Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: FPP Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: 5th Circuit Strikes Down Bump Stock Ban Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2024 22:08:23 -0400 Organization: Ph'nglui Mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh Wgah'nagl Fhtagn. Lines: 181 Message-ID: References: <17d91fbd5fad865f$338100$533214$2d54864@news.newsdemon.com> <17d9412e82a8a311$8843$3053472$46d50c60@news.newsdemon.com> Reply-To: fredp1571@gmail.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2024 04:08:24 +0200 (CEST) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="135701bad7255964217cc25f17b69a9f"; logging-data="3119200"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/YHblncGct/j6F3LDxsjoj" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.14; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.10.0 Cancel-Lock: sha1:4K/8OJQJ1knbZlY0uirgw5KokAU= In-Reply-To: Content-Language: en-US Bytes: 10468 On 6/20/24 9:49 PM, BTR1701 wrote: > In article , FPP > wrote: > >> On 6/19/24 7:28 PM, BTR1701 wrote: >>> In article , >>> moviePig wrote: >>> >>>> On 6/19/2024 3:13 PM, BTR1701 wrote: >>>>> In article , >>>>> moviePig wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> On 6/18/2024 10:38 PM, BTR1701 wrote: >>>>>>> In article , >>>>>>> moviePig wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On 6/18/2024 9:47 PM, BTR1701 wrote: >>>>>>>>> In article , >>>>>>>>> moviePig wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On 6/18/2024 5:03 PM, BTR1701 wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> In article , FPP >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On 6/15/24 8:30 PM, BTR1701 wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> In article >>>>>>>>>>>>> <17d9412e82a8a311$8843$3053472$46d50c60@news.newsdemon.com>, >>>>>>>>>>>>> trotsky wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 6/15/24 11:46 AM, moviePig wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 6/15/2024 4:20 AM, trotsky wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 6/14/24 5:47 PM, BTR1701 wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The Federal Firearms Act of 1934 >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> From wiki: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The current National Firearms Act (NFA) defines a number of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> categories of regulated firearms. These weapons are >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> collectively >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> known as NFA firearms and include the following: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Machine guns: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "any weapon which shoots, is designed to shoot, or can be >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> readily restored to shoot, automatically more than one shot, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> without manual reloading, by a single function of the trigger. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The term shall also include the frame or receiver of any such >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> weapon, any part designed and intended solely and exclusively, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> or combination of parts designed and intended, for use in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> converting a weapon into a machinegun, and any combination of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> parts from which a machinegun can be assembled if such parts >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> are >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in the possession or under the control of a person."[10] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So, bump-stocks are patently a "workaround" for a law whose >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> intent is patently obvious. Not exactly a triumph of sanity. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> "A work around" is accurate. And the spirit of the law is far >>>>>>>>>>>>>> more >>>>>>>>>>>>>> important, obviously, than the letter of the law >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Oh, cool! I see Hutt the Fuck-Up Fairy has visited us again! >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> No, Hutt, you're unsurprisingly about as absolutely wrong as you >>>>>>>>>>>>> can be yet again. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> The letter of the law is obviously paramount in the context of >>>>>>>>>>>>> jurisprudential determination as evidenced by the 1000-page >>>>>>>>>>>>> statutes >>>>>>>>>>>>> we have coming out of Congress, millions of pages of >>>>>>>>>>>>> administrative >>>>>>>>>>>>> regulations, and the multi-page click-thrus of tiny and near- >>>>>>>>>>>>> hieroglyphic legalese that you have to agree to just to use a >>>>>>>>>>>>> piece of software. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> If all we needed to concern ourselves with was a law's "spirit", >>>>>>>>>>>>> then none of that would be necessary. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> I'd elaborate further but I don't have the time or the crayons to >>>>>>>>>>>>> explain it to you. Jeezus, Hutt, if I wanted to kill myself, I'd >>>>>>>>>>>>> climb your ego and jump to your IQ. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> And how does using a bump stock differ from a fully automatic >>>>>>>>>>>> machine >>>>>>>>>>>> gun? >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> With a bump stock, for every round fired, a separate trigger pull >>>>>>>>>>> occurs. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> With a machine gun, one one trigger pull is required to fire >>>>>>>>>>> multiple >>>>>>>>>>> rounds. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Also, the rate of fire of a bump stock-equipped rifle is >>>>>>>>>>> significantly >>>>>>>>>>> slower than a rifle firing on full-auto. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> So, this 15-sec. video is a lie? >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=brrecvXhRVc >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I don't know what you're talking about. You can clearly see the bump >>>>>>>>> device using the recoil (and Newton's Third Law) to reset the trigger >>>>>>>>> after every round. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> What I'm seeing is a NOT "significantly slower" rate of fire. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The bump device I used produce a fast rate of fire but not as fast as >>>>>>> full-auto rifle. Perhaps this is a different model that works more >>>>>>> efficiently. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Regardless, the law passed by Congress did not differentiate "machine >>>>>>> gun" from other guns by how fast it shoots, so the rate of fire is >>>>>>> actually irrelevant to the issue. >>>>>> >>>>>> Yes, we've already established that a determined judiciary can do an >>>>>> end-run around even the clearest legislative intent. >>>>> >>>>> They didn't end-run anything. They only reiterated-- since our >>>>> government seems to have lost its way and needs a reminder-- that >>>>> Congress is the only body granted the authority by the Constitution to >>>>> legislate in this country, not administrative agencies like BATF, and if >>>>> Congress wants to change the definition of "machine gun" to incorporate >>>>> bump stocks into it, it can do so at any time. However, BATF has no >>>>> authority to do it for them. >>>> >>>> Machine gun: >>>> >>>> "...any weapon which shoots, is designed to shoot, or can be readily >>>> restored to shoot, automatically more than one shot, without manual >>>> reloading, by a single function of the trigger." >>>> >>>> Now, tell me again how either gun in my video doesn't qualify... >>> >>> Because with the bump stock, it's only firing one shot per pull of the >>> trigger. The trigger is just being pulled repeatedly really fast as a >>> result of rebounding recoil caused by the bump stock. The bumper rocks >>> the rifle back and forth against the shooter's trigger finger, causing a >>> separate trigger pull each time. The statute you quoted above clearly >>> says "by a SINGLE function of the trigger". If you shoot 100 rounds with >>> a bump stock, you've got 100 functions of the trigger, not a single >>> function of the trigger. >>> >>> Now you tell me, if bump stocks meet the definition of "machine gun" as >>> written in the statute, why did the BATF feel the need to rewrite the >>> statute to include them? BATF is on record when bump stocks first became >>> popular with a determination that a bump stock-equipped rifle does NOT >>> meet the definition of "machine gun" under the Act. It was only after >>> the Las Vegas shooting that the BATF-- under political pressure-- >>> decided to promulgate rules that added totally new criteria to the >>> definition of "machine gun" not found in the actual statute. This is >>> what got them a spanking by SCOTUS. >>> >>> https://babylonbee.com/new/all-bump-stocks-lost-in-boating-accidents-back >>> -in-2017-miraculously-wash-up-on-shore >>> ========== REMAINDER OF ARTICLE TRUNCATED ==========