Path: ...!Xl.tags.giganews.com!local-1.nntp.ord.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 22 Jun 2024 15:46:57 +0000 User-Agent: NewsTap/5.3.5 (iPhone/iPod Touch) Cancel-Lock: sha1:O309nFECNS/s0WOhB/SdHgufosY= Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: 5th Circuit Strikes Down Bump Stock Ban Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit From: BTR1701 References: <17d91fbd5fad865f$338100$533214$2d54864@news.newsdemon.com> <17d9412e82a8a311$8843$3053472$46d50c60@news.newsdemon.com> Message-ID: Date: Sat, 22 Jun 2024 15:46:57 +0000 Lines: 198 X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com X-Trace: sv3-kRHtjI6j85RDpKqhELdtFE0W+zUd6w++l2WNHshXuMyzWHMGE2vSBZm9xhyWyVVEQkJLkG7Kc9UzGKG!NeuT2oJR2vbbX7camOZGHJvQRw5v+jj5gWVvjMOHU6OZlM9MLc0EoYDmEFvhadpvS5QWJVxUAg== 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: 11343 FPP wrote: > On 6/21/24 12:59 AM, BTR1701 wrote: >> In article , FPP >> wrote: >> >>> On 6/20/24 9:49 PM, BTR1701 wrote: >>>> In article , FPP >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> On 6/19/24 7:28 PM, 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: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On 6/18/2024 9:47 PM, BTR1701 wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> In article , >>>>>>>>>>>> moviePig wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 6/18/2024 5:03 PM, BTR1701 wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> In article , FPP >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 6/15/24 8:30 PM, BTR1701 wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In article >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <17d9412e82a8a311$8843$3053472$46d50c60@news.newsdemon.com>, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> trotsky wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 6/15/24 11:46 AM, moviePig wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 6/15/2024 4:20 AM, trotsky wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 6/14/24 5:47 PM, BTR1701 wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The Federal Firearms Act of 1934 >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> From wiki: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The current National Firearms Act (NFA) defines a number of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> categories of regulated firearms. These weapons are >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> collectively >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> known as NFA firearms and include the following: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Machine guns: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "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. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The term shall also include the frame or receiver of any >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> such >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> weapon, any part designed and intended solely and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> exclusively, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> or combination of parts designed and intended, for use in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> converting a weapon into a machinegun, and any combination >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> parts from which a machinegun can be assembled if such parts >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> are >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in the possession or under the control of a person."[10] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So, bump-stocks are patently a "workaround" for a law whose >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> intent is patently obvious. Not exactly a triumph of sanity. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "A work around" is accurate. And the spirit of the law is far >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> more >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> important, obviously, than the letter of the law >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Oh, cool! I see Hutt the Fuck-Up Fairy has visited us again! >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> No, Hutt, you're unsurprisingly about as absolutely wrong as >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> can be yet again. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The letter of the law is obviously paramount in the context of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> jurisprudential determination as evidenced by the 1000-page >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> statutes >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> we have coming out of Congress, millions of pages of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> administrative >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> regulations, and the multi-page click-thrus of tiny and near- >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hieroglyphic legalese that you have to agree to just to use a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> piece of software. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If all we needed to concern ourselves with was a law's >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "spirit", >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> then none of that would be necessary. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'd elaborate further but I don't have the time or the crayons >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> explain it to you. Jeezus, Hutt, if I wanted to kill myself, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'd >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> climb your ego and jump to your IQ. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 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 ========== REMAINDER OF ARTICLE TRUNCATED ==========