Path: ...!feeds.phibee-telecom.net!news.mixmin.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: FPP <fredp1571@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv
Subject: Re: 5th Circuit Strikes Down Bump Stock Ban
Date: Sat, 22 Jun 2024 11:42:42 -0400
Organization: Ph'nglui Mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh Wgah'nagl Fhtagn.
Lines: 105
Message-ID: <v56rdi$3qngn$2@dont-email.me>
References: <atropos-13D763.17305115062024@news.giganews.com>
 <v51ik8$2kkd7$2@dont-email.me>
 <atropos-696A04.09292320062024@news.giganews.com>
 <v5203r$2n6c1$3@dont-email.me>
 <1oucnSmdyL0VBun7nZ2dnZfqn_WdnZ2d@giganews.com>
 <v52knn$2qv7o$5@dont-email.me>
 <atropos-7D5EFE.19185120062024@news.giganews.com>
 <v56pft$3qb1e$2@dont-email.me>
 <lTSdnT7Heb6bc-v7nZ2dnZfqnPidnZ2d@giganews.com>
Reply-To: fredp1571@gmail.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Sat, 22 Jun 2024 17:42:42 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="072282864a3da7810fb240dbac999e40";
	logging-data="4021783"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/xiI4P2O8F45EB57zi7iIv"
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.14; rv:78.0)
 Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.10.0
Cancel-Lock: sha1:PqNHcu5KXYVQk1Ol57sw5mkqPCM=
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <lTSdnT7Heb6bc-v7nZ2dnZfqnPidnZ2d@giganews.com>
Bytes: 6073

On 6/22/24 11:30 AM, BTR1701 wrote:
> FPP <fredp1571@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 6/20/24 10:18 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
>>> In article <v52knn$2qv7o$5@dont-email.me>, FPP <fredp1571@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 6/20/24 5:13 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
>>>>> On Jun 20, 2024 at 12:32:11 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 6/20/2024 12:29 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
>>>>>>> In article <v51ik8$2kkd7$2@dont-email.me>,
>>>>>>> moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 6/19/2024 11:25 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
>>>>>>>>> In article <s6077jpsl679hmse4jdbsf9eg38a9pf6qt@4ax.com>,
>>>>>>>>> shawn <nanoflower@notforg.m.a.i.l.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>>>>>>> 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've seen people who can pull a trigger all on their own pretty damn
>>>>>>>>> fast-- certainly at a speed that most hoplophobes would consider
>>>>>>>>> "machine gun adjacent".
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Should we make it illegal for a human to pull a trigger faster than a
>>>>>>>>> certain rate? Or force anyone who can do it accurately faster than a
>>>>>>>>> certain rate to register their finger with the BATF as a "machine
>>>>>>>>> gun"?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> 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.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Did you look at the 15-sec. video I posted? I submit that what you're
>>>>>>>> seeing for *both* guns is a single function of the trigger *finger* --
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Even if true, the statute is silent on what the finger is doing, so
>>>>>>> it's irrelevant.
>>>
>>>>>> A human finger is implied by "a single function of the trigger".
>>>>>
>>>>> No, it's the functioning of the trigger that's at issue, not what causes it
>>>>> to function. (Other things can cause a trigger pull besides a finger.)
>>>
>>>> So describe the intent of the law.  Go ahead... what was the law
>>>> designed to do? To regulate and prevent.
>>>>
>>>> Have at it.
>>>
>>> I don't care what a bunch of politicians (all with their own agendas)
>>> intended. When I look to what's required of me legally, I only ask what
>>> does the law prohibit me from doing.
>>>
>>> When I drive, I don't spend time wondering about all the intents of the
>>> various lawmakers that set the speed limit at 70MPH. I only care that I
>>> can drive up to 70MPH without having to worry about a ticket.
>>>
>>> If we decided court cases based on intent, then a talented shooter would
>>> indeed have to worry about registering her index finger with the
>>> government as a "machine gun" if she could fire fast enough to mimic a
>>> machine gun. Something that even you dismissed as silly elsewhere in
>>> thread.
>>
>> They decide law based on intent all the time.  It's a staple of the system.
> 
> Cool! Let's go with intent, then. Which means all those millions of
> illegals pretending to be refugees and just reciting the magic words to
> game the system can be summarily denied and deported because the intent of
> the refugee law was never to allow millions of people who don't qualify as
> refugees to game and overwhelm the system and flood unchecked into the
> country.
> 
> Regardless of what the law actually says, its intent was never to create
> the current border crisis we're currently experiencing, so we can ignore
> what's written and just go with intent.
> 
> I'm really starting to warm up to The Law According to Effa!
> 
>> What do you think the Supreme Court uses to judge whether a law is
>> constitutional?
> 
> Umm... the Constitution.
> 


Ummm... pass the border bill your side wrote.

Ummm... you won't because your INTENT is to do nothing and use it as a 
wedge issue.

See?

-- 
On May 30, 2024 Donald J. Trump was unanimously convicted on 34 felony 
counts in New York City... so I took this picture in my side yard.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/0es3xolxka455iw/BetterThingsToDo.jpg?dl=0

"Thou shalt not make a machine in the likeness of a man’s mind." - OC 
Bible  25B.G.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/ek8kap93bmk0q5w/D%20U%20N%20E%20Part%20II.jpg?dl=0