It seems the same arguments could be made against the pistol brace restrictions.
To: chickenlips
They were never full auto and not really practical but it’s a fun way to eat up a lot of ammo very quickly and you cut chop down little trees
2 posted on
02/29/2024 10:11:22 AM PST by
NWFree
(Sigma male 🤪)
To: chickenlips
You dont need a bump stock in order to get the same rapid results.....
To: chickenlips
Reading through
oral arguments, I was extremely disappointed that no second amendment argument was made at all. It was only brought up once, and that was essentially to say that they aren't making a 2nd Amendmeny claim.
Full auto weapons are definately covered by the Second Amendment. The Court, if they were honest, could not say otherwise. Miller was decided incorrectly because the government effectively lied to the court, and did not inform the court that sawed-off shotguns were used extensively during WWI.
6 posted on
02/29/2024 12:45:03 PM PST by
zeugma
(Stop deluding yourself that America is still a free country.)
To: chickenlips
Dahm! Donald Trump's attack on the 2nd Amendment, going farther than Obama would ever go, maybe overturned. Trump tried to give BATF carte blanch to declare anything they don't like illegal and it may not succeed. Is Donald sad?
8 posted on
02/29/2024 2:42:23 PM PST by
Badboo
(A fascist is the one who wants to take your guns. That's how it always starts.)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson