If you’re like me (and you are reading this right now, after all), you likely get a sense of real joy whenever you see the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives receive a loss in court. After all, the ATF is one of the biggest thorns in the side of law-abiding Americans who simply want to exercise their Second Amendment rights and keep and bear firearms to protect themselves and their familiar.
So, assuming that you are like me, you’ll likely get great joy from today’s story because this story is exactly what I described earlier: It is the ATF taking a loss in court in a ruling that sided with you and me and our Second Amendment rights. Tom Ozimek writes,
A federal judge in Texas has ruled in favor of gun rights groups who sued the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) in a bid to overturn the agency’s prohibition of forced reset triggers, devices that increase the firing rate of semi-automatic guns.
U.S. District Judge Reed O’Connor in Fort Worth, Texas wrote in a July 23 order that the ATF exceeded its authority when it classified forced reset triggers as machine guns and, with very narrow exceptions, made them illegal.
“Each time an agency circumvents the legislative process it chips away at the most prudent reason for the separation of powers that is, ensuring unelected and unaccountable individuals do not make the law,” the judge wrote, adding that the country’s foundational documents granted lawmaking authority to duly elected officials in order to “safeguard against future tyranny.”
“While this case may seem focused on firearms, it represents so much more,” the judge wrote. “It is emblematic of a devastating problem that increasingly rears its head in federal courts: rampant evasion of the democratic process.”
The case was brought by Texas Gun Rights (TXGR) and the National Association for Gun Rights (NAGR), whose initial complaint challenged the ATF’s classification of forced reset triggers as machine guns on the premise that the ban was arbitrary and capricious, and violated constitutional rights.
Judge O’Connor clearly cares about the Constitution and about doing the legal and right thing. His ruling in this case is spot on right.
The ATF’s efforts to strip gun rights are about a systemic abuse of power that has been rampant in Washington where the Executive Branch (of which all departments such as the ATF are a part) has been running roughshod over separation of powers and over the rights of the American people.
It’s truly great to see this decision come down in court in favor of the Constitution and the American people, and thank you to Texas Gun Rights and the National Association for Gun Rights for taking this fight to court for all of us.
Now how many murders are commeted with a silencer i say none so why zhould all of us have to give them 200.00 and wait 6 months for approval i am now wearing hearing aids i dowon a can and love it no more hearing protection its awesome ow the court needs to
Fix this issue
Must be 200 to 300 a day they are used on AR-15’s equip with bump stocks and 5000 round magazines. Lets not forget it’s the “choice” gun for the gang members and used in drive by shootings!
dude, seriously? It is not the choice weapon for gang members. What are the goint to do, tuck it in their waistbands? The Glock after market pistol with an “ILLEGAL” fire switch on it makes a Glock a Machine pistol! Most common weapon for gang bangers. ALSO, the most inaccurate. It just sprays bullets, no ability to aim well, recoil and rapid fire means non-targeted people get hit! Answer: anyone using a firearm for criminal activity automatic 10 year sentence without parole, Convicted Felon in possession of a firearm 20 years automatic without parole. Convicted felon USING a firearm committing a criminal acted 30 years. 2nd offense is EXECUTION!
There should be no laws regarding guns as it is a human right not to be granted, or taken away by Gov. They want an A R ban, there will be another civil war. One just can’t executive order a ban or confiscation. Stand firm on all the bill of rights.
This is an example of the Chevron ruling in action. To put it simply, the Chevron ruling says that an agency cannot be a legislator, cop, judge, jury, and executioner.
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
The problem is the anti-gunner focus on “Militia” or take words out of the amendment like leave out free in free state. They are saying that it says that if gives the states the right to form a Militia. (The National Guard) When the original intent of the Second Amendments was:
It is evident that the framers of the Constitution did not intend to limit the right to keep and bear arms to a formal military body or organized militia, but intended to provide for an “unorganized” armed citizenry prepared to assist in the common defense against a foreign invader or a domestic tyrant.
So when can we expect one of the national advocate groups to challenge the constitutional legality of the ATF itself.
Any rule, restriction, law, ordinance or other act that allows something also can prohibit the same thing too. So if there is a requirement to register a suppresser then there can be a denial, a violation of the 2nd, as it “infringes” on the right to bear arms. What about short barreled rifles, automatic firearms, and the rest of the rules. Nothing may infringe.
Let the AT stick to booze and smokes.