How do you fire grenades with your Garand if you don’t use blanks, Geoff?
…the original idea was that it would be in charge of collecting the taxes on them, that’s why it was originally a part of the Treasury department. The regulatory/law enforcement mission came later.
Granted, that musical era was a little bit before my time, but I dare you to stay still and not boogie when ABBA starts playing in the car next to you at the stoplight…
When I was in middle school, the local high school had some HS students doing a musical act of some sort, I forget what.
What I do remember very clearly was the T-shirt the drummer wore.
It said, “Disco Sucks”. We kids thought it was hilarious, the coolest shirt. At the dinner table later that evening, I related the story of the shirt. My older sister, who was in that HS said it made a splash back at the HS all right, as the kid who wore it got suspended.
I thought that was a raw deal, and asked my sister when the kid got back to tell him we flipp’n *loved* it. 🙂
My first experience with authoritarian censorship… 🙁
MADDMAXX July 6, 2023 At 21:52
Your comment is awaiting moderation
I cut its heart out but someone else shot it in head… I had forgotten ALL about ABBA, the BEE GEES, Donna Summer, KC and Co, Kool and the Gang, and the other hundred or so top Disco groups of the 70s… What a waste…
As innocuous as it can get but off to moderation jail with you… Thanks TTAG…
“Granted, that musical era was a little bit before my time, but I dare you to stay still and not boogie when ABBA starts playing in the car next to you at the stoplight…”
‘Dancing Queen’ does it for you ‘I Haz A Question’ ?
Sorry, bro, but . . . not in this lifetime. Donna Summer actually had (some) talent, and a good voice, but ABBA were thoroughly mediocre. There was nothing about disco that deserves continued life. Sorry, not sorry.
In this ‘frame’ case the court only considered the APA to arrive at its ruling. Its clear that the ATF violated the APA in deriving this rule. But there was also a constitutionality issue too, but, according to legal standard the APA was considered enough to strike down the rule so, basically, the constitutionality issue was not addressed.
However, that does not mean there are not constitutionality issues here as well and it goes back to the GCA of 1968. Was that defined in the GCA really constitutional if considered under the Bruen standard (or any number of other cases even) because at the time of adoption firearms were considered as firearms if they were complete and ready to fire. In other words when the 2A was adopted, for example, a trigger was not considered a firearm but rather a part and the ‘stock’ was a part and not a firearm and the barrel was a part and not a firearm etc… and a firearm was what was completed as a whole thing that was overall capable of actually firing a projectile, and not something or a collection of ‘somethings’ that could be assembled together to create a firearm.
So in this case of striking down the ‘frame’ rule the court pointed out (directly and indirectly) there was a difference between ‘complete’ and ‘not complete’ and ‘parts’ and ‘complete firearms’.
Its pretty clear the NFA and GCA were derived at by using the ‘interest balancing’ concept, with the government getting what it wanted, once again as it did in about 90% of 2A court cases that used ‘interest balancing’ prior Bruen. Applying ‘interest balancing’ in court cases for constitutional rights was and is an abomination. Its an abomination for any case that involves constitutional rights and not just the 2A.
Basically, overall, in ‘interest balancing’ all the government had to do was show up in court to win and get their way. Which is why the anti-gun and Bidens government now are so upset at Bruen because it removed that control they had over deciding how a constitutional right applied and who could or could not exercise a constitutional right, you can see it in their own words and actions now, for example, the want (their falsely termed) ‘common sense gun control’ where they get to decide and we know what their decision is going to be because they have flat out said it.
So, overall, is the GCA definition of a ‘frame or receiver’ as a firearm really constitutional if Bruen is applied?
Doesn’t matter. What actually matters is the availability of jigs and receivers/frames which are only available from the businesses participating in the lawsuit and are incredibly overpriced for what they are unless you feel an unbranded $60 router from Harbor Freight is worth $400 when sold with $400 of aluminum plates and guides.
Without the widespread availability and reasonable cost, Clown Shoes McThatsnotmycoke has won.
Everyone can make money now a days very easily…dd…..I am a full time college student and just w0rking for 3 to 4 hrs a day. Everybody must try this home online job now by just use… This Following Website.—–>>> http://Www.EarnCash7.com
Polis can kiss my ass. RMGO are you ready to take my case?
He’d love to… he’s one of THOSE kind, ya know…
NICE
I’m still confused as to why a they put gunms with the same bureau that controls two addictive substances.
Guns are kind of addictive.
‘Hello. My name is jwm and I have a problem.’
That was funny stuff right there!!!!
It’s called being a Gunaholic. 1 is too many and 100 is not enough.
The next one is the absolute last…(with fingers crossed behind back).
“Guns are kind of addictive.”
I’m kinda partial to ‘Ammo Sexual’.
An Ammo Sexual never shoots blanks… 😉
How do you fire grenades with your Garand if you don’t use blanks, Geoff?
…the original idea was that it would be in charge of collecting the taxes on them, that’s why it was originally a part of the Treasury department. The regulatory/law enforcement mission came later.
My wife says white men killed disco. I told her I was no where near when it happened and she cannot prove otherwise.
Disco never died. It just moved into my house.
Granted, that musical era was a little bit before my time, but I dare you to stay still and not boogie when ABBA starts playing in the car next to you at the stoplight…
When I was in middle school, the local high school had some HS students doing a musical act of some sort, I forget what.
What I do remember very clearly was the T-shirt the drummer wore.
It said, “Disco Sucks”. We kids thought it was hilarious, the coolest shirt. At the dinner table later that evening, I related the story of the shirt. My older sister, who was in that HS said it made a splash back at the HS all right, as the kid who wore it got suspended.
I thought that was a raw deal, and asked my sister when the kid got back to tell him we flipp’n *loved* it. 🙂
My first experience with authoritarian censorship… 🙁
Oh, and ABBA had the formula down *tight*, solid pop music for the day…
Easy. I don’t listen to Abba.
“I don’t listen to Abba.”
I’m sorry, I didn’t know. 🙂
It’s fun pop music. Not all music needs to be serious or a ‘message’… 🙂
Nothing in English comes out of any cars at stoplights around here…
MADDMAXX July 6, 2023 At 21:52
Your comment is awaiting moderation
I cut its heart out but someone else shot it in head… I had forgotten ALL about ABBA, the BEE GEES, Donna Summer, KC and Co, Kool and the Gang, and the other hundred or so top Disco groups of the 70s… What a waste…
As innocuous as it can get but off to moderation jail with you… Thanks TTAG…
“Granted, that musical era was a little bit before my time, but I dare you to stay still and not boogie when ABBA starts playing in the car next to you at the stoplight…”
‘Dancing Queen’ does it for you ‘I Haz A Question’ ?
😄
(cough cough)
ABBA Gold is one of the best music compilations of our modern time.
Nobody does disco like Frank Zappa.
Disco Boy
Haz,
Sorry, bro, but . . . not in this lifetime. Donna Summer actually had (some) talent, and a good voice, but ABBA were thoroughly mediocre. There was nothing about disco that deserves continued life. Sorry, not sorry.
OK, so the frame rule(s) are currently dead. Until the Fascists control all three branches of government like they did with ‘Obama Care’ (gag).
Sounds like ‘Job 1’ is now to make sure they can never do what they did with guns what the did with sham ‘health care’ in 2012.
Or am I reading it wrong? 🙁
Not wrong at all. Actually totally correct.
🇺🇸💖
How the Supreme Court’s Next Gun Case is Going to Be HUGE!!! (case will be heard by SCOTUS next term at some some point)
Caught On Video Armed Pregnant Woman Shoots Robber In Houston > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3GxotKvJ2yM
Anti-Gun Army Vet Tweets Video Destroying Shotgun Because He’s Sick of Guns In Texas > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XaOr6dwTRM0
In this ‘frame’ case the court only considered the APA to arrive at its ruling. Its clear that the ATF violated the APA in deriving this rule. But there was also a constitutionality issue too, but, according to legal standard the APA was considered enough to strike down the rule so, basically, the constitutionality issue was not addressed.
However, that does not mean there are not constitutionality issues here as well and it goes back to the GCA of 1968. Was that defined in the GCA really constitutional if considered under the Bruen standard (or any number of other cases even) because at the time of adoption firearms were considered as firearms if they were complete and ready to fire. In other words when the 2A was adopted, for example, a trigger was not considered a firearm but rather a part and the ‘stock’ was a part and not a firearm and the barrel was a part and not a firearm etc… and a firearm was what was completed as a whole thing that was overall capable of actually firing a projectile, and not something or a collection of ‘somethings’ that could be assembled together to create a firearm.
So in this case of striking down the ‘frame’ rule the court pointed out (directly and indirectly) there was a difference between ‘complete’ and ‘not complete’ and ‘parts’ and ‘complete firearms’.
Its pretty clear the NFA and GCA were derived at by using the ‘interest balancing’ concept, with the government getting what it wanted, once again as it did in about 90% of 2A court cases that used ‘interest balancing’ prior Bruen. Applying ‘interest balancing’ in court cases for constitutional rights was and is an abomination. Its an abomination for any case that involves constitutional rights and not just the 2A.
Basically, overall, in ‘interest balancing’ all the government had to do was show up in court to win and get their way. Which is why the anti-gun and Bidens government now are so upset at Bruen because it removed that control they had over deciding how a constitutional right applied and who could or could not exercise a constitutional right, you can see it in their own words and actions now, for example, the want (their falsely termed) ‘common sense gun control’ where they get to decide and we know what their decision is going to be because they have flat out said it.
So, overall, is the GCA definition of a ‘frame or receiver’ as a firearm really constitutional if Bruen is applied?
Doesn’t matter. What actually matters is the availability of jigs and receivers/frames which are only available from the businesses participating in the lawsuit and are incredibly overpriced for what they are unless you feel an unbranded $60 router from Harbor Freight is worth $400 when sold with $400 of aluminum plates and guides.
Without the widespread availability and reasonable cost, Clown Shoes McThatsnotmycoke has won.
it doesn’t matter if the GCA definition of a ‘frame or receiver’ as a firearm is really constitutional if Bruen is applied?
why not?
Everyone can make money now a days very easily…dd…..I am a full time college student and just w0rking for 3 to 4 hrs a day. Everybody must try this home online job now by just use… This Following Website.—–>>> http://Www.EarnCash7.com