Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2024 02:42:37 -0500 Mime-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: 5th Circuit Strikes Down Bump Stock Ban Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv References: Content-Language: en-US From: trotsky In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lines: 106 Path: ...!news-out.netnews.com!netnews.com!s1-4.netnews.com!feeder.usenetexpress.com!tr2.iad1.usenetexpress.com!news.newsdemon.com!not-for-mail Nntp-Posting-Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2024 07:42:37 +0000 X-Received-Bytes: 6072 Organization: NewsDemon - www.newsdemon.com X-Complaints-To: abuse@newsdemon.com Message-Id: <17daf5278b1b9186$518535$1616079$c8d58268@news.newsdemon.com> Bytes: 6403 On 6/20/24 11:29 AM, BTR1701 wrote: > In article , > moviePig wrote: > >> On 6/19/2024 11:25 PM, BTR1701 wrote: >>> In article , >>> shawn wrote: >>> >>>> On Wed, 19 Jun 2024 16:28:26 -0700, 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: >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 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. >>>> >>>> Yes, you are definitely technically correct. (The best kind.) That >>>> said you can see why people consider the bump stock to be the >>>> equivalent of turning a weapon into an equal to a machine gun. It >>>> isn't a machine gun but it ends throwing lead down field much like >>>> one. >>> >>> I've seen people who can pull a trigger all on their own pretty damn >>> fast-- certainly at a speed that most hoplophobes would consider >>> "machine gun adjacent". >>> >>> Should we make it illegal for a human to pull a trigger faster than a >>> certain rate? Or force anyone who can do it accurately faster than a >>> certain rate to register their finger with the BATF as a "machine gun"? >>> >>>> I think eventually the law will be updated to include bump stocks >>>> but who knows how long that will take. As no one who was involved in >>>> writing the original act likely foresaw the possibility of a bump >>>> stock. >> >> Did you look at the 15-sec. video I posted? I submit that what you're >> seeing for *both* guns is a single function of the trigger *finger* -- > > Even if true, the statute is silent on what the finger is doing, so it's > irrelevant. No, but you're lying is.