Supreme Court overturns Trump-era ban on gun bump stocks

Bumpstock us back. Was a hollow ruling as the maneuver was (with practice) easy to perform without addon..

Supreme Court overturns Trump-era ban on gun bump stocks

Still a freedom returned is a good thing, plus it plays to the upcoming ruling on BAN on gas operated rifles..

 

Accessories are not a Constitutional right but even if they were, why does the violent right think this is a good thing? Why do they defend the tools used to make it easier to slaughter Americans? Do they have an ounce of decency or morality? Decent people would insist on regulation.

 

Who's the violent right that are slaughtering Americans? Can you name them so we can denounce them?

 

Not about that, more about give an inch and the gubbermint wants six more..

Small nudges that's how we Amercans have gotten to this point..

Nudge theory

 

Demonstration of the nudge effect administered over decades of media propaganda.. Not many have the mental fortitude to combat this subtle form of conditioning

 

You didn't you know that Detroit, St Louis, Chicago, Baltimore, Oakland and New Orleans are plum stuffed full of MAGA.

 

Not a defense of the tools of slaughter.
Defense of the 2nd.

A distinction apparently lost on liberals

 

I agree with the court. At the time of the executive order, we had just gotten done with a mad man who had killed hundreds of people in Los Vegas with this device attached to a gun.

There need to be limits to the second amendment. We need to do what we can to keep criminals, insane people and drug addicts from getting guns. “Normal people” deserve protection. It is the same of a person who kills someone. They lose their civil rights to freedom. If you commit a crime, take drugs that impair your judgement or are declared insane, you lose your right to get a gun. Ordinary citizens deserve protection.

 

hhhhmmmmm

Sadly it’s no surprise to see the Supreme Court roll back this necessary public safety rule as they push their out of touch extreme agenda. They’re even further to the right of Donald Trump.

https://x.com/SenSchumer/status/1801646802082394453

 

Did you read the ruling before hollering? They did not rule that the bump stock could not be banned. Just that it would take Congress to do it. Currently the firearms law that is in effect makes a distinction between semi-automatic, one pull one bullet, versus a full automatic, one pull several bullets. The bump stock still meets the requirements of one pull one bullet. It does not actually change the function of a gun. It just affects the rate that the trigger is pulled. So its not that the bumpstock can't be banned. It just has to go through Congress. Not through the ATF/Executive Branch.

Did you want them to rule following the law? Or do you want them to go beyond the law and make law? Additionally, did you want the Executive Branch to make law? Or should that be Congress's job?

 

I also want to point out, I think there's a huge difference between making the sale of something illegal, and making the possession of something illegal.

I hate how people just talk about "bans" and conflate the two together.


And even if they were to make possession of this illegal, I do not think anyone should be convicted of felony simply because law enforcement found (or said they found) a 2 dollar piece of plastic.

I think the law should have to specifically specify a higher burden of evidence.
Otherwise, it's going to be ridiculously easy to frame gun owners with a crime.

 

when a POS like Chuck Scummer starts talking about bump stocks being used in many mass shootings, that turd is lying twice

1) the only massacre that was reported to feature bump stocks was the Vegas/Paddock shooting and it is doubtful bump stocks actually increased the body count

2) Summer went to Harvard Law-he should know better that his citing (dishonestly) massacres has no relevance to how the court should rule. anytime some turd references a crime as an argument for how a law should be interpreted, it usually means they are wrong

 

it's already a federal felony-remember the Hunter Biden case. what else can be done other than actually enforcing those laws? BTW I disagree with that federal law under both second and tenth amendment grounds and the drug addict one is especially odious

 

translation-screw the constitution, ignore the laws and pass crap that feels good that won't do a damn thing to stop premeditated criminals from killing innocents

 

It's also probably not a Constitutional right for the federal government to criminalize possession of things.

Now we as a society have made certain compromises, but I think it's a failed argument to say that we've accepted one thing can be illegal, so it's fine if any other things are made illegal.

 

The ban was clearly unconstitutional. Only congress can re-define what a machine gun is. The ATF can’t. A president can’t.

It’s sad so many people are willing to wipe their ass with the Constitution in the pursuit of a false perception of “safety”. One man breaking a bunch of laws is used as an excuse by some for them to violate the supreme law of the land themselves. It would be funny if it weren’t so sad and disturbing.

 

No schit, Sherlock!

But until you change the 2nd, you have (a) got Buckley's.....and (b) SCOTUS, a totally corrupt SCOTUS which will ebb and flow according to the political demands of the majority's come and go Master, right or left, it does not seem to matter. Jurisprudence is a nothing. SCOTUS will rule (not) on Law, but, soup du jour, as per Roe v Wade, (versions one and then, two,) and now this absolutely absurd and totally illogical decision, as the Minority accurately described. I don't think 'you' guys understand how absolutely undemocratic and judicially corrupt your Country is. I don't suggest that is wilful, I know it is based on apathy in the majority and deliberate manipulation by the 'Swamp' no matter what colour it is.

 

Tell me, how many times do your have to pull the trigger and hold it locked in when you use a pump stock? I am told by the bloke I regard as the resident expert on firearms, @Turtledude , just once, and the entire magazine will be unloaded in machine gun rate of fire.

 

Your view is highly misinformed. RvW was flawed as admitted to by even Ginsberg. And this decision was nothing more than enforcing the FACT that there is a separation of powers between the 3 branches of government. It is NOT the Executive Branches job to make law. Period. And that is what the bump stock ban was. A law that should have been passed by Congress. There is nothing "illogical" about that. Except to those that don't understand our system but instead listen to talking mouths.

 

No. This decision was based on what the corrupt and completely compromised Thomas concluded was a trigger pull.

 

You can literally achieve the same effect of a bump stock simply by hooking a finger in the belt hoops of your pants. All it does is take advantage of the recoil to pull the trigger.

 

Because it IS a trigger pull. Like I said above, all that a bump stock does is take advantage of recoil to pull the trigger. And I think that you misunderstood what @Turtledude is saying.

 

Well you people made babyfaced Kyle a folk hero for slaughtering his fellow Americans.

 

Do you agree with this?

To be totally honest with you, the only way four people on SCOTUS agreed with that crap is because they are ideologically fixated, and simple English, common sense, goes out the bloody window as the Minority wrote.

If I am right, you are stuffed "USA," and I am not for one second happy about that.

Any Country which has a corrupted Judiciary has no right to call itself democratic.

Amazes me.

 

Slaughtering? Hero? What a load of poppycock. Kyle defended himself against people who were threatening his life. The evidence, both video and eye witness testimony, proved that. The only ones that claim otherwise are gun banners and leftist identitarians because someone dared challenge their bs 'authority' to set businesses on fire.