leadcounsel wrote:
Rather than doublding down on the complex artibrary fabricated definitions, it would be nice if they'd just go the opposite direction and disband all of the silliness.
I'd honestly propose no more legally consequential definitions and terms used only loosely to identify what the receiver is regardless as to whether it is a pistol that shoots rifle ammo or a rifle that shoots pistol ammo, etc. It's a firearm, with loose definitions as we generally use them.
In a fair world, yes.
But at this point it should be obvious to everyone that the ATF, like all government agencies, is about power, not gun safety. If they can define something, they can control it. Federal agencies
do not relinquish control unless they are forced to do so. Who's going to force them?
It's a power hungry bureaucracy and what's best for the rest of us is irrelevant to them.
For our part, recognizing this fact and reacting to them as such, rather than expecting logic and fairness, will help us better deal with and accept the reality that is, rather than the fantasy we want it to be.