• Rapidcreek@lemmy.worldOP
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    41
    ·
    28 days ago

    "As a firearms owner myself, there’s no legitimate use for a bump stock – not for self defense, not in a law enforcement context, not even in military applications … but what they are tailor made for is a mass shooting.

    Sen. Martin Heinrich (D) of New Mexico

    • Semi-Hemi-Lemmygod@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      26
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      28 days ago

      There’s lots of non-legitimate ways people use guns. For example, I’ve only ever shot them for fun. I imagine being able to have a simulated machine gun experience without all the red tape is pretty fun.

      However, we outlawed three-wheeled ATVs despite them being fun so it’s not an argument.

      • 555@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        19
        ·
        28 days ago

        If you want to fire a machine gun, go to a range that has a machine gun.

      • FuglyDuck@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        17
        ·
        28 days ago

        There’s plenty of ranges that you can rent much more fun automatic weapons, and really the red tape isn’t that bad for that.

        Bump stocks legitimately suck.

      • BrianTheeBiscuiteer@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        27 days ago

        I have no problem with regular people having the ability to shoot machine guns or similar auto-fire weapons but for God’s sake license that shit!

  • AutoTL;DR@lemmings.worldB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    28 days ago

    This is the best summary I could come up with:


    Sen. Martin Heinrich, a New Mexico Democrat, requested that his bill banning bump stocks be brought up for a vote under unanimous consent, a procedure in which a measure passes so long as no lawmaker objects.

    In rising to object, Ricketts said it was “another day in the Democrat summer of show votes” and argued that the bill “is about banning as many firearm accessories as possible.”

    The Supreme Court’s conservative justices found that the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives overstepped its authority in prohibiting the devices, concluding that a semi-automatic rifle outfitted with a bump stock is not the same as a machine gun because the trigger still must be released and reengaged to fire each shot.

    The ban, which went into effect in 2019, came after a gunman, who used semi-automatic rifles equipped with the accessories, killed 60 people at a Las Vegas music festival in one of the deadliest mass shootings in modern U.S. history.

    “A bump stock does not convert a semiautomatic rifle into a machine gun any more than a shooter with a lightning-fast trigger finger does,” Justice Clarence Thomas wrote in the majority opinion.

    In a concurring opinion, Justice Samuel Alito said the Las Vegas massacre strengthened the case for changing the law to ban bump stocks.


    The original article contains 527 words, the summary contains 215 words. Saved 59%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!

  • bloodfart@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    27 days ago

    The Supreme Court was low key right to overturn atfs bump stock ban, so going through congress to get a ban is the right way to do it, but…

    It’s a dumb thing to blow political capital on.