Crime Polymer 80 Raided by ATF for DIY Firearms

[brackis1]

They jumped on p80 because biden has made it clear hes going after "ghost guns" and "assault weapons". Nothing more. They(p80) have been pumping out 70-100,000 units PER MONTH. If it really was an issue with how shit was packaged, it would have been addressed long ago. Fuck outta here with all the extra bullshit

Yeah bro Biden has been working on this case since the minute he took office; it's clearly all his fault@@@!@@#!@#$#@$@!#%$Q#$%T%T

 

[Gregolian]

Hey at least you're able to differentiate the two things, despite being obviously super duper upset over a 1990s shootout when it was BATF and not regular porker cops.

They're an enforcement agency but like to act like they get to write regulations is why I get so pissed off about them.

They're a goddamn joke.

 

[evergreenrider]

Yeah bro Biden has been working on this case since the minute he took office; it's clearly all his fault@@@!@@#!@#$#@$@!#%$Q#$%T%T

They sat down with the ATF before this all transpired idiot. So is bidens stated intent not his true intent?

 

[panamaican]

You're creating a false equivalency. There were no requisite serial numbers. Everything they did was both within the letter and spirit of the law as written. This is like saying "Well, you bought a new iPhone with headphones. We here at BIG GOV REGULATOR approved iPhone and headphones, but not the iPhone WITH headphones! So enjoy prison!"




Again, there is underlying presumption here that I just don't agree with. The law itself is the violation of the right. But disregarding that, how does one "skirt" the law? It seems to me one is either obeying the law or not. For example, if I am in a 30 MPH speed limit zone, and I am going 29 MPH, am I 'skirting' the law?

Well, if the government says "You can sell the Iphone and headphones separately but when you sell them together then it falls under a different part of the law", either you follow the entire law or you don't. You don't get to follow part of it and then say "Well, it's close enough. You should treat together the same as separate."

Your speed limit example doesn't make sense, 29 MPH is within the law.

Skirting the law is when you know what the law is intended to do and then you do something that contravenes the intent of the law with the hope that the government doesn't act. In the law, we have this conversation where we say "It's not settled law." Meaning that what we're suggesting isn't outright violating the law but it's not outright within the law either. So, the client can decide if the risk is worth it. They could take the risk and the government never acts or they could take the risk and when the government takes a closer look, the government decides that the action is a violation. When the client acted it might not have been black and white but "gray" isn't much of a defense, unless your goal is to get into the courts.

These guys could have submitted the new kit to the ATF first for clarification. They submitted the various parts individually. If they intended to sell the parts together as a kit, it's very straightforward to just ask the ATF "Hey we want to bundle these parts together for cost savings, will that violate Section XX?" And if the ATF says "Yes" then they can just find another way to do it such as a discount if the customer buys X, Y, and Z together on the same purchase. Same outcome but within the bright lines of the law.

Instead they got approval for the individual pieces and then bundled them together knowing that it might not be kosher with the ATF.

 

[tinker_190]

You're just a verbose goof who has no interest in regulating firearms for sale.

Yes

I made a side comment about how right wing losers are suddenly social justice warriors when their gun-brother got his gun racket stopped. That has nothing to do with the legality at hand. But hey, guess who tried to actually argue legality using a dogshit red-herring about unmilled blocks of aluminum?

I didn't try to argue the legality of it. I tried to argue the underlying thought process of it.

lol @ "ceding ground" like this is a shootout and not some imps crying that laws are getting enforced on 1 dude who pushed beyond what he got approval for to make extra bucks off sketchy people instead of selling receivers like the other 1000 companies out there.

I don't agree with the premise that this was marketed towards sketchy people to begin with.