Whutmeworry
NES Member
Supreme Court won't touch bump stock ban
Bump stocks allow a shooter to fire continuously with a single pull of the trigger and figured prominently in the Las Vegas mass shooting in 2017.
www.google.com
Discuss...
If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership The benefits pay for the membership many times over.
Be sure to enter the NES/MFS May Giveaway ***Canik METE SFX***
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.
Does the addition of a generic top-level domain (.com) to an otherwise generic term create a protectable trademark? |
Is a safe berth clause in a voyage charter contract a guarantee of a ship's safety or a duty of due diligence? |
Supreme Court won't touch bump stock ban
Bump stocks allow a shooter to fire continuously with a single pull of the trigger and figured prominently in the Las Vegas mass shooting in 2017.www.google.com
Discuss...
What folks need to understand is that this isnt about bump stocks
Its about unconstitutional bureaucratic state creating rules without any basis in constitution/law that carry the weight of law and violate constitutionally guaranteed rights
Attack the legal foundation of the bureaucratic state and you solve this issue......
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.
I get all that. The thing is that there are more important things that we need to be concerned with before we try to twist arms about something like bump stocks. For instance, if you were starving would you be complaining about how you hate chocolate frosting on your cake?It's not the bump stocks. It's how they were banned and the precedent set. It's a big deal. And the "conservative pro 2A" side of SCOTUS continues to not care about 2A cases.
I still can't get past Bump-Stocks = Life in Prison, Third Pin o'fun = 20 yrs in prison.
I have been around firearms all of my life and never even saw a bumpstock. I never knew anyone who owned one, either. Were they really that widespread or were they merely a niche item?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.
Ya know to be honest at almost 59 years old I've never seen one nor do I know anyone with one.I have been around firearms all of my life and never even saw a bumpstock. I never knew anyone who owned one, either. Were they really that widespread or were they merely a niche item?
Ya know to be honest at almost 59 years old I've never seen one nor do I know anyone with one.
Not saying I agree with the taking of them. I do think the SCOTUS could do a lot more for our 2A rights but lets agree we are the minority and the black sheep.neither will you know anyone with smoothbore "not-firearm" Reformation SBR ... which actually was a very potent project, please don't say other wise.
Another aspect not mentioned in this thread is TAKING. Yes, bumpstocks were taken without grandfathering or compensation. A big first, unlike '86 ban. Tested on smaller scale in MA ("they are like only $200 or something ....") done nationwide.
So yeah, unconstitutional bureacracy making laws on whim, 2a, 5a ... this should trump all the bullshit for SCOTUS and looked at on priority basis.
But...but...but...I was told this was just 3D chess by Trump and it would never hold up in court!
Not saying I agree with the taking of them. I do think the SCOTUS could do a lot more for our 2A rights but lets agree we are the minority and the black sheep.
I get all that. The thing is that there are more important things that we need to be concerned with before we try to twist arms about something like bump stocks. For instance, if you were starving would you be complaining about how you hate chocolate frosting on your cake?
I get all that. The thing is that there are more important things that we need to be concerned with before we try to twist arms about something like bump stocks. For instance, if you were starving would you be complaining about how you hate chocolate frosting on your cake?
I have been around firearms all of my life and never even saw a bumpstock. I never knew anyone who owned one, either. Were they really that widespread or were they merely a niche item?
They were a toy, that actually diminished the effectiveness of the firearm, but made it sound wicked cool (in liberal terms, that means scary).
The ATF drafting law out of the thin air is the biggest threat to 2a we are facing. Cool it's just bump stocks, but this was done at trump's direction. What happens when Bernie is POTUS?
For years and years I've been saying our only chance is through the courts. And for a while post Heller that seemed like a real possibility. But after the subsequent limp wristed wording of things like Heller and McDonald, followed by a lot of jurisdictions effectually ignoring the majority of those rulings with SCOTUS refusing to actually f***ing explain something in detail - it's bad. And it doesnt seem like it will improve. It's not just the liberal justices holding this back.
They were a toy, that actually diminished the effectiveness of the firearm, but made it sound wicked cool (in liberal terms, that means scary).