impending new brace rule next month

[yoni]

Today was a holiday to honor those that have fallen to give us our freedoms.

Their is no better way to honor these souls, that were killed or maimed on the battlefields around the world and at home.

Than to resist, the tyranny of Brandon and his pretend Jew that serves as a modern day Kapo, head of the ATF. FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF both of you .

[machman72]

I joined FPC(Firearms Policy Coalition) and GOA(Gun Owners of America) yesterday. Recent YT vids has made me aware of these two organizations.

I already have multiple tax stamps but have chosen not to comply with the brace law. I wanted to join this thread to try to have another source of info on this matter.

[Diamondback]

And SAF and GOA get their injunction, too. Suck on THAT, SS-Sturmbannfuhrer Dettelbach!

[ubet]

And SAF and GOA get their injunction, too. Suck on THAT, SS-Sturmbannfuhrer Dettelbach!

I don’t think this admin cares what the courts say though. While it feels good to win a small battle, their is still a big war to fight in this


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Diamondback]

True, and an injunction doesn't mean jack when you have a triggerhappy SS-Sturmtruppen cocksmoker on your doorstep in Full Waco Mode. That's the part the courts and too many don't understand but the Enemies Domestic get all too well, there is no relief a court can grant once they've put you in the grave.

ATF needs both the Judicial and Congressional Oversight equivalents of a thorough prison-bitching, the special kind the lifers reserve for pedos and similar Scum Of The Scum. HARD. And daily.

[ubet]

atf needs abolished turned into a store. You can’t fix anything in big gov


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[jsbhike]

. That's the part the courts and too many don't understand but the Enemies Domestic get all too well, there is no relief a court can grant once they've put you in the grave.

Likely the courts do get it and is why various components turn a blind eye to the others actions.

[ubet]

Food for thought lads:

https://youtu.be/_a9ijjMLCMw

It sure sounds like, to me, unless you were a member PRIOR to the lawsuit you aren’t covered


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[gaijin]

Can’t find it again, but I saw a vid (2A utube atty) that said it applied to any member, regardless of join date.
But that’s worth what you paid for it.

[georgeib]

Can’t find it again, but I saw a vid (2A utube atty) that said it applied to any member, regardless of join date.
But that’s worth what you paid for it.

That's certainly what FPC is claiming. The language in the injunction they obtained is broader that in the injunction obtained by GOA. FPC also went back to the judge for clarification, and received it, with the judge saying that the injunction was nationwide, and applies to FPC members in general. There was no limitation as when you had to have become a member.

I will say that what is typically true of legal language, and the reason it is often so verbose, is because it is designed to be as specific as possible. If something is not specifically excluded, as in this case, a very strong argument can be made that it was not meant to be excluded. As there are no specific limitations as to which members of the FPC are protected by the injunction, it is safe to conclude that it means "members of the FPC," as in all members.