Amicus Brief Supports Gun Owners of America’s Bump Stock Case

“As such, they have an interest in the outcome of this case because a positive ruling in the instant matter will assist them in their efforts to have their lawful property returned to them in the future and will help guide other courts in reaching the correct conclusion which is that bumpstocks are not machineguns,” the brief elaborates. [More]

I'm not resuming this blog per normal practices-- as I said in the last post, I will still use it to promote my articles, assuming this one doesn't get "unpublished" as well.  In the meantime, I will be using this weekend to scout out a new home.

Order in the Court

In the course of one evening, William Dale Wooden burglarized ten units in a single storage facility. He later pleaded guilty, for that night’s work, to ten counts of burglary—one for each storage unit he had entered. Some two decades later, the courts below concluded that those convictions were enough to subject Wooden to enhanced criminal penalties under the Armed Career Criminal Act (ACCA). That statute mandates a 15-year minimum sentence for unlawful gun possession when the offender has three or more prior convictions for violent felonies like burglary “committed on occasions different from one another.” 18 U. S. C. §924(e)(1). The question presented is whether Wooden’s prior convictions were for offenses occurring on different occasions, as the lower courts held, because the burglary of each unit happened at a distinct point in time, rather than simultaneously. The answer is no. Convictions arising from a single criminal episode, in the way Wooden’s did, can count only once under ACCA. [More]

I'm not clear on what this really means because I thought one felony would be enough. Maybe someone familiar with this case can weigh in.

I notice the emphasis on the rule of lenity by Gorsuch, which is a point raised in complaints against the bump stock ban, saying it should apply instead of Chevron deference. I also read resistance to that from others on the court, and Kavanaugh has me worried. 

And it makes me wonder...

[Via Jess]

Bumping Up

GOA FILES PETITION IN U.S. SUPREME COURT TO REVIEW ATF BUMP STOCK BAN [More]

Is any gun owner out there still ignorant enough to rant this is just about "a stupid piece of plastic"?

Mixed Signals

 Supreme Court Signals Game Changing ATF Smack Down Is Coming!!! [Watch]

He provides a good analysis of what is going on with "bump stocks" in the courts, but I don't see where the title conclusion is coming from. They may or may not hear it and if they do, there are no guarantees on who they'll "smack down."

I do have a "logic" question for the Supreme Court: 

If a bump stock is legally a machinegun and I turned and raised it when confronted by law enforcement, would they be legally protected if they shot me because I didn't put down a "gun"? 

[Via Jess]

'Headed to' Doesn't Mean It'll Get Considered

 Bump Stock Ban Headed To Supreme Court After Appeals Court Deadlocks  [More]

And all they have to do to let it stand is...nothing.

Say the Republicans do that "blue wave" everybody's pinning their hopes on: How many do you think will push to fix this legislatively?

Sorry to be such a downer. I want a win on this more than just about anybody.

[Via bondmen]

Speaking of Mail

I can't find this on the GOA site to link to, so I'm just pasting the text of their email presser here:

WASHINGTON, D.C. – The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit today issued an order in Gun Owners of America’s (GOA) case challenging the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives’ (ATF) bump stock ban. “GOA’s fight is far from over as our lawyers begin preparing a petition for certiorari to the High Court,” Erich Pratt, Senior Vice President of Gun Owners of America, said. “The fact that the Sixth Circuit was so divided that it could not even give us an answer to our question means that the Supreme Court must eventually decide whether unelected ATF bureaucrats have the power to create new federal crimes out of thin air.” The court split evenly, 8 to 8 -- an extremely rare occurrence in the courts of appeals. This peculiar result means that the court was unable to reach a majority opinion either way in the case, resulting in the flawed ruling of the lower, district court being “affirmed” by default. Along with its order, the court issued two opinions, one supporting the bump stock ban and one opposing it, but neither representing the judgement of the court (and so neither with any precedential value.) GOA is concerned that in the future, the ATF could similarly ban semiautomatic firearms by illegally classifying them as machine guns.

Coulda Woulda Shoulda

 It is also supported by the Due Process Institute, which describes itself as a “nonprofit, bipartisan, public interest organization” that seeks “procedural fairness in the criminal justice system.” In a brief filed, it asserts that this case falls under the so-called rule of lenity, which favors less harsh interpretations of ambiguous criminal statutes. Codrea group and other bump stock advocates have made this argument as well. In contrast to Chevron deference, the Due Process Institute notes that the law isn’t settled on “the proper interpretation of a statute with both criminal and civil implications,” according to them. However, the rule of lenity should prevail, it says. [More]

It should.

If it doesn't, we'll have a real problem on our hands, especially when ATF decides to transmute semiautos into machineguns.

Are there any anonymous, ignorant comment dolts out there still bloviating insultingly about "a stupid piece of plastic not being a hill worth dying on"?

We Get a Bump in the Media

 Machine Gun Law, ATF Rule at Center of Suits Over Bump Stock Ban [More]

Ours gets some of the ink in this piece from Bloomberg. On the whole, it has the appearance of balance, but leading off with the arguments by the grabbers buries ours after the initial impression has been made.

You know who ought to file a brief and apologize, say this was never his intent and ATF perverted his orders? The 3D Chessmaster who promised he'd be on our side and then got us into this intolerable mess after a wholly uncalled-for green light from the Lairds of Fairfax.

Except he can't. What a pal.

Here They Come to Save the Day!

 NRA-ILA Files Brief Urging SCOTUS to Hear Bump Stock Ban Challenge [More]

Comedy gold!

And I note they're still pushing the special infringements Trump took as his green light that whatever he did above and beyond would be costless to him.

Thank a 'Friend'

 Rare Breed Triggers Fires Back At ATF, Says "Will Not Comply" [More]

Anybody know if there's a legal defense fund? And if one of the things not to comply with is purchase records identifying customers...?

And yeah, thank Trump and NRA for setting "bump stock" precedent. Gee, I wonder why I had to use the Wayback Machine on that last link...

[Via bondmen]

Generally Speaking

 BUMP STOCK CASE GAINS MOMENTUM AS EIGHTEEN ATTORNEYS GENERAL SUBMIT BRIEF [More]

And one general attorney...

Welcome to the Party, Pals

 NRA JOINS GUN OWNERS OF AMERICA’S BUMP STOCK CASE [More]

Well, somebody's gotta claim sole credit if it wins...

It's a Won Battle, Anyway

VICTORY: COURT RULES A BUMP STOCK IS NOT A MACHINE GUN [More]

It's good news, no doubt, and something those of us with our own skin in the game welcome, but I wouldn't start claiming victory until the war is won.

A Vote of No Confidence

 BIG 2A WIN * 1st Bump Stock Case Brought To Court: Federal Prosecutor Drops The Charge [Watch]

It's encouraging that the feds are afraid to test the legality against the testimony of their former FTB guru.

As an aside, I was just inputting my two cents on a bump stock legal doc this morning that I'll be writing about later.

[Via Jess]

What's Trending

[More]

Funny, I don't see pistol braces in the top five. We need to change that.

Here's what is being "offered" for comment:

And I don't know if it's just my local connection or if this is more widespread, but when I go to Regulations.gov to find it so I can comment, I'm getting error messages, which reminds me of what they did with bump stock comments. Since they "give" us until Jan. 4, it's on them to get things up and running now. If you have a direct link, please post it in "comments."

I'll be putting an AmmoLand piece together on this soon.

[Via Roger J]

UPDATE: Here it is.

[Thanks, Bear! Everybody knows about his new location, right?]

Now That the Trail's Been Blazed...

 Joe Biden plans to move quickly against guns, adding the issue to his list of first executive orders, according to his top policy aide. [More]

Because who needs checks and balances when you can wield dictatorial power with fawning media approval?

Now that our "pro-gun president" has clearly shown the way (with a special assist from our "gun rights leaders"!) does anybody still not understand the issue and still maintain the "bump stock ban" is just about "a stupid piece of plastic"?

[Via Len Savage] 

Bumped Out of Court

Ohio Court Strikes Down Cincinnati’s Bump Stock Ban [More]

Not that one member of Team Tyranny will lose his job over this... 

My concern is if SCOTUS will hear the federal case, and what it will do about it.

I do note there are still plenty of obnoxious (and universally hostile) dumbasses who have completely missed the point out there bloviating about a piece of plastic not being a hill worth dying on.

[Via Jess]

What a Load of Poo

 A Key Largo man already facing felony charges over accusations he pointed a handgun at a group of people riding on a golf cart in his condo complex in May now faces an additional charge of owning a bump stock, a device that allows a semiautomatic rifle to rapidly fire almost like a fully automatic weapon. [More]

Looks like there are plenty of "thanks" to go around...

And:

Calls to ban them came from even many staunch pro-gun owners’ rights advocates...

Name one. I guarantee you I'll find other betrayals.

[Via bondmen]

3D Chess Again, Right?

How President Trump Saved Our Gun Rights From Obama’s Bump Stock Strawman [More]

Fletcher ain't buyin' it.

But Kamala is.

The Age of Chaos

Violence is accomplishing what violence always accomplishes—destruction, ruin, and death. The only theoretical justification for government is that it employs force to protect its citizens from violence—invasion, violence against persons or property, and the indirect violence implicit in procuring and keeping value through fraud or extortion. [More]

Say, is that a bump stock...?

[Via bondmen]