Guns & Outdoors Forum

The SCOTUS does the right thing and overturns Orange Man’s directive to the AFT to ban bump stocks by changing rules they do not have the authority to change.


Am I bashing Trump? You bet your ass I am. He was a president. Not a dictator. You think bump stocks were stupid and pointless? I really don’t disagree. But alphabet agencies do not have the ability to change laws and declare they are now verboten. Only our elected representatives do. By taking votes, with constituents input. Which changes laws, which then allows alphabet soup to enforce such.

Thankfully this was overturned. As well as the pistol brace rule has been, in at least one case. And most likely will be in the other pending cases. And if it makes it to scotus, it will be overturned as well.
The fox doesn’t get to guard the hen house. It’s Almost like the founders saw this coming and designed it as such…

https://www.youtube.com/live/MBSIikUgmA ... j04ILXmPbu

While I agree with you, Biden is riding hard on ban assault weapons again. While he empties the federal reserves to lower gas prices. But watch for a bill to ban bump stocks, braces and any gun that they can be used with. I hope I'm wrong. But.....

I fear that you're correct Ron

Well of course they will introduce legislation. Thats what they do.
Thats what both sides do.
Because that’s the legal process. I’m ok with that. I may not like the legislation, but at least there’s a process to follow to squash it.

That fight will NEVER end.

But hopefully this ban shtuff on a whim because the president says to will stop.

…and the guy that brought the case to the Supremes is a black, gay, libertarian-leaning Republican from Austin, TX.

Michael Cargill is awesome. He taught my wife’s CHL class, and I’ve bought a poop of guns from him. Cool dude.

Saw an interesting take on the bump stock ban and the reasons behind it. Dont know if its true, but it makes a bit of sense that a supposed pro gun pres would do it.
Allowing the AFT to screw with bump stocks stopped the dem legecritters from looking into the meaning of "automatic" until after the SCOTUS picks. Came from Mark Smith who is pretty sharp and gives the reasoning behind stuff even if you dont like it.

Varmintmist wrote: ↑Fri Jun 14, 2024 5:06 pm Saw an interesting take on the bump stock ban and the reasons behind it. Dont know if its true, but it makes a bit of sense that a supposed pro gun pres would do it.
Allowing the AFT to screw with bump stocks stopped the dem legecritters from looking into the meaning of "automatic" until after the SCOTUS picks. Came from Mark Smith who is pretty sharp and gives the reasoning behind stuff even if you dont like it.

May be believable if DJT didn’t hadn’t of said that due process in taking guns took too long.

Varmintmist wrote: ↑Fri Jun 14, 2024 5:41 pm https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jrsdS8QNc94

About the 10 minute 30 second mark is where he starts talking about what our redhead spoke of above. That way you can skip right to it and not have to look at his hair. The hair on the guy on the YouTube. We all know redheads, you can’t stare at their head or they will steal your soul.

Been working on the lathe all day while the thoughts swirl in my head and I realized why we are in the predicament that we are in. People are stupid. Congress has a 10% approval rating yet 90% re-election rating. People don't vote for what's best. They vote on who they think will suppress the "other guy." Or, out of familiarity they keep voting for the same thing in fear of trying something new.

That's like going to a restaurant and getting the same item every time, although you don't like it very much at that particular place, but you're too afraid to try something else because it "could" be worse. There's a particular generation of people that are too damn scared to try something new and we are all paying for it.

The 10% people approve of if "my guy/gal." That's why 90% of them get re-elected. They retire when they've been serviced by the country to their satisfaction.

Keep in mind that only a third of USA “citizens” vote even during a presidential election and far less on the other elections. Anyone else who is a red blooded American see a problem with that?
While I am no 100% backer of so called “Cheeto Jesus”, this republic cannot survive another 4 years of Obiden.
And, like the saying goes, if I’m not on a government list, someone isn’t doing their job. (And I don’t GAF!)

Pretty sure I have heard the "we can't survive 4 more years" argument at least 4 times in my lifetime. That is 16 years we couldn't survive we somehow survived. Pretty sure we will survive the next one too. The cheetoh Jesus wasn't playing 5D chess. He has always been, and will always be an anti gunner at heart. He told everyone in his book. He thinks/thought the Presidency is/was a Monarchy and he can only pander in the face of his true beliefs for so long. If re-elected look for more of the same.

FJB wrote: ↑Fri Jun 14, 2024 10:04 pm Keep in mind that only a third of USA “citizens” vote even during a presidential election and far less on the other elections. Anyone else who is a red blooded American see a problem with that?
While I am no 100% backer of so called “Cheeto Jesus”, this republic cannot survive another 4 years of Obiden.
And, like the saying goes, if I’m not on a government list, someone isn’t doing their job. (And I don’t GAF!)

Yes. I agree. We won’t survive another 4 years of Biden!

Just like….we couldn’t survive another four years of EVERY DEMOCRAT PRESIDENT of the last 30 years. Just ask every Fox News talking head or boomer in the coffee shops.

But I do get that THIS TIME it’s VERY different. A grave situation.

Just like, every other election for the past 30 years.

Only in America can a New York Democrat become the head and guiding figure of the Republican party.

I might buy one if they are not too pricy. They are absolutely the stupidest firearm accessory ever, but I figure if 10-20-100 million gun owners go out and buy one now it might send a message. You damn sure won't get any Dems voting for any bans in a close election.

Ironically, the only thing I have noticed a difference in by whoever the president is, is gas prices and my 2A rights. If I could be guaranteed beyond a shadow of a doubt that those two things wouldn't get fugged up, I'd never give a solitary damn about who's elected again. Hell I wouldn't even vote again. I honestly don't ask for much.

Since I ride, and ride hard, on the horse of the NFA and GCA being the things that need to go away, I tend to regard all this bump stock kerfuffle as working to overturn the wrong law.

Hunter Biden's a slimy little lefty-larva, but I'll always maintain that the 4473 is a violation of our 5th Amendment right of not having to self-incriminate. I don't care if you're coked to the gills and armed with a flamethrower - until you point that flamethrower at someone for reasons other than self defense, I see no reason to take you to court, let alone jail.

But still, a bump stock win. . . I'll take it. It does bode well for the fights against the AWB's and mag limits that are making their way up the SCOTUS chain.

Of course the Dems are going to double down on their stupid, but as I've said elsewhere, I've come to regard it as almost a positive: NY and CA's response to the recent SCOTUS rulings has been to attempt to go even farther down their road of restrictions to the point you can't even call it an attempt at public safety anymore - - it's just gun owner harassment, plain as day, which makes our counter arguments easier.

I wouldn't put too much stock in this ruling being indicative of how the Supremes will rule. I believe this ruling was on separation of powers and not 2 A grounds.

BTW, something I read on Twitter was a fellow who found it super easy to bump fire an AR with the silly CA shark fin pistol grip. Said rhe fin encourages a looser grip that facilitates bump fire.

breamfisher wrote: ↑Sat Jun 15, 2024 4:41 pm I wouldn't put too much stock in this ruling being indicative of how the Supremes will rule. I believe this ruling was on separation of powers and not 2 A grounds.

Ding Ding Ding

This is about executive fiat becoming law. The supremes said no bueno. If they want to regulate such things, then congress should write better law.

Separation of powers.

Another part of the Constitution.

Rugerfan wrote: ↑Sun Jun 16, 2024 12:00 amIMG_3212.jpeg

HA!

It's a good indicator when alot of people kept their bumpstocks, although they couldn't use them anywhere. That means they knew they couldn't use them out in public but may have been willing to use them in their home, if you catch my drift.