Bronze Supporter
- Messages
- 12,991
- Reactions
- 23,087
- Thread Starter
- #21
Eh. Thats a bad thing, how?
I don't think they'll stop issuing opinions.
It just means they'll legally have to craft their opinions based entirely on what the law says and not what the law could say.
"Does this part or assembly make a gun fire automatically with a single function of the trigger"? If yes, MG. If no, not a MG, regardless of ROF or operation method.
"Is this barrel under 16 or 18 inches, or under 26" OAL, and does the firearm have a shoulder stock, designed to be fired from the shoulder?"
If yes, SBR/SBS. If no, not a SBR/SBS, regardless of how the device could be shouldered.
Let the Courts determine if the ATF or other Fed Agencies' interpretation of the laws, square with the Courts' own interpretation.
Agree with both these above. Countless cases where individuals and business prosecuted by the ATF have really no defense. They can't even present evidence because previously court had to defer to ATF "expertise". Think of all the people still trying to get their weapons back Fe. ATF just blows them off forever and if they go to court their attorneys just blow anyone out of the water for the most part. Cases don't even get off the ground.IMO, It's not that EVERY decision must go through the courts. It just means that WHEN an opinion or decision is challenged, and goes through the courts, the agency is no longer considered the only SME or given deference.
In the future those prosecuted by the ATF will have a chance to present their case instead of ATF saying "only our opinion is relevant, therefore judge you must dismiss".
I agree ATF is going to have to think much more carefully about what they enforce against individuals and businesses because their nearly unbeatable trump card is gone now. Huge, huge win for individual's rights in America.