Trump bump stock rule overturned

[DougC]

Read more at Red State blog.

There are few things as senseless as blaming a sword for the hand that wields it. But that is the premise behind every gun control law ever written, and from the 1934 National Firearms Act until today, the federal government keeps swinging and missing on this issue.

Now, following the Supreme Court's dumping on the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATFE) bump-stock rule, Joe Biden is making a ban on "assault weapons" part of his 2024 campaign:

In the 30-second ad, shared with The Hill, Biden blames former President Trump for the conservative-leaning court’s decision on Friday.

 

[Johnny Diamond]

Yeah, fuckin waa,

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

 

[S13]

View attachment 457287

Mine was still in my trashcan... Amazing!!

 

[seeker_two]

I tend to think Trump learns from such mistakes as the bump stock ban. I hope so anyway.

I wish so....but I haven't seen anything from him indicating he'll do anything different this time around.

 

[cycleguy2300]

Kind of dangerous to start supporting bans on firearms accessories because you deem them “useless”.

Also kind of a stretch to say the bumpstock ban did anything to prevent future antigun legislation.

It was a delaying action. The left was wanting to ban much much more. While still infringement and something to fight, Trump had no control of congress and if they had used the political power of the story pass laws banning items, it likely would not have been overturned and people wouldn't have fought it and instead cheerfully surrendered the items like many did with bumpstocks and braces.

It was a painless withdrawal to defensible ground that blunted the attack and put us in a position to not only reclaim lost ground but make large advances towards "shall not be infringed".

Had bumpstocks not been banned, there is a real likelihood Congress (not Trump) would have passed legislation that not only would have been draconian, but much more difficult to overturn in the courts.

Giving up ground is a bad habit, but it is the nature of battle that it will happen.

Sent from my SM-S918B using Tapatalk

 

[Glenn B]

I wish so....but I haven't seen anything from him indicating he'll do anything different this time around.

Well, not an admission that he was wrong supporting a bump stock ban but at least he says we should respect the SCOTUS ruling. Source:

Trump's campaign says Supreme Court’s decision striking down his admin's bump stock rule ‘should be respected'

The campaign for former President Donald Trump said the Supreme Court's decision to strike down a Trump-era ban on bump stocks should be 'respected.'

www.foxnews.com

 

[Younggun]

It was a delaying action. The left was wanting to ban much much more. While still infringement and something to fight, Trump had no control of congress and if they had used the political power of the story pass laws banning items, it likely would not have been overturned and people wouldn't have fought it and instead cheerfully surrendered the items like many did with bumpstocks and braces.

It was a painless withdrawal to defensible ground that blunted the attack and put us in a position to not only reclaim lost ground but make large advances towards "shall not be infringed".

Had bumpstocks not been banned, there is a real likelihood Congress (not Trump) would have passed legislation that not only would have been draconian, but much more difficult to overturn in the courts.

Giving up ground is a bad habit, but it is the nature of battle that it will happen.

Sent from my SM-S918B using Tapatalk

Painless to people who had to either destroy their property or become felons? Painless to the businesses who were fucked?

It’s not like congress stopped trying to ban shit because of the stupid ban. And I haven’t seen any evidence they would have been any more successful without it.

This was not a 4D chess move.

 

[cycleguy2300]

Painless to people who had to either destroy their property or become felons? Painless to the businesses who were fucked?

It’s not like congress stopped trying to ban shit because of the stupid ban. And I haven’t seen any evidence they would have been any more successful without it.

This was not a 4D chess move.

Those that complied on this and braces should pretend anything different would have happened if congress banned something more.

Sent from my SM-S918B using Tapatalk

 

[DoubleDuty]

Not enough people complained to him about it. The real issue is why we allow a government that has no right to infringe on the right of the people to bear arms to infringe. Gun control came about because criminals had more influence than the law abiding citizens that are supposed to be in charge had. Apathy and stupidity is at the heart of this shit. I will say it over and over they want to rule us.

w

I wish so....but I haven't seen anything from him indicating he'll do anything different this time around.

Well it's up to us to make sure he understands that gun control violates the Constitution.

 

[vmax]

And?
What has happened between then a and now? Nothing gun related since giving in on a useless pos accessory saved the AR for quit a spell. They were prevoliously on a roll banning shit they could have went a whole lot deeper.

You say we should throw the gun grabbers and ATF a bone now and then?

Make a sacrifice to save the big picture.

How long did was the left happy with that sacrifice (which was a man's invention and his livelihood)? Did they seem satisfied and not try and take our 2A rights for a year or 2?

I can't possibly disagree with your way of thinking any more.

F*ck those people to Hell for what they are doing daily to take our rights

 

[Maverick44]

Those that complied on this and braces should pretend anything different would have happened if congress banned something more.

Sent from my SM-S918B using Tapatalk

How many do you think actually complied?

 

[Younggun]

Those that complied on this and braces should pretend anything different would have happened if congress banned something more.

Sent from my SM-S918B using Tapatalk

You shouldn’t pretend anything different would have happened if Trump hadn’t had the ATF go after braces.

It’s pure cope for people who are afraid to call out Trump for a fuckup.

 

[DoubleDuty]

You shouldn’t pretend anything different would have happened if Trump hadn’t had the ATF go after braces.

It’s pure cope for people who are afraid to call out Trump for a fuckup.

He screwed up and so did we.

 

[cycleguy2300]

You shouldn’t pretend anything different would have happened if Trump hadn’t had the ATF go after braces.

It’s pure cope for people who are afraid to call out Trump for a fuckup.

Those rightfully bellowing about this being an infringement, who then submitted and destroyed or surrendered the bumpstocks and braces, wouldn't have fought to keep any other items had congress passed laws making the infringement even more egregious than banning a toy.

Banning a toy was the same as a finger wag and wink to your kid when they made someone angry so you "did something" It took the wind out of the anti-gunners sails and prevented something much worse that people wouldn't have resisted...

Sent from my SM-S918B using Tapatalk

 

[Younggun]

Those rightfully bellowing about this being an infringement, who then submitted and destroyed or surrendered the bumpstocks and braces, wouldn't have fought to keep any other items had congress passed laws making the infringement even more egregious than banning a toy.

Banning a toy was the same as a finger wag and wink to your kid when they made someone angry so you "did something" It took the wind out of the anti-gunners sails and prevented something much worse that people wouldn't have resisted...

Sent from my SM-S918B using Tapatalk

You aren’t actually addressing the issue. Instead you are using events that never happened and have no evidence they would have happened as justification for telling people “you own that legally. Now you can destroy it or be a felon. **** you, **** your property, and **** the business that made it”

Anti gunners have tried banning things after every “mass shooting”. And they will keep doing it. Giving them bump sticks gave us nothing.

 

[DoubleDuty]

You aren’t actually addressing the issue. Instead you are using events that never happened and have no evidence they would have happened as justification for telling people “you own that legally. Now you can destroy it or be a felon. **** you, **** your property, and **** the business that made it”

Anti gunners have tried banning things after every “mass shooting”. And they will keep doing it. Giving them bump sticks gave us nothing.

And again all gun control violates the Constitution that's on the citizens and the SCOTUS for allowing it to happen. We have this garbage because we actually suck as Americans. I feel like all those who gave their lives for our country did so for nothing.

 

[Havok1]

It was a delaying action. The left was wanting to ban much much more. While still infringement and something to fight, Trump had no control of congress and if they had used the political power of the story pass laws banning items, it likely would not have been overturned and people wouldn't have fought it and instead cheerfully surrendered the items like many did with bumpstocks and braces.

It was a painless withdrawal to defensible ground that blunted the attack and put us in a position to not only reclaim lost ground but make large advances towards "shall not be infringed".

Had bumpstocks not been banned, there is a real likelihood Congress (not Trump) would have passed legislation that not only would have been draconian, but much more difficult to overturn in the courts.

Giving up ground is a bad habit, but it is the nature of battle that it will happen.

Sent from my SM-S918B using Tapatalk

So? What Congress would have passed means diddly squat unless Trump signed it into law. A pro 2a company was put out of business because of Trumps EO, and gun rights organizations spent significant time and money trying to unfuck what he did. It was hardly a “painless withdrawal”, it was just Trump not supporting gun rights like he historically hasn’t other than during his campaigns.

 

[cycleguy2300]

You aren’t actually addressing the issue. Instead you are using events that never happened and have no evidence they would have happened as justification for telling people “you own that legally. Now you can destroy it or be a felon. **** you, **** your property, and **** the business that made it”

Anti gunners have tried banning things after every “mass shooting”. And they will keep doing it. Giving them bump sticks gave us nothing.

But did you DO anything about it?

Did you refuse to comply or did you bend over and spread em? I'm saying that we WERE going to get F'd because "we" let it happen and bumpstocks was the "with lube" option... most of you complied with this and the brace rule, and will comply with the ffl rule... that is why the rights erode, not ultimately because of politically driven bans, but because they are not resisted.

Sent from my SM-S918B using Tapatalk

 

[DoubleDuty]

So? What Congress would have passed means diddly squat unless Trump signed it into law. A pro 2a company was put out of business because of Trumps EO, and gun rights organizations spent significant time and money trying to unfuck what he did. It was hardly a “painless withdrawal”, it was just Trump not supporting gun rights like he historically hasn’t other than during his campaigns.

It's still on us for letting it happen.

 

[cycleguy2300]

So? What Congress would have passed means diddly squat unless Trump signed it into law. A pro 2a company was put out of business because of Trumps EO, and gun rights organizations spent significant time and money trying to unfuck what he did. It was hardly a “painless withdrawal”, it was just Trump not supporting gun rights like he historically hasn’t other than during his campaigns.

"Veto override"

And it was effected by BATFE rule, not an EO.

Unless you have your own definitions...

Sent from my SM-S918B using Tapatalk