US Supreme Court lifts ban on gun bump stocks
US Supreme Court lifts ban on gun bump stocks
It says the government does not have the right to ban the accessories, which were used in America's deadliest mass shooting.
As I said in the other thread... This wasn't a merits decision as to "bumpstocks good" or "bumpstocks bad". The point was that machine guns have a statutory definition. Bumpstocks did not fit that definition. Trump tried to use executive order to essentially amend the law all by himself to revise the practical implementation of that definition. That's not how the US works. If the president wants bumpstocks banned, he must use political capital to lobby congress to pass a bill, then sign the bill if it makes it that far.
To everyone whining about the outcome of this particular case, imagine unilateral executive authority applied to every area of American life, and realize what you are wishing for.
48Unfortunately, I think too many people actually want that.
10Only when they agree with the actions.
1
In my opinion, a bumpstock does actually fit the definition of a machine gun, because the user-action to fire multiple shots in a row is one continuous action. Your finger becomes a part of the mechanical function of the gun and the trigger is pressed by pushing the handguard forward.
3
In the military, even using a 3 round burst setting is discouraged. You immediately lose accuracy and go through ammunition extremely fast.
If you've never fired a full auto weapon, the magazine is empty almost instantly if you hold down the trigger. And none of the rounds after the first 3 are anywhere near a target.
Its only advantage is providing suppression but at the cost of vastly more ammo consumption.
It's incredibly fucking stupid to use these things for anything other than indiscriminate area effect, which equates only to spraying into a crowd in any realistic civilian context.
American gun culture is so incredibly fucking stupid and lacking in any kind of moral guidance.
46It's incredibly fucking stupid to use these things for anything other than indiscriminate area effect, which equates only to spraying into a crowd in any realistic civilian context.
This is what really pains me is the bump stock is a device whose only real purpose is to hurt a large group of people with no regard to who is in that area. No one is going to be out on the white house lawn mowing down zombie hordes with this thing. Its primary intent is to hurt civilians.
7
Twaz the way it was always going to go. There is very specific wording for what is a machine gun, and a bump stock did not meet it.
41Yup. From a legal standpoint this was the right decision. Too bad the SC isn't always so punctilious in its rulings.
12Bullshit. Your finger doesn't move after the first pull. That makes it automatic by the legal definition. This is a bad ruling by "judges" who don't deserve the honor of the name.
-8That's not how it works. The trigger still resets after each shot with a bump stock, even if your finger doesn't move. The entire gun does, which allows the reset. While bump stocks make rapid fire easier, it still takes a bit of practice to get it to work. Still, by definition, it's not an automatic weapon.
While everyone here is allowed their own opinions on gun control, defining how a weapon works in a legal context is extremely important. The terminology needs to be very exact and definitions need to be consistent. The reason for this is because everyone has their own opinions and points of view. Those opinions need to be normalized somehow.
This comment is just about how the legal system works in general.
14
These idiots have blood on their hands.
35You realize many guns can be made full auto just by filling down or replacing a single part and the spring, right? It's been an issue for DECADES. This law was just reactionary legislation and didn't actually impact mass shootings. It being gone doesn't really change anything other than one less law to enforce.
Does America have a gun problem? Yes. Does it have an ass backwards bureaucracy problem? Also yes.
15No they don't. Lawmakers do, for failing to pass a law banning bump stocks. What exactly do you think is the role of a judge?
1No they don’t (well… they do, but not for this). Bump stocks are a stupid gimmick that were only ever banned in the first place to appease low-information hysterical types.
-1
Since a bump stock alone is just a useless object, couldn’t they have just been banned them without ever even needing to reference weapons?
18Some states have. It's currently an open legal question as firearm parts/accessories generally get included under 2A protections as the right to keep and bear arms is infringed if, say, triggers are illegal. It's currently working it's way through the courts to determine the answer to your question and we wont have any definitive answers for years.
7
These we're banned under Trump. This is ridiculous.
16Sorry, can't hear you. Because of the hearing damage from using a full auto rifle without a fucking silencer!
10That could happen with any gun loud enough, could even be a bolt action.
Suppressors are basic safety equipment, though, just ask France. Hell in some places in europe they're required to hunt to cut down on noise polution.
Since we have the NFA here which likes to pretend they're only tools for super murder assassins like Golgo 13 because they're so quiet they absorb sound like a black hole absorbs light (/s), we have active/passive ear protection instead.
I'd recommend the use of this basic safety equipment while doing anything loud, especially firing guns, unless unable due to it being a surprise self defense situation during which it becomes an acceptable risk.
6
I'll preface this by saying I'm not American so the point of this isn't a statement on seconds amendment. What I do not understand is, why would citizens be so obsessed by this format of firearms that it would make it all the way to the supreme court.
13They've had the ability to use critical thinking entirely replaced with hate filled propaganda.
They need weapons capable of slaughtering their fellow citizens in mass for the fever dream race war they are trying to ignite.
13The 1% profits are affected
0
im glad the country is using time and resources for such an important issue as this
13Another indication that the US gov doesn't care to even mitigate mass shootings or school shootings. The most important thing is that gun manufacturers make money.
7Shall not be infringed on my accessories. I remember that part too.
7@ me when the next mass shooting with bump stocks happens. I give it a year max
6I give it a few days. It might have already happened, I haven't been checking the news today.
-1
Finally! I can defend my home, again.
4Well those 80-100 feral hogs ain't gonna shoot themselves.
What? The number? Well bump stocks were illegal so we couldn't keep their numbers under control. We were totally unarmed.
4
Really the issue is who is allowed to use them anyway
3You think they'll remember to update the content?
2Now if they would just ban financial bump stocks, a.k.a. penny stocks, which contributed as much to the las vegas shooting as gun bump stocks did.
1I don't know much about finance, but how would you ban cheap-ass stocks?
1
US Supreme Court
lifts ban on gun bump stocksapproves mass murder facilitating deviceFTFY.
-2