Reddit Posts
Mentions
Pistol braces … FFL Dealers being put out of business … Requiring FFL transfer between private citizens… ammo embargo … all be EO or ATF ruling.eg not voted. The bump stock ban was overturned by the Supreme Court and these probably will be as well but shouldn’t even have to go through that process. They want to: Assault weapons ban (which means all semi-auto weapons) So there’s 4 things to Trumps 1. Aside from that, taking the position the Dems are more pro-gun than Republicans is absurd. I’m more worried about the state of the government. Apparatus than I am about one guy who will serve one term. Do you reallly think the country would put up with half the stuff Dem supporters and media tell you to be afraid of? If so, why didn’t he implement while he was in office last time.
I like how this is noted unreliable source because I know exactly what was said. It goes more along the lines of we don't have any plans at present to introduce more products. That does not have anything to do with demand. They just are saying they aren't planning on rolling out more and more crypto ETFs. I would not be surprised at some point if someone develops a large cap ETF or an established coin ATF and we all know what the likely candidates are going to be
The SEC is doing the same shenanigans the ATF has been doing for years, they are over-reaching in the exact same ways. I'll illustrate why. We have laws. They are comprised of language in the form of words. Laws are (ideally) made up to be very specific, with intentional wording and an already established legal vocabulary. They're laws after all, why the fuck would anyone want vague laws? Vague laws also inevitably cause court battles, sometimes going all the way to the Supreme Court. And here's why: Who has the power to make law? Congress. Who has the power of rule-making? Un-elected bureaucrats in bureaucratic agencies. What happens when "rule-making" involves changing definitions of crucial words or concepts? Or adding or subtracting criteria of laws? How is the law to be applied when agencies are operating under their own set of "rule-making" that fundamentally contradicts the original legal meanings set forth by Congress? Should people go to jail under the rule, or the law? How do you enforce law with this glaring discrepancy? Does the vanilla law apply, or does the law plus rule-making apply? Do you see how this gets absolutely out of control very quickly? This is why things like "Congressional Oversight" are supposed to exist.
The Country People and the entire world was better off with Trump. It was the republicans that brought down the absolutely unbearable Prices of Obama Care. They’re all Thieves no Doubt. I didn't vote for Trump after he dumped Assange and Wiki Leeks. I don't ever want to Vote for him again. But as bad as Biden has been the ATF FBI NSA CIA and Corruption in the Justice Dept. I'd Vote Trump as much as I dispose him. He treats his children and Ex wives much better than Biden has done with his family. Using his son for his bag man. Showers with his teenage daughter. And of Course it's Trump we should hate. For talking inappropriately. Fauci Created the Virus. Collect Million upon millions in Royalties on Vaccines that weren't fit for animals. Vaccines that do more damage than good. Faci also banned HQC which would have saved lives which Trump tried to get to the USA Citizens. Then the Democrats instead accused him of telling everyone to shoot up Clorox. The Demacrats are every thing they accuse Trump of being. Same with all the Law Suits. Let's try Trump for what Biden did… It is sickening!!!
Dismantle DOJ, FBI, FCC... Through in ATF and CIA and we got a deal.
..because if you use your own logic...Any Govt can theoretically invalidate specifically to you, the CBDC that you own...get it now ? or , restrict what you can / cannot buy ...& limit your travel as your CBDC arent valid THIS year to catch a plane trip with the family to Hawaii.. Case in Point ? Canada's Trudeau blocking Protestors Bank accounts....so it aint far fetched if NSA, CIA, ATF, FBI, DoJ, BATF, School Boards, etc... dont like your attitude & dont appreciate you Voting for XYZ candidate..they can just put in a request to Central Command to make your life Hell... ;-)
Doesn't matter if it's amazing or horrible. SCOTUS already ruled that three letters agencies cannot circumvent Congress to make laws. EPA tries it, ATF tries it, SEC tries it. Looks like in this instance Congress agrees that it makes laws. Will Congress make laws? Doubt it.
Your first and third points somewhat contradict one another, but primarily because of the assumptions of the first. The third is solid, but even that fits within the mosaic of what is happening. >I don't think marijuana is a good example because marijuana can exist within a state vacuum and not violate federal law if you don't cross state lines or use within federal jurisdictions This, very unfortunately for US citizens, is not true. The feds have reserved the right to raid and arrest people in weed-legal states for their marijuana grow operations or sales, and certainly have done so. After all, federal laws are on the books, and they contradict with state laws **explicitly**, not implicitly in some foggy legal grey area. The financial aspects of your third point actually support this. All that being said, I do not believe the feds have been as heavy-handed in direct enforcement in recent years due to fear of sparking a lawsuit with the government that would (eventually) reach the Supreme Court after making it's way through Circuit Courts. The DEA in particular is much more tactful than the BATFE (ATF) who is almost the exact opposite. A great and recent example of this effective but circuitous route to the Supreme Court is with firearms laws in the United States, where the ATF very clumsily bungled legal battles and lost a lot of ground in legal arguments, and major wins occurred on behalf of firearms rights organizations (who had tighter and more cohesive arguments). Just as note, many of those cases are still unfolding, but they are wonderful examples of how labyrinthine and ambiguous these things are until they are settled. In the case of marijuana, the fact that the DOJ urged the DEA to reschedule the classification of it is a good example of specific federal agencies trying to "stay ahead" of that potentiality this time instead, as they would prefer to reschedule to a lesser classification than give full legality (what most states want). This is a very typical game the feds play in general: they don't want to totally give up some of the cards in their deck, but the fact is that their hand is being moved in that direction from popular pressure from individual states. It's a very messy legal clusterfuck, but there is rhyme and reason to all of the moves being made, like a chess game. >States have no jurisdiction here at all .... They can't even stand up their own Banks or reserves. This is not entirely true. I'll start with state banks first. There is only one recent state bank that has propped itself up as separate from the rest of the "banking cartel" here in the US, and that is the Bank of North Dakota. It is not common for states to do this obviously, so many people don't even know about it, or the fact that this specific bank (and the state by extension) came out almost totally unscathed during the 2008 financial crisis. The domino effect that occurred at that time didn't affect this bank because it wasn't line up with the other dominos, and it wasn't operating under fractional reserve banking like everyone else. >States have no jurisdiction here at all. They are not allowed to regulate currency This is only true for what the federal gov actually acknowledges **as actual and official currency**. Right now cryptocurrencies are in a limbo state, and rightly so as they are part of an emerging market, and a class of assets that **still** has not been properly defined by government. This is a big issue, and cryptocurrencies are (for lack of a better term) a hybrid class of assets. The US (and the world) has never had to legally tangle with this type of asset, and therefore there is so very much that has to happen in order for the legal dust to settle, and will likely take many years and many more lengthy court battles. There are *MANY* ways an individual state could navigate potential legal protections on owning cryptocurrencies, but it *WILL* be challenged by the feds at some point. This goes back to the lengthy court battles between individuals or states versus the feds, but is also the perfect example of the "test case". When the tip of a legal movement occurs in the states, someone has to be the first few "test cases" while legal arguments are formed. When these occur, they are likely to fail on the merits in higher courts, while the court arguments are still in their infancy. As a result, the first few legal battles over an issue happen very slowly. Nearly nobody wants to have the brass balls to be the test case, and in many cases depending on the exact details there may be potential criminal charges hanging in limbo for an individual or group of people until the case is decided. Because test cases are likely to fail usually, this could directly result in prison time for someone. That's one hell of a gamble for people trying to make legal points. Over time, other states (or individuals or groups) pay close attention to these fledgling cases, and evolve their arguments for stronger standing in their own court battles. When groups and states do this in higher and higher numbers, the legal arguments become honed and sharpened, and it snowballs to something very significant. Yet again, the legal battles over firearms in the US are an excellent example of this, with previously assumed federal authority being found to be in error and (ultimately) completely flipped on their head or broad powers of an agency being reigned back in. In the case of cryptocurrencies and state regulation, both the feds AND the states are in uncharted territory. There are far too many things necessary to define legally in almost every corner of the space and legal system, and as a result the grey area is absolutely *huge* right now. The legal shenanigans of the feds are making this even worse, and while the feds **absolutely** make decisions bereft of intelligence, you would be shocked how many times these seemingly incompetent decisions are plays in a larger game, often serving as stall tactics or to move things in directions that are more beneficial to the feds long-term and further down the road. These types of laws being passed by states will very likely lead to being the pivotal test cases down the line, the first salvos being fired in **very** long and protracted legal battles. This is why early legislation like this is so very important, and why people should be paying such close attention to it. The intricacies of the legal system in the United States are not nearly as solid and black-and-white as people (and popular culture) make them out to be, and it is far more fluid and ambiguous than it seems on the surface. There is often no such thing as a "final say" on a legal matter, as American legal history proves, usually in the form of challenges that test the sturdiness and relevance of laws old and new. It is also very **healthy** for people, groups, and states to be doing these sorts of things as they directly challenge the federal government to prove their legal arguments and definitions in court under the scrutiny of higher courts. These challenges to the feds to make and defend their own case for why they are enforcing certain things in certain ways are a form of accountability to the federal government. With enough public and state pressure they can result in much more robust and fair laws for ordinary people, so long as people actually understand the battle that's taking place.
They were explosives per the ATF's definition. What's worse is that he put countless people at risk by storing the explosives in his apartment and shipping the explosives through the mail to anybody who purchased them from him on eBay.
Military spending is not what stands between you and universal healthcare, politician salaries and bloated offices like the DNR, ATF, TSA, and so many others are. Drain the swamp, cull the parasites, cut back on spending, and then we can talk about universal healthcare and viable social programs.
You know how you get an allowance of $1 every week for cleaning your room? Well $1 a week isn't enough to buy a car, pay off the cops, blow up your bully's house, and also bribe your teachers; so what do you do? You create a special piece of paper, that says next week when you get paid for cleaning your room whoever holds that piece of paper will get that dollar. It's an IOU based on your future allowance. Then you give that same piece of paper to a bunch of people at the same time. In grown up terms that's called "rehypothecation." To everyone else it's called "fraud" or maybe even "stealing." But, and here's the important part, with your new money you buy a bunch of guns and pay off the police. You may even create your own police that you can name a bunch of weird alphabet names like ATF, CIA, FBI, or even IRS. Now, when anyone questions why you're selling the same IOU to a bunch of people at the same time, you can send your own police after them to explain how you're legally correct and anyone asking questions is a 'terrorist' or a 'conspiracy nutter.' And you don't want to be a terrorist do you? Now you may wonder if this kind of system can create lasting wealth. And of course the answer is sort of yes but actually no. Eventually the whole system will collapse and cause unbelievable pain and suffering. But it won't happen right now. Hopefully we can all have a big party now and we'll all be dead before it's time to clean up. Be sure to vote!! As that gives the system a veil of legitimacy.
Federal law enforcement agencies (DHS, FBI, ATF, etc.) have not relegated enforcement of federal drug crimes to the states bro. Not sure how you could even think that. Do you know how federal law enforcement even works? I can’t even believe you’re saying almost none lol. Go to any federal district’s website and you will see many examples of people being charged with firearm charges simply because they owned a firearm and were being arrested for a federal drug crime. The feds do it to enhance federal drug offenders prison sentences. Tons of casual drug dealers. Not kingpins or huge drug dealers. We’re not talking about state law enforcement in any way so not sure what you’re even talking about a blue state going after guns. It’s part of the federal government carrying out a war on guns.
government agency going rouge and doing whatever they want? getting notes from the ATF i see prepare for a very long and slow process, crypto bois aren't ready for how slow executive agencies can be
Bitcoin is my ATF. Followed by litecoin. Also hold some Monero just in case the world decides to go to hell in a hand basket.