User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 4/2/2019 1:50:21 PM EST
[#1]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
And IS happening. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted: The same thing that will eventually happen.  Which has happened throughout history and will happen to our country. Not a matter of if but a matter of when. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/2/2019 1:56:54 PM EST
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Not the painful part...YET. Which has happened throughout history and will happen to our country. Not a matter of if but a matter of when. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/2/2019 2:01:50 PM EST
[#3]
So is this it from a legal standpont? Is it done?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/2/2019 2:05:00 PM EST
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
A stop sign is ambiguous. A complete cessation of forward movement has many interpretations, both permissible and impermissible. For example, does complete refer to the vehicle in its entirety, or to the sprung or unsprung mass? Does that also include occupants, including liquids contained in containers inside occupant compartment or not? Forward implies position or direction, and may or may not be relative to any number of stationary or moving objects. Movement is also relative, and to what does it refer? In the light of these ambiguities, the prosecution qualifies for Chevron deference as our reading, interpretation, and subsequent promulgation of our Rule contained the Driver's Handbook is reasonable, and therefore is not impermissible. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted: Without the agency claiming chevron deference... Because the Definition is of what constitutes a MG is pretty low level, I guess if one is dumb enough even a stop sign could be considered quite ambiguous. In the light of these ambiguities, the prosecution qualifies for Chevron deference as our reading, interpretation, and subsequent promulgation of our Rule contained the Driver's Handbook is reasonable, and therefore is not impermissible. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/2/2019 2:06:20 PM EST
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So is this it from a legal standpont? Is it done? How's that for freedom and liberty in a land of 300+million and a Constitution? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/2/2019 2:13:20 PM EST
[#6]
Right or wrong...if this goes to SCOTUS it will be a bellwether moment to see how this Court and these new appointees will truly come down on the rights of the individual gun owner.
I don't own one and have no interest in them personally but BY GOD I believe we should all be able to have one if we want it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/2/2019 2:15:00 PM EST
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
All comes down to at least 5 of 9 people in black robes........ How's that for freedom and liberty in a land of 300+million and a Constitution? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
So is this it from a legal standpont? Is it done? How's that for freedom and liberty in a land of 300+million and a Constitution? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/2/2019 2:16:29 PM EST
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted: LOL History much? The republicans would confirm Hillary's justices and hide behind the "qualified" and "president has the right to appoint" bs |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/2/2019 2:21:32 PM EST
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted: BS and you know it. The turtle didn't do it for the Obama appointee, ad HRC is even more hated than Obama. They would not have confirmed a hardcore liberal SCOTUS nominee. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/2/2019 2:23:16 PM EST
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You would rather have 300 million voting on it? I can already tell you the answer. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
So is this it from a legal standpont? Is it done? How's that for freedom and liberty in a land of 300+million and a Constitution? But if there is one thing I've learned,it's that very few people want freedom and individual liberty-the vast majority have a petty tyrant inside ready to use the force of government to force their ideas on everyone else. And here we are.......... |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/2/2019 2:25:16 PM EST
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted: In a perfect world,the government would abide by the Constitution and protect the freedom and liberty of the smallest minority-the individual. But if there is one thing I've learned,it's that very few people want freedom and individual liberty-the vast majority have a petty tyrant inside ready to use the force of government to force their ideas on everyone else. And here we are.......... |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/2/2019 2:27:01 PM EST
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
In a perfect world,the government would abide by the Constitution and protect the freedom and liberty of the smallest minority-the individual. But if there is one thing I've learned,it's that very few people want freedom and individual liberty-the vast majority have a petty tyrant inside ready to use the force of government to force their ideas on everyone else. And here we are.......... Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
So is this it from a legal standpont? Is it done? How's that for freedom and liberty in a land of 300+million and a Constitution? But if there is one thing I've learned,it's that very few people want freedom and individual liberty-the vast majority have a petty tyrant inside ready to use the force of government to force their ideas on everyone else. And here we are.......... |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/2/2019 2:27:05 PM EST
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
No, its all about play calling. You use one strategy when you're in the opponents red-zone with a first and ten. You use a completely different strategy when you're on your own 1 yard line, with a 3rd and 20. Keep pretending that the conditions on the field don't matter. See how that goes. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted: Oh give me a break. What I see is similar to that 80% plastic lowers company that got all of its customers' names vacuumed up by the Federal agencies a few years back. Or the California idiots that decided that programming the entire AR15 sequence into a CNC machine and having customers show up and press "start" should be considered self-builds. (Which resulted in California stomping gun owners with laws against self-built firearms). A small segment of gun owners are convincing themselves that a decade old gimmick / toy is so indispensable to freedom that common ownership of all semi-autos should be put at risk from the flack that will result from this legal battle. And the worst part of it is, anyone could have built a bump stock of their own (or something nearly equivalent) for decades. This only became an issue when some fly-by-night entrepreneurs decided to monetize the idea and get rich convincing people that there would really be no fall out creating an entire industry out of a loophole when its clear that Americans have never changed their animosity against machine guns / full auto fire. I'm a realist. Whether or not we agree on the "utility" of bump stocks is not the issue. The issue is that I'm right on the rest: There will NOT be a victory on bump stocks in the courts; and even if there were, the result will not increase freedom, but will result in "all the bad things" getting dumped into the resulting federal legislation: Serialized barrels; semi-autos banned if they don't have pneumatic rotary dampers on the triggers to delay trigger resets for .5 seconds between shots; ammo purchase and storage restrictions. ALL of which fuck us up much worse. There is a REASON the people at the NRA did their best to sweep bump stocks off the stage quietly and through administrative action rather than having the lunatics in Congress playing with new legislation. The NRA is pretty smart about this shit. We should give them some credit. Well, its air through the engine, the gambit has been played; we'll see whether gun owners and gun rights are better off or worse off in 5 years because of the great "bump stock" matters. I know what I think will happen. We will have to see. I fucking hate this mentality, especially when it's coupled with a little "I'm smarter than the rest of you, why can't you see that?" You use one strategy when you're in the opponents red-zone with a first and ten. You use a completely different strategy when you're on your own 1 yard line, with a 3rd and 20. Keep pretending that the conditions on the field don't matter. See how that goes. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/2/2019 2:29:03 PM EST
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Incrementalism FTLoss.  There isn't one area where 2A supporters can get ANYTHING (back) that hasn't already been taken. If a state can legalise weed... |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/2/2019 2:29:17 PM EST
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Other than being inane, meaningless drivel that makes no sense at all, this is a pretty great post! Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted: Oh give me a break. What I see is similar to that 80% plastic lowers company that got all of its customers' names vacuumed up by the Federal agencies a few years back. Or the California idiots that decided that programming the entire AR15 sequence into a CNC machine and having customers show up and press "start" should be considered self-builds. (Which resulted in California stomping gun owners with laws against self-built firearms). A small segment of gun owners are convincing themselves that a decade old gimmick / toy is so indispensable to freedom that common ownership of all semi-autos should be put at risk from the flack that will result from this legal battle. And the worst part of it is, anyone could have built a bump stock of their own (or something nearly equivalent) for decades. This only became an issue when some fly-by-night entrepreneurs decided to monetize the idea and get rich convincing people that there would really be no fall out creating an entire industry out of a loophole when its clear that Americans have never changed their animosity against machine guns / full auto fire. I'm a realist. Whether or not we agree on the "utility" of bump stocks is not the issue. The issue is that I'm right on the rest: There will NOT be a victory on bump stocks in the courts; and even if there were, the result will not increase freedom, but will result in "all the bad things" getting dumped into the resulting federal legislation: Serialized barrels; semi-autos banned if they don't have pneumatic rotary dampers on the triggers to delay trigger resets for .5 seconds between shots; ammo purchase and storage restrictions. ALL of which fuck us up much worse. There is a REASON the people at the NRA did their best to sweep bump stocks off the stage quietly and through administrative action rather than having the lunatics in Congress playing with new legislation. The NRA is pretty smart about this shit. We should give them some credit. Well, its air through the engine, the gambit has been played; we'll see whether gun owners and gun rights are better off or worse off in 5 years because of the great "bump stock" matters. I know what I think will happen. We will have to see. I fucking hate this mentality, especially when it's coupled with a little "I'm smarter than the rest of you, why can't you see that?" You use one strategy when you're in the opponents red-zone with a first and ten. You use a completely different strategy when you're on your own 1 yard line, with a 3rd and 20. Keep pretending that the conditions on the field don't matter. See how that goes. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/2/2019 2:30:40 PM EST
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
In a perfect world,the government would abide by the Constitution and protect the freedom and liberty of the smallest minority-the individual. But if there is one thing I've learned,it's that very few people want freedom and individual liberty-the vast majority have a petty tyrant inside ready to use the force of government to force their ideas on everyone else. And here we are.......... Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
So is this it from a legal standpont? Is it done? How's that for freedom and liberty in a land of 300+million and a Constitution? But if there is one thing I've learned,it's that very few people want freedom and individual liberty-the vast majority have a petty tyrant inside ready to use the force of government to force their ideas on everyone else. And here we are.......... |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/2/2019 2:37:55 PM EST
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted: In a perfect world,the government would abide by the Constitution and protect the freedom and liberty of the smallest minority-the individual. But if there is one thing I've learned,it's that very few people want freedom and individual liberty-the vast majority have a petty tyrant inside ready to use the force of government to force their ideas on everyone else. And here we are..........  Attached File |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/2/2019 2:39:53 PM EST
[#18]
Rational anarchism is the only sane way to live in a civilization that no longer embraces reason.
See Bernardo de la Paz's description in The Moon is a Harsh Mistress for what rational anarchism is. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/2/2019 2:48:09 PM EST
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
In a perfect world,the government would abide by the Constitution and protect the freedom and liberty of the smallest minority-the individual. But if there is one thing I've learned,it's that very few people want freedom and individual liberty-the vast majority have a petty tyrant inside ready to use the force of government to force their ideas on everyone else. And here we are.......... Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
So is this it from a legal standpont? Is it done? How's that for freedom and liberty in a land of 300+million and a Constitution? But if there is one thing I've learned,it's that very few people want freedom and individual liberty-the vast majority have a petty tyrant inside ready to use the force of government to force their ideas on everyone else. And here we are.......... 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/2/2019 2:57:42 PM EST
[#20]
It's pretty simple.
The fight against the bump stock ban is not, and never has been, a fight for bump stocks. It is, and has always been, a fight against executive overreach. Congress has the power to ban bump stocks, and no one is going to go nuts if they do. They've already banned machine guns and no one is rebelling over it. The fight is against how this has been done, not what has been done or why. It also doesn't matter that many of us believe bump stocks should be legal and protected by the second amendment. Nor does it matter that some believe they are silly and should not. The only thing that matters is that we fight the abuse of power and try to force the government to respect its own established constraints of power. That's it. If we win and the rule is thrown out, and the very next day Congress passes identical language to ban bump stocks, WE STILL WON. I think over the past 18 months this may have been lost on some. It's easy to get caught up in the emotion of the discussion. So let me try and sum it up, at least based on having been part of this process since the morning of October 1st, 2017. It is critical that we fight the bump stock rule and win, because if the executive branch establishes a precedent of being able to rewrite gun laws without Congress they can go after things far more precious than bump stocks. If Congress had banned bump stocks we'd not be having this discussion. Victory is not measured in whether or not bump stocks are legal, but in preventing an overt act of executive overreach with terrifying potential precedent. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/2/2019 3:07:30 PM EST
[#21]
NOLO for SCOTUS!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/2/2019 3:14:30 PM EST
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It's pretty simple. The fight against the bump stock ban is not, and never has been, a fight for bump stocks. It is, and has always been, a fight against executive overreach. Congress has the power to ban bump stocks, and no one is going to go nuts if they do. They've already banned machine guns and no one is rebelling over it. The fight is against how this has been done, not what has been done or why. It also doesn't matter that many of us believe bump stocks should be legal and protected by the second amendment. Nor does it matter that some believe they are silly and should not. The only thing that matters is that we fight the abuse of power and try to force the government to respect its own established constraints of power. That's it. If we win and the rule is thrown out, and the very next day Congress passes identical language to ban bump stocks, WE STILL WON. I think over the past 18 months this may have been lost on some. It's easy to get caught up in the emotion of the discussion. So let me try and sum it up, at least based on having been part of this process since the morning of October 1st, 2017. It is critical that we fight the bump stock rule and win, because if the executive branch establishes a precedent of being able to rewrite gun laws without Congress they can go after things far more precious than bump stocks. If Congress had banned bump stocks we'd not be having this discussion. Victory is not measured in whether or not bump stocks are legal, but in preventing an overt act of executive overreach with terrifying potential precedent. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/2/2019 3:14:51 PM EST
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It's pretty simple. The fight against the bump stock ban is not, and never has been, a fight for bump stocks. It is, and has always been, a fight against executive overreach. Congress has the power to ban bump stocks, and no one is going to go nuts if they do. They've already banned machine guns and no one is rebelling over it. The fight is against how this has been done, not what has been done or why. It also doesn't matter that many of us believe bump stocks should be legal and protected by the second amendment. Nor does it matter that some believe they are silly and should not. The only thing that matters is that we fight the abuse of power and try to force the government to respect its own established constraints of power. That's it. If we win and the rule is thrown out, and the very next day Congress passes identical language to ban bump stocks, WE STILL WON. I think over the past 18 months this may have been lost on some. It's easy to get caught up in the emotion of the discussion. So let me try and sum it up, at least based on having been part of this process since the morning of October 1st, 2017. It is critical that we fight the bump stock rule and win, because if the executive branch establishes a precedent of being able to rewrite gun laws without Congress they can go after things far more precious than bump stocks. If Congress had banned bump stocks we'd not be having this discussion. Victory is not measured in whether or not bump stocks are legal, but in preventing an overt act of executive overreach with terrifying potential precedent.  Joe''s trial Idiocracy |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/2/2019 3:16:55 PM EST
[#24]
We have had some recent successes through the courts, many cited in the dissent or in the Cali mag ban case. We should be pushing on every front because that is what it takes to win.
No more delaying actions, no more playing it safe and only losing a little. Take note from the lefts victories, push and push hard on all fronts. If you want to win the cultural aspect, take a person out shooting. Don't blame video games (like the NRA did), use them as recruiting tools of the next generation. Get vocal. Support efforts to win back our rights. Or sit in the corner and plan on saying I told you so when things play out to freedoms detriment. I wont sit in the corner now and I wont be there, if or when, they make me a felon for my beliefs. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/2/2019 3:28:08 PM EST
[#25]
So on a more pragmatic level, what is happening? It's been hard to find current news. Is this being appealed to SCOTUS? Is the case and/or cases moving forward?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/2/2019 3:32:23 PM EST
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So on a more pragmatic level, what is happening? It's been hard to find current news. Is this being appealed to SCOTUS? Is the case and/or cases moving forward? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/2/2019 3:35:50 PM EST
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It is critical that we fight the bump stock rule and win, because if the executive branch establishes a precedent of being able to rewrite If Congress had banned bump stocks we'd not be having this discussion. Victory is not measured in whether or not bump stocks are legal, but in preventing an overt act of executive overreach with terrifying potential precedent. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/2/2019 3:51:03 PM EST
[#28]
So what’s the verdict?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/2/2019 3:58:42 PM EST
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So what’s the verdict? Hopefully he will post the filing notifying the CADC of the intent to appeal to SCOTUS before the 48 hour window expires. The order requires counsel to inform the court if they intend to appeal to SCOTUS, and upon such notification the stay is extended until such time as SCOTUS responds. I think everyone would feel better with confirmation that notification has been conveyed to CADC and receipt has been acknowledged. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/2/2019 4:00:57 PM EST
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
@SuperMoose has indicated this will be appealed to SCOTUS. Hopefully he will post the filing notifying the CADC of the intent to appeal to SCOTUS before the 48 hour window expires. The order requires counsel to inform the court if they intend to appeal to SCOTUS, and upon such notification the stay is extended until such time as SCOTUS responds. I think everyone would feel better with confirmation that notification has been conveyed to CADC and receipt has been acknowledged. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
So what’s the verdict? Hopefully he will post the filing notifying the CADC of the intent to appeal to SCOTUS before the 48 hour window expires. The order requires counsel to inform the court if they intend to appeal to SCOTUS, and upon such notification the stay is extended until such time as SCOTUS responds. I think everyone would feel better with confirmation that notification has been conveyed to CADC and receipt has been acknowledged. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/2/2019 4:15:28 PM EST
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
When it happens it'll get posted. As I said, we'll be seeking a stay. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
So what's the verdict? Hopefully he will post the filing notifying the CADC of the intent to appeal to SCOTUS before the 48 hour window expires. The order requires counsel to inform the court if they intend to appeal to SCOTUS, and upon such notification the stay is extended until such time as SCOTUS responds. I think everyone would feel better with confirmation that notification has been conveyed to CADC and receipt has been acknowledged. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/2/2019 4:41:13 PM EST
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
If HRC had won, we would still have bump stocks. Republicans in the Senate would have opposed every single thing she did. It would have been a do nothing 4 years. Instead, we got further erosion of our freedom. I, for one, am tired of MAGA and "winning." Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I hate New York progressives... Oh wait, I had to vote for one. I guess I'm just supposed to be happy that the other girl lost. This sets a dangerous precedent. Republicans in the Senate would have opposed every single thing she did. It would have been a do nothing 4 years. Instead, we got further erosion of our freedom. I, for one, am tired of MAGA and "winning." |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/2/2019 4:57:11 PM EST
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Rational anarchism is the only sane way to live in a civilization that no longer embraces reason. See Bernardo de la Paz's description in The Moon is a Harsh Mistress for what rational anarchism is. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Rational anarchism is the only sane way to live in a civilization that no longer embraces reason. See Bernardo de la Paz's description in The Moon is a Harsh Mistress for what rational anarchism is. A rational anarchist believes that such concepts as ‘state’ and ‘society’ and ‘government’ have no existence save as physically exemplified in the acts of self-responsible individuals. He believes that it is impossible to shift blame, share blame, distribute blame… as blame, guilt, responsibility are taking place inside human beings singly and nowhere else. But being rational, he knows that not all individuals hold his evaluation, so he tries to live perfectly in an imperfect world… aware that his effort will be less than perfect yet undismayed by self-knowledge and self-failure I will accept any rules that you feel necessary to your freedom. I am free, no matter what rules surround me. If I find them tolerable, I tolerate them; if I find them too obnoxious, I break them. I am free because I know that I alone am morally responsible for everything I do. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/2/2019 5:01:48 PM EST
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
NOLO for SCOTUS! |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/2/2019 5:07:04 PM EST
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
When it happens it'll get posted. As I said, we'll be seeking a stay. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
So what’s the verdict? Hopefully he will post the filing notifying the CADC of the intent to appeal to SCOTUS before the 48 hour window expires. The order requires counsel to inform the court if they intend to appeal to SCOTUS, and upon such notification the stay is extended until such time as SCOTUS responds. I think everyone would feel better with confirmation that notification has been conveyed to CADC and receipt has been acknowledged. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/2/2019 5:15:35 PM EST
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
If HRC had been POTUS we would probably be using battlefield pickups by now. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I hate New York progressives... Oh wait, I had to vote for one. I guess I'm just supposed to be happy that the other girl lost. This sets a dangerous precedent. Republicans in the Senate would have opposed every single thing she did. It would have been a do nothing 4 years. Instead, we got further erosion of our freedom. I, for one, am tired of MAGA and "winning."  Yeah, just like what happened in the FBHO days... oh wait, you’re just making shit up.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/2/2019 5:30:20 PM EST
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You use your tongue prettier than a twenty dollar whore. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted: Without the agency claiming chevron deference... Because the Definition is of what constitutes a MG is pretty low level, I guess if one is dumb enough even a stop sign could be considered quite ambiguous. In the light of these ambiguities, the prosecution qualifies for Chevron deference as our reading, interpretation, and subsequent promulgation of our Rule contained the Driver's Handbook is reasonable, and therefore is not impermissible. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/2/2019 5:32:24 PM EST
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Especially since both teams are taking us downfield to the same goal........... Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted: Oh give me a break. What I see is similar to that 80% plastic lowers company that got all of its customers' names vacuumed up by the Federal agencies a few years back. Or the California idiots that decided that programming the entire AR15 sequence into a CNC machine and having customers show up and press "start" should be considered self-builds. (Which resulted in California stomping gun owners with laws against self-built firearms). A small segment of gun owners are convincing themselves that a decade old gimmick / toy is so indispensable to freedom that common ownership of all semi-autos should be put at risk from the flack that will result from this legal battle. And the worst part of it is, anyone could have built a bump stock of their own (or something nearly equivalent) for decades. This only became an issue when some fly-by-night entrepreneurs decided to monetize the idea and get rich convincing people that there would really be no fall out creating an entire industry out of a loophole when its clear that Americans have never changed their animosity against machine guns / full auto fire. I'm a realist. Whether or not we agree on the "utility" of bump stocks is not the issue. The issue is that I'm right on the rest: There will NOT be a victory on bump stocks in the courts; and even if there were, the result will not increase freedom, but will result in "all the bad things" getting dumped into the resulting federal legislation: Serialized barrels; semi-autos banned if they don't have pneumatic rotary dampers on the triggers to delay trigger resets for .5 seconds between shots; ammo purchase and storage restrictions. ALL of which fuck us up much worse. There is a REASON the people at the NRA did their best to sweep bump stocks off the stage quietly and through administrative action rather than having the lunatics in Congress playing with new legislation. The NRA is pretty smart about this shit. We should give them some credit. Well, its air through the engine, the gambit has been played; we'll see whether gun owners and gun rights are better off or worse off in 5 years because of the great "bump stock" matters. I know what I think will happen. We will have to see. I fucking hate this mentality, especially when it's coupled with a little "I'm smarter than the rest of you, why can't you see that?" You use one strategy when you're in the opponents red-zone with a first and ten. You use a completely different strategy when you're on your own 1 yard line, with a 3rd and 20. Keep pretending that the conditions on the field don't matter. See how that goes. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/2/2019 5:42:40 PM EST
[#39]
Bump fire stocks.
According to the .gov (ostensibly the executive branch) they to some degree channel energy in some manner previously performed by a human. If that's what makes them 'machine guns', I can think of very few gun accessories/features/components which do not channel (or control) some energy required for the function of a semiautomatic firearm, at least to some degree. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/2/2019 5:59:36 PM EST
[#40]
I don't think the ATF expected 'automatically' to be construed as widely as some of the judges have stretched it.
As the dissent noted, under the 2 judges interpretation, there is no distinction between semi and full automatic. The floodgates will be open under that interpretation. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/2/2019 7:23:03 PM EST
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
This is where I continue to make myself unpopular by keeping it real. Here are some truths that will result, in my opinion, in all this bump stock litigation sinking virtually all semi-autos in general in the long run. ... 9. Anyone who doubts the last three should look back on item 2. We've never softened NFA regulations. The only reason the AWBan did not get renewed was that it contained a sunset clause. Even then it was a closer thing than it should have been as the Dems and RINOS were scheming and they almost backdoored a renewal through the lawful commerce of arms thing. Remember, gun guys -- especially freedom oriented gun guys -- are a very small part of the population. We don't have anything near the sort of political clout to get the population to swallow rapid fire. Not in this day and age and not after Vegas. We don't have the clout, and this whole exercise is putting semi autos all at risk. ... |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/2/2019 8:09:30 PM EST
[#42]
..."The plaintiffs argue that if the release of the trigger is a separate
function, the operation of a bump stock—which requires the shooter to keep the trigger finger stationary while steadily pushing the gun forward into the finger—must also involve multiple functions of the trigger. But the Rule reasonably distinguishes binary-trigger guns on the ground that they require a second act of volition with the trigger finger. The release of a trigger is a volitional motion.But merely holding the trigger finger stationary—which is what operation of a bump stock entails—is not"... I disagree with this. Holding your finger in a trigger pulling position is volitional. It is not a normal physical position for your finger to rest in. You must intentionally expend energy and use thought to keep your finger in such a position. Definition of volition from Webster's: 1: the power of choosing or determining : WILL 2: an act of making a choice or decisionalso : a choice or decision made Would medical doctors agree that holding ones finger in such a position is volitional? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/2/2019 8:36:48 PM EST
[#43]
Unfortunate but completely expected.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/2/2019 9:00:09 PM EST
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
... Would medical doctors agree that holding ones finger in such a position is volitional? 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/2/2019 9:25:22 PM EST
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
..."The plaintiffs argue that if the release of the trigger is a separate function, the operation of a bump stock—which requires the shooter to keep the trigger finger stationary while steadily pushing the gun forward into the finger—must also involve multiple functions of the trigger. But the Rule reasonably distinguishes binary-trigger guns on the ground that they require a second act of volition with the trigger finger. The release of a trigger is a volitional motion.But merely holding the trigger finger stationary—which is what operation of a bump stock entails—is not"... I disagree with this. Holding your finger in a trigger pulling position is volitional. It is not a normal physical position for your finger to rest in. You must intentionally expend energy and use thought to keep your finger in such a position. Definition of volition from Webster's: 1: the power of choosing or determining : WILL 2: an act of making a choice or decisionalso : a choice or decision made Would medical doctors agree that holding ones finger in such a position is volitional? 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2019 8:56:49 AM EST
[#46]
A stay has been requested to the Supreme Court. A copy will be posted here as soon as its available.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2019 9:06:56 AM EST
[#47]
Thank You Sir.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2019 9:14:58 AM EST
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
A stay has been requested to the Supreme Court. A copy will be posted here as soon as its available. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2019 9:31:27 AM EST
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Which range toy they’re dumb anyway item is next ? mags above 10 rounds or shoulder braces ?? “Sorry your girl lost” People here value worship of POTUS more than the 2A. Any criticism of Trump is met with deflection, hate, and distain. I’m truly ashamed of being a member of this “pro-gun” forum, ashamed of being an NRA life member, and ashamed to be an American, where the constitution is only a piece of old paper. 
There’s plenty of blame to go around. This whole thing is completely insane to anyone with more than a basic understanding of how this went down. We deserve whatever comes next. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/3/2019 9:33:47 AM EST
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
CLEO signoffs were eliminated, and that was done under FBHO. Otherwise, I agree with your analysis, I don't like it but I agree that's reality. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
This is where I continue to make myself unpopular by keeping it real. Here are some truths that will result, in my opinion, in all this bump stock litigation sinking virtually all semi-autos in general in the long run. ... 9. Anyone who doubts the last three should look back on item 2. We've never softened NFA regulations. The only reason the AWBan did not get renewed was that it contained a sunset clause. Even then it was a closer thing than it should have been as the Dems and RINOS were scheming and they almost backdoored a renewal through the lawful commerce of arms thing. Remember, gun guys -- especially freedom oriented gun guys -- are a very small part of the population. We don't have anything near the sort of political clout to get the population to swallow rapid fire. Not in this day and age and not after Vegas. We don't have the clout, and this whole exercise is putting semi autos all at risk. ... |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
