Page 15 of 20 FirstFirst ... 51314151617 ... LastLast
Results 141 to 150 of 192

Thread: ATF issues cease and desist on Q LLC Honey Badger Pistol

  1. #141
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    TEXAS !
    Quote Originally Posted by 36trap View Post
    I agree with @HCM, election results will ultimately decide this matter.

    What isn't clear to me is what happens to Q in the event ATF determines their brace isn't actually a brace? Surely there are penalties for selling a pile of unregistered SBR's? Does Q loose their license? Are they subject to criminal prosecution? Fines? All of the above?
    No because what they did was not illegal at the time. Retroactively prosecuting prior conduct that was legal at the time is known as “ex-post facto” and it is unconstitutional.

  2. #142
    Quote Originally Posted by HCM View Post
    No because what they did was not illegal at the time. Retroactively prosecuting prior conduct that was legal at the time is known as “ex-post facto” and it is unconstitutional.
    A possible concern could be that, since Q did not get specific ATF approval for the Honey Badger Pistol configured with its proprietary brace prior to selling it, the ATF could argue that the conduct was never legal and Q was selling improperly documented SBRs the whole time. It’s always been a risk with braces because ATF was previously examining the braces themselves and not complete firearms.
    My posts only represent my personal opinion and do not necessarily reflect the opinions or official policies of any employer, past or present. Obvious spelling errors are likely the result of an iPhone keyboard.

  3. #143
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    TEXAS !
    Quote Originally Posted by DanM View Post
    A possible concern could be that, since Q did not get specific ATF approval for the Honey Badger Pistol configured with its proprietary brace prior to selling it, the ATF could argue that the conduct was never legal and Q was selling improperly documented SBRs the whole time. It’s always been a risk with braces because ATF was previously examining the braces themselves and not complete firearms.
    They would never get a criminal conviction out of that and if they tried to suspend or revoke their manufacturers license over something like that I predict ATF would lose the litigation based on the income and use argument.

    Speaking of which with over 4 million pistol brace is floating around the US you could make a pretty good, use argument for pistol braces.

  4. #144
    Quote Originally Posted by HCM View Post
    They would never get a criminal conviction out of that and if they tried to suspend or revoke their manufacturers license over something like that I predict ATF would lose the litigation based on the income and use argument.

    Speaking of which with over 4 million pistol brace is floating around the US you could make a pretty good, use argument for pistol braces.
    I hope you’re right. I’m getting quite tired of losing gun rights. Pistol braces aren’t my hill to die on but we’re running out of things that people can say are “stupid” or “obvious loopholes to get around the NFA.” First it’s bump stocks, next it’s pistol braces, pretty soon it’s going to be another AWB without a sunset provision or a complete semi-auto ban.

    I’m worried that things might get stupid if the government keeps pushing. I’m betting a whole lot more people have picked AWB 2.0 or semi-auto ban as their hill to die on than those who picked pistol braces. Imagine 4 million people waking up one morning and finding out that their braced pistol is now an unregistered SBR and whether they left it as is or if they decided to convert them to full auto or make some IEDs, the crime is the same and the punishment is the same.

  5. #145
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    TEXAS !
    Quote Originally Posted by DanM View Post
    I hope you’re right. I’m getting quite tired of losing gun rights. Pistol braces aren’t my hill to die on but we’re running out of things that people can say are “stupid” or “obvious loopholes to get around the NFA.” First it’s bump stocks, next it’s pistol braces, pretty soon it’s going to be another AWB without a sunset provision or a complete semi-auto ban.

    I’m worried that things might get stupid if the government keeps pushing. I’m betting a whole lot more people have picked AWB 2.0 or semi-auto ban as their hill to die on than those who picked pistol braces. Imagine 4 million people waking up one morning and finding out that their braced pistol is now an unregistered SBR and whether they left it as is or if they decided to convert them to full auto or make some IEDs, the crime is the same and the punishment is the same.
    I could just form 1 mine but what about those ins states that don't allow SBRs ?

    An AWB 2.0 with grandfathering will be unpopular but generally peaceful.

    An AWB 2.0 with no grandfathering will result in massive non-compliance but mostly passive resistance. Conversely most enforcement would simply be via attrition as seen in NY, CA etc. It is basically the Dems shitting in gun owners punch bowl because they know no one will turn them in, they just get the satisfaction of taking away gun owners ability to shoot and train with them publicly. Sales of .223 and 7.62x39 bolt guns will go through the roof to justify ammo purchases. etc.

    An AWB 2.0 with no grandfathering i.e. Australian style "mandatory buy backs" as discussed by Kamala Harris et al. will result in an insurgency because you cant force buy backs unless you are pro-actively enforcing the ban. You want to kick over a hornets nest in the US that would do it.

  6. #146
    Site Supporter rob_s's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    SE FL
    Quote Originally Posted by HCM View Post
    Speaking of which with over 4 million pistol brace is floating around the US you could make a pretty good, use argument for pistol braces.
    I think that’s the strongest reason why people aren’t going to suddenly be turned into felons as Kevin keeps saying.

    The ATF is going to have a pretty hard time saying they allowed this stupid shit to go on for multiple years and 4M sales and THEN criminalized everyone that already had one.

    Future sales though...
    Does the above offend? If you have paid to be here, you can click here to put it in context.

  7. #147
    Member StraitR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Basking in sunshine
    With 4 million braces in circulation, there will certainly be a percentage of those who have chosen it for their hill to die on (particularly in our current political climate). If just 1% (.01) of owners chose armed and/or physical confrontation, that's up to 40,000 incidents. If only .1% (.001) chose confrontation, that's still up to 4,000 incidents. Even the outright banning of braces has the potential to get sporty.

    Doing the same type math on sporting rifle or standard capacity magazine ownership means any ban + confiscation would get pretty nasty. Rightfully so, given that level of tyranny, IMO. The power must remain in the people, and that won't be the case with lever guns, bolt guns, revolvers and Glock 48's. Like it or not, the Left is signaling their intention to take "our" hill.

  8. #148
    Frequent DG Adventurer fatdog's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Location
    Rural Central Alabama
    Quote Originally Posted by rob_s View Post
    The ATF is going to have a pretty hard time saying they allowed this stupid shit to go on for multiple years and 4M sales and THEN criminalized everyone that already had one. .
    I have to point out they just did for the bump stocks...

  9. #149
    Site Supporter rob_s's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    SE FL
    Quote Originally Posted by fatdog View Post
    I have to point out they just did for the bump stocks...
    Wasn’t that an executive order?
    Does the above offend? If you have paid to be here, you can click here to put it in context.

  10. #150
    Member olstyn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    Minnesota
    Quote Originally Posted by rob_s View Post
    Wasn’t that an executive order?
    Sort of - he issued an executive order directing the ATF to change the rules, so it was sort of a two step process: https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/depar...ces-final-rule

    There were also FAR less bump stocks in circulation than braces.

User Tag List

Posting Permissions

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