Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Classifieds
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Log in
Register
What's New?
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More Options
Advertise with us
Contact Us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
The Range
Law & Order
Fed. Court Judge denies injunction in "bump-stock" case
Search titles only
By:
Reply to Thread
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Tanis143" data-source="post: 3209148" data-attributes="member: 43724"><p>I'm no lawyer, but this doesn't seem correct. I thought that when a law is drafted, if there are no alternating definitions then the common definition for a word is used. If the definitions need updating, then only the legislative branch has the authority to change the law to include the definitions. In this case the judge basically said the ATF can change the definitions any time they choose to do so. How is that possible?</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Tanis143, post: 3209148, member: 43724"] I'm no lawyer, but this doesn't seem correct. I thought that when a law is drafted, if there are no alternating definitions then the common definition for a word is used. If the definitions need updating, then only the legislative branch has the authority to change the law to include the definitions. In this case the judge basically said the ATF can change the definitions any time they choose to do so. How is that possible? [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
The Range
Law & Order
Fed. Court Judge denies injunction in "bump-stock" case
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom