Trump administration officially bans bump stocks

CNN ^ | 12/18/2018 | Laura Jarrett

[Simon Green]

The same could be said for you. Most people don’t want one.

Most people don’t want an AR-15. Should we ban those?

[laplata]

Tell me what practical use a bump stock serves.

[laplata]

Not at all.

[Travis T. OJustice]

There is no Constitutional test for “usefulness.”

[StoneWall Brigade]

Ping

[Ron H.]

You have to think it out, if it is illegal, the courts will overturn it. Maybe that is the plan anyways.

Ohhhhh really!! Somebody should tell the liberal activist judges who continually ignore the US Constitution and simply rule based on what they personally want and desire instead.

[Armscor38]

What practical purpose does your speech serve, such as your post? Why not ban it?

[laplata]

I asked a legitimate question. Your question serves no practical purpose.

[Seaplaner]

Bump stocks are not a hill to die on.

Precisely, my good FRiend.

I never even heard of them until the Las Vegas tragedy.

I don't think that the majority of us gun owners want to make a 2A stand that hinges on something that the general public associates with mayhem, and that serve little or no purpose for us.

(I have taken the precaution of donning my asbestos undies, as some here might politely disagree.)

[Ron H.]

Yes. Everyone here knows that right's are derived from popular opinion!

LOL. That's right, that's just what the liberals like to think and say. Thanks for reminding me of that salient point. After all who even bothers to abide by the US Constitution or the Bill of Rights anymore in these troubling times?

[The Pack Knight]

Tell me what practical use a bump stock serves.

That argument is being used by the left already to ban "high capacity magazines" and "assault weapons." When the 3rd Circuit's held earlier this year that the New Jersey ban on magazines with over 10 round capacity did not violate the 2nd Amendment, part of its reasoning is that such magazines are "not well-suited for self defense."

[laplata]

I understand all that but that does not answer my question.

[laplata]

Right on!

[laplata]

I know that. I stand by my question.

[Trump.Deplorable]

We haven’t been a constitutional republic since the early 1900’s some say late 1800’s after the industrial revolution. But anyways, thanks for your comment, it is duly noted.

[Armscor38]

“Legitimate” is in the eye of the beholder. To me, your question serves no purpose. But as we believe in the Constitution here, 2nd Amendment rights and the Freedom of Speech, regardless if they serve any purpose, are very important to us.

[laplata]

2. What kind of mushroom are you?

><><

Please explain that question. I’m waiting.

[Ron H.]

They’re not banned.

Correct. My late brother legally owned three (or more) of them, machine gun's, along with a few noise suppressors (aka silencers). Regulated but not illegal. He was a firearms collector or rather a connoisseur of finely made and sometimes rare firearms and was a trader who was properly licensed. I always loved perusing his large collection of them and going to the range with him.

[Ron H.]

..... Guess what else I can do.

Mama always taught me that "where's there a will there is a way". Also sometimes also known as "necessity is the mother of invention".

[Ron H.]

Until it appears in the Federal Register, THERE IS NO BAN. Some memo to the SAC pukes does NOT make it so.

Didn't think about that.