• ODT Gun Show & Swap Meet - May 4, 2024! - Click here for info

ATF pistol brace :(

All this **** winds up at the Supreme Court sooner or later. And they already ruled that if it ain't in the " Text , History or Tradition" of the 2nd Amendment then it's unconstitutional. On top of that the West Virginia case ruling against the EPA making up new laws as they go along applies to these new bull**** rulings on braces, FRT triggers 80% kits and solvent traps. It shouldn't be long before GOA or a similar group gets this to higher and then the highest court.
 
These folks complied ¥¥¥¥¥¥
C2A33B83-9A5E-4326-B749-DF9D3D1203ED.jpeg


Will you??
 
sambo77 said:
They complied enough to get to where that happened at. If they didn't comply they probably would've met a swift death but in the "round up" phase...
Click to expand...
Yes, they complied. While we aren't Jews, we are subhuman (according to the dear leader) and represent a "clear and present danger" to the "democracy." It's only a matter of time before they make it illegal for us (conservatives) to own firearms.

"If you read the 1938 Nazi gun laws closely and compare them to earlier 1928 Weimar gun legislation – as a straightforward exercise of statutory interpretation – several conclusions become clear. First, with regard to possession and carrying of firearms, the Nazi regime relaxed the gun laws that were in place in Germany at the time the Nazis seized power. Second, the Nazi gun laws of 1938 specifically banned Jewish persons from obtaining a license to manufacture firearms or ammunition. Third, approximately eight months after enacting the 1938 Nazi gun laws, Hitler imposed regulations prohibiting Jewish persons from possessing any dangerous weapons, including firearms.

The difficult question is how to characterize the Nazi treatment of the Jewish population for purposes of evaluating Hitler's position on gun control. Truth is, the question itself is absurd. The Nazis sought to disarm and kill the Jewish population. Their treatment of Jews is, in this sense, orthogonal to their gun-control views. Nevertheless, if forced to take a position, it seems that the Nazis aspired to a certain relaxation of gun registration laws for the "law-abiding German citizen" – for those who were not, in their minds, "enemies of the National Socialist state," in other words, Jews, Communists, etc."
 
palmettomoon said:
Yes, they complied. While we aren't Jews, we are subhuman (according to the dear leader) and represent a "clear and present danger" to the "democracy." It's only a matter of time before they make it illegal for us (conservatives) to own firearms.

"If you read the 1938 Nazi gun laws closely and compare them to earlier 1928 Weimar gun legislation – as a straightforward exercise of statutory interpretation – several conclusions become clear. First, with regard to possession and carrying of firearms, the Nazi regime relaxed the gun laws that were in place in Germany at the time the Nazis seized power. Second, the Nazi gun laws of 1938 specifically banned Jewish persons from obtaining a license to manufacture firearms or ammunition. Third, approximately eight months after enacting the 1938 Nazi gun laws, Hitler imposed regulations prohibiting Jewish persons from possessing any dangerous weapons, including firearms.

The difficult question is how to characterize the Nazi treatment of the Jewish population for purposes of evaluating Hitler's position on gun control. Truth is, the question itself is absurd. The Nazis sought to disarm and kill the Jewish population. Their treatment of Jews is, in this sense, orthogonal to their gun-control views. Nevertheless, if forced to take a position, it seems that the Nazis aspired to a certain relaxation of gun registration laws for the "law-abiding German citizen" – for those who were not, in their minds, "enemies of the National Socialist state," in other words, Jews, Communists, etc."
Click to expand...
Ty for supporting with context. No source, but at least context. My grandmother being a survivor and knowing her story (I don't expect anyone to know), I can say she and her lost family were rounded up unwilling and they did not "comply" in a sense, they ran, they hid, most of them died, she got out. Seeing the image may have struck a nerve due to the extreme nature of comparison.
 
Go_NoGo said:
Ty for supporting with context. No source, but at least context. My grandmother being a survivor and knowing her story (I don't expect anyone to know), I can say she and her lost family were rounded up unwilling and they did not "comply" in a sense, they ran, they hid, most of them died, she got out. Seeing the image may have struck a nerve due to the extreme nature of comparison.
Click to expand...
Oops. Not intentional....

Columbia Law. https://scholarship.law.columbia.edu/faculty_scholarship/1327/

I can understand the sensitivity to the imagery and I'd love to say (shout) "THAT'S JUST HYPERBOLIC!" but I am not so sure now. You know as well as I do that most liberals would be perfectly fine with "Trumpeteers" being rounded up and exterminated, their property redistributed by the State. I can promise you that is not so far fetched as you might think. I've overheard comments damned near word for word out of scumbag pieces of shyte mouths' at cocktail parties. They have nothing but contempt for the "American Rube."
 

Attachments

  • 20220905_175816.jpg
    20220905_175816.jpg
    272 KB · Views: 18
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

ATF changes definition
2 3 4
Replies
34
Views
1K
IMDB
IMDB
Getting rid of majority of collection & ATF new rule
2 3 4 5 6
Replies
52
Views
2K
Steven1979
Steven1979
ATF new “rule” for no firearm Transaction without background check
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Replies
91
Views
4K
JOC
JOC

Featured Listings!

Back
Top Bottom