Free Republic

Related to the above pic, those are +1 magazine extensions for my battlefield .22 but they don't work.

Apparently, my gun is from California and thus won't fire if no magazine is inserted. The extension doesn't have the little nub that tells it a magazine is inserted.

The pink one is more attention-getting and does look friendlier than a scary black assault weapon.

My wife got jealous of my new assault weapon and bought one of her own. Hers is the red one and I'm a bit worried about the pink clashing. Do you think that could be a problem?

I doubt many have read the "assault" weapons ban cosponsored by Senator Harris. I did.

I learned that a Ruger 10-22 with an adjustable stock is actually a battlefield .22. That would be the one on the right.



Admittedly, it looks a bit scary.

In an effort to improve the image of assault weapons, I decided to get one that doesn't look quite so mean and I chose the S&W Victory .22. It's a semiauto, it accepts a removable magazine, and mine has a threaded barrel, making it another battlefield .22. I'm considering decorating the thread protector with a flower but can't decide whether I should go with silver or pink. Any opinions are welcome.





Senator Harris used to frequently say the government needs to take these away, though she used the synonymous term "buyback" instead of "take."

Now it is said that a staffer told a reporter that VP Harris no longer wants to buyback our battlefield .22's. I do not believe this. The candidate herself can say it into a camera, just like she many times said she does want to take our .22's. Sending a staffer and not bothering to comment on the flip flop is the least convincing flip flop I have seen.

I doubt many have read the "assault" weapons ban cosponsored by Senator Harris. I did.

I learned that a Ruger 10-22 with an adjustable stock is actually a battlefield .22. That would be the one on the right.



Admittedly, it looks a bit scary.

In an effort to improve the image of assault weapons, I decided to get one that doesn't look quite so mean and I chose the S&W Victory .22. It's a semiauto, it accepts a removable magazine, and mine has a threaded barrel, making it another battlefield .22. I'm considering decorating the thread protector with a flower but can't decide whether I should go with silver or pink. Any opinions are welcome.





Senator Harris used to frequently say the government needs to take these away, though she used the synonymous term "buyback" instead of "take."

Now it is said that a staffer told a reporter that VP Harris no longer wants to buyback our battlefield .22's. I do not believe this. The candidate herself can say it into a camera, just like she many times said she does want to take our .22's. Sending a staffer and not bothering to comment on the flip flop is the least convincing flip flop I have seen.

I don't know about that and wasn't intending to advocate a brand, more advocating using metal instead of politicians.

As for Liberty, they say you can opt out of their system and they'll delete your safe's combination from their records.

So that's nice.

Ironclad? As Trump's bump stock confiscation program showed, you can take the grabber out of NY but you can't take the grabbiness out of the NY'er.

Donald Trump: ‘I don’t know why anyone needs an AR-15’

In the summer of 2019, after back-to-back mass shootings in Dayton, Ohio, and El Paso involving an AR-15-style pistol and an AKM-style rifle, Trump told aides that he wanted to ban AR-15s, according to people present for the statements.

“I don’t know why anyone needs an AR-15,” Trump told aides as he flew on Marine One to the White House in August 2019, according to a person who heard his comments.

As one former official put it in describing the real estate developer turned politician, “His reflexes were a New York liberal on guns. He doesn’t have knee-jerk conservative reflexes.”

Feinstein knew an ally when she saw one in Trump.

Ironclad gun protection comes from private companies like Liberty Safes and certainly not from gungrabby NY'ers. Being better than Biden is like saying a catshit sandwich is better than a dogshit sandwich. OK, maybe, but so what? I ordered cereal!

SlideFire Is For Sale

... In a statement released Monday, bump stock inventor Jeremiah Cottle wrote, "While the Court's ruling on Friday is a positive development for the manufacture and sale of bump stocks, and has been long awaited, I have decided that it is time to hand the reins to someone else." ...

Not sure that's a good buy. I think Trump can just ban them again, call it an Official Act, and SCOTUS won't bother him about it.

We’re going to tax our way to prosperity yet!

I’m hopeful he won’t learn just because the lesson he might learn would be that he got tremendous praise for usurping legislative power and then, years later, when SCOTUS overturned his usurpation, there was no political price to pay.

You can take the grabber out of NY but you can’t take the grabbiness out of the NY’er.

Not mentioned in all of this, companies like RW Arms, who turned over a million bucks worth of inventory for destruction.

That’s a big fifth amendment problem to me but Trump just declared their property a public nuisance and they had to hand it over, end of story.

6-3, you were close.

Sotomayor had a brief footnote about the fact that ATF had issued 15 guidance letters saying that bump stocks don’t equal machine guns between 2008 and 2017. She said they found that other devices were equal to machine guns, so obviously they could have found that bump stocks were as well, they just needed Trump to come along and educate them.

Well, she didn’t really add that last part. It’s implied.

Donald Trump and Hunter Biden Face the Illogical Consequences of an Arbitrary Gun Law

The twin crusades against drugs and guns are at their worst when they interact.

Should fit right in, the 7th Circuit being the one that says an AR-15 and an M-16 are the same.

Bevis v Naperville

Based on the record before us, we are not persuaded that the AR-15 is materially different from the M16. Heller informs us that the latter weapon is not protected by the Second Amendment, and therefore may be regulated or banned. Because it is indistinguishable from that machinegun, the AR-15 may be treated in the same manner without offending the Second Amendment.

"It's a machine gun" is also the justification that Trump used for banning and taking bump stocks. You can take the grabber out of New York but you can't take the grabbiness out of the New Yorker.

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.

One would think that the eager embrace of Trump's power grab by Biden, Kagan, Sotomayor, and Jackson would give people reason to doubt that it's a good idea.

OK, maybe two would dare think that, you and me. I wish we had company.

The second amendment wasn't the only part of the bill of rights to be ignored. Companies destroyed millions of dollars in inventory after Trump reinterpreted the law to say they were felons for owning it. There was no compensation.

It wasn't the government's job to inform the court about the militia uses of short shotguns. It was Miller's and he was dead or missing so no one made that argument.

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.

It is about the power of the regulatory state.

And that power has recently come from what Justice Kennedy once called "reflexive deference" to federal agencies.

Kagan is a big fan of deference to federal agency decisions, saying this in the oral arguments about Chevron deference:

... what Chevron says is now there are two possible decision-makers, there's the agency and there's the court, and what we think is that Congress would have preferred the agency to resolve this question when congressional direction has -- cannot be found because of the agency's expertise, because of the agency's experience, because the agency understands how this question fits within the statutory scheme. ...

Of course, she turned out to be talking about deference ONLY to their most recent decision, not the previous 15 times they said that bump stocka were not machine guns. Those were just mistakes. Oops. By the way, anyone who relied on those mistakes has been a felon this whole time.

Gorsuch brings up the fact that a half million people depended upon previous interpretations that the bump stock was NOT a machine gun and the change in the rule turns them into a federal felon.

And businesses like RW Arms had a million bucks worth of inventory, relying on those previous 15 ATF determinations that they were making legal products.

Then Trump changed his mind about what the law said and those businesses had a very expensive disposal problem on their hands.

Fifth amendment? Just compensation? What do those things mean?

Yes, and I don't understand why people are moved by what Trump says.

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.

and

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.

Authoritarian asshole. You can take the gun grabber out of New York but you can't take the grabbiness out of the grabber.