Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: moviePig Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: 5th Circuit Strikes Down Bump Stock Ban Date: Sun, 23 Jun 2024 12:05:59 -0400 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 130 Message-ID: References: <17db9a2aa8acb743$240$3767249$10d55a65@news.newsdemon.com> Reply-To: nobody@nowhere.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Date: Sun, 23 Jun 2024 18:06:00 +0200 (CEST) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="9ba2c2d3ce561632f359d9cd1548a403"; logging-data="444828"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+2M422Dj4lHDP8px3k3rCvNGuvObnjXss=" User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Cancel-Lock: sha1:TMHEAQu/yVsFYjr+HDvyKV/bjvM= Content-Language: en-US In-Reply-To: <17db9a2aa8acb743$240$3767249$10d55a65@news.newsdemon.com> Bytes: 6658 On 6/23/2024 6:06 AM, trotsky wrote: > On 6/22/24 3:00 PM, moviePig wrote: >> On 6/22/2024 1:48 PM, Adam H. Kerman wrote: >>> BTR1701  wrote: >>>> FPP wrote: >>>>> On 6/21/24 1:02 AM, BTR1701 wrote: >>>>>> In article , FPP >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> On 6/20/24 9:47 PM, BTR1701 wrote: >>>>>>>> In article , FPP >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On 6/19/24 9:10 PM, shawn wrote: >>>>>>>>>> On Wed, 19 Jun 2024 16:28:26 -0700, BTR1701 >>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> In article , >>>>>>>>>>> moviePig wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> 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 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. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Both still require the same action. A single trigger pull, with >>>>>>>>> constant pressure. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Which isn't the standard under the law. The law's standard is a >>>>>>>> "single >>>>>>>> function of the trigger". As I said above, if you shoot 100 >>>>>>>> rounds with >>>>>>>> a bump stock, you've got 100 functions of the trigger, not a single >>>>>>>> function of the trigger. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> A semi-auto rifle physically can't fire more than one round with a >>>>>>>> single function of the trigger. It's impossible for a semi-auto >>>>>>>> rifle to >>>>>>>> meet the definition of "machine gun" under the NFA. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> You keep glossing over the fact that both machine guns and bump >>>>>>> stocks >>>>>>> require the same action. >>>>>> >>>>>> No, I'm focusing on the one thing that legally matters: a single >>>>>> function of the trigger. It's literally impossible for a semi-auto >>>>>> rifle >>>>>> to fire more than one round with a single function of the trigger. >>>>>> The >>>>>> trigger mechanism must complete a full cycle of function for every >>>>>> round >>>>>> that leaves the barrel. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Which is what the bump stock facilitates. >>>> >>>> Yes, it facilitates multiple trigger functions in rapid succession, and >>>> since it's multiple functions, not a single function, it falls >>>> outside the >>>> definition of machine gun in the Act. >>>>> >>>>> Fuck what they decided on bump stocks. They turn single shot guns into >>>>> machine guns >>>> >>>> The Court didn't turn anything into anything. They clearly said >>>> Congress >>>> can regulate machine guns and can even include bump stocks in the >>>> definition if it collectively so desires. But the Court clarified that >>>> Congress is the *only* body that can do this. BATF can't do it for >>>> them. >>> >>> Congress can write such a law without it being unconstitutional under >>> the Second Amendment. That's the message from Alito's concurrence. >>> >>> The message to the idiots with massive reading comprehension problems: >>> It is possible to carefully draft laws regulating firearm use and >>> possession >>> that are constitutional. >> >> No.  Against a determined judiciary, it's *not* possible. >> >> (And the present instance may eventually become a textbook example.) > > > Speaking of comprehension problems here's a video of Trump babbling > about not being able to get enough water.  And yet Adam H. Verman > doesn't seem to be talking about him. > > https://video.twimg.com/ext_tw_video/1804664764200615936/pu/vid/avc1/640x360/fPg6JQ7WOjHA5_wp.mp4?tag=12 I think MAGA doesn't actually listen, but just watch for applause cues.