2A NEWSLETTER: WEEK OF FEBRUARY 16th

Image Source: Shutterstock via myimages - Micha

Iowa House Subcommittee Rejects Registration Requirement for 'Ghost Guns'

A bill proposing mandatory state-issued serial numbers for privately manufactured firearms has been decisively tabled, ensuring our rights and freedoms remain protected.

Representative Phil Thompson, echoing the concerns of many within our community, cited the formidable challenges and potential overreach of setting up a registration system. His decision not to move forward with the bill in the House Public Safety Committee is a testament to the vigilant defense of our Second Amendment rights.

This proposal ignited a debate, with proponents pushing for increased regulation under the guise of public safety and crime prevention. However, it's crucial to recognize the broader implications of such measures. The push for registration has been met with rightful skepticism by those who see it as a slippery slope toward the eventual confiscation of firearms. History has shown that an unarmed populace is far more susceptible to control than an armed one, making the defense of our manufacturing and ownership rights paramount.

Respected voices within the gun rights community, have also rightly challenged the misleading and fear-mongering terminology of "ghost guns." Such language serves only to obscure the issue, drawing parallels with past rhetorical strategies aimed at vilifying lawful firearm ownership.

As a company committed to upholding the Second Amendment and ensuring our customers can exercise their rights to manufacture and own firearms, we stand firm against unnecessary and overreaching regulations.

The shelving of this bill is a victory for all of us who value our constitutional rights and the principles of liberty and self-defense. We will continue to monitor the legislative landscape closely, advocating for the interests of our customers and the broader gun-owning community.

Image Source: Shutterstock via icedmocha

Supreme Court's Upcoming Decision Could Mark a Turning Point for Firearms Regulation

We’re currently at the forefront of the ongoing legal battle concerning the rights to manufacture and own firearms through unfinished gun parts and kits, a domain where we have established ourselves as a pivotal player. The recent push by the Biden Administration for the Supreme Court to review the VanDerStok v. Garland case is not just a matter of legal discourse; it's a direct challenge to the core of our operations and the freedoms of the 80% community.

In November 2023, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals delivered a landmark decision, declaring the ATF's restrictions on these items "unlawful." This ruling represented a crucial victory for us, reinforcing the principle that individuals have the freedom to manufacture their own firearms without government interference. The Department of Justice (DOJ), however, has challenged this decision, seeking a reversal by the highest court in the land.

The Supreme Court's track record suggests it takes such requests seriously, especially when they stem from federal entities like the DOJ. This case stands out not only because of who is petitioning but also due to the substantial legal discrepancies it aims to resolve. With the DOJ emphasizing the need for clarity, the Supreme Court's intervention appears almost inevitable. This isn't just about a single rule or regulation; it's about the broader ability of federal agencies to impose restrictions that could limit our Second Amendment rights.

The procedural history of the case further underscores its significance. After a district court judge and the Fifth Circuit sided against the ATF's overreach, the Supreme Court intervened with emergency stays, allowing the contested regulations to temporarily remain in effect. These actions signal the Court's active interest in the case and suggest that a definitive ruling on the matter is on the horizon.

This legal battle comes at a time when the Supreme Court is scrutinizing the extent of executive agencies' power to reinterpret and enforce federal laws, a trend that has seen the Court push back against administrative overreach. The outcome of VanDerStok v. Garland, especially in conjunction with the Court's decision on related cases like Cargill, could reshape the landscape of firearms regulation in the United States.

For the 80% community, the implications are profound. A ruling in favor of maintaining the Fifth Circuit's decision could fortify our ability to engage in the private manufacturing of firearms, safeguarding against potential overregulation. On the other hand, a reversal could impose new limitations and challenges, affecting not only how we operate but also how Americans can exercise their Second Amendment rights.

As we await the Supreme Court's decision, we remain committed to our fighting the ATF in this lawsuit for the rights of firearms manufacturers and owners alike. We're diligently tracking these shifts, and adjusting our operations under the ever-changing legal landscape, as we continue to challenge the ATF in court each step of the way. We will continue to protect our customers' interests and the future of our industry. We be will keeping you informed and engaged as this critical issue unfolds, ready to stand up for our shared values and interests.

If you're still looking for clarity, watch this insightful video by Armed Scholar, where everything is broken down in detail.