Path: ...!Xl.tags.giganews.com!local-2.nntp.ord.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2024 05:19:51 +0000
From: BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com>
Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv
Subject: Re: 5th Circuit Strikes Down Bump Stock Ban
References: <P8OcnfwhaeSXPiT-nZ2dnZfqn_adnZ2d@giganews.com> <v4i2m6$30bm2$1@dont-email.me> <atropos-25D624.12335314062024@news.giganews.com> <v4ih8u$336lr$1@dont-email.me> <atropos-C652A7.15471614062024@news.giganews.com> <17d91fbd5fad865f$338100$533214$2d54864@news.newsdemon.com> <v4kgh9$3i0t8$1@dont-email.me> <17d9412e82a8a311$8843$3053472$46d50c60@news.newsdemon.com> <atropos-13D763.17305115062024@news.giganews.com> <v4s1kl$1c3jr$5@dont-email.me> <atropos-B5B6C7.14031818062024@news.giganews.com> <v4t1nu$1ig6v$2@dont-email.me> <atropos-5889D5.18473418062024@news.giganews.com> <v4tfnl$1ons5$2@dont-email.me> <atropos-C71DF5.19385218062024@news.giganews.com> <v4v8jq$23o16$1@dont-email.me> <atropos-A285B6.12133319062024@news.giganews.com> <v4vh5f$258cf$2@dont-email.me> <atropos-35247F.16282619062024@news.giganews.com> <v52kf9$2qv7o$1@dont-email.me> <atropos-3C4CB7.18492520062024@news.giganews.com> <v52sol$2vpu9$1@dont-email.me>
User-Agent: MT-NewsWatcher/3.5.3b3 (Intel Mac OS X)
Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2024 22:17:08 -0700
Message-ID: <atropos-17149E.22170820062024@news.giganews.com>
Lines: 200
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-EeDEJt7Hrq9VwfxRn2raO9qUYupmPyBNn1O7XpK6RLW601ssa/dWlNRa7f0U3UuK3+EJeEKLQ44OCF8!tPaVxXek0qnxhC6p14x3kCOaTFUs8glrb2VLKxWgrdiDJ+KR/knjWTIZEazBqNb/Stvot8Yj9I5W!jQY=
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: 11359

In article <v52sol$2vpu9$1@dont-email.me>,
 moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:

> On 6/20/2024 9:49 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
> > In article <v52kf9$2qv7o$1@dont-email.me>, FPP <fredp1571@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > 
> >> On 6/19/24 7:28 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
> >>> In article <v4vh5f$258cf$2@dont-email.me>,
> >>>    moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> On 6/19/2024 3:13 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
> >>>>> In article <v4v8jq$23o16$1@dont-email.me>,
> >>>>>     moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> On 6/18/2024 10:38 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
> >>>>>>> In article <v4tfnl$1ons5$2@dont-email.me>,
> >>>>>>>      moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> On 6/18/2024 9:47 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> In article <v4t1nu$1ig6v$2@dont-email.me>,
> >>>>>>>>>       moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> On 6/18/2024 5:03 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>> In article <v4s1kl$1c3jr$5@dont-email.me>, FPP
> >>>>>>>>>>> <fredp1571@gmail.com>
> >>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> On 6/15/24 8:30 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> In article
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> <17d9412e82a8a311$8843$3053472$46d50c60@news.newsdemon.com>,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>         trotsky <gmsingh@email.com> 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
> >>> 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.
> >>>
> >>> Now you tell me, if bump stocks meet the definition of "machine gun" as
> >>> written in the statute, why did the BATF feel the need to rewrite the
> >>> statute to include them? BATF is on record when bump stocks first became
> >>> popular with a determination that a bump stock-equipped rifle does NOT
> >>> meet the definition of "machine gun" under the Act. It was only after
> >>> the Las Vegas shooting that the BATF-- under political pressure--
> >>> decided to promulgate rules that added totally new criteria to the
> >>> definition of "machine gun" not found in the actual statute. This is
> >>> what got them a spanking by SCOTUS.
> >>>
> >>> https://babylonbee.com/new/all-bump-stocks-lost-in-boating-accidents-back
> >>> -in-2017-miraculously-wash-up-on-shore
> >>>
> >> Yes, it fits. The law doesn't specify a trigger pull by the finger.
> >> It says "a single function of the trigger".
> >>
> >> Machine gun requires one pull, and steady pressure on the trigger.
> >> A bump stock requires one pull, and steady pressure on the trigger.
> >>
> >> How are they substantively different, counselor?
> > 
> > One's trigger is functioned only once, the other's trigger functions for
========== REMAINDER OF ARTICLE TRUNCATED ==========