Supreme Court rejects bump stock ban

[IGotWorms 3,759]

Hooray! Maybe some psycho killer can top that Las Vegas guy now

 

 

The Supreme Court on Friday struck down a ban on bump stocks enacted by the Trump administration after a deadly mass shooting in Las Vegas in 2017.

The decision, by a vote of 6 to 3, split along ideological lines. Justice Clarence Thomas, writing for the majority, found that the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives had exceeded its power when it prohibited the device, an attachment that enables a semiautomatic rifle to fire at a speed rivaling that of a machine gun.

The agency, he added, had overstepped in issuing a rule that classified bump stocks as machine guns.

“We hold that a semiautomatic rifle equipped with a bump stock is not a ‘machine gun’ because it cannot fire more than one shot ‘by a single function of the trigger,’” Justice Thomas wrote. He included several diagrams of the firing mechanism in the opinion.

…

Justice Sotomayor summarized her dissent from the bench, a practice reserved for profound disagreements and the first such announcement of the term. “The majority puts machine guns back in civilian hands,” she said.

“When I see a bird that walks like a duck, swims like a duck and quacks like a duck, I call that bird a duck,” Justice Sotomayor wrote. “A bump stock-equipped semiautomatic rifle fires ‘automatically more than one shot, without manual reloading, by a single function of the trigger.’ Because I, like Congress, call that a machine gun, I respectfully dissent.”

[IGotWorms 3,759]

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/06/14/us/politics/supreme-court-trump-gun-bump-stocks.html

[Strike 4,389]

Good

[GutterBoy 2,896]

Can't wait for the next school shooter that has a bump stock.

 

FREEDOM!@#$%

[EternalShinyAndChrome 3,113]

3 minutes ago, GutterBoy said:

Can't wait for the next tranny school shooter that has a bump stock.

 

FREEDOM!@#$%

FYP, for accuracy. 

[EternalShinyAndChrome 3,113]

I'm guessing the liberal idiots in here have no idea what a bump stock is. 

[jerryskids 5,735]

Sounds like a good ruling.  From Alito's concurrence:

Quote

Justice Samuel Alito filed a concurrence on June 14 that emphasized Congress’s role. Referring to the Las Vegas shooting, he said “an event that highlights the need to amend a law does not itself change the law’s meaning.”

He added: “There is a simple remedy for the disparate treatment of bump stocks and machineguns. Congress can amend the law—and perhaps would have done so already if ATF had stuck with its earlier interpretation. Now that the situation is clear, Congress can act.”

Congress's job is to make the laws.  I'm for anything that restricts unelected bureaucracies when there is a clear Constitutional alternative.   

[squistion 1,375]

From the Twitters:

Quote

So everyone in Las Vegas who was slaughtered died in vain. This is why we can’t vote for anyone but Biden. We have to start putting non maniacs on SCOTUS.

 

Quote

I can't buy more than 2 packets of Sudafed from Walgreens but I can buy all the bump stocks I want. Thanks SCOTUS.

 

Quote

The rest of us: it would be cool if we could do something, anything, about mass shootings

SCOTUS: let’s bring back machine guns

 

[Maximum Overkill 1,126]

Who needs a bump stock, we can fix that at the firing pin  

[iam90sbaby 2,256]

You gonna cry worms?

[Maximum Overkill 1,126]

 

 

[kilroy69 1,090]

2 hours ago, IGotWorms said:

Hooray! Maybe some psycho killer can top that Las Vegas guy now

 

 

The Supreme Court on Friday struck down a ban on bump stocks enacted by the Trump administration after a deadly mass shooting in Las Vegas in 2017.

The decision, by a vote of 6 to 3, split along ideological lines. Justice Clarence Thomas, writing for the majority, found that the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives had exceeded its power when it prohibited the device, an attachment that enables a semiautomatic rifle to fire at a speed rivaling that of a machine gun.

The agency, he added, had overstepped in issuing a rule that classified bump stocks as machine guns.

“We hold that a semiautomatic rifle equipped with a bump stock is not a ‘machine gun’ because it cannot fire more than one shot ‘by a single function of the trigger,’” Justice Thomas wrote. He included several diagrams of the firing mechanism in the opinion.

…

Justice Sotomayor summarized her dissent from the bench, a practice reserved for profound disagreements and the first such announcement of the term. “The majority puts machine guns back in civilian hands,” she said.

“When I see a bird that walks like a duck, swims like a duck and quacks like a duck, I call that bird a duck,” Justice Sotomayor wrote. “A bump stock-equipped semiautomatic rifle fires ‘automatically more than one shot, without manual reloading, by a single function of the trigger.’ Because I, like Congress, call that a machine gun, I respectfully dissent.”

To be fair. It does not make it a machine gun. It does not fit the criteria. Congress can MAKE a law that covers a bump stock and they can make it illegal but under the current law this simply does not fit the definition.  The ATF just can not start judging something as a machine gun that is not. That leads to them being able to call anything a "machine gun"  

[jerryskids 5,735]

14 minutes ago, kilroy69 said:

To be fair. It does not make it a machine gun. It does not fit the criteria. Congress can MAKE a law that covers a bump stock and they can make it illegal but under the current law this simply does not fit the definition.  The ATF just can not start judging something as a machine gun that is not. That leads to them being able to call anything a "machine gun"  

Thing is, Worms is a lawyer, you'd think he understands how it is supposed to work.

[EternalShinyAndChrome 3,113]

1 minute ago, jerryskids said:

Thing is, Worms is a lawyer, you'd think he understands how it is supposed to work.

No way he's a lawyer.  I think he just stayed at a Holiday Inn one night.  He's too stupid to be a lawyer.

[Strike 4,389]

2 minutes ago, EternalShinyAndChrome said:

No way he's a lawyer.  I think he just stayed at a Holiday Inn one night.  He's too stupid to be a lawyer.

I don't know is it's stupidity but he doesn't have the thought processes of any decent lawyer I've ever known.  So if he is one he's not a good one.

[Mike Honcho 4,446]

 

[Maximum Overkill 1,126]

Wonder if Tranny's have Bump Stocks?

 

 

[Maximum Overkill 1,126]

 

 

 

[RaiderHaters Revenge 3,860]

Liberals sure hate when the constitution is upheld 

[Maximum Overkill 1,126]

53 minutes ago, RaiderHaters Revenge said:

Liberals sure hate when the constitution is upheld 

TRANNIES ARE KILLING OUR KIDS WITHOUT BUMP STOCKS!!!  

[Pimpadeaux 2,403]

5 hours ago, EternalShinyAndChrome said:

I'm guessing the liberal idiots in here have no idea what a bump stock is. 

You're mom, for example, is a bump stock.

BUMP DAT RUMP, BOYOS!

[Pimpadeaux 2,403]

2 hours ago, RaiderHaters Revenge said:

Liberals sure hate when the constitution is upheld 

You do realize it was the Clownzo administration that created the bump-stock ban, you focking ignorant bumpkin.

[EternalShinyAndChrome 3,113]

19 minutes ago, Pimpadeaux said:

You're mom, for example, is a bump stock.

BUMP DAT RUMP, BOYOS!

5/10.  doesn't really flow that well as a joke.

[RaiderHaters Revenge 3,860]

23 minutes ago, Pimpadeaux said:

You do realize it was the Clownzo administration that created the bump-stock ban, you focking ignorant bumpkin.

Yes and it was wrong then too

[Pimpadeaux 2,403]

2 minutes ago, RaiderHaters Revenge said:

Yes and it was wrong then too

Why would anyone need a bump-stock weapon?

[EternalShinyAndChrome 3,113]

1 minute ago, Pimpadeaux said:

Why would anyone need a bump-stock weapon?

Why wouldn't they?

[Pimpadeaux 2,403]

3 minutes ago, EternalShinyAndChrome said:

Why wouldn't they?

Are you OK with BLM, Antifa, liberals and trannies having bump-stock weapons?

[EternalShinyAndChrome 3,113]

1 minute ago, Pimpadeaux said:

Are you OK with BLM, Antifa, liberals and trannies having bump-stock weapons?

It's not what I think, it's what the Constitution thinks.  The Constitution says they can as long as they are law-abiding citizens.  Of course, that eliminates most of BLM/Antifa and trannies but a lot of other liberals - despite being bat- crazy - do abide by the law.

[Pimpadeaux 2,403]

1 minute ago, EternalShinyAndChrome said:

It's not what I think, it's what the Constitution thinks.  The Constitution says they can as long as they are law-abiding citizens.  Of course, that eliminates most of BLM/Antifa and trannies but a lot of other liberals - despite being bat- crazy - do abide by the law.

So what about nuclear bombs?

If we're talking about "the right keep and bear arms," then nuclear bombs would meet the "arms" definition. 

Quote

A weapon, arm, or armament is any implement or device that is used to deter, threaten, inflict physical damage, harm, or kill. 

Quote

 

 

So you'd be fine with BLM, Antifa, liberals and trannies having nuclear bombs in their homes.

[The Real timschochet 4,510]

I thought owning machine guns was illegal. Aren’t bump stocks basically allowing folks to own machine guns? Whats the difference? 

[EternalShinyAndChrome 3,113]

1 minute ago, Pimpadeaux said:

So what about nuclear bombs?

If we're talking about "the right keep and bear arms," then nuclear bombs would meet the "arms" definition. 

So you'd be fine with BLM, Antifa, liberals and trannies having nuclear bombs in their homes.

You can get as absurd as you want, but you're not being realistic nor are you arguing in good faith.

[EternalShinyAndChrome 3,113]

1 minute ago, The Real timschochet said:

I thought owning machine guns was illegal. Aren’t bump stocks basically allowing folks to own machine guns? Whats the difference? 

Nope.  Bump stocks don't turn a gun into a machine gun.

[Pimpadeaux 2,403]

Just now, EternalShinyAndChrome said:

You can get as absurd as you want, but you're not being realistic nor are you arguing in good faith.

Yes I am. Where do you draw the line?

If you're going to really apply the Second Amendment to today's time, then it would infringe on my Second Amendment rights to not allow me to keep and bear nuclear bombs, Patriot missile systems, F-16s, mustard gas and other weapons considered "arms."

Bump stocks - whose purporse is to turn semi-automatic weapons into a focking machine gun -  would be a nice line.

[The Real timschochet 4,510]

6 minutes ago, EternalShinyAndChrome said:

Nope.  Bump stocks don't turn a gun into a machine gun.

Can you explain the difference? Because I can’t see it. I don’t pretend to be a gun expert but it sure seems like the same thing. 

[Maximum Overkill 1,126]

24 minutes ago, Pimpadeaux said:

Why would anyone need a bump-stock weapon?

You don't even know what a bump stock is biatch. 

I'd bet my life that you never fired a weapon.  

[EternalShinyAndChrome 3,113]

2 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

Can you explain the difference? Because I can’t see it. I don’t pretend to be a gun expert but it sure seems like the same thing. 

An automatic rifle shoots multiple rounds with one pull of the trigger.  THOSE are illegal.

Semi-automatics - ALL civilian made firearms - are one pull of the trigger, one round.

Bump stocks allow you to pull the trigger faster, but you still have to pull the trigger for each round.  People who don't know any better think that is a machine gun.  It is not.  Bump stocks make use of the recoil of the firearm to allow the shooter to pull the trigger faster, but only one round comes out each time.

[The Real timschochet 4,510]

5 minutes ago, EternalShinyAndChrome said:

An automatic rifle shoots multiple rounds with one pull of the trigger.  THOSE are illegal.

Semi-automatics - ALL civilian made firearms - are one pull of the trigger, one round.

Bump stocks allow you to pull the trigger faster, but you still have to pull the trigger for each round.  People who don't know any better think that is a machine gun.  It is not.  Bump stocks make use of the recoil of the firearm to allow the shooter to pull the trigger faster, but only one round comes out each time.

How much faster? Is there really any reasonable difference? 

[EternalShinyAndChrome 3,113]

4 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

How much faster? Is there really any reasonable difference? 

Yes, there is.  Anyone who has shot an automatic knows the difference between that and a semi-automatic.

Again, AUTOMATIC weapons shoot MULTIPLE rounds at once with every pull of the trigger.

SEMI-AUTOMATICS, even with a bump stock, always shoot ONE round with every pull of the trigger.  Humans will never be as fast as an automatic.

[Gepetto 1,113]

According to the Bushmaster AR-15 manual, the firearm has a maximum effective rate of 45 rounds per minute.

[EternalShinyAndChrome 3,113]

1 minute ago, Gepetto said:

According to the Bushmaster AR-15 manual, the firearm has a maximum effective rate of 45 rounds per minute.

That's one person pulling the trigger 45 times in the span of 1 minutes. Certainly do-able, but that's do-able with almost all semi-automatics, pistol or rifle.

I can certainly shoot 45 rounds out of my S&W semiautomatic pistol in the span of one minute.

I know you know this, but just wanted to add on to this in case someone is thinking, "OMG!  45 ROUNDS! IT'S AN AUTOMATIC!!".