Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2024 03:06:41 -0500 Mime-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: 5th Circuit Strikes Down Bump Stock Ban Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv References: <17db9a2aa8acb743$240$3767249$10d55a65@news.newsdemon.com> Content-Language: en-US From: trotsky In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Lines: 137 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: Mon, 24 Jun 2024 08:06:42 +0000 X-Received-Bytes: 6423 Organization: NewsDemon - www.newsdemon.com X-Complaints-To: abuse@newsdemon.com Message-Id: <17dbe2357e005282$1360$1016857$4cd50660@news.newsdemon.com> Bytes: 6803 On 6/23/24 11:05 AM, moviePig wrote: > 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. Maybe they're just in it for the entertainment value.