Path: ...!Xl.tags.giganews.com!local-2.nntp.ord.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2024 16:32:04 +0000 From: BTR1701 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: 5th Circuit Strikes Down Bump Stock Ban References: User-Agent: MT-NewsWatcher/3.5.3b3 (Intel Mac OS X) Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2024 09:29:24 -0700 Message-ID: Lines: 102 X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com X-Trace: sv3-V6Pl+sc2JM5rN3eP0CRlVO68/HSd3qlRyhtUDoV6f3qZLi2ZcH4Ft10FYff+g7ZIIPOaNnrGlflE+g0!qH0nLzT9bKlzDnB2WZeaNMk5WEzbujEU1ZkzomeOupoUHdVztWA2qkbaOb3cDk2jJPwgvDK47jm6!2LE= X-Complaints-To: abuse@giganews.com X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly X-Postfilter: 1.3.40 Bytes: 6361 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.