Posted on 03/28/2019 9:37:54 AM PDT by Jyotishi
Supreme Court won't stop Trump administration's bump stock ban originally appeared on abcnews.go.com
The Supreme Court will not stop the Trump administration's ban on bump stocks from going into effect, it was announced on Thursday.
The ban on bump stocks was announced by the Justice Department in December 2018 and took effect on Tuesday. On Monday, the Supreme Court was considering an emergency request from Gun Owners of America, Gun Owners Foundation and the Virginia Citizens Defense League to stay the ban while cases challenging it were appealed.
(Excerpt) Read more at yahoo.com ...
If two things happen really really quickly, they are still two things. Fully automatic means one thing.
Of course they will try. They may even succeed. I really don’t see much future for america as we know it once trump is out, whenever that happens. That’s one reason I moved from Seattle to rural KY. It will at least happen a little slower here. :)
I would not go that far by any stretch. The way the dems are going he may win in the biggest landslide ever. The danger is if things change it could be close. What is certain is no support was gained but significant support was lost. If this ban is not fully struck down the 2nd amendment has been put in danger. The more this fact is realized the more damage this ban is going to do. Huge huge mistake.
Or belt loops and index fingers.
Heck, I knew a guy 20 years ago who could empty a 30 round AK mag in 2-3 seconds from high ready, with no accessories, just the rifle and his hands. It’s not that hard to learn if you like wasting ammo and turning money into noise.
Find a better hill to die on.
Bump stocks turn a semi-automatic weapon into an automatic weapon (almost).
Don’t give me that one trigger pull BS. A bump stock is just a way to try to get around the law. WHY? If rubber bands really work, then what’s the beef? Rubber bands are still LEGAL!
Getting all upset about bump stocks just makes people look foolish.
Start looking for a better hill, this battle is already lost, as it should be. It was a silly, meaningless battle anyway.
Oh, that isn’t a camel’s nose, it’s a mouse’s.
Trump ONLY won by turning out those that haven’t voted in years, and those that had never voted.
Those votes are gone!
It only takes 15,000-20,000 votes in MI,WI,PA, and the RATS win. This ban will cost more than that.
Because the “law” is unconstitutional doesn’t make it legitimate regardless of popular opinions of our governing “betters.”
Oh well. I guess Trump is finished.
I'm as rock-ribbed a pro-2nd Amendment supporter as you can find, but if the ATF had originally classified bump stocks as prohibited items, no one would have heard of them. And no one would be getting their panties in a bunch now.
It’s not about the stupid bump-stocks, it’s about what’s next!!
OK, everyone, let’s take a deep breath. Here’s my take on this whole thing:
1) Bumpstocks are NOT machine guns, because they do NOT achieve multiple shots from a single pull of the trigger;
2) This ruling was NOT on the substance of the issue, i.e. “is a bump stock a machine gun, and thus subject to the [unconstitutional] 1934 NFA?” - no, this ruling was ONLY a procedural matter, and ONLY about whether or not there will be a temporary stay on the ban. The substantive case is yet to be heard.
3) See #1. It is quite probable that the USSC, which is VERY hung up on the words of a statute (for obvious reasons) will find that a bump stock does NOT meet the definition of a “machine gun” under existing law. They will also find (once again) that mere agencies of the Executive Branch are utterly without power to make new law, only to enforce existing law in a manner consistent with that law and the Constitution. It is a GUARANTEE that the prior letter from the BAT Phuckers, stating very clearly why a bump stock is NOT a machine gun, will be entered into the record [so that we will not have another “US v. Miller” fiasco where the Court could say that “...it is not within judicial notice that...” a bump stock is not a machine gun].
4) While I understand the strategy of “sacrificing” bump stocks to prevent something worse from being enacted into law, I vigorously disagree with it. The anti-gun crowd has NEVER, NOT ONE SINGLE TIME, given anything to us - they only “generously” and with great reluctance, agree to take less of our rights away. Take a look at Law Dog’s “Gun Rights Cake Analogy” for the long and sordid history of this phenomenon: http://thelawdogfiles.blogspot.com/2017/10/gun-rights-cake-analogy.html
5) Trump is NOT likely to lose in 2020, not with the economy humming and the MuleHead report exonerating him of any collusion with the Russkies...and not with the Dems trying every single day to out-Commie the rest of the 589 Presidential candidates - people are looking at them like a bunch of nuts, which is a correct (if incomplete) analysis.
6) I, personally, don’t care for bump stocks and don’t own one - mainly because aimed fire with such a device is very difficult (and I’m not going to spend several $K trying to master the device and burning out my barrel). Nope, I’ll take well-aimed, semi-auto fire every time. BUT, the 2nd Amendment protects ALL arms, and I think that it is the civic duty of everyone to fight for all of the arms out there, even if we don’t own or want them - as Franklin said, “Either we all hang together, or surely we shall all hang separately.” Thus, I think that we need a victory in the Court on this issue, just to prove the point that no agency can make law, and that an entire class of weapons cannot simply be outlawed or be made highly restricted.
In conclusion: While I disagree with this ruling, it is not on a substantive matter (that will come later). While many disagree on the issue of whether to “die on this hill” of bump stocks or not due to their desire to own one or not, it is my opinion that we must fight on this issue (or, more practically, help those in the best position to fight to do so) as it involves the making of new federal law that is not merely unconstitutional in substance, but made by a regulatory agency that has no power under our Constitution to make ANY law.
It is just bump stocks. Today.
Binary triggers were approved as not being a "machine gun" via an ATF determination letter. Just like bump stocks were approved by the ATF by a determination letter that has since been rescinded.
With this precedent, there is nothing from stopping the ATF to wake up one morning and decide a binary trigger, which fires one shot on a pull of the trigger, and fires another shot when the trigger is released, is suddenly a machine gun because two shots are fired for each "pull" of the trigger.
The other thing that the ATF almost banned but got a lot of pushback for is the arm stabilizing braces for AR pistols. The ATF originally had a letter of determination that said that an arm brace wasn't a shoulder stock, so it was legal on a pistol.
Suddenly, there were hundreds of thousands of AR "pistols" with arm braces that can be shouldered just like a stock. The ATF last year tried to write another determination letter saying that if you shouldered the arm brace, you were "redesigning" the brace into a stock and was in violation of the SBR (Short Barreled Rifle) law of the NFA. Subsequently, the ATF withdrew that letter, so it is currently legal to shoulder an arm brace, but all it would take is an Attorney General who decides he doesn't like them to take away arm braces.
It’s spelled, “Unconstititititutional”
(-:
A lot of these scumbags worked in the Bush administration as well. They can probably expose the Bush family, along with others in the republican establishment, for serious crimes. That's why I have doubts about Barr punishing anyone. I'm afraid he's only negotiated a truce to keep the serious criminal activity committed under the Bush and Obama administrations from becoming public. I think Lindsey Graham approached Trump with some kind of deal on behalf of the establishment. Trump couldn't build a capable cabinet outside of the establishment. They destroyed almost everyone who was a possible threat to them in his administration.
I'm not sure if Sessions role was planned from the beginning, or if he didn't understand what he was getting himself into. He could have been blackmailed as well. Brennan got caught spying on the senate under Obama. We have a serious problem with deep state. We have the votes, but not the candidates. They know how to destroy people. Trump is a rare exception. He sent them into a panic, but they've taken out many of his allies, and he can't do everything on his own.
Not “bump stocks”. Without those how ever will stop the upcoming dictatorship.
Never mind. I’ll go full bed wetting over the slippery slope and light my hair on fire.
Agreed,
Should have invested!
/s
THIS. IS. NOT. ABOUT F******G. BUMP. STOCKS.
Federal law clearly says a bump stock is not a machine gun. It is very cut and dried. The president determined they should be classified as MGs anyway, so ATF tortured the English language sufficiently to do it.
The president created law out of thin air without congressional action. Period.
The ban broadly outlaws devices that help increase rate of fire. Other things that increase rate of fire: aftermarket triggers, standard capacity magazines, lightweight bolt carriers, recoil compensators.
I don’t give a hoot in Hell if you think bump stocks are safe or not. We have a God given right to them, and we also have a strong interest in preventing the executive branch from accruing more power. We have a word for a man who creates law unilaterally without the consent of the people as expressed through their representatives. This man is called a king.
The President is merely the President of the United States. He is not king of the United States.
People who think this is about stocks and that it’s ok to ban them because they’re silly need to get their heads out of their asses.
“Also on the hit list: Binary triggers and trigger cranks. ”
Interestingly enough, the bump stock ban regulation specifically exempts binary triggers. What I take from that is the ATF knows bump stocks aren’t MGs and they didn’t want to be involved in this.
It also tells me that the ATF might actually be more on my side than my president is. They were complying with the law until Trump ordered them not too.
Well I’m not for this ban!!!
“Don’t give me that one trigger pull BS. A bump stock is just a way to try to get around the law. WHY? If rubber bands really work, then what’s the beef? Rubber bands are still LEGAL!”
One trigger pull bs? Do words mean things? Do laws matter? Should we abide by the letter of the law or by the “spirit” of the law? Laws either mean what they say or they mean whatever the government says they mean. I
This is why I despise the thinking of so many people on our side. People I should be able to count on are perfectly happy to leave me hanging high and dry. I got news for you....that blade can cut both ways. You don’t care about my rights and I might have a hard time caring about yours.
We will hang together or we will hang separately. The “durrr bump stocks are stoopid” have chosen to hang separately. A shame that is, and a big one.
They were banned at our gun club years before the Vegas shooting. Idiots sprayed bullets over the berms into adjacent ranges during cease fires when people were retrieving their targets. It is lucky no one was hit. They were considered a severe safety hazard. There was no one who stood up for them.
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.