I'd hit it.
Posted on 03/11/2018 3:55:19 PM PDT by Lazamataz
NOBODY, and I mean NOBODY could ever call me a Never Trumper. In fact, I was perhaps one of the very first Trump supporters on this forum.
However, by using his Executive Order to ban bump-stocks as machine guns -- despite the fact that they STILL PULL ONE TRIGGER FOR ONE ROUND BEING FIRED -- he has just done something in an extra-judicial manner.
Despite the clear language of the law that defines automatic weapons -- that one trigger pull discharges multiple rounds continuously -- his EO causes the language to be ignored.
Now, I get that Trump bashed the NRA, then met with them the next day. I get that. That’s chicken feed for the liberals and RINOs.
BUT
Trump banned bump stocks pretty much by Executive Order.
DO YOU REALIZE WHAT THAT MEANS?
It means the first Democrat who gets elected will ban ALL SEMIAUTOS by Executive Order. All they have to do, with this precedent, is show someone firing a semi-auto in a bump-fire method using a pants belt-loop. Voila: It's a full-auto. Therefore, it can be EO'd away.
The right thing to have done was to encourage / demand the House give him a bump stock ban bill. Then get it through the Senate. Then sign it.
But by doing what he just did, he made it possible for Dems to EO firearms away.
Laz, I don’t care much about bump stocks, but I don’t like this.
I imagine that's between me and GOD.
It’s not a reasonable give away. It’s how you ban all semi autos and it doesn’t matter how much of America sees it that way.
You need to do some internet research. Learn what bump firing is (not bump stocks, bump firing). Understand how it works. Understand how a bump stock makes bump firing easier.
Understand that a bump stock is not remotely required for bump firing.
Further understand that banning bump stocks is contrary to current law in terms of what defines a machine gun by law.
Understand that the only legal definition they can use to ban bump stocks is to define an acceptable rate of fire. Remember how I said all semis can be bump fired without any special equipment?
I think you can figure it out from there. The bump stock ban has jack and s**t to do with bump stocks and the sooner we get that in our heads, the more likely we are to avoid an assault weapons ban, an ar15 ban, or an outright semi auto ban period.
You may attempt to advise. You’re free to do that.
I will ignore your attempts. I’m free to do that.
You’re missing the ‘where does it end’ point.
I'd hit it.
Exactly. Trump mentioned the Reciprocity Bill and insisted that it not be included because that would kill the bill.
Instead, he turns to Feinstein and suggests that they include all of her provisions in the bill, which I presume to be another so-called "Assault Weapons Ban". Trump did everything short of waving a red flag in front of Congress telling them how to proceed so that NOTHING gets passed in the near term.
Trump gave the anti-gunners the DACA treatment and they didn't even notice.
Let the government pretend to ban a device which consists of a spring and some shaped plastic that can be turned out on a 3D printer. It's just not going to change much.
In the end, the 2nd Amendment will live or die by SCOTUS. What really matters is the opinions of the Justices appointed. As I said in #83, the ban supports the spirit, if not the letter of the law. So expecting this EO to be blocked in court will only lead to disappointment. What POTUS is more likely to appoint 2nd amendment friendly judges than Trump?
It’s Mass. You have to bow before the state to get anything.
ctdonath2 wrote:
“Unintended consequences...
Categorizing bump stocks as machineguns means BATFE violated 922(o) machinegun ban when Obama admin ruled them legal. Now 922(o) is at serious risk of judicial review; _Heller_ said M16 ban was unconstitutional, with a smart lawyer M16s will be legalized.”
So the President’s action is one move in a legal chess game.
Know what a double tap trigger is ? What is your feelings on those ? Fires two rounds on every pull/release.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/5845
The term “machinegun” means any weapon which shoots, is designed to shoot, or can be readily restored to shoot, automatically more than one shot, without manual reloading, by a single function of the trigger. The term shall also include the frame or receiver of any such weapon, any part designed and intended solely and exclusively, or combination of parts designed and intended, for use in converting a weapon into a machinegun, and any combination of parts from which a machinegun can be assembled if such parts are in the possession or under the control of a person.
You are right, and President Trump is wrong. Still, this is salvageable and even as a big win. I’d like to see the Administration defend this bad ruling in court against the NRA’s lawsuit and (intentionally) fail. The precedent would help in defending against any similar regulatory overreach in the future.
What EO did Trump issue to ban bumpstocks?
There are problems with your argument. It is based on emotion.
Killings at school are on a downward trend. These things have always happened, the only thing that changed is that we have 24/7 news coverage that makes it seem like it happens more.
We live in a country of 350 million people. Something tragic happens everyday. If you find that a good enough reason to shred civil rights, then American liberty is, in fact, doomed.
I think all of us single heterosexual men in here would, my friend.
If you think this is some kind of 4d chess by Trump you’re off your rocker.
Heller did not hold banning of M16s is unconstitutional, and nothing that happens here is going to change that.
If you think this is some kind of 4d chess by Trump you’re off your rocker.
Heller did not hold banning of M16s is unconstitutional, and nothing that happens here is going to change that.
I agree with this take - but consider how Trump had painted himself into a corner with the “write out” comments. He was so emphatic - he had to do something. Otherwise - that’s a pretty big matzo ball just hanging there. If someone used a bump stock in a high profile gun crime next week - Trump would own it.
I think his idea was to make this his only action - and avoid a bigger gun control bill. But Laz is correct to point out the exposure here.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.