SCOTUS Passes on Challenge to Bumpstock Ban

Boris said:
It's a complex problem. Big part of draining swamp is reducing fed. And ya'll know how the last .gov shutdown went? Loud cries because .gov is the biggest resource drain on the economy. Reduce the fed and unemployment would skyrocket. No president will do it.
Click to expand...

I don't see how this has to do with what I was talking about
 
edmorseiii said:
That is not entirely true. I watched more then a few dudes with them stitch up the car at the old monadnock shoots with surprising control and effectiveness.

Similarly, I watched some liberal smear show on the big bad militias 2 or 3 years ago, and while making fun of these over weight commandos running an ECP drill, one of them dropped down behind his slide fire equipped RPK with a drum mag and immediately ate my words about bumpstocks being useless.
Click to expand...

Maybe. On average though, I'd stick by my comment.

More importantly, we've allowed a situation where AG's and regulatory organizations are passing LAW. And that is wrong.
 
yanici said:
Go ahead and flame me. I don't care. But, there are a lot more more important things on the SCOTUS menu that we need taken care of before these toy bump stocks get squared away. We all know that they can't take everything and pushing this would just put the real issues aside.
Click to expand...


You do understand that they are whittling away at guns ownership.? If you think just the guns you like are all that matter remember that each one is a stepping stone. Not defending everything firearm related put you square in the FUDD category.

Oh I don’t care about slide fire stocks, oh I don’t care about “ high capacity” magazines, oh I don’t care about AR-15’s, oh I don’t care about “assault rifles”, oh I don’t care about semi auto rifles, oh I don’t care about “sniper” rifles, I dont care about semi auto shotguns.......bye guns.

All you have to do is look at all the proposed laws banning guns, past and future. And every time something gets denied they bring it back next year. And you will see it every year until it passes.

How do you eat an elephant? One bite at a time.
 
dhuze said:
You do understand that they are whittling away at guns ownership.? If you think just the guns you like are all that matter remember that each one is a stepping stone. Not defending everything firearm related put you square in the FUDD category.

Oh I don’t care about slide fire stocks, oh I don’t care about “ high capacity” magazines, oh I don’t care about AR-15’s, oh I don’t care about “assault rifles”, oh I don’t care about semi auto rifles, oh I don’t care about “sniper” rifles, I dont care about semi auto shotguns.......bye guns.

All you have to do is look at all the proposed laws banning guns, past and future. And every time something gets denied they bring it back next year. And you will see it every year until it passes.

How do you eat an elephant? One bite at a time.
Click to expand...

We fight an uphill battle. If they fail guncontrol legislation, all they have to do is wait a year to throw it back with a few swipes of the pen to have another chance. When we fail, we have to spend months or (more often than it should) years and a lot of resources going through courts to have another chance.

I think things are NOT as bad as other people think, certainly not good, but not the doomsday others make it out to be.

Why? Because the dems are playing too dirty, instead of simply whittling away gun rights (the most effective stagey) they have gotten impatient, and are too quickly jumping at complete 2A (and other amendments) destruction. This HAS been waking up people (notice how carry license numbers have increased). That includes me, I used to be a fudd. Then looking into it, I saw how dem controlled areas are scewing people over for no reason at all (such as abusive redflag laws, make licensing process as hard as possible, etc) . This woke me up to the fact that dems want 2A annihilation.

If the worse comes, most gun owners will simply live in non-compliance as many already do in non-free states. And the gun sanctuary movement will continue to rise (how useful it might be I do not know).
 
Never wanted a bump stock, but that doesn't matter. Today its bump stocks, tomorrow it will be pistol braces. Which I and many people care about a lot more than bump stocks.
 
The court was between a rock and a hard place. It looks like they wanted a bumpstock ban, but also were not interested in issuing a decision stating that the government could ban something and seize it without compensation.

This also happens at lower court levels. Comm2A was well prepared to argue against the "Glock Ban"; we could have produced experts in court explaining that the loaded chamber indicator worked; and even demonstrate this by teaching the court how to tell. BUT, Judge Kennedy decided to deny us access to the court. The decision was basically "All AGs claims accepted as fact; all plaintiffs claims rejected as false; summary judgment for AG". No testimony, witness questioning or any of that other pesky stuff to interfere with the result the court wanted.

As to the battle - we have been losing the magazine/AW issue but scoring nothing but victories (at the national level) in the battle for carry rights. It's now routine in states where it was previously unimagineable.
 
Rob Boudrie said:
The court was between a rock and a hard place. It looks like they wanted a bumpstock ban, but also were not interested in issuing a decision stating that the government could ban something and seize it without compensation.

This also happens at lower court levels. Comm2A was well prepared to argue against the "Glock Ban"; we could have produced experts in court explaining that the loaded chamber indicator worked; and even demonstrate this by teaching the court how to tell. BUT, Judge Kennedy decided to deny us access to the court. The decision was basically "All AGs claims accepted as fact; all plaintiffs claims rejected as false; summary judgment for AG". No testimony, witness questioning or any of that other pesky stuff to interfere with the result the court wanted.

As to the battle - we have been losing the magazine/AW issue but scoring nothing but victories (at the national level) in the battle for carry rights. It's now routine in states where it was previously unimagineable.
Click to expand...
In the mid term it's looking like we'll only be carrying authorized firearms.

It's not really a victory.
 
namedpipes said:
Maybe. On average though, I'd stick by my comment.

More importantly, we've allowed a situation where AG's and regulatory organizations are passing LAW. And that is wrong.
Click to expand...

This is happening because, for the most part, the legislators (State and US) don’t have the stones to make hard decisions for fear of being voted out the next election cycle. They don’t do what they were elected to do so it creates a vacuum....some unelected power whore sees the opportunity to thrust their personal ambitions into the circus ring and all of a sudden, it becomes law. With the increasingly uninformed and lazy electorate out there, this will only get worse over time.
 
Dench said:
In the mid term it's looking like we'll only be carrying authorized firearms.

It's not really a victory.
Click to expand...
Nothing on the table to benefit us this time around, but there have been past victories - like Chicago going from "may not own a handgun registered before 1982+-" to "IL a shall issue state, no exception for Chicage". Or TX permits, or Making FL, WA and MN "Shall issue" instead "important people only".

We have to be careful when they change the boogeyman de jour. In the 70s it was handguns, rifles were not even on the radar screen.
 
Rob Boudrie said:
Nothing on the table to benefit us this time around, but there have been past victories - like Chicago going from "may not own a handgun registered before 1982+-" to "IL a shall issue state, no exception for Chicage". Or TX permits, or Making FL, WA and MN "Shall issue" instead "important people only".

We have to be careful when they change the boogeyman de jour. In the 70s it was handguns, rifles were not even on the radar screen.
Click to expand...

The LTC things are certainly victories when viewed in bubbles, and at the time I saw them as so. But as time has gone on and the "conservative" SCOTUS continues to do 2 things: make zero meaningful and clear 2A decisions (regardless of the f***ing right or wrong choice) and make continuous non stop draconian police state garbage decisions. The "vote (R) for SCOTUS" thing has done nothing for 2A and a lot of bad shit for civil liberty.

We've been completely bent over by the court (R)'s voted in hoping someday they might give us a 2A case we'd be thrilled about.

Prove me wrong SCOTUS.

timbo said:
This is happening because, for the most part, the legislators (State and US) don’t have the stones to make hard decisions for fear of being voted out the next election cycle. They don’t do what they were elected to do so it creates a vacuum....some unelected power whore sees the opportunity to thrust their personal ambitions into the circus ring and all of a sudden, it becomes law. With the increasingly uninformed and lazy electorate out there, this will only get worse over time.
Click to expand...

You're right that elected officials don't want to get heat from things they don't support hard core, like guns. Let's be real, most (R)'s in those offices could give a shit about AR's and militias, etc.

What the real mystery is why people in appointed positions play the same game. These are the real useful idiots in this broke ass corrupt system.
 
The bump stock thing flying was the product of gun snobs considering them a silly plastic toy, ie NRAs initial statements. I think the court not picking it up is political - not deemed important.

But notably, the powers that be could've (shouldve to be consistent) attacked binary triggers too, however similar technology being used for snobby skeet competition I think kept them off the docket.

Don't get me wrong, none of this stuff should be illegal- I 100% would support full auto's being sold without as much as a background check because I think that's what our constitution intends, but I think there's more going on with even the conservative judges..

I hope the day never comes, but the true test will be if now a federal magazine or AW confiscation scheme can fly - ie what the dems are pushing lately, can they really create such laws impacting such common firearms at the federal level, something even more extreme than how the (very rare comparatively) full auto's where handled many years ago.
 
Lower courts continue to examine the issue as SCotUS wanted.


View: https://twitter.com/gunpolicy/status/1246603483198951424

Federal judge rebukes justice department’s abuse of the Tenth Amendment
Click to expand...
As you’re likely aware, the Justice Department reclassified bump stocks as “machine guns” after outcry following the Las Vegas shooting. As a result, people who owned those bump stocks were told to either surrender or destroy them. Of course, we here at FPC filed multiple lawsuits opposing this decision as unconstitutional and because it was an invalid power grab on part of the Executive Branch. To add injury to, well, injury, the federal government also claimed that people didn’t have a right to financial compensation despite being deprived of their property. The Justice Department claimed that because the order was a “valid exercise of police power” (it wasn’t), they didn’t have to pay out the owners. Well, on Monday, to the chagrin of the DOJ, a federal judge in Texas (who, ironically enough, was appointed by President Trump) rebuked this ridiculous claim in the ongoing case Lane v. United States, explaining that “the federal government forgot the Tenth Amendment and the structure of the Constitution itself.” While this wasn’t a ruling in favor of the bump stock owners, it at least shines a decent light.
Click to expand...
 
You know you’ve been in Coronatine too long when you look at this thread date and think, “the third? How did I not see this. Wait. What month is this?”
 

Similar threads

Import ban extended to ♾️
Replies
17
Views
791
Animal357
A
Nevada Supreme Court Upholds Ban on So-Called ‘Ghost Guns’
Replies
4
Views
201
Dennis in MA
Dennis in MA
Florida House Passes Bill to Lower Legal Gun Purchase Age to 18
Replies
0
Views
93
Reptile
Reptile
Illinois AWB Challenge: 7th Circuit Declines to 'en banc' Case Cleared to SCOTUS
2 3
Replies
63
Views
3K
Parker Schreiber
Parker Schreiber
Washington state high-capacity magazine ban remains on books for now
Replies
1
Views
120
pastera
pastera
Back
Top Bottom