Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2024 02:49:05 -0500 Mime-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: 5th Circuit Strikes Down Bump Stock Ban Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv References: <1oucnSmdyL0VBun7nZ2dnZfqn_WdnZ2d@giganews.com> Content-Language: en-US From: trotsky In-Reply-To: <1oucnSmdyL0VBun7nZ2dnZfqn_WdnZ2d@giganews.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lines: 115 Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!diablo1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feeder.usenetexpress.com!tr2.iad1.usenetexpress.com!news.newsdemon.com!not-for-mail Nntp-Posting-Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2024 07:49:06 +0000 X-Received-Bytes: 6385 Organization: NewsDemon - www.newsdemon.com X-Complaints-To: abuse@newsdemon.com Message-Id: <17daf581ed94787b$518539$1616079$c8d58268@news.newsdemon.com> Bytes: 6767 On 6/20/24 4:13 PM, BTR1701 wrote: > On Jun 20, 2024 at 12:32:11 PM PDT, "moviePig" wrote: > >> On 6/20/2024 12:29 PM, 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. >> A human finger is implied by "a single function of the trigger". > > No, it's the functioning of the trigger that's at issue, not what causes it to > function. That's so weird since its the bump stock causing it to function. What's with the lying right asshole bit?