Supreme Court 6-3 Decision Changes Second Amendment Suppressor Laws Forever! 5th Cir. Weighs Impact!

In this video I break down some important developments in the current efforts to remove NFA and ATF restrictions on suppressors!

🎥 Follow Me On Other Social Media 🎥

📷 My YouTube Setup 📷

Legal Disclaimer: This content is not intended to provide any legal guidance or advice. Although I am a licensed attorney I am not providing any legal advice through this video. If you have any legal questions please contact a licensed professional in your area to address your specific issues.

DISCLAIMER: This video and description contains affiliate links, which means that if you click on one of the product links, I’ll receive a small commission. This helps support my channel and allows us to continue making awesome videos like this. Thank you for the support!

[WarningStrangerDanger]

Requiring a mugshot and fingerprints for something you have a constitutional legal right to own always looks evil.

[simonerubino]

If they're not firearms, why are they regulated under NFA?

[josephkennedy]

The ATF should have no authority to regulate firearms in any way whatsoever per "Shall not be infringed."

[VibeGuy]

The commerce clause was never a valid argument for violating the Shall not be infringed clause. Congress had no constitutional authority to enact the NFA or the GCA.

[jamescook]

My position is; If the military and 'law enforcement' can use it, the citizens have the right to own/use it also. NO exceptions.

[richardtreat]

Need to get rid of the SBR tax. The whole NFA needs to go.

[K.O.tyranny]

I don't know how they've gotten away with TAXING any RIGHT.

[EarthAltar]

The injury comes after you've purchased the suppressor, paid for the shipping, tax stamp, sales tax, FFL transfer fee, fees to file, and six months go by and you have no idea what's happening with the $1, 600.00 you spent while you wait in limbo. The process is the injury apart from the fees. If it's a firearm it shouldn't be regulated. If it's not a firearm then the ATF has no jurisdiction over it. The $200.00 bribe to obtain the property you've already paid for and rightfully own is ridiculous.

[thegoodguy]

So weird. I watched the whole video and I never heard anything about a 6-3 Supreme Court decision. All I heard about was the activity in the 5th circuit. Where was a SCOTUS ruling that changed the NFA discussed? Anybody?

[Iron_Road]

This "They lack standing" claim is total bullshit, like what do you mean I have not suffered injury with my rights being restricted? Wth is that bullshit.

[jeremiahcarlson]

I listened to the arguments live on Gunsandgadgets channel. The ATF keeps saying that silencers aren’t firearms. If that’s so, why do they have authority to regulate them? Why has no one pointed this out?

[Krieg]

Standing is BS. Besides, If suppressors aren’t bearable arms and not protected by the second amendment, then the ATF has no authority over them.

[Tygyr-Snake]

So they admitted to taxing people to exercise a right?

[bmphil]

A suppressor is not a firearm. It's an accessory. They should never have even had jurisdiction over that. It's like regulating the muffler on your

[BIGEARL]

When the government says a cylinder is illegal unless you pay $200

[jakes.]

How is this not arbitrarily turning a right into a privilege.

[Bill-vown]

We the People deserve hearing protection. Government of the people bye the people for the people.

[markl]

So, the 5th says a individual would need to expose themselves to criminal prosecution to have standing!? That's crazy

[justintime]

So regulating suppressors under the national firearms act is ridiculous just by the name of the law. The second amendment says shall not be infringed. Suppressors are not firearms. They can’t have it both ways.

[RockinRack]

Why cant a texas suppressor manufacturer claim they are a victim because of all the money they have missed out on