Re: "Supreme Court to review Trump-era ban on gun ‘bump stocks’"

51
Here is some unsurprising fear mongering by Vox.
https://archive.is/S8ILx

I am assuming at least part of what Vox gets wrong is by design.
sbɐɯ ʎʇıɔɐdɐɔ pɹɐpuɐʇs ɟo ןןnɟ ǝɟɐs
ɯɯ6 bdd ɹǝɥʇןɐʍ
13ʞ
"ǝuıqɹɐɔ 1ɐ4ɯ" dɯɐʇsןןoɹ --- ɯoɔos0269ǝן ʇןoɔ
"ǝuıqɹɐɔ ʇuǝɯǝɔɹoɟuǝ ʍɐן sʇןoɔ" dɯɐʇsןןoɹ --- 0269ǝן ʇןoɔ
(béɟ) 59-pɯɐ

Re:

52
DispositionMatrix wrote: Sat Jun 15, 2024 6:28 am Here is some unsurprising fear mongering by Vox.
https://archive.is/S8ILx

I am assuming at least part of what Vox gets wrong is by design.
So is the article in Slate,
The Supreme Court struck down the federal ban on bump stocks on Friday, legalizing a device that can effectively transform semiautomatic rifles into machine guns. Predictably, the court split 6–3, with the Republican-appointed justices carving a massive loophole in federal law at the behest of the firearms industry. Justice Clarence Thomas’ majority opinion is rooted in historical misrepresentations and utterly implausible manipulations of the statutory text. It enables future mass shooters to equip their AR-15s with an attachment that increases the rate of fire exponentially, to up to 800 rounds per minute.
https://slate.com/news-and-politics/202 ... tocks.html

Another antigun article that shows their true orientation, as political as OANN or Newsmax.
"Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts." - Daniel Patrick Moynihan

Re: "Supreme Court to review Trump-era ban on gun ‘bump stocks’"

57
Ban makes perfect sense for their purposes. Part of why they allow NFA guns to be legal with just a $200 stamp is because the number of NFA guns one could purchase is actually very limited. And since no new legal automatic guns can be made legal for stamp-holders (as far as I understand) by definition automatic weapons are rare and a shrinking pool you can legally purchase; the high prices are creating a rather high bar of entry.

Making bump-stocks NFA stamp available increases the pool of “automatic weapons” in a manner of speaking, counter to their idea of limiting them to the public.
"It is better to be violent, if there is violence in our hearts, than to put on the cloak of non-violence to cover impotence. There is hope for a violent man to become non-violent. There is no such hope for the impotent." -Gandhi

Re: "Supreme Court to review Trump-era ban on gun ‘bump stocks’"

58
sikacz wrote: Sat Jun 15, 2024 2:44 pm Well it was a stupid move to ban by using the ATF. Since I never had a bump stock, did they outright ban it or require a tax stamp?
Especially since Eric "Fast 'N' Furious" Holder's own DoJ approved bump stocks in 2010, when they first came out. I've seen the letter.

So, the ATF at first approved it, and then once they were on the market, changed their minds. Equally unfortunately, that ruling by fiat has the force of law. IANAL, but that does look like an ex-post-facto law to me, and we're against those just on principle here in the United States.
"SF Liberal With A Gun + Free Software Advocate"
http://www.sanfranciscoliberalwithagun.com/
http://www.liberalsguncorner.com/
Image

Re: Re:

59
highdesert wrote: Sat Jun 15, 2024 7:12 am
DispositionMatrix wrote: Sat Jun 15, 2024 6:28 am Here is some unsurprising fear mongering by Vox.
https://archive.is/S8ILx

I am assuming at least part of what Vox gets wrong is by design.
So is the article in Slate,
The Supreme Court struck down the federal ban on bump stocks on Friday, legalizing a device that can effectively transform semiautomatic rifles into machine guns. Predictably, the court split 6–3, with the Republican-appointed justices carving a massive loophole in federal law at the behest of the firearms industry. Justice Clarence Thomas’ majority opinion is rooted in historical misrepresentations and utterly implausible manipulations of the statutory text. It enables future mass shooters to equip their AR-15s with an attachment that increases the rate of fire exponentially, to up to 800 rounds per minute.
https://slate.com/news-and-politics/202 ... tocks.html

Another antigun article that shows their true orientation, as political as OANN or Newsmax.
Slate and Salon are of the same ilk, though Salon is the worst of the two. I avoid them like I avoid Newsweek. I think the best way to get the actual news is old.reddit.com/news

CDF
Crippled but free, I was blind all the time I was learning to see.

Re: "Supreme Court to review Trump-era ban on gun ‘bump stocks’"

60
I'm not a fan of Alito, but his concurring opinion summarizes it well. It's very short.
I join the opinion of the Court because there is simply no other way to read the statutory language. There can be little doubt that the Congress that enacted 26 U. S. C. §5845(b) would not have seen any material difference between a machinegun and a semiautomatic rifle equipped with a bump stock. But the statutory text is clear, and we must follow it. The horrible shooting spree in Las Vegas in 2017 did not change the statutory text or its meaning. That event demonstrated that a semiautomatic rifle with a bump stock can have the same lethal effect as a machinegun, and it thus strengthened the case for amending §5845(b). But an event that highlights the need to amend a law does not itself change the law’s meaning.

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.
https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/2 ... 6_e29g.pdf
"Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts." - Daniel Patrick Moynihan

Re: "Supreme Court to review Trump-era ban on gun ‘bump stocks’"

61
Yep, if Congress doesn't like bump stock make a law to regulate it in whatever form they want and can politically get done. Considering the mechanics of the stock, I suspect a machine gun would be more accurate. Don't really care though, but Alito is right. The ball has been in the hands of Congress all along.
Image
Image

"Resistance is futile. You will be assimilated!" Loquacious of many. Texas Chapter Chief Cat Herder.

Re: "Supreme Court to review Trump-era ban on gun ‘bump stocks’"

62
A wave of Senate Democrats is backing a bipartisan bill to ban bump stocks after the Supreme Court threw out a federal ban on the gun attachment, Axios has learned. Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) will try this week to pass a bump stock ban — knowing he's likely to draw an objection from at least one Republican, which would thwart the effort but boost Democrats' pre-election messaging. Sens. Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nev.) and Susan Collins (R-Maine) have picked up 20 new cosponsors for their Banning Unlawful Machinegun Parts (BUMP) Act since the ruling.

Republicans are likely to object to Schumer's unanimous consent request to pass the bill. Even a single GOP objection would give Democrats the opportunity to paint Republicans as broadly against a ban that polls have shown is popular and was put in place under the Trump administration — right after a string of mass shootings that left nine dead over the weekend. Bump stocks are attachments that allow semiautomatic rifles to fire bullets more rapidly. They were banned after a 2017 mass shooting in Las Vegas, in which a gunman opened fire on a music festival, killing 60 people and wounding 850 more.

In its 6-3 ruling last week, the Supreme Court's conservative majority argued that bump stocks do not convert semiautomatic rifles into what the law defines as a machine gun. The Supreme Court's decision brings fresh attention to the debate over gun control ahead of the November election. Democrats are confident that voters, on balance, will reward any efforts at moderate firearms restrictions. Two vulnerable Senate Democrats from battleground states President Biden won in 2020 — Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.) and Bob Casey (D-Pa.) — cosponsored the bill.

By contrast, Sens. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) and Jon Tester (D-Mont.)— who are seeking re-election in states Trump twice won — have not signed on. Schumer's strategy of prodding Republicans to block the measure without a recorded floor vote could provide some cover for vulnerable Democrats from red states.
https://www.axios.com/2024/06/18/bump-s ... ts-schumer

Again Democrats are going down the rabbit hole of gun control like they've put all their eggs in the basket of abortion rights. Those aren't the top two issues in this election but Democrats haven't always been the smartest party.
"Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts." - Daniel Patrick Moynihan

Re: "Supreme Court to review Trump-era ban on gun ‘bump stocks’"

64
featureless wrote: Tue Jun 18, 2024 11:04 am Yes, let's blow the Dems political capital in something that will save no lives while ignoring women's rights to bodily autonomy. Excellent plan...
Yep, let’s reinforce the anti gun agenda plank. Universal healthcare, supporting income equality, living wage and raising pensions pegged to a cost of living index of some type would be somyI could get behind. None of those are concerns for biden and his affluent supporters. But bad guns are. Their priorities are messed up.
Image
Image

"Resistance is futile. You will be assimilated!" Loquacious of many. Texas Chapter Chief Cat Herder.

Re: "Supreme Court to review Trump-era ban on gun ‘bump stocks’"

65
Senate Republicans blocked bipartisan legislation Tuesday that would have outlawed bump stocks after the Supreme Court struck down a ban on the rapid-fire gun accessory used in the deadliest shooting in modern U.S. history.Democrats tried to force a voice vote on the bill to ban bump stocks, a tactic often used by both parties when they know that they don’t have the votes to pass legislation but want to bring an issue to the Senate floor. The bill, sponsored by Sens. Martin Heinrich, D-N.M., and Susan Collins, R-Maine, would ban the sale of the devices, similar to the rule issued by President Donald Trump’s administration after a gunman in Las Vegas attacked a country music festival in 2017 with semiautomatic rifles equipped with the accessories.

Nebraska Sen. Pete Ricketts objected for Republicans, blocking an immediate vote on the bill. He called the legislation a “gun grabbing overreach” that could be interpreted to include other gun accessories beyond bump stocks. The effort to force the legislation is part of a larger election-year push by Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer to hold votes on issues that are priorities for Democrats and where they believe they have a political advantage, even if they know the bills won’t pass. Republicans have blocked legislation to protect access to contraception and in vitro fertility treatments in recent weeks, arguing that the Democrats are only bringing up the issues for political reasons. And Schumer announced this week that the Senate will vote in July on legislation that would restore the nationwide right to have an abortion after the Supreme Court overturned it almost two years ago. The votes have put Republicans in a tricky position. In the case of bump stocks, many Republicans supported the ban when Trump issued it. But several said this week that they would oppose the legislation to reinstate it, arguing that the vote is another election-year stunt by Democrats, not a serious attempt to pass bipartisan legislation.

North Carolina Sen. Thom Tillis, a Republican who worked with Democrats on bipartisan gun legislation two years ago, said that if Schumer were serious about banning bump stocks, “he’d be calling people into a room who have worked on bipartisan bills,” but instead “it’s a political exercise, which is a shame.” South Dakota Sen. John Thune, the No. 2 Republican, criticized Schumer for a “summer of show votes” and for bringing up bills that are “clearly designed to fail.” Schumer countered on the floor that “it’s not enough for Republicans to roll their eyes and dismiss this bump stock vote as a ‘show vote.’ Tell that to the families who lost loved ones.” The messaging votes come as the Senate’s other business has come to a halt, with bipartisan negotiations on legislation such as rail safety, farm programs, taxes and prescription drugs stalled during a contentious election year.
https://apnews.com/article/bump-stocks- ... 67fd234f60

It's all about embarrassing the other political party during an election year.
"Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts." - Daniel Patrick Moynihan

Re: "Supreme Court to review Trump-era ban on gun ‘bump stocks’"

66
highdesert wrote: Thu Jun 20, 2024 8:30 am
Senate Republicans blocked bipartisan legislation Tuesday that would have outlawed bump stocks after the Supreme Court struck down a ban on the rapid-fire gun accessory used in the deadliest shooting in modern U.S. history.Democrats tried to force a voice vote on the bill to ban bump stocks, a tactic often used by both parties when they know that they don’t have the votes to pass legislation but want to bring an issue to the Senate floor. The bill, sponsored by Sens. Martin Heinrich, D-N.M., and Susan Collins, R-Maine, would ban the sale of the devices, similar to the rule issued by President Donald Trump’s administration after a gunman in Las Vegas attacked a country music festival in 2017 with semiautomatic rifles equipped with the accessories.

Nebraska Sen. Pete Ricketts objected for Republicans, blocking an immediate vote on the bill. He called the legislation a “gun grabbing overreach” that could be interpreted to include other gun accessories beyond bump stocks. The effort to force the legislation is part of a larger election-year push by Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer to hold votes on issues that are priorities for Democrats and where they believe they have a political advantage, even if they know the bills won’t pass. Republicans have blocked legislation to protect access to contraception and in vitro fertility treatments in recent weeks, arguing that the Democrats are only bringing up the issues for political reasons. And Schumer announced this week that the Senate will vote in July on legislation that would restore the nationwide right to have an abortion after the Supreme Court overturned it almost two years ago. The votes have put Republicans in a tricky position. In the case of bump stocks, many Republicans supported the ban when Trump issued it. But several said this week that they would oppose the legislation to reinstate it, arguing that the vote is another election-year stunt by Democrats, not a serious attempt to pass bipartisan legislation.

North Carolina Sen. Thom Tillis, a Republican who worked with Democrats on bipartisan gun legislation two years ago, said that if Schumer were serious about banning bump stocks, “he’d be calling people into a room who have worked on bipartisan bills,” but instead “it’s a political exercise, which is a shame.” South Dakota Sen. John Thune, the No. 2 Republican, criticized Schumer for a “summer of show votes” and for bringing up bills that are “clearly designed to fail.” Schumer countered on the floor that “it’s not enough for Republicans to roll their eyes and dismiss this bump stock vote as a ‘show vote.’ Tell that to the families who lost loved ones.” The messaging votes come as the Senate’s other business has come to a halt, with bipartisan negotiations on legislation such as rail safety, farm programs, taxes and prescription drugs stalled during a contentious election year.
https://apnews.com/article/bump-stocks- ... 67fd234f60

It's all about embarrassing the other political party during an election year.
I hate to agree with Republicans on this one but I do - if Democrats were serious about getting rid of bump stocks (and I'm fine with it) they *would* be working on a bipartisan bill to make a law to ban/limit this device. Instead, Dems play the fear and terror/pity card instead of doing their job. Classic 21st Century American politics. Nothing constructive will get done but the Dems harvest the Mom's support and the Republican harvest the Conservative/Pro 2A vote.

VooDoo
Tyrants disarm the people they intend to oppress. Hope is not a Plan.

Dot 'em if ya got 'em!

Re: "Supreme Court to review Trump-era ban on gun ‘bump stocks’"

67
VodoundaVinci wrote: Thu Jun 20, 2024 9:54 am
highdesert wrote: Thu Jun 20, 2024 8:30 am
Senate Republicans blocked bipartisan legislation Tuesday that would have outlawed bump stocks after the Supreme Court struck down a ban on the rapid-fire gun accessory used in the deadliest shooting in modern U.S. history.Democrats tried to force a voice vote on the bill to ban bump stocks, a tactic often used by both parties when they know that they don’t have the votes to pass legislation but want to bring an issue to the Senate floor. The bill, sponsored by Sens. Martin Heinrich, D-N.M., and Susan Collins, R-Maine, would ban the sale of the devices, similar to the rule issued by President Donald Trump’s administration after a gunman in Las Vegas attacked a country music festival in 2017 with semiautomatic rifles equipped with the accessories.

Nebraska Sen. Pete Ricketts objected for Republicans, blocking an immediate vote on the bill. He called the legislation a “gun grabbing overreach” that could be interpreted to include other gun accessories beyond bump stocks. The effort to force the legislation is part of a larger election-year push by Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer to hold votes on issues that are priorities for Democrats and where they believe they have a political advantage, even if they know the bills won’t pass. Republicans have blocked legislation to protect access to contraception and in vitro fertility treatments in recent weeks, arguing that the Democrats are only bringing up the issues for political reasons. And Schumer announced this week that the Senate will vote in July on legislation that would restore the nationwide right to have an abortion after the Supreme Court overturned it almost two years ago. The votes have put Republicans in a tricky position. In the case of bump stocks, many Republicans supported the ban when Trump issued it. But several said this week that they would oppose the legislation to reinstate it, arguing that the vote is another election-year stunt by Democrats, not a serious attempt to pass bipartisan legislation.

North Carolina Sen. Thom Tillis, a Republican who worked with Democrats on bipartisan gun legislation two years ago, said that if Schumer were serious about banning bump stocks, “he’d be calling people into a room who have worked on bipartisan bills,” but instead “it’s a political exercise, which is a shame.” South Dakota Sen. John Thune, the No. 2 Republican, criticized Schumer for a “summer of show votes” and for bringing up bills that are “clearly designed to fail.” Schumer countered on the floor that “it’s not enough for Republicans to roll their eyes and dismiss this bump stock vote as a ‘show vote.’ Tell that to the families who lost loved ones.” The messaging votes come as the Senate’s other business has come to a halt, with bipartisan negotiations on legislation such as rail safety, farm programs, taxes and prescription drugs stalled during a contentious election year.
https://apnews.com/article/bump-stocks- ... 67fd234f60

It's all about embarrassing the other political party during an election year.
I hate to agree with Republicans on this one but I do - if Democrats were serious about getting rid of bump stocks (and I'm fine with it) they *would* be working on a bipartisan bill to make a law to ban/limit this device. Instead, Dems play the fear and terror/pity card instead of doing their job. Classic 21st Century American politics. Nothing constructive will get done but the Dems harvest the Mom's support and the Republican harvest the Conservative/Pro 2A vote.

VooDoo
Yup, Democrats reinforce that guns are evil and by extension so are firearms owners.
"Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts." - Daniel Patrick Moynihan

Re: "Supreme Court to review Trump-era ban on gun ‘bump stocks’"

69
highdesert wrote: Thu Jun 20, 2024 10:03 am
VodoundaVinci wrote: Thu Jun 20, 2024 9:54 am
highdesert wrote: Thu Jun 20, 2024 8:30 am
Senate Republicans blocked bipartisan legislation Tuesday that would have outlawed bump stocks after the Supreme Court struck down a ban on the rapid-fire gun accessory used in the deadliest shooting in modern U.S. history.Democrats tried to force a voice vote on the bill to ban bump stocks, a tactic often used by both parties when they know that they don’t have the votes to pass legislation but want to bring an issue to the Senate floor. The bill, sponsored by Sens. Martin Heinrich, D-N.M., and Susan Collins, R-Maine, would ban the sale of the devices, similar to the rule issued by President Donald Trump’s administration after a gunman in Las Vegas attacked a country music festival in 2017 with semiautomatic rifles equipped with the accessories.

Nebraska Sen. Pete Ricketts objected for Republicans, blocking an immediate vote on the bill. He called the legislation a “gun grabbing overreach” that could be interpreted to include other gun accessories beyond bump stocks. The effort to force the legislation is part of a larger election-year push by Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer to hold votes on issues that are priorities for Democrats and where they believe they have a political advantage, even if they know the bills won’t pass. Republicans have blocked legislation to protect access to contraception and in vitro fertility treatments in recent weeks, arguing that the Democrats are only bringing up the issues for political reasons. And Schumer announced this week that the Senate will vote in July on legislation that would restore the nationwide right to have an abortion after the Supreme Court overturned it almost two years ago. The votes have put Republicans in a tricky position. In the case of bump stocks, many Republicans supported the ban when Trump issued it. But several said this week that they would oppose the legislation to reinstate it, arguing that the vote is another election-year stunt by Democrats, not a serious attempt to pass bipartisan legislation.

North Carolina Sen. Thom Tillis, a Republican who worked with Democrats on bipartisan gun legislation two years ago, said that if Schumer were serious about banning bump stocks, “he’d be calling people into a room who have worked on bipartisan bills,” but instead “it’s a political exercise, which is a shame.” South Dakota Sen. John Thune, the No. 2 Republican, criticized Schumer for a “summer of show votes” and for bringing up bills that are “clearly designed to fail.” Schumer countered on the floor that “it’s not enough for Republicans to roll their eyes and dismiss this bump stock vote as a ‘show vote.’ Tell that to the families who lost loved ones.” The messaging votes come as the Senate’s other business has come to a halt, with bipartisan negotiations on legislation such as rail safety, farm programs, taxes and prescription drugs stalled during a contentious election year.
https://apnews.com/article/bump-stocks- ... 67fd234f60

It's all about embarrassing the other political party during an election year.
I hate to agree with Republicans on this one but I do - if Democrats were serious about getting rid of bump stocks (and I'm fine with it) they *would* be working on a bipartisan bill to make a law to ban/limit this device. Instead, Dems play the fear and terror/pity card instead of doing their job. Classic 21st Century American politics. Nothing constructive will get done but the Dems harvest the Mom's support and the Republican harvest the Conservative/Pro 2A vote.

VooDoo
Yup, Democrats reinforce that guns are evil and by extension so are firearms owners.
The dem agenda on guns is divisive and a vote loser among some in the gun community. This issue won’t build consensus or a bigger tent. It’s clear the dems don’t care about gun owners votes as they have decided we are all evil regardless of our political positions on other issues. Truly guilt by association.
Image
Image

"Resistance is futile. You will be assimilated!" Loquacious of many. Texas Chapter Chief Cat Herder.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Semrush [Bot] and 0 guests