Ghost Gun Comment Period and Pistol Braces Regulation Published
The new rules surrounding a ban on 80% lowers have just been opened up for a comment period in the Federal Registrar! Go leave a comment and let the ATF know what you think of their new definitions!
Also, shortly before allowing comments on a potential new ruling to ban 80% 's, the ATF just sent new proposals aimed at pistol braces to the White House. This document is not available to the public just yet, however, once it is available later today you will be able to read it here at this link.
Don’t be afraid to speak up, this is your chance to be heard and to make a difference in the firearm community.
Don't feel discouraged either, remember, just last year gun owners were able to fight back against the proposed regulations on pistol braces by commenting on the rules in the federal registry. After receiving an overwhelming amount of comments declaring the ruling as unconstitutional, the ATF then removed the new set of rules.
Supreme Court 9-0 Against Gun Seizure
This Monday, the Supreme Court unanimously declared that an exception to the Fourth Amendment for “community caretaking” which is permitted for searching a vehicle without a warrant, does not permit police to enter and search a home without a warrant. Going forward, police will only be allowed to enter a home without a warrant if there is a need to assist citizens who are seriously injured or are threatened with such injury.
This ruling comes after a lawsuit filed by Edward Caniglia, who had two of his handguns seized without a warrant. While Caniglia was in an argument with his wife, he had placed a handgun on the dining room table and asked her to “shoot him and get it over with.” His wife then left their home and spent the night in a hotel. After not being able to get a hold of Caniglia, she called the police the very next day. The police were able to locate Caniglia on his porch. When they approached him, Caniglia denied that he was ever suicidal but later agreed to go under a psychiatric evaluation on the condition that the officers would not confiscate his firearms.
Shortly after he left to go under the psychiatric evaluation, the police confiscated his firearms.
Caniglia later sued the officers, arguing that the search and seizure violated his Fourth Amendment rights. The officers argued that their actions were legal because they believed Caniglia was suicidal and that they were acting under “community caretaking”. Caniglia had no criminal history, no record of violence or misuse of guns. Police returned his guns only after he sued.
ENJOY OUR NEWSLETTER?
Have topics you would like to see us touch on, or any feedback for us? Make sure to leave a comment below! We want to make sure we are putting out news relevant to our customers, and what you want to hear! Knowledge is power, and the more informed we all are to what's going on with our rights, the more effectively we can fight back.