Path: ...!feeds.phibee-telecom.net!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv
Subject: Re: 5th Circuit Strikes Down Bump Stock Ban
Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2024 18:16:47 -0400
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 196
Message-ID: <v54u4f$3bnc4$3@dont-email.me>
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>
 <v52nan$2v630$5@dont-email.me>
 <atropos-B6CEA3.21594220062024@news.giganews.com>
Reply-To: nobody@nowhere.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Sat, 22 Jun 2024 00:16:48 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="0a2fbad305af87c7b41015176a1534a8";
	logging-data="3530116"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18t/MWdSkxdQ+6q96dT3nYwM9uBmSbLvdo="
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:Ovj2FHCFceZKIdr9eX7kY18tdqI=
In-Reply-To: <atropos-B6CEA3.21594220062024@news.giganews.com>
Content-Language: en-US
Bytes: 11211

On 6/21/2024 12:59 AM, BTR1701 wrote:
> In article <v52nan$2v630$5@dont-email.me>, FPP <fredp1571@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> 
>> On 6/20/24 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
========== REMAINDER OF ARTICLE TRUNCATED ==========