.

Supreme Court won't touch bump stock ban (C&P)

cbxjeffcbxjeff Member Posts: 14,549 ✭✭✭
Well I thought that this would be the case.  Justice Neil Gorsuch, a Trump appointee, agreed with his colleagues that the court should not grant a review of the lawsuit, although he said the federal appeals court in Washington, D.C., used the wrong logic in upholding the ban and suggested he would be open to hearing the issue at a future date.
It's too late for me, save yourself.

Comments

  • mohawk600mohawk600 Member Posts: 2,266 ✭✭✭
    Fostech or Franklin
  • Don McManusDon McManus Member Posts: 21,507 ✭✭✭✭
    The ban is 100% based upon a false premise.  Every justice knows it, but they will not take a stand against this act of changing a law by fiat.  So much for electing republicans because of Supreme Court picks.

    Freedom and a submissive populace cannot co-exist.

    Brad Steele
  • cbxjeffcbxjeff Member Posts: 14,549 ✭✭✭
    As I see it, the pull of the trigger fires one shot only.  The fact that if the bump stock, if used as designed, the entire rifle moves slightly forward and upon rebound back to it's original position the trigger is pulled once again resulting in a second round being fired. Hence, one round is fired with every trigger pull.  This is what's called semi-automatic (as most of us on the forum know). I sure agree with Justice Gorsuch. A friend of mine demonstrated this to me buy holding his AR at waist level and indeed, only one round was fired just as if there were no bump stock at all.
    It's too late for me, save yourself.
Sign In or Register to comment.