Military court rules "Bump Stocks," are not machine guns.....duh.....

[BULLDOG]

And you know what, the civilian courts may actually pay attention to the military court in any ruling they make since thwy are still a court of law you dumb ass.

I suppose they could. Nothing says they have to.

 

[justinacolmena]

Military court rules "Bump Stocks," are not machine guns.....duh.....​

Bump stocks are not machine guns.....

They are about the stupidest thing ever though.

My car alarm is going off. That's all from act 1 scene 2 of the communist party gun control playbook.

Hey...dipshit.....

Here you go......as to our ongoing discussion of your desire for background checks as a means to get gun registration...versus democrats who keep releasing gun criminals....

Uh huh. So, fingerprinting, DNA cheek swab rape kits, the whole "armed and dangerous" police file photo workup, mandatory full registration of all gun ownership purchases and sales? And you refuse to come out on the record against these pernicious and progressive infringements of our Constitutional rights.

broke into the Showtime Guns & Ammo store on August 2nd, 2019 and stole approximately 50 firearms.

Now I can't even say that's a crime. Who's taking all these fingerprints, calling the cops on customers, and discriminating? Selling guns to certain customers with stellar records, perfect employment history, good credit, and no arrests or mental health issues but discriminating and telling other customers that they're not allowed to purchase or possess firearms, or even calling the cops and trying to have people arrested for attempting to purchase firearms which they have the legal right under the Constitution to keep and bear? That's a right which "shall not be infringed." It doesn't require perfect credit.

 

[Flash]

They're ridiculous pieces of garbage that let you do an initiation of the third world "spray and pray" shooting technique without an actual full auto rifle.

They are unusable for any tactical application.

When the guys shoot it at the range the bullet spread at a 50 yd berm is several feet. If they were shooting at a car at 50 feet I doubt a fifth of the bullets would hit the car. That is how big the spread is.

Then it jams the rifle.

The only reason Pollack was able to get casualties with a bump stock was because of his shooting position.

I contend that Pollack would have had more casualties with a quick reset trigger semi auto. Almost anything I can think of as a knowledgeable firearm user would have been more effective.

It is silly to ban bump stocks as a public safety issue. Not only is is silly but it is against the Constitution seeing that the Bill of Rights says the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

It is just nothing more that these filthy anitgun nuts being dickheads.

 

[DrLove]

moron you are the one who said the bump stock helped him, not us.

Well hell yes it helped him. That sounded exactly like machine gun fire.

By the time Paddock ended the terror attack by taking his own life, 59 people were dead and another 527 injured. In the midst of one 31-second span, he fired a staggering 280 rounds, roughly nine bullets every second — from about 1,200 feet away.​

1,200 feet away - 9 rounds per second aiming randomly into a massive crowd? Obviously he didn't NEED to be accurate dummy - It was like shooting fish in a barrel.

Las Vegas terrorist Stephen Paddock fired 280 rounds in 31 seconds into concert crowd, killing 59: ‘It was like a war zone’

Stephen Paddock sat alone in his 32nd floor room at the Mandalay Bay Resort and Casino, the bright lights of the Las Vegas Strip at odds with the dark thoughts in his head. The retired accountant w…

www.nydailynews.com

 

[DrLove]

They are unusable for any tactical application.

When the guys shoot it at the range the bullet spread at a 50 yd berm is several feet. If they were shooting at a car at 50 feet I doubt a fifth of the bullets would hit the car. That is how big the spread is.

Then it jams the rifle.

The only reason Pollack was able to get casualties with a bump stock was because of his shooting position.

I contend that Pollack would have had more casualties with a quick reset trigger semi auto. Almost anything I can think of as a knowledgeable firearm user would have been more effective.

It is silly to ban bump stocks as a public safety issue. Not only is is silly but it is against the Constitution seeing that the Bill of Rights says the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

It is just nothing more that these filthy anitgun nuts being dickheads.

There are limits to the second amendment. Did you know that Loony Bird? Scalia did. SCOTUS has confirmed a state's right to ban semi auto assault-style weapons.

"Like most rights, the right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited." Further, it is not "a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose."​

​

Scalia's language goes on to explain that an important limitation of this right is for especially dangerous weapons like machine guns. Since that ruling, federal appeals courts have accepted this language in upholding state laws banning semi-automatic assault weapons.​

​

Scalia also made clear that Heller casts no doubt on laws prohibiting possession of firearms in "sensitive places such as schools and government buildings," laws "imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms," and other limitations.​

Even Scalia acknowledged limits to Second Amendment

In their misleading argument that the Second Amendment is in danger of repeal, the authors of the Your View ignored the 2008 Heller decision in which conservative Justice Scalia’s majority op…

www.mcall.com

 

[occupied]

They are unusable for any tactical application.

When the guys shoot it at the range the bullet spread at a 50 yd berm is several feet. If they were shooting at a car at 50 feet I doubt a fifth of the bullets would hit the car. That is how big the spread is.

Then it jams the rifle.

The only reason Pollack was able to get casualties with a bump stock was because of his shooting position.

I contend that Pollack would have had more casualties with a quick reset trigger semi auto. Almost anything I can think of as a knowledgeable firearm user would have been more effective.

It is silly to ban bump stocks as a public safety issue. Not only is is silly but it is against the Constitution seeing that the Bill of Rights says the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

It is just nothing more that these filthy anitgun nuts being dickheads.

The right fighting to keep weapons that are only good for indiscriminate mass murder reveals their true intentions.

 

[Crepitus]

They are unusable for any tactical application.

When the guys shoot it at the range the bullet spread at a 50 yd berm is several feet. If they were shooting at a car at 50 feet I doubt a fifth of the bullets would hit the car. That is how big the spread is.

Then it jams the rifle.

The only reason Pollack was able to get casualties with a bump stock was because of his shooting position.

I contend that Pollack would have had more casualties with a quick reset trigger semi auto. Almost anything I can think of as a knowledgeable firearm user would have been more effective.

It is silly to ban bump stocks as a public safety issue. Not only is is silly but it is against the Constitution seeing that the Bill of Rights says the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

It is just nothing more that these filthy anitgun nuts being dickheads.

A. A Bumpstock is not an "arm". It's an accessory.

B. Crowd size was the deciding factor in the effectiveness of the shooter. A wide target where the distribution of the shots was actually a positive rather than negative. It would have worked nearly as well at a busy mall or a block party.

 

[Flash]

The right fighting to keep weapons that are only good for indiscriminate mass murder reveals their true intentions.

Bump stocks are range toys that have no tactical use.

Serious gun people won't touch them. The stereotypical bump stock user is some 20 year old kid that gets shits and giggles out of hearing bang bang bang.

I wouldn't care if they were unavailable to buy because they are useless. However, the bigger issue is that the fucking government has no right to infringe upon the right to keep and bear arms. It says so in the Bill of Rights.

In this case it was Trump that got the ATF to issue the stupid infringement. He was screwed by the NRA. The NRA came out after the Las Vegas shooting and the idiots sided with the Libtards and said they should be banned. The NRA lost a lot of members because of that, including me.

 

[BULLDOG]

They are unusable for any tactical application.

When the guys shoot it at the range the bullet spread at a 50 yd berm is several feet. If they were shooting at a car at 50 feet I doubt a fifth of the bullets would hit the car. That is how big the spread is.

Then it jams the rifle.

The only reason Pollack was able to get casualties with a bump stock was because of his shooting position.

I contend that Pollack would have had more casualties with a quick reset trigger semi auto. Almost anything I can think of as a knowledgeable firearm user would have been more effective.

It is silly to ban bump stocks as a public safety issue. Not only is is silly but it is against the Constitution seeing that the Bill of Rights says the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

It is just nothing more that these filthy anitgun nuts being dickheads.

And gun nuts are adamant that anyone who wants such a dangerously inaccurate device should be able to get and use it. Think about that for a minute . How much more dangerous is an entremely inaccurate gun as compared to a gun with normal accuracy? Is that what a responsible gun owner would want?

 

[occupied]

Bump stocks are range toys that have no tactical use.

Serious gun people won't touch them. The stereotypical bump stock user is some 20 year old kid that gets shits and giggles out of hearing bang bang bang.

I wouldn't care if they were unavailable to buy because they are useless. However, the bigger issue is that the fucking government has no right to infringe upon the right to keep and bear arms. It says so in the Bill of Rights.

In this case it was Trump that got the ATF to issue the stupid infringement. He was screwed by the NRA. The NRA came out after the Las Vegas shooting and the idiots sided with the Libtards and said they should be banned. The NRA lost a lot of members because of that, including me.

Gun ownership more than any other right requires responsibility yet gun politics is almost entirely devoted to shielding gun nuts from consequences in the aftermath of tragedy. All the arguments of slippery slopes and ludicrous fantasies of civil war and the collapse of civilization are worthless. Just say you like to shoot guns and they make you feel safe. Be honest in your arguments and quit with the hyperbolic flights of fancy. No one wants to take your guns, they just want you to take responsibility.

 

[Flash]

And gun nuts are adamant that anyone who wants such a dangerously inaccurate device should be able to get and use it. Think about that for a minute . How much more dangerous is an entremely inaccurate gun as compared to a gun with normal accuracy? Is that what a responsible gun owner would want?

It is a toy, Vern.

It is made to go bang bang bang and has no tactical use. Pollock didn't do his damage because some of the rounds were fired from a bump stock. He did his damage because of his tactical location.

My backyard swimming pool is a lot more dangerous.

What gets me are the stupid uneducated anti gun nutcase Moon Bats that have never seen one in their lives and have no idea what they are saying when they say the stocks should be banned.

What we need is for the Supreme Court to overthrow the NFA and order that any gun law be subject to strict scrutiny. That would end the filthy ass government from infringing upon our Constitutional rights.

We got an indication a couple of months ago from Justice Thomas that this may be coming.

 

[BULLDOG]

It is a toy, Vern.

It is made to go bang bang bang and has no tactical use. Pollock didn't do his damage because some of the rounds were fired from a bump stock. He did his damage because of his tactical location.

My backyard swimming pool is a lot more dangerous.

What gets me are the stupid uneducated anti gun nutcase Moon Bats that have never seen one in their lives and have no idea what they are saying when they say the stocks should be banned.

What we need is for the Supreme Court to overthrow the NFA and order that any gun law be subject to strict scrutiny. That would end the filthy ass government from infringing upon our Constitutional rights.

We got an indication a couple of months ago from Justice Thomas that this may be coming.

Your backyard pool doesn't fire a deadly projectile in random directions. If it is such a uselwess toy, why are gun nuts so adamant that everyone have access to them?

 

[Flash]

Gun ownership more than any other right requires responsibility yet gun politics is almost entirely devoted to shielding gun nuts from consequences in the aftermath of tragedy. All the arguments of slippery slopes and ludicrous fantasies of civil war and the collapse of civilization are worthless. Just say you like to shoot guns and they make you feel safe. Be honest in your arguments and quit with the hyperbolic flights of fancy. No one wants to take your guns, they just want you to take responsibility.

The problem with you Idiot anti gun nuts is that you don't understand that the Constitution says very clearly that the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. There is no qualifications to the right to keep and bear arms stated in the Bill of Rights. It doesn't say the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infirnged but the government can infringe upon your right to own a bump stock.

You stupid uneducated Moon Bats don't know anymore about the Constitution than you know about Economics, History, Climate Science, Biology or Ethics.

We Americans sure as hell don't trust you deranged Left Wing fuckers to define what is reasonable because you will always be bat shit crazy, like wanting to ban AR-15s.

By the way Moon Bat. One of the very first thing Joe Potatohead's Taliban buddies did the other day when they took over Afghanistan was to ban firearms. The Taliban get to keep their guns (supplied mostly by Potatohead) but the people can't have them. They think that is reasonable gun control just like you shitheads here at home.

 

[2aguy]

Well hell yes it helped him. That sounded exactly like machine gun fire.

By the time Paddock ended the terror attack by taking his own life, 59 people were dead and another 527 injured. In the midst of one 31-second span, he fired a staggering 280 rounds, roughly nine bullets every second — from about 1,200 feet away.​

1,200 feet away - 9 rounds per second aiming randomly into a massive crowd? Obviously he didn't NEED to be accurate dummy - It was like shooting fish in a barrel.

Las Vegas terrorist Stephen Paddock fired 280 rounds in 31 seconds into concert crowd, killing 59: ‘It was like a war zone’

Stephen Paddock sat alone in his 32nd floor room at the Mandalay Bay Resort and Casino, the bright lights of the Las Vegas Strip at odds with the dark thoughts in his head. The retired accountant w…

www.nydailynews.com

Shit head.....he could have done that without the bump stock, you moron, and without the bumpstock every single one of those rounds would have gone into the crowd, not over the crowd....you idiot.


The bump stock saved lives...you dumb ass.

You don't know what you are talking about, but you continue to display your ignorance and stupidity...

 

[2aguy]

And gun nuts are adamant that anyone who wants such a dangerously inaccurate device should be able to get and use it. Think about that for a minute . How much more dangerous is an entremely inaccurate gun as compared to a gun with normal accuracy? Is that what a responsible gun owner would want?

There are thousands in private hands, one was used illegally, you dumb fuck.

Cars kill over 30,000 people every single year........we should ban those.

 

[2aguy]

There are limits to the second amendment. Did you know that Loony Bird? Scalia did. SCOTUS has confirmed a state's right to ban semi auto assault-style weapons.

"Like most rights, the right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited." Further, it is not "a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose."​

​

Scalia's language goes on to explain that an important limitation of this right is for especially dangerous weapons like machine guns. Since that ruling, federal appeals courts have accepted this language in upholding state laws banning semi-automatic assault weapons.​

​

Scalia also made clear that Heller casts no doubt on laws prohibiting possession of firearms in "sensitive places such as schools and government buildings," laws "imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms," and other limitations.​

Even Scalia acknowledged limits to Second Amendment

In their misleading argument that the Second Amendment is in danger of repeal, the authors of the Your View ignored the 2008 Heller decision in which conservative Justice Scalia’s majority op…

www.mcall.com

You guys keep lying about what Scalia said......you are dishonest assholes...

You dumb ass...what he actually said...

What did Scalia say about the rifle the Las Vegas shooter used? About 20 million Ar-15 Rifles are now in private hands........you idiot...

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/07pdf/07-290.pdf

Some have made the argument, bordering on the frivolous, that only those arms in existence in the 18th century are protected by the Second Amendment.

We do not interpret constitutional rights that way. Just as the First Amendment protects modern forms of communications, e.g., Reno v. American Civil Liberties Union, 521 U. S. 844, 849 (1997), and the Fourth Amendment applies to modern forms of search, e.g., Kyllo v. United States, 533 U. S. 27, 35–36 (2001), the Second Amendment extends, prima facie, to all instruments that constitute bearable arms, even those that were not in existence at the time of the founding.

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/15pdf/15-133_7l48.pdf
The question under Heller is not whether citizens have adequate alternatives available for self-defense.

Rather, Heller asks whether the law bans types of firearms commonly used for a lawful purpose—regardless of whether alternatives exist. 554 U. S., at 627–629. And Heller draws a distinction between such firearms and weapons specially adapted to unlawful uses and not in common use, such as sawed-off shotguns. Id., at 624–625.
The City’s ban is thus highly suspect because it broadly prohibits common semiautomatic firearms used for lawful purposes.


Roughly five million Americans own AR-style semiautomatic rifles. See 784 F. 3d, at 415, n. 3. The overwhelming majority of citizens who own and use such rifles do so for lawful purposes, including self-defense and target shooting. See ibid. Under our precedents, that is all that is needed for citizens to have a right under the Second Amendment to keep such weapons. See McDonald, 561 U. S., at 767–768; Heller, supra, at 628–629.
=======
Heller, however, forbids subjecting the Second Amendment’s “core protection . . . to a freestanding ‘interestbalancing’ approach.” Heller, supra, at 634. This case illustrates why. If a broad ban on firearms can be upheld based on conjecture that the public might feel safer (while being no safer at all), then the Second Amendment guarantees nothing.

 

[occupied]

The problem with you Idiot anti gun nuts is that you don't understand that the Constitution says very clearly that the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. There is no qualifications to the right to keep and bear arms stated in the Bill of Rights. It doesn't say the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infirnged but the government can infringe upon your right to own a bump stock.

You stupid uneducated Moon Bats don't know anymore about the Constitution than you know about Economics, History, Climate Science, Biology or Ethics.

We Americans sure as hell don't trust you deranged Left Wing fuckers to define what is reasonable because you will always be bat shit crazy, like wanting to ban AR-15s.

By the way Moon Bat. One of the very first thing Joe Potatohead's Taliban buddies did the other day when they took over Afghanistan was to ban firearms. The Taliban get to keep their guns (supplied mostly by Potatohead) but the people can't have them. They think that is reasonable gun control just like you shitheads here at home.

Take the same responsibility for your gun politics you are hopefully taking with your guns themselves. Tell the truth and quit with the over the top bullshit. I believe we have the right to responsible gun ownership but I'll be damned if I'm on the same side of this issue with people who's arguments are all crazed fever dreams of civil wars and insidious plots.

 

[Flash]

Take the same responsibility for your gun politics you are hopefully taking with your guns themselves. Tell the truth and quit with the over the top bullshit. I believe we have the right to responsible gun ownership but I'll be damned if I'm on the same side of this issue with people who's arguments are all crazed fever dreams of civil wars and insidious plots.

You stupid uneducated dimwit Moon Bats would know what "responsible" meant if it was tattooed on your Libtard asses.

I am a responsible gun owner. I have almost 30 ARs and a M-16 They have never been used in a crime and never will.

However, many asshole Libtards think it is "responsible" to ban me from having them because the turds don't think I have a need for them.

 

[Flash]

 

[occupied]

You stupid uneducated dimwit Moon Bats would know what "responsible" meant if it was tattooed on your Libtard asses.

I am a responsible gun owner. I have almost 30 ARs and a M-16 They have never been used in a crime and never will.

However, many asshole Libtards think it is "responsible" to ban me from having them because the turds don't think I have a need for them.

Quit being a whackadoodle about it. It's hard to believe anyone that buys into the fantasies you people trade back and forth are capable of responsibility.