testtest

Biden Calls on Congress to Pass Bump Stock Ban

bc22wm said:
AMEN BROTHER!

Now to mean it, hold their feet to the fire, and apply it to every other agency and dept.
Call it a rule, or a policy, strongly worded suggestion, when the Gov. tells you, you have to do or can't do IT'S A LAW.

Just curious if you feel the same way about the TAC-14 and Shockwave? Personally, I don't want any of them but what I want even less is someone telling you that you can't have it.
Click to expand...
No. Apples and oranges comparison. Unlicensed machineguns have been illegal since 1934. It is established law. The bumpstock is a means of exploiting a loophole in the law to make a weapon that mimics a machinegun. The guns you cite are not SBS shotguns by virtue of having no stock.

Although I personally think nothing good can come from proliferation of bumpstocks on the street, my feelings have no bearing on my prediction that legislation on them is forthcoming.
 
HayesGreener said:
I understand and support the constitutional issue here over the administrative overreach, but. The guy who invented this thing is his own worst enemy. I just watched a video of him demonstrating the bump stock. I have used and was instructor on many automatic weapons in my career, and from what I saw, if I didn't know better I would have sworn that it is an automatic weapon. Call it what you will, but it mimics a machinegun. It was clearly designed and intended to circumvent the NFA through a technical loophole.. There is a legal way to own NFA weapons. I can't help but wonder where we are headed as automatic weapons and clones proliferate among thugs.
We can argue all day long about one trigger pull for each shot making it a semi-auto, but that is an esoteric and picayune argument to the average citizen who sees it operate. I predict the congress will pick this up and enact legislation that goes beyond bumpstocks.

I miss my MP5.
Click to expand...
Completely agree. Clever solution to a question that needn't have been asked. There are two pathways to the full auto experience (that don't have an hourly rate). I had 8 or so families of auto weapons in my uniformed experience & it was a lot more affordable than plan B.
 
HayesGreener said:
I understand and support the constitutional issue here over the administrative overreach, but. The guy who invented this thing is his own worst enemy. I just watched a video of him demonstrating the bump stock. I have used and was instructor on many automatic weapons in my career, and from what I saw, if I didn't know better I would have sworn that it is an automatic weapon. Call it what you will, but it mimics a machinegun. It was clearly designed and intended to circumvent the NFA through a technical loophole.. There is a legal way to own NFA weapons. I can't help but wonder where we are headed as automatic weapons and clones proliferate among thugs.
We can argue all day long about one trigger pull for each shot making it a semi-auto, but that is an esoteric and picayune argument to the average citizen who sees it operate. I predict the congress will pick this up and enact legislation that goes beyond bumpstocks.

I miss my MP5.
Click to expand...
Very well said.
 
The Founders intended that Executive Orders and Agency "Rules" be based on Laws passed by the legislature, that are Constitutional.

Executive Orders and/or Rules that "grossly stretch" the original intent and language of the laws beyond their actual language, and/or are blatantly un-Constitutional, is what gets slapped down by the SCOTUS.

That's why the message of this current iteration of SCOTUS is to either change laws, or amend the Constitution.

But the wishy-washy side of SCOTUS thinks that the social benefit of the day (according to their ideology) over-rules the actual intent of the Constitution and/or existing laws.
 
Last edited:
As earlier mentioned, any AR can be bumped-fired from the shoulder with a trigger pull of 4lbs (give or take) or less. We've had one mass shooting with a bump stock used, Las Vegas (unless I missed something which is entirely possible). Bump stocks are not "commonly" used in any crimes. No infringements on gun rights are acceptable under any circumstances. We already have laws for people who murder. Please do not help the leftists with their incrementalism.
 
The bump stock ban was a knee jerk reaction to a problem that doesn't exist. They aren't being used in many crimes. In fact more illegal aliens from Venezuela have killed people in the US this year than bump stocks have.

That said, I don't have any desire for one so it was never skin off my back. Still, ALL GUN LAWS ARE UNCONSTITUTIONAL.
 
HayesGreener said:
Apples and oranges comparison.
Click to expand...
NO. The same time frame was when "sawed off" shotguns became illegal. Calling the shockwave or tac-14 a "firearm" instead of a shotgun doesn't change the fact the fact that it is what it is. A rose by any other name. Both are cleaver ways around B.S. laws.
 
HayesGreener said:
Well, I wish y'all luck in getting all those gun laws repealed, but until that happens there is the reality of existing law. I firmly believe bump stocks will be the lightning rod that energizes new anti-gun legislation. Hopefully I am wrong.
Click to expand...
It's not about repealing existing law.. It's about preventing new, pointless laws.

Without Googling, can anyone here name a single crime committed with a bump stock besides the Las Vegas massacre ?

Does anyone remember the Port Arthur shooting. One crime disarmed all of Australia.
 
Well, i gotta say this and i'll let myself out after it, but saying i don't want it and don't see a need for it so you shouldn't have it is EXACTLY how a liberal thinks. I don't smoke or drink but damned i will fight for your right to be able to. NEVER give an inch to the Anti 2A crowd cause they will take a mile.

200w.gif
 
Post Bruen, the landscape has changed. 1791, on or about. Was there a similar law on the books at that time? Technology changes,the ammendment remains constant. There were no, none, Zero laws restricting firearm or weapon ownership. The revolution was sponsored by privately owned cannons and ships. The second ammendment has nothing to do with hunting or collecting. It's 100% about self preservation and opposing tyranny.
Back in the early days of this country, there were repercussions for voting against your constituents. They would tar and feather you and put you on a train headed west.
I don't appreciate the idea of the bump stock, but I don't think it should be banned. I don't drink, at my core, I'm a prohibitionist. Way way too many folks dying from alcoholism, drunk driving collisions and just all around poor decisions while under the influence. But that's my position, I don't and won't push my "feelings " on others. I might share my position, but that's as far as it goes.
Fun fact, prohibition led to GCA of 1934. It, like all laws, was a knee-jerk reactions to a manufactured problem.
Just my opinion
 
Last edited:
KillerFord1977 said:
Im happy the Supreme Court upheld that an Agency of the US Govt cannot write laws
Click to expand...
That's the way the constitution says it should be ... when appointed agencies write/reword the rules/laws the way they want them, there is no recourse for the 'people' to fire them. That's the reason only congress, those folks elected 'by the people' to write laws have that ability. Because they are the only ones answerable to the 'people' when they write/pass stupid laws!!!

Hopefully this ruling will put a damper on all appointed agencies from making up their own rules ... think EPA. OSHA, BLM, and the list goes on. These agencies are supposed to enforce the law as handed down by/from congress, not reword the law to suit the agency's needs.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top