I was pleased that they ruled against the αsshat anti-abortion folks… and I’m okay with their narrow reason. I’m furious that they ruled against even a slightly sane gun restriction… but I can see that given prior rulings (that NOTHING is more important than the right to freely have and use guns), they pretty much had to… or they’d probably have been shot with bump-stock rifles… (not exactly sarcasm).
Idiots all 6 them. They better hope they never get in the crosshairs of a mass shooter using a bump stock. Eventually we’ll see more mass killings like we saw in Vegas
Like all MAGAts the so-called ‘conservatives’ on the Court treat the Constitution exactly like they treat the Bible. They pick out the parts they like and ignore or trash the rest.
I was born and raised in the SE USA, of parents from out in the country in the southern Appalachians. Guns were never obviouse in the house, but all of us learned at an early age that they were to be treated with care and respect and mostly Just Not Touched unless it was handed to us by our father (mom could have, but wasn’t comfortable with them). I hunt, and target shoot, and collect interesting firearms including battle rifles from the late 1800s to early 1900s. I have rifles that are single shot, magazine-fed bolt or lever action, and magazine-fed semi-automatic. There is an enormous difference between semi-automatic and full auromatic, and how the full automatic is achieved is irrelevant. The Supreme Court decision is just plain Wrong!
As much as it pains me to say it, I don’t think SCROTUS had much choice in this decision. Judges are called to parse obtuse prose and convoluted logic in poorly-written legislation all the time. This is a technical flaw in the legislation, as-written. In order to stay out of the weeds, it boils down to this: the legislation defines a “machine gun” as a firearm whose mechanism will repeatedly fire with a single action of the trigger. Everyone seems to agree on that.
A bump-stock modification interposes a bar beside the trigger which is moved forward by the recoil of the bump-stock, pushing your trigger finger back to its non-firing position. The effect of this is that the shooter can put a constant pressure on the trigger, and the bump-stock will kick your finger forward just long enough to chamber the next round. Effectively, you pull the trigger once and keep pulling on it, and the bump-stock keep kicking your finger back, and continues to fire. The bump-stock makes it an automatic machine gun indirectly.
So it all boils down to fact that the legislation defined a machine gun as one which will fire multiple rounds on a single actuation of the trigger. A bump-stock semi-automatic rifle still fires only one shot with a single actuation of the trigger. It just makes it a whole lot easier to fire multiple rounds because the shooter simply maintains a constant pressure on the trigger. Effectively, it’s a semi-automatic rifle that can spray rounds like an automatic machine gun.
The dissenting Justices went with “common sense” and a clear knowledge of what the authors of the legislation meant. This is a time-honored tradition in the Court, and there are countless examples of this approach in case law. But this court decided to rule on a fine point of engineering which will require the NRA-indebted Congressional Republicans to fix. I’m not sanguine.
Mowing down zombie deer or hordes of ravening squirrels? As an alternative way to produce chainsaw carved art? You name it, the bumpstock has a potential idiocracy market! No, wait, it really is just meant for mowing down people. Well, or maybe it is really just a loophole for selling things to microcephalic folks who think they have some need to mow down hordes of “undesirable” people like they had a modern-day gatling gun and an upcoming federal mandate to hunt them down after the next election. Regardless of the winner, supposed or factual, the hunt will still be on, as the idiocracy has support at all levels.
wirepunchr 17 days ago
The victim will die from excessive lead poisoning.
DrDon1 16 days ago
“Civil Rights? You can’t handle Civil Rights!”
Concretionist 16 days ago
I was pleased that they ruled against the αsshat anti-abortion folks… and I’m okay with their narrow reason. I’m furious that they ruled against even a slightly sane gun restriction… but I can see that given prior rulings (that NOTHING is more important than the right to freely have and use guns), they pretty much had to… or they’d probably have been shot with bump-stock rifles… (not exactly sarcasm).
MC4802 Premium Member 16 days ago
Karma calls a realistic demonstration of the two types of weapons, not me calling, Karma calling. Maybe at the next SCOTUS outside picnic.
Dapperdan61 Premium Member 16 days ago
Idiots all 6 them. They better hope they never get in the crosshairs of a mass shooter using a bump stock. Eventually we’ll see more mass killings like we saw in Vegas
Rich Douglas 16 days ago
Republicans appoint these kinds of justices. Stop voting for Republicans, please.
ncorgbl 16 days ago
Bump stocks qualify as modifying of weapons to be automatic.
sincavage05 16 days ago
Insane! The only thing a bumpstock is good for is killing people.
braindead Premium Member 16 days ago
Like all MAGAts the so-called ‘conservatives’ on the Court treat the Constitution exactly like they treat the Bible. They pick out the parts they like and ignore or trash the rest.
Curiosity Premium Member 16 days ago
I was born and raised in the SE USA, of parents from out in the country in the southern Appalachians. Guns were never obviouse in the house, but all of us learned at an early age that they were to be treated with care and respect and mostly Just Not Touched unless it was handed to us by our father (mom could have, but wasn’t comfortable with them). I hunt, and target shoot, and collect interesting firearms including battle rifles from the late 1800s to early 1900s. I have rifles that are single shot, magazine-fed bolt or lever action, and magazine-fed semi-automatic. There is an enormous difference between semi-automatic and full auromatic, and how the full automatic is achieved is irrelevant. The Supreme Court decision is just plain Wrong!
gammaguy 16 days ago
“Bump stocks don’t qualify as machine guns…
“I’m pretty sure that bump stocks do qualify as machines.
ShadowMaster 15 days ago
“Everything that guy just said is bullsh*t. Thank you.”
Aviatrexx Premium Member 14 days ago
As much as it pains me to say it, I don’t think SCROTUS had much choice in this decision. Judges are called to parse obtuse prose and convoluted logic in poorly-written legislation all the time. This is a technical flaw in the legislation, as-written. In order to stay out of the weeds, it boils down to this: the legislation defines a “machine gun” as a firearm whose mechanism will repeatedly fire with a single action of the trigger. Everyone seems to agree on that.
A bump-stock modification interposes a bar beside the trigger which is moved forward by the recoil of the bump-stock, pushing your trigger finger back to its non-firing position. The effect of this is that the shooter can put a constant pressure on the trigger, and the bump-stock will kick your finger forward just long enough to chamber the next round. Effectively, you pull the trigger once and keep pulling on it, and the bump-stock keep kicking your finger back, and continues to fire. The bump-stock makes it an automatic machine gun indirectly.
So it all boils down to fact that the legislation defined a machine gun as one which will fire multiple rounds on a single actuation of the trigger. A bump-stock semi-automatic rifle still fires only one shot with a single actuation of the trigger. It just makes it a whole lot easier to fire multiple rounds because the shooter simply maintains a constant pressure on the trigger. Effectively, it’s a semi-automatic rifle that can spray rounds like an automatic machine gun.
The dissenting Justices went with “common sense” and a clear knowledge of what the authors of the legislation meant. This is a time-honored tradition in the Court, and there are countless examples of this approach in case law. But this court decided to rule on a fine point of engineering which will require the NRA-indebted Congressional Republicans to fix. I’m not sanguine.
dflye Premium Member 12 days ago
Mowing down zombie deer or hordes of ravening squirrels? As an alternative way to produce chainsaw carved art? You name it, the bumpstock has a potential idiocracy market! No, wait, it really is just meant for mowing down people. Well, or maybe it is really just a loophole for selling things to microcephalic folks who think they have some need to mow down hordes of “undesirable” people like they had a modern-day gatling gun and an upcoming federal mandate to hunt them down after the next election. Regardless of the winner, supposed or factual, the hunt will still be on, as the idiocracy has support at all levels.