Hi-Point Firearms Forums banner
1 - 20 of 56 Posts

·
King of you Monkeys
Up down
Joined
·
21,704 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
26,944 Posts
Covered this WAY back in March when the ATF revoked their FFL for the 11th or 12th time.
 
  • Sad
Reactions: Rerun

·
Administrator
Joined
·
29,780 Posts
Looks like it has an optics cut.

Peace favor your sword (mobile)
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
26,944 Posts
Going for lucky 13?
Dunno, but their site only lists accessories right now. Unless I didn't look hard enough, which I will fully admit that I did not...

Their blog doesn't show any updates since losing their FFL officially in March.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
26,944 Posts
What for?
Being the 11th or 12th time they switched owners and FFL's to avoid prosecution... It's basically the same company with a new sibling, cousin, or other blood relative being the FFL under a new DBA.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Taco Salad

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
9,829 Posts
Discussion Starter · #9 ·
Yup, it's another entity but apparently they're only offering the 9mm pistol at this time. They've removed the restrictor in the magazine so now it's a 15 rounder, but based on the photos I saw, the mag still has a round hole for the mag catch, which eventually wears, causing the mag to seat too low, resulting in feeding issues. They really ought to come out with a zombie color scheme.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
9,829 Posts
Discussion Starter · #11 ·
@bumthum, well, for now they're only producing the Nine anyway. Mebbe .380 by Christmas.

JA INDUSTRIES LLC <[email protected]godaddy.com>
To: Adam
Wed, Nov 2 at 6:04 PM
Hi Adam, 380s should be available around christmas time if all goes to plan. No word on when or if we will begin the 22s.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rerun

·
Registered
Joined
·
274 Posts
I just want to know who they bribed to get their FFL back.
This is almost an Alex Jones Show level conspiracy. With the ATF cracking down on so many gun issues, and an openly hostile anti-gun administration, how on earth does this company have another valid FFL if the frog-turning, shape-shifting, global elites aren't involved?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
26,944 Posts
This is almost an Alex Jones Show level conspiracy. With the ATF cracking down on so many gun issues, and an openly hostile anti-gun administration, how on earth does this company have another valid FFL if the frog-turning, shape-shifting, global elites aren't involved?
And in only 7 months since a very publicly announced loss of their FFL as JA Industries. I didn't know federal level appeals moved that quickly.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bumthum

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
9,829 Posts
Discussion Starter · #15 ·
Mebbe a different applicant, using the same business name? It's worked in the past for them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: moona11

·
Registered
Joined
·
274 Posts
I'm not familiar with how the manufacturer FFL works, but I would assume that the applicant would need to be in the upper echelon of the company, or owner. Otherwise any one of the employees could hold the FFL (in the companies name) while the other assets reside with an owner. I guess, can they do that?
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
29,780 Posts
I'm not familiar with how the manufacturer FFL works, but I would assume that the applicant would need to be in the upper echelon of the company, or owner. Otherwise any one of the employees could hold the FFL (in the companies name) while the other assets reside with an owner. I guess, can they do that?
Depends on how the Corporation is set up. You don't think the Ruger FFL is held by a person do you?

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
26,944 Posts
Yes, but in the article I posted from March they just have another person in the family start another LLC and file for the FFL, then d.b.a. it. Technically you can't get an FFL solely for personal use, with the C&R being the exception to the rule but which clearly states must only be used in furtherance of the holder's private collection. There has to be a proposed or intended business associated with the FFL and some states will actually require you to have a license for said home based business as the sole proprietor
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
274 Posts
Depends on how the Corporation is set up. You don't think the Ruger FFL is held by a person do you?

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk
I'm not sure how that would work. My guess would be that large companies like Ruger file for an FFL differently than smaller companies like JA.

Yes, but in the article I posted from March they just have another person in the family start another LLC and file for the FFL, then d.b.a. it. Technically you can't get an FFL solely for personal use, with the C&R being the exception to the rule but which clearly states must only be used in furtherance of the holder's private collection. There has to be a proposed or intended business associated with the FFL and some states will actually require you to have a license for said home based business as the sole proprietor
This is what I would assume for smaller companies, an LLC (probably frequently a sole owner/proprietor) would file for the FFL and it would be tied back to that individual. I know you can tie an FFL to an address you don't own, would a company be able to own the factory with the tooling and an LLC be set up to operate the factory as a contractor? I'm thinking along the lines of how Lake City runs. Just a thought, but if the factory was owned by a third party and these various JA companies merely operated it, then it wouldn't effect the ownership or assets of the factory if JA was sued, or lost it's FFL and had to reform, etc. Kind of like an extra layer of legal shielding. I'm just trying to wrap my head around this entire thing.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
26,944 Posts
I'm not sure how that would work. My guess would be that large companies like Ruger file for an FFL differently than smaller companies like JA.



This is what I would assume for smaller companies, an LLC (probably frequently a sole owner/proprietor) would file for the FFL and it would be tied back to that individual. I know you can tie an FFL to an address you don't own, would a company be able to own the factory with the tooling and an LLC be set up to operate the factory as a contractor? I'm thinking along the lines of how Lake City runs. Just a thought, but if the factory was owned by a third party and these various JA companies merely operated it, then it wouldn't effect the ownership or assets of the factory if JA was sued, or lost it's FFL and had to reform, etc. Kind of like an extra layer of legal shielding. I'm just trying to wrap my head around this entire thing.
If I am interpreting the rules and what happened to JA, et al correctly there is an LLC doing business as JA in its historical forms and as each LLC came under scrutiny or a lawsuit was filed, the original LLC filed for bankruptcy, a new one was started by a family member with a new FFL, and they took over JA as a new iteration of the same. Then the angry mom lady people and Bloomberg threw a shit ton of money at it, and bought all the existing stock from the last Jennings and had it all destroyed?

Now we have the latest version in JA Industries that the feds actually managed to get in to court and revoke the FFL of that somehow have an FFL again.

It's like the craziest game of 3 card Monty ever and even when the fed managed to find the queen JAI flipped the table and kept the money.

Edit: or would it be the shell game since we're taking shady business stuff? 🤔
 
  • Like
Reactions: bumthum
1 - 20 of 56 Posts
Top