GoA, GoF, and States challenge ATF Universal Background Checks rule/Restrictions in Privatw .

[Manimal]

Washington, D.C. — Gun Owners of America (GOA) and the Gun Owners Foundation are thrilled to be partnering with Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton in a lawsuit challenging the Biden ATF’s new rule to require background checks on the private sales of firearms. The States of Louisiana, Mississippi, and Utah also joined in the filing.

 

[Magdump]

Awesome.

 

[323MAR]

This is awesome, GOA doesn't play! It's also nice to have our own AG on board.

 

[Manimal]

more states are jumping in with their own lawsuits.

 

[Strick8]

So as I understand it effective this coming Friday, 5/10, any private sale or trade between 2 BayouShooter members will fall under the new rule.

Also, as I understand it a seller/buyer/trade where the parties go to an FFL to complete the deal does NOT satisfy the seller’s responsibility, as the seller must 1) obtain an FFL AND 2) complete a background check. Although it would make sense that if the ATF’s real goal was to ensure all transferees undergo a background check the TRUE goal is to criminalize, as felons, as many gun owners as it can and thus confiscate their firearms.

This Friday. In 5 days. A board like BS is a great resource to the ATF in IDing honest folks who are selling/trading firearms. Let’s hope a TRO is issued by Friday. If you’re not already a member of GOA, the Second Amendment Foundation, or the Firearms Policy Coalition it may be time to sign up. Under the braces rule members were exempted from the rule pending final legal resolution.

 

[Strick8]

So as I understand it effective this coming Friday, 5/10, any private sale or trade between 2 BayouShooter members will fall under the new rule.

Also, as I understand it a seller/buyer/trade where the parties go to an FFL to complete the deal does NOT satisfy the seller’s responsibility, as the seller must 1) obtain an FFL AND 2) complete a background check. Although it would make sense that if the ATF’s real goal was to ensure all transferees undergo a background check the TRUE goal is to criminalize, as felons, as many gun owners as it can and thus confiscate their firearms.

This Friday. In 5 days. A board like BS is a great resource to the ATF in IDing honest folks who are selling/trading firearms. Let’s hope a TRO is issued by Friday. If you’re not already a member of GOA, the Second Amendment Foundation, or the Firearms Policy Coalition it may be time to sign up. Under the braces rule members were exempted from the rule pending final legal resolution.

So as I understand it effective this coming Friday, 5/10, any private sale or trade between 2 BayouShooter members will fall under the new rule.

Also, as I understand it a seller/buyer/trade where the parties go to an FFL to complete the deal does NOT satisfy the seller’s responsibility, as the seller must 1) obtain an FFL AND 2) complete a background check. Although it would make sense that if the ATF’s real goal was to ensure all transferees undergo a background check the TRUE goal is to criminalize, as felons, as many gun owners as it can and thus confiscate their firearms.

This Friday. In 5 days. A board like BS is a great resource to the ATF in IDing honest folks who are selling/trading firearms. Let’s hope a TRO is issued by Friday. If you’re not already a member of GOA, the Second Amendment Foundation, or the Firearms Policy Coalition it may be time to sign up. Under the braces rule members were exempted from the rule pending final legal resolution.

Correction: The Justice Department submitted its proposed rule to the Federal Register on 4/11, but it was not actually “published” until 4/19. So we don’t actually lose our rights until 5/20, NOT 5/10! WHOO HOO!!!

 

[jdindadell]

Great I still have time to sell my Naboo blaster,,, err stainless ruger mark 2.

 

[Magdump]

Correction: The Justice Department submitted its proposed rule to the Federal Register on 4/11, but it was not actually “published” until 4/19. So we don’t actually lose our rights until 5/20, NOT 5/10! WHOO HOO!!!

Man Strick, I really don’t want to be the bubble buster here, but did you not read the retroactive clause in that rule?