Live to Shoot - Defending our 2nd Amendment Rights

ATF is Crushed - Big Loss in The Courts

September 10, 2022 Jeff Dowdle Episode 131
Show Notes Transcript

Welcome to the live to shoot podcast. My name is Jeff do, and I've been a licensed dealer for the last 14 years. And this podcast, we talk about all things, the amendment as sports story or something going on personal life or anything that I might find. Interesting. So welcome. Welcome, welcome. It is now September. Little bit of the fall in the air, but football has started. And so that is a great thing. My H frogs started with win last weekend and they played Tarleton this weekend. So that should be a win. And then the Cowboys, oh, they're so frustrating. We will see, but they do start off against the ears and not very hopeful, but this week I meant to get this out earlier. This actually happened last week. You know, few as things can make me as happy as one, me being right on something and two, the ATF being wrong and getting proven it as well as just any of these other foreign agencies in our government. So what am I talking about? Well, I am talking about the pistol and the receiver and frame rule. That the ATF has proposed and begin to implement and they were taken to court. So the plaintiffs in this case, and this was in right down the street in the Fort, in Fort worth, in Northern district of Texas fed district court. Jennifer Vander stock, Michael G Andron, tactical machining, LLC firearms policy and firearm policy and coalition for the plaintiffs V merit Garland in his official capacity as attorney general of the United States. United States department of justice, Steven Deach in his official capacity as director of the bureau of alcohol, tobacco, firearms, and explosives, and the bureau of alcohol, tobacco, firearms and explosives were the defendants. And in this case, the the issue at hand was the final rule that the ATF issued in April 20, 22, around the definition of a firearm and receiv. And in this, the ATF split the phrase into two parts, assigning the term frame to handguns and the term receiver to a firearm other than hung gun handgun, and such as rifle, shotguns, ATF then defined the terms, frame and receiver along the SI same lines that had done in 1978. Though they updated more precise technol technologic technical terminology, and I'm reading from the, the. Court ruling, but the ATF did not stop there rather than merely updating the terminology. ATF decide to regulate partial frames and receivers under the new rule. The term frame and receivers shall include a partially complete disassembled or nonfunctional frame or receiver, including a frame or receiver parts gets the designed to, or may readily be completed. Assembled, restored, otherwise converted to function as a frame or a receiv. The fire, the op final rule also amended the ATS definition of firearm to include weapon parts kits. The ATFs new definition of firearm shall include a weapon part kits that is designed to, or may readily be completed, assembled, restored, or otherwise converted to expel a projectile by the ex by the action of an. So if y'all remember when we talked about this, there was a couple things that were in discussion and one of 'em was this term readily, you know, what is it, you know, if something is a partial framer receiver, but it can be considered a framer receiver or if it can readily be converted. Right. So that was one of the issues at hand. Well, the parties involved Jennifer van vank Vander stock and Michael AR Argen. Texas residents who own firearms van stock is a high school teacher and a former police officer. And Anderson is a licensed firearm instructor and a retired aerospace administrator. Both of them own firearm components that they intend to manufacture into firearms for personal lawful use. They claim that the final rule prohibits them from purchasing products that they want to use to manufacture their own farms technical machining. Manufacturers and sales fire items that are subject to regulation under the final rule. Over 90% of their business consists of selling items that individuals can use to manufacture frames and receivers in the build functioning firearms. So the issue at hand was, you know, is this legal, is this what, what the ATF done is legal? And the court said, no, they, they slapped them down. And the. The main thing that the court said was, and this is where I'm right. And I was saying that this just can't be done. And we've seen this a lot with our administrative state that's in the government. And whether it's the FBI, the ATF, the EPA, the C CDC, you name it, we've seen a lot of this where they. They overstepped their bounds. And in this case, the court is saying the ATF has overstepped their bounds because they redefined the definition of a firearm and a receiver. These definitions were put in place by Congress. And the only way that they can be changed is by Congress. The ATF can't go in and change the definitions that are in a law that. Put into place. And so the conclusion of this case was that the technical machining has shown it is entitled to a preliminary injection against the defendant's enforcement of the final rule. According to the court grants, the motion in part denies the motion part in orders, the defendant's and their officer's agent service and employees are enjoying from implementing and enforcing against tactical machining, the provisions and blah, blah, blah, blah. That this court has determined are unlawful. So it has determined that this final ruling by the ATF is unlawful because the ATF doesn't have the authority to say that a frame or a receiver. Is a frame or receiver, even if it's not that you have, if you have all the pieces for a frame and receiver, that that is not, you cannot say that those pieces are framed and receivers because they're not, they have not been made into a frame and receiver, just like if I have a bunch of micro chips and some keyboards and things that, that those are not a computer until they're all put together, they're a computer or. Four tires and a much bolt and a steering wheel is not a car until it's a. and that is what the ATF has said. I mean, the, the courts have said, and so they have put the ATF in its place. And so this is a big win for us that, you know, the, we're starting to see that the courts are getting a little bit more confident in their decisions and supporting the second amendment. I think a lot of that has to do with brewing knowing that the, the Supreme court has their back. And so I think we'll see more of this. You know, we've talked about that. There's challenges to the NFA coming up where the NFA is not constitutional based on the Bing decision. And we may see the way the, a, the NFA go the way of, of other things and that we, we might be starting over you know, the, it was leaked this week about the amnesty period for the pistol braces. So I don't know what's gonna come of that, but you know, We're gonna, we gotta keep fighting. And that's what I keep saying. Fight, fight, fight. This is you have to win. And these people were, were courageous. They took the ATF the court, they took merit Garland to court and we have to keep taking 'em to court. We have to keep suing them over these things that are unconstitutional, unlawful, and infringes on our liberties and our freedoms. So again, this podcast is about getting information. Telling people, you know, our victories and our losses. Well, this is a victory. We beat the ATF on this one. We beat the ATF on this one. So we win. We win, we win. We have to celebrate our wins, gonna be happy about our win. So thank you for listening. Share this podcast, get on the fountain app, listen to it, promote it on that. Do all those things support candidates in this upcoming election in November, we have to win the house and we have to win the Senate. Just watched my son, hunter from bright Bart last night. I recommend it go out and watch it as well. It's funny. It's enlightening. It's a little worrisome that we've got somebody that's been doing the things that that he's been doing and nobody seems to care, but again, just some things to point out. I appreciate you listening. Have a great weekend and I will talk to you.