Is An AR-15 Now A Machine Gun In Nevada?
BY Herschel Smith
4 years ago
TTAG.
The defendants in Parsons v. Colt et al. asked a federal district court to dismiss the lawsuit. On April 10, 2020, US District Court judge Andrew P. Gordon (Obama appointee) refused to dismiss the plaintiffs’ wrongful death claim. The case will now move forward in Nevada state courts.
Gordon used a set of lies regarding the design and history of the AR platform to rationalize his finding that the manufacturers somehow knew they were making arms that could easily be converted to machineguns, despite the fact that even the ATF claimed otherwise, until they changed their pseudo-minds in late 2017 (and didn’t make it retroactively official until 2019).
Carl then cites from the ruling, made by an Obama-appointed judge.
26 U.S.C. § 5845. Nevada’s definition of “machine gun” mirrors the federal definition. NRS § 202.253. The ATF has defined “designed to shoot” to include “those weapons which have not previously functioned as machineguns but possess design features which facilitate full automatic fire by simple modification or elimination of existing component parts.” ATF Ruling 82-2.
I read the judgment. It’s as bad as Carl is suggesting in one way, but not in another. First, the good news. This isn’t a ruling that is determinative for Nevada. He is only referring this to the Nevada supreme court. See the final two pages of the ruling.
Now for the bad news. If this indeed goes against the plaintiffs, that’s big trouble. It might not be so in states other than Nevada (can you imagine this happening in Idaho or Texas?), but this is a wrongful death lawsuit, and it could cost big.
The suit is against Daniel Defense (and other manufacturers) and Sportsman’s Warehouse. What happens now if you want to buy a Daniel Defense rifle?
The cost goes up due to [a] legal expenses, and [b] awards. That’s the whole intent behind this.
On April 16, 2020 at 8:16 am, X said:
“Now for the bad news. If this indeed goes against the plaintiffs, that’s big trouble. It might not be so in states other than Nevada (can you imagine this happening in Idaho or Texas?), but this is a wrongful death lawsuit, and it could cost big.”
Same thing with the Remington lawsuit. Remington was SUPPOSED to protected from frivolous anti-gun lawsuits under Federal law, but the Sandy Hook lawsuit was allowed to proceed because the court ruled that Remington could be held liable not for it’s guns, but for it’s ADVERTISING.
It is impossible to win in court. If you are in the position of asking the courts to uphold your “rights,” then you don’t have any.
Seriously, what do you THINK is going to happen when you go before (((Ruth Bader Ginsburg))) and ask and 86-year-old cancerous yenta from Columbia Law in New Yaaawk to tell you that you have the right to own an AK and a 30-round mag?
The only people who “win” in court are the lawyers. Because they always get paid. Courts are a sham… NEVER forget that.
On April 16, 2020 at 8:48 am, Michael said:
“When I use a word,” Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, “it means just what I choose it to mean—neither more nor less.” “The question is,” said Alice, “whether you can make words mean so many different things.” “The question is,” said Humpty Dumpty, “which is to be master—that’s all.”
ATTRIBUTION: LEWIS CARROLL (Charles L. Dodgson), Through the Looking-Glass,
On April 16, 2020 at 11:00 am, Flammenwerfer said:
“Peace is that brief glorious moment in history when everybody stands around reloading”.
–Thomas Jefferson
On April 16, 2020 at 11:50 am, MTHead said:
OH, it’s just plastic bump-stocks they want to get rid of? I can hardly wait, next up. Cars and alcohol!
The joys of living life by the reasonableness of lawyers!