Bump for update: US appeals court blocks ban on rapid-fire ‘bump stocks’

[41mag]

To me it is more about the “overreach“ …..
I don’t have any bump stocks, don’t care, don’t want one. But I don’t want to be told I can’t have one if I want it.

 

[Gingerbeard Man]

It's funny how bump stock threads always devolve into name-calling...

That was my thought exactly. And why I chose to not engage. You'd think someone with 62 years on this planet could have a civil discussion without making it personal.

Oh well, he's banned. Don't think anyone will shed a tear about that.

 

[Mrs_Esterhouse]

The ban was ruled unconstitutional and there is currently no stay. It seems they are legal now, no?

 

[palmettomoon]

The ban was ruled unconstitutional and there is currently no stay. It seems they are legal now, no?

At least until the Pollock is turned loose by his alphabet agency handlers to use one against some innocents.

 

[BIKER13]

He'll be back they always come back

 

[spencer60]

The ban was ruled unconstitutional and there is currently no stay. It seems they are legal now, no?

That court only covers Mississippi, Louisiana, Texas, and the Canal Zone. So if you live in one of those you could try your luck.

That being said, since there was a long period where owning a bump stock was illegal everywhere, they could still get you for owning an illegal machinegun if you suddenly show up with a functional SlideFire.

That is unless you could prove it was produced after this ruling took effect.

 

[Mrs_Esterhouse]

That court only covers Mississippi, Louisiana, Texas, and the Canal Zone. So if you live in one of those you could try your luck.

That being said, since there was a long period where owning a bump stock was illegal everywhere, they could still get you for owning an illegal machinegun if you suddenly show up with a functional SlideFire.

That is unless you could prove it was produced after this ruling took effect.

If it was unconstitutional, its date of production should not matter. The ruling struck down the ATF's ban.

 

[Fatal_Bert]

It was all part of Orange man's plan, and we still forsakend him.

 

[SpeedyR]

It will be interesting to see if SCOTUS takes the case now that there are two higher level opposing decisions...

My only hope is that they come down with something similar to what was brought about over the EPA. just the basic idea but they/SCOTUS said that the EPA was far overreaching in what they were doing. If there are major issues affecting a lot of people (emissions for coal burning plants for example) it needed to be done legislatively (i.e. congress) instead of by rulings by a non elected group (EPA). At least that was what I got out of the SCOTUS ruling on the EPA...

we could only hope to have something similar with the BATFE...

 

[unheard]

common sense dictates that nobody really needs them

Luckily, cOmMoN sEnSe has absolutely 0 input in what I deem needed for myself.

Trump and the NRA recommended a regulatory approach rather than letting Congress run wild after the Las Vegas shooting.

If you want to see why, just take a look at Florida's ridiculous law about 'rate limiting' and imagine that on a national scale.

The bump-stock ban was simply a narrowly targeted way to short circuit knee-jerk legislation that would (not could, WOULD) have been far worse and affected all gun owners.

The good news is that it really was done illegally. Even though it's taken years, with the now mixed decisions in various circuits we may get a good SCOTUS ruling on overreach out of this.

I'd love to see them address the 'takings' issue here as well. But so far they haven't heard any of those cases.

I'm sure that was totally the reason for The Great Cheeto's® reasoning behind this.