This video discusses the Supreme Court's 7-2 ruling in Vanderstok v. Garland, which upholds the ATF's regulation of unfinished frames and receivers under the Gun Control Act. The discussion, featuring Professor Mark Smith from The Four Boxes Diner, aims to break down the ruling's implications for Second Amendment supporters, the classification of firearm parts, and potential future legal battles. It also explores the apparent contradiction between the Ninth Circuit's stance on magazines and the Supreme Court's decision on firearm part regulation.
This video, featuring William Kirk of Washington Gun Law, analyzes the potential legal ramifications of the ATF's rule on unfinished frames and receivers. It argues that the ATF could leverage the capability of AR-15 lower receivers to be converted to fully automatic receivers as grounds for banning them. The video urges viewers to examine the FPC's brief to understand the full scope of the legal challenge, which extends beyond 80% lowers. It encourages viewers to educate themselves and support the Firearms Policy Coalition.
This video discusses a "brutal ruling" in Oregon that imposes a ban on untraceable and undetectable firearms, as well as unfinished frames and receivers. The ruling, in the case of Montgomery v. Rosenblum, challenges Oregon HB 2005, which is set to go into effect on September 1st. The motion for an injunction was denied, meaning Oregon residents have until September 1st to bring their firearms into compliance with the new law. The video urges viewers to "arm yourself with education" and provides resources for further information and to contact Washington Gun Law.
This video discusses the critical legal developments impacting the future of 80% lowers (unfinished frames and receivers). It focuses on the Garland v. VanDerStok case, where the ATF's authority to regulate these items is being challenged. William Kirk from Washington Gun Law explains the case's implications, emphasizing the importance of education for Second Amendment rights. The video also promotes the Firearms Policy Coalition and its partner, Taylor Freelance, encouraging viewers to support their work.
This video discusses the Supreme Court's decision to review the case of Garland v. VanDerStock, which challenges the ATF's rule on regulating unfinished frames and receivers. Washington Gun Law President William Kirk explains how this rule expands ATF's authority beyond finished firearms to raw materials. The discussion emphasizes the broader implications for governmental power and the interpretation of the Second Amendment, drawing parallels to the bump stock ban case. The video encourages viewers to educate themselves on these matters and provides contact information for legal advice and further resources.
This video discusses the Supreme Court's acceptance of the case Garland v. VanDerStock, which concerns unfinished frames and receivers. William Kirk, President of Washington Gun Law, analyzes the significant implications of this case and how it could limit the ATF's enforcement powers, drawing parallels to the bump stock case. The content aims to educate viewers on the legal landscape surrounding firearm rights and provides resources for further engagement with gun rights organizations like the Firearms Policy Coalition.
This video discusses a Nevada Supreme Court ruling that upholds a law concerning unfinished firearm frames and receivers, often referred to as 'ghost guns.' William Kirk of Washington Gun Law explains the decision in Sisolak v. Polymer80, where a lower court's finding of unconstitutional vagueness was overturned. The ruling suggests that residents of Nevada should prepare for the eventual implementation of this law. The video encourages viewers to educate themselves on the matter and provides a link to the court's order.
This video features William Kirk, President of Washington Gun Law, discussing the implications of the VanDerStok v. Garland ruling from the 5th Circuit concerning unfinished frames and receivers. He aims to inform lawful and responsible gun owners about what this legal decision means for them moving forward. The video provides a link to the full ruling for viewers seeking more detailed information and offers contact details for Washington Gun Law for further questions.
William Kirk, President of Washington Gun Law, breaks down the ATF's open letter regarding Polymer 80, Lone Wolf, and similar polymer "Glock" style frames. The letter clarifies that these frames, when sold individually, are now considered firearms by the ATF. This means purchasers will need to complete a Form 4473 and undergo a background check. The video aims to inform lawful gun owners about the implications of this new ATF rule (2021R-05F) and its impact on the acquisition of these frames.
This video, featuring William Kirk of Washington Gun Law, discusses significant developments in the VanDerStock v. Garland lawsuit concerning the ATF's regulation of unfinished frames and receivers, often referred to as 80% lowers. The lawsuit challenges the ATF's "vast overreach" in regulating these firearm components. Encouragingly, a new plaintiff has been allowed to intervene, and a temporary injunction has been granted. The video aims to educate viewers on the implications of these legal proceedings for firearm owners.
This video discusses the legal challenge to the ATF's new regulations on unfinished frames and receivers, specifically focusing on the VanDerStok v. Garland lawsuit. William Kirk of Washington Gun Law explains how the lawsuit argues that the ATF has exceeded its authority by attempting to regulate raw materials, rather than solely defined firearms. The discussion highlights recent developments, including a request for additional injunctive relief to allow an 80% lower manufacturer to continue operations, which is presented as a very encouraging sign for the lawsuit. The video aims to educate viewers on these important legal developments.
This video features William Kirk, President of Washington Gun Law, discussing the recent temporary injunction granted in the VanDerStok v. Garland case. The lawsuit, brought by the Firearms Policy Coalition, challenges the ATF's new rules on frames and receivers, alleging they exceed congressional authority. The court's decision indicates a belief that the plaintiffs will likely prevail, offering a significant development in the ongoing debate over ATF overreach and firearm regulations. The content encourages viewers to educate themselves on these critical legal matters.
