1
- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Judge rules that major portions of the National Firearms Act are unconstitutional
Posted on 10/11/26 at 11:51 am to Squirrelmeister
Posted on 10/11/26 at 11:51 am to Squirrelmeister
I think people are cruising past the fact that the ATF is just choosing not to enforce the ruling for now and that change of office will likely result in overturned rulings and re-enforcement.
All of which will be very muddy without a form 4
All of which will be very muddy without a form 4
Posted on 10/11/26 at 12:11 pm to Tiger Prawn
quote:
It said “required federal tax stamp”
If the state is the one requiring a federal stamp, you'd need to have one.
Im no lawyer but if i was a dickhead prosecutor in Lousiana thats what I would say to burn you
Posted on 10/12/26 at 3:42 pm to ConnectTheDots
LDWF just clarified the issue on their social media...
quote:
Due to recent changes to federal law and guidance issued by the ATF, tax stamps are no longer required to legally possess a suppressor for your firearm. Given these changes, if your suppressor is legally possessed, and it is attached to a firearm that is legal for the season you are hunting, you are not violating state law and you are clear to use it to hunt.
Posted on 10/12/26 at 4:14 pm to Tiger Prawn
Yep I just saw that as well. Very good and very clear message. Good job Louisiana (dont get to say that often)
Posted on 10/12/26 at 5:00 pm to Tiger Prawn
quote:
LDWF just clarified the issue on their social media...
Great news
Posted on 10/14/26 at 4:16 pm to Tiger Prawn
quote:
LDWF just clarified the issue on their social media...
I think this just muddies the water even more.
1) The only federal law that's been changed is the $200 tax stamp. Federal registration and approval is still the law, they're just choosing not to enforce it...for now.
2) LA law follows federal guidance for the most part, meaning that going by the letter of the law, SBR, SBS, and Suppressors are still regulated.
3) While LDWF is quasi-law enforcement, I think you'll still want to wait for official AG or LSP guidance before running out and buying the items. To my knowledge, they've been silent on the issue so far.
4) The overarching issue with all of this is the ATF's guidance acknowledges that you could be screwed if/when these laws are enforced again, as there's no mechanism to register these items after you buy them, and there's no guarantee you'll be grandfathered in.
Posted on 10/14/26 at 5:55 pm to The Pirate King
quote:
The only federal law that's been changed is the $200 tax stamp. Federal registration and approval is still the law, they're just choosing not to enforce it...for now
I thought this was deemed unconstitutional if the DOJ does not appeal?
Posted on 10/14/26 at 6:14 pm to Timmayy
quote:
likely result in overturned rulings
Probably not. The ATF wouldn't do well trying to appeal to the 5th Circuit and then SCOTUS would certainly not be favorable to them. So if a future admin wanted to contain this as much as possible they'd leave it alone and try to re-establish the tax fee to something more than $0 through Congress.
Posted on 10/14/26 at 6:18 pm to The Pirate King
quote:
they're just choosing not to enforce it...for now.
Not exactly, for those that fall under the original and future pool of members/customers party to the ruling, the ATF is enjoined from enforcement. They have no choice there. For the expanded guidance they have discretion.
Posted on 10/14/26 at 8:33 pm to The Pirate King
quote:Entrapment by estoppel- a criminal defense grounded in the Due Process Clause that applies when a government official misleads a defendant into believing that a specific action is legal, and the defendant reasonably and in good faith relies on that advice before committing the act.
Federal registration and approval is still the law, they're just choosing not to enforce it...for now.
Posted on 10/15/26 at 9:00 am to HoboDickCheese
quote:
Entrapment by estoppel- a criminal defense grounded in the Due Process Clause that applies when a government official misleads a defendant into believing that a specific action is legal, and the defendant reasonably and in good faith relies on that advice before committing the act.
Entrapment by Estoppel in Great Detail
Kirk ( among others) has been all over this subject.
Brings up good points regarding democrats taking over and gutting everything "accomplished" so far. I still contend this should have been done by law, striking down the NFA restrictions, not by budgetary means.
But that would mean counting on Congress to do the right thing - won't ever hold my breath for that to occur.
Posted on 10/18/26 at 10:45 am to flvelo12
The law should have been repealed. I’m not sure how a budget will get passed if the dems take over the house. You know they will jack up the tax. There will be a huge fight over it. But, if the current Congress would have repealed it the proper way, who’s to say the democrats wouldn’t just reverse it anyway “the proper way”.
They are seething with anger over this.
They are seething with anger over this.
Page 10 of 10
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News