Date: Sun, 23 Jun 2024 05:06:30 -0500
Mime-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Subject: Re: 5th Circuit Strikes Down Bump Stock Ban
Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv
References: <atropos-13D763.17305115062024@news.giganews.com> <atropos-4D6141.22022320062024@news.giganews.com> <v56q4g$3qg7n$1@dont-email.me> <lfmdnR_OQrVsbOv7nZ2dnZfqn_udnZ2d@giganews.com> <v572pb$3rn1f$3@dont-email.me> <v57agt$3tgec$3@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: en-US
From: trotsky <gmsingh@email.com>
In-Reply-To: <v57agt$3tgec$3@dont-email.me>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Lines: 118
Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!newsfeed.endofthelinebbs.com!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!diablo1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feeder.usenetexpress.com!tr2.iad1.usenetexpress.com!news.newsdemon.com!not-for-mail
Nntp-Posting-Date: Sun, 23 Jun 2024 10:06:30 +0000
X-Received-Bytes: 5742
Organization: NewsDemon - www.newsdemon.com
X-Complaints-To: abuse@newsdemon.com
Message-Id: <17db9a2aa8acb743$240$3767249$10d55a65@news.newsdemon.com>
Bytes: 6150

On 6/22/24 3:00 PM, moviePig wrote:
> On 6/22/2024 1:48 PM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
>> BTR1701  <no_email@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>> FPP <fredp1571@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On 6/21/24 1:02 AM, BTR1701 wrote:
>>>>> In article <v52n7s$2v630$4@dont-email.me>, FPP <fredp1571@gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 6/20/24 9:47 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
>>>>>>> In article <v52ki8$2qv7o$2@dont-email.me>, FPP <fredp1571@gmail.com>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 6/19/24 9:10 PM, shawn wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Wed, 19 Jun 2024 16:28:26 -0700, BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> 
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> In article <v4vh5f$258cf$2@dont-email.me>,
>>>>>>>>>> moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> 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