Introducing unrelated
ATF FATD letters at trial will confuse the jury and place the jury in the position of deciphering
nuances of ATF opinion letters as opposed to focusing on the specific firearm at issue in this case.
I'm not sure if I should roll my eyes at that or laugh at that.
"Don't show the jury that we make up the rules as we go along."
The avalanche has already started. It is too late for the pebbles to vote.
I have two questions who didn't see this coming, and for those who didn't, would you be interested in buying a lovely bridge that I happen to be trying to unload?
HTRN, I would tell you that you are an evil fucker, but you probably get that a lot ~ Netpackrat
Describing what HTRN does as "antics" is like describing the wreck of the Titanic as "a minor boating incident" ~ First Shirt
The only part that is unsurprising about it is ATF prosecuting somebody in defiance of their own rulings. Could have just as easily been over a method of permanently attaching a muzzle extension, or what constitutes a legal semi build of a former subgun, or them deciding (again) that their previously approved method of demilling is no longer OK. Or that wipes are now silencer parts, but now they are not, however now they are again... Oh, they did that, didn't they? At least they didn't prosecute anybody over that one.
Cognosce teipsum et disce pati
"People come and go in our lives, especially the online ones. Some leave a fond memory, and some a bad taste." -Aesop
Not only in Defiance of their own rulings, but gag orders at trial so the defense couldn't introduce it, and then further gag orders on what exactly was going on in the trial, to keep the public from finding out about it.
It may sound like tinfoilhattery, but it could have been the plan all along - let pistol braces exist, then go after the users, creating a pr victory. I mean, it sounds like something Lex Luthor would come up with, but this is BATFE we're talking about here..
HTRN, I would tell you that you are an evil fucker, but you probably get that a lot ~ Netpackrat
Describing what HTRN does as "antics" is like describing the wreck of the Titanic as "a minor boating incident" ~ First Shirt
HTRN wrote: ↑Wed Oct 31, 2018 11:15 am
Not only in Defiance of their own rulings, but gag orders at trial so the defense couldn't introduce it, and then further gag orders on what exactly was going on in the trial, to keep the public from finding out about it.
That's what gets me. They don't want their own rulings introduced as evidence in a trial.
I wonder if you could use their motion to suppress their rulings as evidence in a trial.
The avalanche has already started. It is too late for the pebbles to vote.
Most of the other braces, such as the SIG brace, have a specific approval, on the specific brace - from what a gleaned, via a quick scan from the vendor's website, their letter was not issued specifically for their brace, and they just relied on a general opinion
