M*CARBO Brotherhood

ATF Rule Changes

ATF proposed rule 2021R-05
Summary of Proposed Rule 2021R-05 | Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (atf.gov)

ATF Posts Proposed Rule Changing Definitions of Firearm Frame and Receiver - YouTube

9 Likes

why SC has this going thru.
"Section 23-31-250. (A) The State of South Carolina, and its political subdivisions, can not be compelled by the federal government to take any legislative or executive action to implement or enforce a federal law, treaty, executive order, rule, or regulation related to an individual’s right to keep and bear arms enshrined in the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution that limits or proscribes carrying concealable weapons, whether concealed or openly carried, as provided in this chapter.

(B) Any federal law, treaty, executive order, rule, or regulation related to limiting or proscribing the carry of concealable weapons must be evaluated by the Attorney General. The Attorney General shall issue a written opinion of whether the law, treaty, executive order, rule, or regulation purports to compel legislative or executive action prohibited pursuant to subsection (A).

(C) If the Attorney General renders an opinion that a federal law, treaty, executive order, rule, or regulation purports to compel legislative or executive action prohibited pursuant to subsection (A), then:

(1) no public funds of this State, or any political subdivision of this State, shall be allocated for the implementation or enforcement of that federal law, treaty, executive order, rule, or regulation;

(2) no personnel or property of this State, or any political subdivision of this State, shall be allocated to the implementation or enforcement of that federal law, treaty, executive order, rule, or regulation; and

(3) no official, agent, or employee of the State of South Carolina, or any political subdivision of it, shall implement, attempt to implement, enforce, or attempt to enforce that federal law, treaty, executive order, rule, or regulation."

B. This SECTION takes effect upon approval by the Governor.
https://www.scstatehouse.gov/sess124_2021-2022/bills/3094.htm
the whole bill approved by the house, approved by the senate with amendments,currently in the house one more time before it goes to the governor for signature.

16 Likes

As a long time SC resident I am proud to support this proposed legislation.
The morons in the Whitehouse can kiss my ass.:us:

14 Likes

Just read that NC is doing away with buy permits. That’s good news.
Honestly, I didn’t realize they had to get permission to buy a gun.
Unless they are married, of course.

11 Likes

thats only for a handgun. hold over from jim crow laws…you could always buy a shotgun or rifle…

8 Likes

Does anything in the SC code prohibit the Feds from doing their own arrests, confiscations, prohibitions, etc. independent of SC law enforcement/government? After all, agencies like ICE can arrest illegals regardless of whether a state helps them or not. I’m wondering if the new law, at least from what I read in your post, really means anything. SC may not help the Feds do something unconstitutional, but they might not be able to stop them from doing it either.

8 Likes

It seems a lot of people are getting to the point of non-compliance with new laws.
And if you are not going to comply with new laws, why comply with the old laws.

I think I’m getting close to that point as well, but hoping it doesn’t come to that.
Hoping someone intervenes and ends all this BS before we are all felons.

12 Likes

they are only 3 major ATF offices in SC with 5 satellite (small less than 12 people) offices. they hard pressed to do anything on their own without cooperation with local law enforcement.
correspondingly they 3 US marshal offices with 2 satellites. they going to be hard pressed to enforce and hold anything in the state.

9 Likes

Just because there are only a few ATF agents in the state at the moment doesn’t mean the Fed can’t surge as many agents and other enforcers to help them as they want, maybe just to make a point, and to make that state an example to the others of what the Fed can/will do to whoever obstructs them. And that’s the limit of what I can say before I get too political.

8 Likes

Being in NC ive been tryin to stay current on the doing away with pistol purchase permits. Right now you can go to box store and buy long guns with some quick paper work and back ground check. But are required to go to local sheriff office and pay 5 dollars each for pistol purchase permits and are still required to fill out paperwork and go threw the background check. So the majority of nc says whats the point in pistol purchase permits if the background check is still required anyway. And several counties here are back logged at sheriff office for monthes trying to do there assigned jobs along with pistol purchase permits.

7 Likes

Unlimited pistol purchases and no fees with CCW permit in NC. Last time I looked.

7 Likes

11 Likes

I see a lot of people saying that, but how many will stand firm on it?
Maybe I’m overly hopeful, but I think many will. Surely not all.

12 Likes

I can see your point ValorSolo, but in the subject area of the 2nd amendment I believe messing with it could be the last straw. There will be a hell of a lot of new felons. And I’ll shut up before I get into politics :innocent: :innocent:
Larry

12 Likes

:raising_hand_man:t2: I think a lot more people than we think will become felons if they keep poking at our freedoms I have some liberal family on the west coast that are already saying that this is going to far and it’s not what they even want

12 Likes

The Supremacy Clause makes Federal law paramount in areas within the scope of Federal jurisdiction. Remember though that all rights not granted to the Feds are specifically reserved to the states by the 10th Amendment. The Feds cannot MAKE the states do anything, but they can use a carrot and stick approach to enforce their will. Do it our way or highway funding dries up, etc.
Firearm regulation, like marijuana regulation, is within the scope of federal jurisdiction so the Feds conceivably could still enforce Federal law without regard to the states. But they almost never do where weed is concerned. It is all a question of will and resources.

10 Likes

They would much rather have the country high than armed.

11 Likes

That will not pass the smell test. Remember when Trump tried to cut off funding for sanctuary cities/states? It was quickly nixed even though the cities/states were flagrantly breaking federal laws.

7 Likes

You forget which political party is in power now. And the other political party which does nothing to make them uphold the Constitution, laws, and their sacred oaths. Don’t know which is more despicable.

12 Likes

The thing we have to worry about is the UNITED NATIONS SMALL ARMS TREATY. If the fools in Washington vote for this it will have to go to the Supreme Cort.

5 Likes