Path: ...!Xl.tags.giganews.com!local-1.nntp.ord.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2024 19:39:54 +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: Tue, 25 Jun 2024 12:37:32 -0700 Message-ID: Lines: 73 X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com X-Trace: sv3-KlR7+gqY/pGPNTXOX4jykDTTsyD2OWBNJCgL/+p6K32/z6q8+2/yzU8mCNvx45VwK+36XxoW+C6frdJ!OMLMEBKlXYzYiM+Xc98TZBNno1hwfo4gvbflmRTZJtWEW6VH7Nxe5/J1fQ5SbawuDR27aR6LDtmo!OcE= 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: 5128 In article , moviePig wrote: > On 6/21/2024 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. > > What official verbiage defines "a function of the trigger"? Just that: completion of a full cycle of function. > If it's different for full-auto, why not for bump-stocks? The definition is not different for full-auto. A full cycle of function of the trigger with an automatic rifle just produces different results than it does with a semi-auto.