• Civilization 7 has been announced. For more info please check the forum here .

SCOTUS news and opinions


Unsurprising.
Didn't you hear? Bump stocks are the best way stop mass shootings. If everyone has them, no one would use them for fear of all those brave gun rights people always step in to prevent gun violence. More guns and more bullets are the path to fewer gun deaths.
 
Didn't you hear? Bump stocks are the best way stop mass shootings. If everyone has them, no one would use them for fear of all those brave gun rights people always step in to prevent gun violence. More guns and more bullets are the path to fewer gun deaths.
After I close this deal I got on a bridge in Brooklyn, I'm heading for my nearest gun shop. I have to move fast on the bridge, the guy said the deal will only last a few hours. :yup:
 

Unsurprising.
Exactly; the ban made zero sense.

Justice Kagan somehow makes the argument that the rate of fire is the compelling factor, ignoring the fact that one can achieve that without the use of the bump stock anyway. It just takes a bit of dexterity to keep the trigger finger still and let the recoiling weapon continually push between it and your body.
But I presume that, like say pornography, she feels these sorts of things should be open to aesthetic interpretation and that if it retains the feel of a machine gun, it therefore is...
 
Exactly; the ban made zero sense.

Justice Kagan somehow makes the argument that the rate of fire is the compelling factor, ignoring the fact that one can achieve that without the use of the bump stock anyway. It just takes a bit of dexterity to keep the trigger finger still and let the recoiling weapon continually push between it and your body.
But I presume that, like say pornography, she feels these sorts of things should be open to aesthetic interpretation and that if it retains the feel of a machine gun, it therefore is...
Broadly speaking, the obsession with "assault rifles" and accessories like extended magazines is rearranging the deck-chairs on the Titanic. Even the ~500 people shot by Stephen Paddock was a drop in the bucket that year*. That said, I simply don't buy that it's just as easy to create such a high rate of fire without a bump-stock as with one. They wouldn't have been invented and gun-shop owners wouldn't want to sell them if they didn't offer the user something.


* According to the CDC 39,773 are recorded as having been killed by firearms in 2017, of which Paddock and his bump-stock accounted for 60. I've found it almost impossible over the years to find data on how many people are shot in this country, but something close to half-a-million a year isn't outside the realm of possibility.
 
It seems to me, when one can just print one of these, that particular rule was not really aiming at the right target.

Spoiler Portable Wall Hangers :
I'm not sure what that is, but yes, the ability to 'print' plastic components is becoming a huge problem. I think that's a factor in the rise of "ghost guns"..? Maybe I'm conflating two different things.
 
I'm not sure what that is, but yes, the ability to 'print' plastic components is becoming a huge problem. I think that's a factor in the rise of "ghost guns"..? Maybe I'm conflating two different things.
I do not understand these things, but that is a Portable Wall Hanger. These are 3D printed plastic tat that featured a hook portion that could detach. This portion just so happened to be in the shape of a drop-in auto sear capable of converting a semi-auto AR-15 to a full-auto. I think you could just run one off in a 3D printer.
 
Justice Kagan somehow makes the argument that the rate of fire is the compelling factor, ignoring the fact that one can achieve that without the use of the bump stock anyway.

This is of course false, you can bump fire a rifle without a bump stock but you cannot achieve the same rate of fire without one as you can with one.
 
IIRC in Vegas he was firing around 600 rounds per minute. He certainly could not pull the trigger that fast on his own. His gun was fully automatic.
 
IIRC in Vegas he was firing around 600 rounds per minute. He certainly could not pull the trigger that fast on his own. His gun was fully automatic.
So, um.... How long until the Supreme Court invalidates the Automatic weapons ban?
 
This is of course false, you can bump fire a rifle without a bump stock but you cannot achieve the same rate of fire without one as you can with one.
...erm I've honestly never heard it described as such. The bump stock merely assists what "bump firing" does anyway, making it ergonomically easier versus with your bare hands. The overall technique is still the same

IIRC in Vegas he was firing around 600 rounds per minute. He certainly could not pull the trigger that fast on his own. His gun was fully automatic.
Except you are conflating rate of fire with functionality of the gun. By law, an automatic weapon fires continuously with a single manipulation [of the trigger]
any weapon which shoots, is designed to shoot, or can be readily restored to shoot, automatically more than one shot, without manual reloading, by a single function of the trigger.

A bump stock doesn't do that, because it requires a trigger press of the dominant hand in addition to the non-dominant hand pushing the firearm forwards to begin bump firing. The bump stock more accurately operates as a seat the gun rests in. It's hard for me to explain but here's a brief video:

The problem with the ATF was that they believed these two hand motions working in tandem were the same function when they weren't...
Admittedly it is all a very technical ruling, but since the statute revolves around that one premise of the definition of automatic, it became very important to the outcome of the case.
[edited for clarity]
 
Last edited:
Except you are conflating rate of fire with functionality of the gun. By law, an automatic weapon fires continuously with a single manipulation [of the trigger]
Technically, anyone who claiims that a gun firiing over 500 rounds a minute is not an automatic weapon, is, well. beyond any redemption. :p
 
...erm I've honestly never heard it described as such. The bump stock merely assists what "bump firing" does anyway, making it ergonomically easier versus with your bare hands. The overall technique is still the same

Well you don't know wtf you're talking about is the simple explanation
 
Technically, anyone who claiims that a gun firiing over 500 rounds a minute is not an automatic weapon, is, well. beyond any redemption. :p
Except you are not changing the internals of the gun to make it automatic. Compare this to the device Samson posted above, which most certainly would.
Now perhaps this is a distinction without a difference in your book. You're free to believe that. But for the purposes of the ruling, these differences mattered...
 
But for the purposes of the ruling, these differences mattered.
Yes they do. Ask the families of the dead and wounded from the Las Vegas shooting. Thomas' ruling was only to appease the NRA and MAGA.
 
They basically shot down a Trump policy that he should have ran through Congress instead of lording over us via executive fiat/
 
They basically shot down a Trump policy that he should have ran through Congress instead of lording over us via executive fiat/
Run it through Congress and see how fast SCOTUS declares it a violation of the 2nd amendment.
 
I think the Court would uphold it if it went through Congress. On the big gun cases, the Court has made clear that they will strike down a very narrow range of gun grabbing, but the rest is free game
 
Top Bottom