BUMP STOCK SUIT FILED!

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

  • No ad networks!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • md_al

    Active Member
    Apr 25, 2014
    724
    Middle River
    A dangerous precedent... after the triggers will go the laser sights then scopes, then the red dots then the mag size then finally the semi automatics.
     

    fabsroman

    Ultimate Member
    Mar 14, 2009
    35,852
    Winfield/Taylorsville in Carroll
    A dangerous precedent... after the triggers will go the laser sights then scopes, then the red dots then the mag size then finally the semi automatics.

    Ahhh, you are an optimist among pessimists. Lots on here think that mags will be the first thing on the list and they already banned most of the semi-automatics. If we cannot get an "assault weapons ban" overturned in some other circuit and off to SCOTUS, then what makes you think that mags and semi-automatics are safe?
     

    Bountied

    Ultimate Member
    Apr 6, 2012
    6,884
    Pasadena
    Can someone please sum up for me where we stand? I don't have time to read through 121 pages. Sorry for being lazy. Is there any chance to appeal or any chance of things going our way before Oct 2019?
     

    esqappellate

    President, MSI
    Feb 12, 2012
    7,407
    Can someone please sum up for me where we stand? I don't have time to read through 121 pages. Sorry for being lazy. Is there any chance to appeal or any chance of things going our way before Oct 2019?

    Notice of Appeal filed. See attached. The issue(s) to be appealed still TBD. And no, there is little chance of things going our way prior to Oct. 1, 2019. Folks who own the "devices" covered by SB 707 would be well advised to move them out of state prior to that time. This is NOT legal advice.
     

    Attachments

    • NOTICE OF APPEAL.pdf
      122.3 KB · Views: 142

    jkeys

    Active Member
    Jan 30, 2013
    665
    Yeah, I was hoping somebody else would reply to this, but since nobody has, I will reply.

    Article 17, pertaining to ex post facto laws, will not work in this case. They are not making a prior act (i.e., the purchase of the bump stock) illegal. They are making the continued possession of the bump stock illegal. The law was passed before it actually took effect, giving people that had previously purchased a bump stock, binary trigger, etc. time to either get rid of it before 10/1/2018 or apply to the ATF for approval before 10/1/2018. Now, the law gives people additional time for the ATF approval (which is not going to happen) or it gives them time to dispose of the device before 10/1/2019.

    Article 17 would apply if they passed a law on 4/1/2018 making it illegal to have owned a bump stock, etc. on 1/1/2016 or to have purchased a bump stock before 1/1/2018. That would be an ex post facto law.

    The bump stock prohibition is not a retrospective law. It bans possession going forward from a date in the future. It makes the future act of continuing to possess the item a crime.

    IANAL, but if anyone ever gets pinched by this law, just remember that you had to drive out of MD to get your rapid fire trigger activator because you couldn't posses it in this state. When caught you were proceeding straight from the place you kept said device to a state on the other side of MD to do some shooting. FOPA would then apply.
     

    fabsroman

    Ultimate Member
    Mar 14, 2009
    35,852
    Winfield/Taylorsville in Carroll
    IANAL, but if anyone ever gets pinched by this law, just remember that you had to drive out of MD to get your rapid fire trigger activator because you couldn't posses it in this state. When caught you were proceeding straight from the place you kept said device to a state on the other side of MD to do some shooting. FOPA would then apply.

    Everybody is always brilliant until the questions start being asked really quickly. Best advice, take the 5th and think it over before saying anything. Then, tell your attorney what you were doing after you have had some time to think about where you were coming from and where you were going to, which of course would always be truthful. Granted, you would also have to take the stand under oath to use this alibi in court, and while under oath you would be subject to cross examination by the prosecution.

    Oh yeah, and your FOPA justification will be a lot harder if you are discovered at home with the rapid fire trigger device, and it will be even harder if the feds make bump stocks illegal AND your rapid fire trigger advice happens to be a bump stock. Don't think FOPA would be applicable in that situation.

    Prisons are full of people that thought they would never get caught.
     

    ironpony

    Member
    MDS Supporter
    Jun 8, 2013
    7,189
    Davidsonville
    Everybody is always brilliant until the questions start being asked really quickly. Best advice, take the 5th and think it over before saying anything. Then, tell your attorney what you were doing after you have had some time to think about where you were coming from and where you were going to, which of course would always be truthful. Granted, you would also have to take the stand under oath to use this alibi in court, and while under oath you would be subject to cross examination by the prosecution.

    Oh yeah, and your FOPA justification will be a lot harder if you are discovered at home with the rapid fire trigger device, and it will be even harder if the feds make bump stocks illegal AND your rapid fire trigger advice happens to be a bump stock. Don't think FOPA would be applicable in that situation.

    Prisons are full of people that thought they would never get caught.
    Fabs / anyone, is this a fair statement in this regard: feds = Trump Administration.


    Just feeling a little beat up here in MD and wondering if the "feds" are going down a similar path. Many will say the pistol brace was a positive for 2A and I hate to say it but the previous admin gave it a pass.
     

    Allen65

    Ultimate Member
    MDS Supporter
    Jun 29, 2013
    7,063
    Anne Arundel County
    Fabs / anyone, is this a fair statement in this regard: feds = Trump Administration.

    Hard to say. The administration has yet to appoint a new Director, and the Acting Director has been that since 2015 and is a career 1811, not an outside political appointee.

    From what I understand, the re-examination of bump stock status was directed by the White House (along with strong hints about what the desired outcome should be), but I doubt they get into day to day decisions of the Bureau, which would be in the A/Dir's hands
     

    fabsroman

    Ultimate Member
    Mar 14, 2009
    35,852
    Winfield/Taylorsville in Carroll
    Fabs / anyone, is this a fair statement in this regard: feds = Trump Administration.


    Just feeling a little beat up here in MD and wondering if the "feds" are going down a similar path. Many will say the pistol brace was a positive for 2A and I hate to say it but the previous admin gave it a pass.

    https://www.cnn.com/2018/11/28/politics/final-bump-stock-ban/index.html

    Time will tell, but that article is from November 28th. Granted, it is from CNN, so take it with a grain of salt. End of the day, I don't think Trump is any huge supporter of the 2nd Amendment. I have him in the same camp as Hogan. I vote for them because they are the lesser of two evils, not because I have some grand notion that tomorrow I will be able to legally build myself a machine gun. Heck, one of Trump's campaign promises was that he would undo Obama's ATF Rule 41f/p as soon as he took office. Here we are nearly 2 years after the date he took office and Rule 41f/p is still the law. I posted about this in the "Thoughts on Trump" page, but I understand if it was missed because I rarely ever go to that monstrosity anymore.
     

    Hawkeye

    The Leatherstocking
    Jan 29, 2009
    3,971
    Fabs / anyone, is this a fair statement in this regard: feds = Trump Administration.

    Yes.

    Just feeling a little beat up here in MD and wondering if the "feds" are going down a similar path.

    Yes, they are.

    From what I understand, the re-examination of bump stock status was directed by the White House (along with strong hints about what the desired outcome should be)

    Yes. It came directly from Trump's mouth. Among his other anti-gun comments and actions (take the guns first, due process later, etc) was that he directed ATF to come up with a way to regulatorily ban bump stocks after the Vegas shooting.

    https://www.cnn.com/2018/11/28/politics/final-bump-stock-ban/index.html

    Time will tell, but that article is from November 28th. Granted, it is from CNN, so take it with a grain of salt.

    No grain of salt needed - that article is factually correct. Things went down pretty much exactly like it says there. They couldn't pass a law to do it, the Vegas shooting happened, and Trump immediately ordered ATF to find a way to ban them, and told the NRA that "bump stocks are gone."

    End of the day, I don't think Trump is any huge supporter of the 2nd Amendment.

    He is certainly not. He made the pro-2A noises during his campaign to grab votes, but he has no track record of ever being pro-2A before that, and has no track record of being pro-2A since he was elected. Remember, this is the guy who said "take the guns first, and due process later.... I like taking the guns early."

    Heck, one of Trump's campaign promises was that he would undo Obama's ATF Rule 41f/p as soon as he took office. Here we are nearly 2 years after the date he took office and Rule 41f/p is still the law. I posted about this in the "Thoughts on Trump" page, but I understand if it was missed because I rarely ever go to that monstrosity anymore.

    Yup. The guy is not our friend.
     

    Occam

    Not Even ONE Indictment
    MDS Supporter
    Feb 24, 2018
    20,230
    Montgomery County
    Yup. The guy is not our friend.

    From a 2A perspective, the judges he's seated in federal, circuit, and SCOTUS slots are from an entirely different planet than the ones you'd see if Hillary had won. It's impossible to overstate the difference and the importance to our cause.
     

    Hawkeye

    The Leatherstocking
    Jan 29, 2009
    3,971
    Sure, his judge appointments are going to be more 2A friendly than Hillary's would have been, but that's by dint of the pool he's drawing from, which was presented to him by the party.

    Trump himself is no friend of the 2nd Amendment.
     

    j_h_smith

    Ultimate Member
    Jul 28, 2007
    28,516
    Sure, his judge appointments are going to be more 2A friendly than Hillary's would have been, but that's by dint of the pool he's drawing from, which was presented to him by the party.

    Trump himself is no friend of the 2nd Amendment.

    Or, could it be that he's playing both ends against the middle? Could he be stacking the courts with pro 2A judges and playing the game of a moderate in regard to the 2A while he's in office?

    I know I'm probably going to jinx it, but he's talked about the bump stock ban since the LV shooting. He has said many times he's going to have a decision shortly. Well, if it's all that important to him, I do believe he could have gotten those results within 6 months of his first statement. As of yet, there's been absolutely no movement on it.

    Is he playing the anti 2A folks, putting off HIS decision indefinitely?

    I hope so.
     

    Hawkeye

    The Leatherstocking
    Jan 29, 2009
    3,971
    Or, could it be that he's playing both ends against the middle? Could he be stacking the courts with pro 2A judges and playing the game of a moderate in regard to the 2A while he's in office?

    I don't think he's doing that at all. I think that if nothing else, Trump has demonstrated that he seems to have very little forethought about or control of the things that come out of his mouth. He says what he's thinking, no matter if its appropriate or not, and he's said very anti-gun things a bunch of times.

    The guy's a mercenary. He's out for what's best for Donald Trump, and he doesn't care about who or what he squashes on his way there, gun rights included. He thought it would get him votes during the election if he said pro gun things, so he said them. He thought it would make him more popular after the election if he said anti-gun things, so he said them. He goes where the winds blow him in order to keep power.

    I know I'm probably going to jinx it, but he's talked about the bump stock ban since the LV shooting. He has said many times he's going to have a decision shortly. Well, if it's all that important to him, I do believe he could have gotten those results within 6 months of his first statement.

    That's because he doesn't understand how the government of which he is the head works. He can't "have a decision shortly" because the process around publishing new regulations is designed to be slow and ponderous on purpose so that it's difficult to put stupid ones in place. There are financial impact studies that have to be done. There are legal studies that have to get done. You have to publish the proposed rule. Then you have to have a public comment period. Then you have to address the public comments. Then you publish a revised rule. Etc, etc, etc. Eventually, the new regulation is published in the Federal Register and is adopted and goes in to effect.

    As of yet, there's been absolutely no movement on it.

    Yes, there has, actually. ATF has published the proposed new regulation, there's been a comment period, etc. It just hasn't progressed to completion yet.

    Is he playing the anti 2A folks, putting off HIS decision indefinitely?

    Almost certainly not. He's made public statements on a bunch of occasions about how he's going to get them banned, and he has had ATF going through the process of doing so.
     

    fabsroman

    Ultimate Member
    Mar 14, 2009
    35,852
    Winfield/Taylorsville in Carroll
    Fabs / anyone, is this a fair statement in this regard: feds = Trump Administration.


    Just feeling a little beat up here in MD and wondering if the "feds" are going down a similar path. Many will say the pistol brace was a positive for 2A and I hate to say it but the previous admin gave it a pass.

    Here you go, from today's news feed. Appears bumpstocks will become illegal on a national level come March. I have not read the rule, so I have no idea if this applies to binary triggers, etc., but it surely applies to bumpstocks.

    https://finance.yahoo.com/news/trump-administration-moves-ban-bump-stocks-161413166.html

    So, even if we prevail in the 4th Circuit on the Maryland law, how will the new federal ATF rule apply? That will probably require additional litigation unless the 4th Circuit decision goes all the way to SCOTUS and SCOTUS rules in a specific way such that bumpstocks, binary triggers, etc. cannot be infringed upon via rule or legislation.
     

    fabsroman

    Ultimate Member
    Mar 14, 2009
    35,852
    Winfield/Taylorsville in Carroll
    From a 2A perspective, the judges he's seated in federal, circuit, and SCOTUS slots are from an entirely different planet than the ones you'd see if Hillary had won. It's impossible to overstate the difference and the importance to our cause.

    Yes, the difference between Hillary and Trump is all about the Judges that have been appointed. That is the only reason I can stomach Trump. Otherwise, meh. About to start working up a draft of my tax return for 2018. Maybe the tax cuts might be another reason, but we shall see.
     

    swinokur

    In a State of Bliss
    Patriot Picket
    Apr 15, 2009
    55,394
    Westminster USA
    .
     

    Attachments

    • 8EC81556-56E2-4A69-AC64-164FC7624586.jpg
      8EC81556-56E2-4A69-AC64-164FC7624586.jpg
      85.1 KB · Views: 211
    • 726D7793-64EA-4E34-84F8-777F893C73BA.jpg
      726D7793-64EA-4E34-84F8-777F893C73BA.jpg
      101.6 KB · Views: 219
    • D939191D-E44B-4EED-B3B4-E99D7A4D4DA7.jpeg
      D939191D-E44B-4EED-B3B4-E99D7A4D4DA7.jpeg
      77.2 KB · Views: 207

    Users who are viewing this thread

    Latest posts

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    274,917
    Messages
    7,258,612
    Members
    33,348
    Latest member
    Eric_Hehl

    Latest threads

    Top Bottom