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 02:14:58 +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> <v52k6h$2qnl3$11@dont-email.me>
User-Agent: MT-NewsWatcher/3.5.3b3 (Intel Mac OS X)
Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2024 19:12:16 -0700
Message-ID: <atropos-EDEC97.19121620062024@news.giganews.com>
Lines: 104
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-EnXdsOLP+Qk0vH+sCZe9GIxP6+GmZPgDh+CKGVLJLjGJ+YW8beYTYs8iPDeJYclNqrP1eVVeBYtmMUH!eCHZhMUfkVxuAgTR9dD2ahD50hWahxNNpRBwsyfg2uQ3ZIDFhhjYWrjHLdHufJjWLcXCX6l3lddG!Fs0=
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: 6216

In article <v52k6h$2qnl3$11@dont-email.me>, FPP <fredp1571@gmail.com> 
wrote:

> On 6/18/24 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.
> > 
> Close enough to satisfy the intent of the law. The law was written 
> before the stocks existed, and was vague enough to encompass future 
> innovations.

There is nothing vague about the definition of "machine gun" in the NFA.