+- AlphaRomeo15 (https://www.alpharomeo15.org)
+-- Forum: Incoming Chatter (https://www.alpharomeo15.org/Forum-Incoming-Chatter)
+--- Forum: Gun Laws and News (https://www.alpharomeo15.org/Forum-Gun-Laws-and-News)
+--- Thread: Supreme Court rules bump stock ban unconstitutional. (/Thread-Supreme-Court-rules-bump-stock-ban-unconstitutional)
Pages:
1
2
Supreme Court rules bump stock ban unconstitutional. - tommag - 06-14-2024
Not that I want one, I can already miss faster than I want to.
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/supreme-court/supreme-court-rules-gun-bump-stocks-ban-unlawful-rcna154651
RE: Supreme Court rules bump stock ban unconstitutional. - srjdsmith - 06-14-2024
I don’t want one. But now I want one as a “finger in your eye” move.
I can’t afford the ammo and I don’t see a good use for me. But I want one because the Alphabet Boys don’t want me to have one.
RE: Supreme Court rules bump stock ban unconstitutional. - Rampy - 06-14-2024
This was Trump playing the long game so many people hated him for
The brace ban is also a thing of the past largely due to the bump stock
RE: Supreme Court rules bump stock ban unconstitutional. - specops56 - 06-14-2024
(06-14-2024, 01:18 PM)Rampy Wrote: This was Trump playing the long game so many people hated him for
The brace ban is also a thing of the past largely due to the bump stock
I'm sure that's a real comfort to all those former owners who had to get rid of the property they paid for with no compensation. I sure hope Trump doesn't "play the long game" with any more of my rights next time.
Terry
RE: Supreme Court rules bump stock ban unconstitutional. - tommag - 06-14-2024
I'm actually agreeing with Sotamayor in her dissent. If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck and quacks it's probably a duck. That's as far as my agreement goes though. Under the law it's not a machine gun and the ATF should not be able to restrict something "just because we say so".
There's a big difference between interpreting the law and arbitrarily re-writing it. I have no desire for a bump stock, but that doesn't mean I want yours taken away. I disagree with most everything in the nfa of 1934. (I might've gotten the name and date wrong, but you all know what I'm referring to).
RE: Supreme Court rules bump stock ban unconstitutional. - Rampy - 06-14-2024
(06-14-2024, 02:06 PM)specops56 Wrote:(06-14-2024, 01:18 PM)Rampy Wrote: This was Trump playing the long game so many people hated him for
The brace ban is also a thing of the past largely due to the bump stock
I'm sure that's a real comfort to all those former owners who had to get rid of the property they paid for with no compensation. I sure hope Trump doesn't "play the long game" with any more of my rights next time.
Terry
So you would rather democrats banned bump stocks by passing a law instead of what Trump did to save them in the long run
pistol braces would also be banned if democrats got what they wanted but Trump blocked that from happening by his brace ban
Sometimes freedom costs something other than a feel good post on the internet
RE: Supreme Court rules bump stock ban unconstitutional. - specops56 - 06-14-2024
(06-14-2024, 07:04 PM)Rampy Wrote:(06-14-2024, 02:06 PM)specops56 Wrote:(06-14-2024, 01:18 PM)Rampy Wrote: This was Trump playing the long game so many people hated him for
The brace ban is also a thing of the past largely due to the bump stock
I'm sure that's a real comfort to all those former owners who had to get rid of the property they paid for with no compensation. I sure hope Trump doesn't "play the long game" with any more of my rights next time.
Terry
So you would rather democrats banned bump stocks by passing a law instead of what Trump did to save them in the long run
pistol braces would also be banned if democrats got what they wanted but Trump blocked that from happening by his brace ban
Sometimes freedom costs something other than a feel good post on the internet
Somehow I don't think you would feel the same way if it had been something you own and like that he had "saved" for you by making you turn it in or destroy it and then wait years to be allowed to get another one.
Terry
RE: Supreme Court rules bump stock ban unconstitutional. - specops56 - 06-14-2024
(06-14-2024, 07:04 PM)Rampy Wrote:(06-14-2024, 02:06 PM)specops56 Wrote:(06-14-2024, 01:18 PM)Rampy Wrote: This was Trump playing the long game so many people hated him for
The brace ban is also a thing of the past largely due to the bump stock
I'm sure that's a real comfort to all those former owners who had to get rid of the property they paid for with no compensation. I sure hope Trump doesn't "play the long game" with any more of my rights next time.
Terry
So you would rather democrats banned bump stocks by passing a law instead of what Trump did to save them in the long run ........
How would that have been different? Owners would have to give them up and file lawsuits which take years to get to SCOTUS to get the same ruling they just did.
Please explain to me the difference other than it was an R that did it instead of a D.
Terry
RE: Supreme Court rules bump stock ban unconstitutional. - Longhair - 06-15-2024
How many people who had them actually got rid of them? I'm betting that it worked about the same as with braces, and that the number was incredibly low compared to how many were sold.
I'm basically a law-abiding citizen, but not when "the law" directly violates my God-given Constitutionally protected rights.
I don't have one (or any), but if I did, I wouldn't have turned it in or destroyed it/them.
RE: Supreme Court rules bump stock ban unconstitutional. - Rampy - 06-15-2024
(06-15-2024, 09:20 AM)Longhair Wrote: How many people who had them actually got rid of them? I'm betting that it worked about the same as with braces, and that the number was incredibly low compared to how many were sold.
I'm basically a law-abiding citizen, but not when "the law" directly violates my God-given Constitutionally protected rights.
I don't have one (or any), but if I did, I wouldn't have turned it in or destroyed it/them.
Yep, exactly