What are bump stocks? US Supreme Court weighs Trump-era ban on gun attachments (BBC)

BBC ^ | 2/28/2024 | Chloe Kim

[Robert357]

Thank you for the link to the oral arguments.

[Robert357]

Actually better than a lever action was the WW1 Winchester Model 1897 pump shotgun with extended tube magazine and bayonet. If you hold the trigger down and just keep pumping it will slam fire multiple shots with no shoulder/stock bump or trigger movement.

The following is an article on this really old fashions slam fire repeating shotgun. https://www.warhistoryonline.com/guns/trench-broom-famous-model-1897-shotgun.html

[Fury]

Re: 8 - an interesting post.

Are there Supreme Court (or any inferior court) Justices (past or present) that you believe hew to the beliefs outlined by the statements in your post?

[publiusF27]

Trump wasn't waiting for Congress

on February 28, 2018, President Trump hosted a meeting with members of Congress to discuss school and community safety. Senator John Cornyn, the majority whip, suggested that Congress could pass legislation “on a bipartisan basis” to deal with “the bump stock issue.” Remarks by President Trump, Vice President Pence, and Bipartisan Mem- bers of Congress in Meeting on School and Community Safety (Feb. 28, 2018), https://bit.ly/2M6Mjvz. Presi- dent Trump interjected that there was no need for leg- islation because he would deal with bump stocks through executive action:

And I’m going to write that out. Because we can do that with an executive order. I’m going to write the bump stock; essen- tially, write it out. So you won’t have to worry about bump stock. Shortly, that will be gone. We can focus on other things. Frankly, I don’t even know if it would be good in this bill. It’s nicer to have a separate piece of paper where it’s gone. And we’ll have that done pretty quickly. They’re working on it right now, the lawyers.

Id. Later during the meeting, Rep. Steve Scalise, the House majority whip, proposed other gun-control measures that Congress could vote on. Again, the President reiterated that there was no need to legis- late on bump stocks, because his administration would prohibit the devices through executive action:

And don’t worry about bump stock, we’re getting rid of it, where it’ll be out. I mean, you don’t have to complicate the bill by adding another two paragraphs. We’re getting rid of it. I’ll do that myself be- cause I’m able to. Fortunately, we’re able to do that without going through Con- gress.

Id. Moments before the Bump Stock Rule was an- nounced, President Trump tweeted: “Obama Admin- istration legalized bump stocks. BAD IDEA. As I promised, today the Department of Justice will issue the rule banning BUMP STOCKS with a mandated comment period. We will BAN all devices that turn le- gal weapons into illegal machine guns.” Donald Trump (@realDonaldTrump), Twitter (Mar. 23, 2018, 1:50 PM), https://bit.ly/2DPV1cY.


Obama didn't have the power to ban bump stocks. Trump didn't either, the difference being that Republicans won't cross Trump and Democrats will back anything gungrabby.

[thegagline]

And I’m going to write that out. Because we can do that with an executive order. I’m going to write the bump stock; essen- tially, write it out. So you won’t have to worry about bump stock. Shortly, that will be gone.

Thank you for posting this. Apparently, he believes that executive fiat trumps the constitution.

[Dead Corpse]

Not on every point... no. Clarence Thomas comes close. Alito got his “machine gun Sammy” moniker for a reason.

Then again, I was a fan of Lysander Spooner, so my opinions are self-admittedly a bit skewed.

[Dead Corpse]

He’s an Executive businessman from New York. His weakness on the Constitution, in particularly 2A Rights, has been a concern of people like me.

He’s better than the Democrat... but hardly as perfect as his fan club makes him out to be.

Compared to Nikki or some of the other pretenders? Trump is still the “least worst”.

[zeugma]

Respects to you...

Same here DC. Nice knowing where to look for sane posts here.

[publiusF27]

I'm a big fan of Justice Thomas on some issues, notably Kelo v New London and Gonzalez v Raich, but he wasn't exactly helpful at oral arguments in Cargill.

the nature of the firing has changed as a result of the bump stock. So if that's changed, why don't you simply then look backwards and say that the nature of the firing mechanism has changed; thus, the nature of the trigger has changed?

No. It's a trigger and a bump stock makes it function over and over almost, but not quite, as fast as Jerry Miculek who might be a walking felony in Trump's view.