The Supreme Court will decide whether to let civilians own automatic weapons

[fred6052000]

The Supreme Court will decide whether to let civilians own automatic weapons

On February 28, the Supreme Court will hear a case that could effectively make it legal for civilians to own automatic weapons capable of firing as many as nine bullets every second.

 

[VTski4x4]

Wow Vox couldn't have twisted that headline any farther if they tried.

 

[milktree]

Bumpstocks are idiotic. As are binary triggers and forced reset triggers and all the other pseudo machinegun nonsense.

None of them would exist at all except for the Huges amendment.

 

[1sern]

LOL What tools. Vox Fatui

 

[Drix]

Why is 9bps the limit?

 

[fred6052000]

The question is even if the SCOUTS let the civilians own the full auto, does that going to effect in MA?

 

[Taipan01]

Bumpstocks are idiotic. As are binary triggers and forced reset triggers and all the other pseudo machinegun nonsense.

None of them would exist at all except for the Huges amendment.

I agree with the last sentence but I considered it a few times to build up an AR pistol with a FRT and brace. Practical, no but does it have to be? Only thing that kept stopping me is every time something I thought would come together, the government comes in and says, "Ya, that was legal but now it's not". Besides the government intrusion, I wanted to build it with a Noveske lower but I can't find one, damn it. They're worth their weight in gold.

 

[Rick O'Shea]

The question is even if the SCOUTS let the civilians own the full auto, does that going to effect in MA?

Lol, in.

 

[Alex9661]

The question is even if the SCOUTS let the civilians own the full auto, does that going to effect in MA?

It would definitely affect me. I'm willing to jump through the hoops if I can buy a select fire gun at a not retard price.

 

[Spartan65]

Bumpstocks are idiotic. As are binary triggers and forced reset triggers and all the other pseudo machinegun nonsense.

None of them would exist at all except for the Huges amendment.

You could say idiotic, but I still think you should be able to own whatever the f*** you want.

 

[pastera]

Why is 9bps the limit?

Can't outdo Miculek

 

[gerrycaruso]

If this is going to lower the price of machineguns, it will never pass. Too many wealthy and influential people don't want the prices to come down.

 

[milktree]

If this is going to lower the price of machineguns, it will never pass. Too many wealthy and influential people don't want the prices to come down.

Those people are rent-seeking traitors.

 

[milktree]

You could say idiotic, but I still think you should be able to own whatever the f*** you want.

Yep. Still idiotic.

 

[Agnotology]

I agree with the last sentence but I considered it a few times to build up an AR pistol with a FRT and brace. Practical, no but does it have to be? Only thing that kept stopping me is every time something I thought would come together, the government comes in and says, "Ya, that was legal but now it's not". Besides the government intrusion, I wanted to build it with a Noveske lower but I can't find one, damn it. They're worth their weight in gold.

Don't let reptile hear that. He'll put his up to $10 grand.

 

[Knuckle Dragger]

This case isn't even remotely about machine guns or bump stocks. It's about the administrative state.

 

[SKumar]

Why is 9bps the limit?

Why the 10rnd mag limit? It's literally just a number picked out of thin air

 

[Joeldiaz]

Slightly off-topic, but even if SCOTUS strikes down the bump stock ban (they most assuredly will) it doesn’t mean bump stocks will be legal in MA. Garland v. Cargill challenges the bump stock ban on the grounds of ATF’s interpretation of machine guns, not on 2A grounds. It doesn’t affect the MA state law that outright bans bump stocks by name. The whole point of the lawsuit is that if bump stocks need to be banned, then Congress needs to do it, not the ATF.

 

[Mesatchornug]

The question is even if the SCOUTS let the civilians own the full auto, does that going to effect in MA?

You realize civilians own full auto guns already, right?

 

[alx]

The question is - even if they allow it- why would it matter or for that matter- a civilian want it. The tactical value of full auto is well known to be close to zero except in very specific situations which normally would not present during non- war scenarios.

... Actually they should prolly just allow it. The next mass shooter will just run out of ammo the first 30 seconds and hit nothing. Fair enough.

 

[Mesatchornug]

The question is - even if they allow it- why would it matter or for that matter- a civilian want it. The tactical value of full auto is well known to be close to zero except in very specific situations which normally would not present during non- war scenarios.

... Actually they should prolly just allow it. The next mass shooter will just run out of ammo the first 30 seconds and hit nothing. Fair enough.

Stop

1) they're already allowed
2) "because they can" is literally all the reason they need

You're a citizen, not a serf. Try thinking like one.

 

[HorizontalHunter]

This case isn't even remotely about machine guns or bump stocks. It's about the administrative state.

This.….Still waiting on the chevron case.


Oh, and clickbait titles.

 

[anonuser]

if scotus say no, would that also effects binary trigger? since binary trigger is still ok, would that also give the atf justify on their 'ban' for the force reset and binary trigger?
and this seem to have nothing to do with machine gun, engineering go brrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr

 

[wildwest]

Will Jerry Miculek be a felon? Or just have felon fingers?

 

[T-Unit]

The question is even if the SCOUTS let the civilians own the full auto, does that going to effect in MA?

If they didn't it would violate the 14th amendment's equal protection clause because I believe what will likely happen is this case will strike down Hughes and re-open the registry, which brings a focus on the states that have various laws regarding legalization of NFA weapons. Much like how some states before Bruen didn't issue CCW's or had some vague and complex schemes based on "need" for may issues status (which become no issue for many), the laws on the books for states and NFA weapons is clearly no and that's not legal when other states there's no restrictions on NFA stuff.

 

[T-Unit]

This case isn't even remotely about machine guns or bump stocks. It's about the administrative state.

The reason why the ATF assumes it has the power to classify these so called "rate increasing devices" is because by declaring them to be machine guns they must be registered under the NFA act, but the Hughes Amendment doesn't allow it. Unless SCOTUS strikes down Hughes, then Congress is just going to come in with a bill after the next mass shooting and that bill is likely going to put semi autos into a new class of NFA weapons because it's semi autos that the bumpstocks, binary and forced reset triggers are being used in.

Unless SCOTUS strikes down Hughes, you can kiss your semi autos goodbye.

 

[Dench]

I hope Trump loses this case.

 

[240Geezer]

The reason why the ATF assumes it has the power to classify these so called "rate increasing devices" is because by declaring them to be machine guns they must be registered under the NFA act, but the Hughes Amendment doesn't allow it. Unless SCOTUS strikes down Hughes, then Congress is just going to come in with a bill after the next mass shooting and that bill is likely going to put semi autos into a new class of NFA weapons because it's semi autos that the bumpstocks, binary and forced reset triggers are being used in.

Unless SCOTUS strikes down Hughes, you can kiss your semi autos goodbye.

Come take.

 

[Parker Schreiber]

I predict that the Supreme Court will reverse and remand based on its upcoming ruling in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo.

 

[T-Unit]

I predict that the Supreme Court will reverse and remand based on its upcoming ruling in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo.

Another 3 fukking years of legal cases?

Yup, that's exactly what they'd do. Fukking kunts.