Supreme Court overturns Trump-era ban on gun bump stocks

Now I have to get a bump stock to protect me from people with bump stocks.

 

The Supreme court said that the Trump administration didn't have the authority to ban them. It said that they could be banned with an act of congress. That does not make the ban unconstitutional.

 

I've only touched on the creativity of man and their ability to overcome hurdles..

 

Nah, you can perform the same maneuver without it...

Practice practice practice... If you're not a reloaded, in either case you're,re gonna spend a lot of coin on lead, powder and primer..

 

Well in your world maybe.. Invention and improvement is how man has come to this point..

You still using a rotory phone too

 

The ban put in place BY THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL, is what the court said.

A ban, passed by Congress would be constitutional (probably). A ban implemented by the Executive Branch definitely isn't. The Executive Branch can't make laws.

 

No, you're better off with a semi-automatic. The guys with the bump stocks are going to burn up all their ammunition and not hit anything, then you can snipe them with one, or two rounds. It's all about tactics.

 

The Bump stock was just a chew toy to occupy the anti folk. Now the powers that be can recycle the same bullshit again And gun owners really never gave a damn about it to begin with..

Antigun Hollow victories, long as it captures their attention and makes them feel victorious, ban it again

 

That is logical. If the gun is jumping around on your shoulder constantly, it's hard to aim and hit anything.

 

If you are heavy into drugs, chances are you have to be a criminal to fund your habit. Very few people have a daddy like Hunter Biden does, who can have foreign governments throwing millions of dollars at you while you are higher than a kite. People who are drugged up with a gun are very dangerous. How many times have murders happened when people are drunk?

If you are talking about criminals always being about to get guns, I get it. If you are going to break the law, a gun charge is only icing the cake. Still if government can discourage a tragedy, why not? If you break law, especially in the commission of a violent crime, you give up your rights.

 

You're wrong, I see it as something that can be performed without it, and I have posted that..

You're just misinformed, made rediculouse claims, ignored reality and now you turn to personal insults..

O'Well

Not a single one with a bumpstock.

 

Why are you blaming "leftists" they didn't institute this ban. It was done by the Trump administration.

 

my issue is this-there has been no adjudication of being a drug addict. and what is a drug addict? what is a drunk? that is one of the two main problems with that federal law. The second is the tenth and second amendments. I don't agree that congress should have had any power in this area. I find the commerce clause nonsense fraudulent and dishonest

 

yes and no. Trump got an anti gun ATF administration to redefine what a machine gun is. So Trump deserves a bunch of the blame though everyone who understands this issue knows that if Hillary had been president -she would have done this-and more. But Biden continued to push this and defend it after several lower courts found the actions of the ATF to be improper

 

Leftists support the Executive Branch making laws on its own. The Leftist justices voted to leave the illegal ban in place.

 

well that appeal to emotion won't work with anyone who actually understands the issues surrounding Paddock's year long planning of his massacre because he would have killed as many or more without the bump stock. and with his wealth and access to his own plane, he could have obtained items that would have allowed him far more carnage-such as a belt fed M60 Machine gun or something similar-easily obtained on the black market if you had the same amount of money he spent on his 12 rifles.

and there were millions of these bump stocks sold-mainly because the Democrats banned the sale of machine guns to individuals as of May 19, 1986. -weapons that had not been used in any violent crime in over 80 years now. and this is the only massacre we know of where bump stocks were utilized. The liberal attitude of banning millions of items because a few are misused is pathetic but expected

 

The only reason we see these comments about Thomas is because he writes good decisions that the gun banning left hates. Quotamayor is more compromised but being a Latina and allegedly a lesbian, she won't be criticized by those complaining about the two most conservative justices

 

Millions of idiots that have got nothing better to do than burning money

 

He stands in the way of the Left Wing agenda. They can't exercise the control they want without a Supreme Court that supports all their laws.

 

It's their money. They can waste however they want and it's none of your business.

 

you can say the same thing about caviar, expensive wine, Morton or Ruth Crist Steakhouse dinners, any vehicle that costs more than say 45K, recreational drugs, trophy wives, Ivy League schools these days etc

 

part of being a leftist and wanting the government (run by leftists) controlling the lives of all, is pretending one knows what others NEED or should have?

 

Hey, I get it. It was only 60 dead humans. No biggie, right?

 

The SCOTUS finds the law, not public policy solutions. Those are the responsibility of Congress and the President.

 

Part of being a rightist is making things up about what leftists want.