls' OLG Link to post Share on other sites
J-BAR #18287 6,001 Posted October 14, 2019 Share Posted October 14, 2019 They have done a fine job of keeping this a secret, haven’t they. Link to post Share on other sites
Three Foot Johnson 2,503 Posted October 14, 2019 Share Posted October 14, 2019 1 hour ago, The Original Lumpy Gritz said: Look at Ruger 22 pistols. The removable barreled section has the serial #. Not the firing mechanism that holds all of the 'controls' OLG And the AMT Lightning had the s/n on the lower frame. I've heard rumors it was such a close copy of the Ruger, that the non-serial numbered AMT barrel assembly would fit, or was easily fitted to, the non-serial numbered Ruger grip frame assembly. I've never owned one, so never had an opportunity to try it. Link to post Share on other sites
Charlie Harley, #14153 2,957 Posted October 14, 2019 Share Posted October 14, 2019 There’s got to be more to this story. Something isn’t adding up. Link to post Share on other sites
Trailrider #896 1,800 Posted October 14, 2019 Share Posted October 14, 2019 Sounds like the law needs clarification, one way or the other. The fact that Roh was selling completed guns to people prohibited from legally purchasing guns is bad news. As far as I am concerned I don't care whether the AR-15 lower receiver is a firearm or not. I don't own one and have no desire to own one. It does sound like BATF is exceeding its authority in what it is doing by changing definitions without following the legal procedires, but then what else is new? Link to post Share on other sites
Abilene Slim SASS 81783 2,700 Posted October 14, 2019 Share Posted October 14, 2019 47 minutes ago, Charlie Harley, #14153 said: There’s got to be more to this story. Something isn’t adding up. Maybe they'll be using him as an informant? Link to post Share on other sites
SGT. QUINCANNON, SASS #32999 39 Posted October 14, 2019 Share Posted October 14, 2019 i thought this was going to be about football... Link to post Share on other sites
Pat Riot, SASS #13748 22,360 Posted October 15, 2019 Share Posted October 15, 2019 When law enforcement and the department of justice pick and choose laws that they will enforce or not enforce we have a corrupt system...as if this is new... Link to post Share on other sites
Cat Brules 1,726 Posted October 15, 2019 Share Posted October 15, 2019 Loophole LaRue, Thank you for digging this up and posting the web link. It is a very informative article that I doubt very many people have read, or fully understand the ramifications of. I am going to copy the article and file it away. That link may not be good for very long, Thanks again. Cat Brules Link to post Share on other sites
Sixgun Sheridan 4,248 Posted October 15, 2019 Share Posted October 15, 2019 On 10/14/2019 at 11:43 AM, Trailrider #896 said: Sounds like the law needs clarification, one way or the other. The fact that Roh was selling completed guns to people prohibited from legally purchasing guns is bad news. As far as I am concerned I don't care whether the AR-15 lower receiver is a firearm or not. I don't own one and have no desire to own one. It does sound like BATF is exceeding its authority in what it is doing by changing definitions without following the legal procedires, but then what else is new? The problem, as always, is that our fearless leaders enact laws without clear legal definition and it's left to ATF to somehow interpret and enforce those laws. It's like the NFA law that tries to define a pistol or long arm. You end up with AR "pistols" that are basically just short-barreled rifles without an actual stock on them, and when someone goes and puts an "arm brace" on one you have a..... pistol! Because after all, if it's not actually intended to be used as a shoulder stock then it isn't one, correct? That's how you end up with ATF ruling one way, then as soon as the political winds shift they suddenly cover their collective asses and rule the other way, like they did with bump stocks. . Link to post Share on other sites
Pat Riot, SASS #13748 22,360 Posted October 16, 2019 Share Posted October 16, 2019 This is very interesting. I read the entire story and it seems that this all occurred over 4 years ago and is just now getting fleshed in the news. When I first reviewed this article I skimmed through it and made the above comment, which I will leave as is. In rereading, or actually reading, this article a couple of things really stand out. 1. This guy pushed the envelope of legality and morality. He’s a dumbarse that should be slapped real hard and put in jail for a month with people like his clients. Maybe he’d remove his head from his butt. 2. The BATFE has been using their reputation and authority to act under their own internal practices and not following the law. Of course, many of us have known they have done this for years, but now it’s “out there”. 3. I am sure this situation is the reason for the new law in CA regarding gun parts sales. My my biggest fear is that the knee jerk crowd will use this case to tighten their nooses just a bit more on our rights. This case is an example of why I do not participate in the 80% lower fad that many of my friends and acquaintances like to dabble in. I cannot afford a legal team that rivals that of the BATFE or the CA DOJ. Call me a sheep but I like my freedom and I want to retire in comfort in 3 years, not be retired in prison or be destitute. Link to post Share on other sites
Michigan Slim 5,888 Posted October 16, 2019 Share Posted October 16, 2019 When I read the title I thought this thread was about transgenders...…. Link to post Share on other sites
Badlands Bob #61228 1,883 Posted October 16, 2019 Share Posted October 16, 2019 If you want an AR15 that's not registered to you on a 4473, just buy one from an individual. The ATF will never know you own it or where it is. This only applies in states that allow this. Those 80% lowers are more expensive than buying an Anderson lower already finished. I just don't see the attraction. Link to post Share on other sites
Rancho Roy 266 Posted October 16, 2019 Share Posted October 16, 2019 Interesting Link to post Share on other sites
Trailrider #896 1,800 Posted October 16, 2019 Share Posted October 16, 2019 13 hours ago, Badlands Bob #61228 said: If you want an AR15 that's not registered to you on a 4473, just buy one from an individual. The ATF will never know you own it or where it is. This only applies in states that allow this. Those 80% lowers are more expensive than buying an Anderson lower already finished. I just don't see the attraction. As I posted before, I neither need nor want an AR15! However, there are NO LEGAL private transactions in the People's Republic of Colorado anymore. ALL guns must go through an FFL and Colorado Bureau of Investigation & NICS check. The former is for any domestic protection/violence orders. That was passed when an estranged husband kidnapped and murdered his two young daughters with a gun purchased legally a few days before, because domestic orders didn't have to be reported to the FBI or other agencies. He then committed-suicide-by-cop by attacking a police station! Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.