He never takes it off. No thought is ever going to pass through that armor.
He never takes it off. No thought is ever going to pass through that armor.Put on your thinking cap.
This bit of information is in and of itself so damning that nothing else is required.Actually you have no idea who I vote / voted for other than Trump twice
This bit of information is in and of itself so damning that nothing else is required.
This ruling is very surprising. For years I've been reading that this Supreme Court was put in place to do Trumps bidding. This ban was put in place by the Trump admin with his approval. If the above is true why would they go against him?
I'll wait for you TDS suffering phucktards to move the goalposts before you answer. Should be as funny/ sad as usual.
Thank you for saying so. That decision was absolutely pathetic and counts me out of that group.The gun nuts are cheering this decision.
Is that really fair. Am I not expected be OK voting for a guy who is sending bombs that are being dropped on children?This bit of information is in and of itself so damning that nothing else is required.
I’ll take a stab at that. Perhaps just like all the other turncoats that were once loyal to Trunptidump Antibump, they soon going to throw him under the bus too in further rulings against him.This ruling is very surprising. For years I've been reading that this Supreme Court was put in place to do Trumps bidding. This ban was put in place by the Trump admin with his approval. If the above is true why would they go against him?
I'll wait for you TDS suffering phucktards to move the goalposts before you answer. Should be as funny/ sad as usual.
Eh I disagree, I don't want anyone dying to firearms, criminals included. I say body armor for everyone.Remember the north hollywood shootout? The only people who need body armor are LEOs and military. Civilians shouldn't be allowed to own the same equipment as either.
This would be wonderful if it were not for the fact that somebody wearing body armor could kill somebody not wearing such armor with impunity after somebody else with a gun tried to stop them in their tracks with a successful take down shot of some kind. It is incumbent on those preventing others from harming innocent people to use the least force possible, but your suggestion, while preventing the overuse of force, would prevent anyone properly exercising restraint from doing anything at all. The value of idealism is not to be so idealistic that other people can get killed. That is my opinion.Eh I disagree, I don't want anyone dying to firearms, criminals included. I say body armor for everyone.
Banning silencers for people shooting at targets is the simple imposition of hysterical catastrophizing on the part of people willing to fuck others because of their own stupid fears. Unfortunately, being a liberal is not a guaranteed get out of jail card for them. In some areal liberals are just as stupid as liberals where stupid is the result of programmed ignorance and a lack of self awareness. Not their fault any more than conservatives acting similarly. Nobody can force themself to see their unconscious motivations. That takes huge effort and a deep need to see.Haven't heard an idea this stupid since flash hiders were considered "evil" components. Now everybody just buys the largest most deafening muzzle brakes they can find.
If you could pass a law with similar language as we use in Canada to prohibit full automatic and select fire you wouldn't have to worry about what the work around is. Stuff like bump stocks, gatling cranks, and forced reset triggers are all captured and prohibited:
automatic firearm means a firearm that is capable of, or assembled or designed and manufactured with the capability of, discharging projectiles in rapid succession during one pressure of the trigger;
Any electrical or mechanical device that is designed or adapted to operate the trigger mechanism of a semi-automatic firearm for the purpose of causing the firearm to discharge cartridges in rapid succession.
How sensible, but who wouldn't want Liberal Anti-Gun Syndrome victims to have on their plate new fears of being blown away. The more anti-gun they become the less likely they will be in a position to defend themselves when the Republicans take over the government and turn it into a fascist state. Here in the US many want to keep liberals terrified of the one thing Republicans fear, the right and ability if opted for of liberals to defend democracy with force if need be and that, of course, is gun ownership.If you could pass a law with similar language as we use in Canada to prohibit full automatic and select fire you wouldn't have to worry about what the work around is. Stuff like bump stocks, gatling cranks, and forced reset triggers are all captured and prohibited:
automatic firearm means a firearm that is capable of, or assembled or designed and manufactured with the capability of, discharging projectiles in rapid succession during one pressure of the trigger;
Any electrical or mechanical device that is designed or adapted to operate the trigger mechanism of a semi-automatic firearm for the purpose of causing the firearm to discharge cartridges in rapid succession.
See the 'body armor for everybody' statement. Not just cops and criminals, everybody.This would be wonderful if it were not for the fact that somebody wearing body armor could kill somebody not wearing such armor with impunity after somebody else with a gun tried to stop them in their tracks with a successful take down shot of some kind. It is incumbent on those preventing others from harming innocent people to use the least force possible, but your suggestion, while preventing the overuse of force, would prevent anyone properly exercising restraint from doing anything at all. The value of idealism is not to be so idealistic that other people can get killed. That is my opinion.
Except trump has come out against the bump stock ban lately.The exception that proves the rule.
He's been bragging about how he's very much against any gun regulation, so this is certainly one mistake he'd reverse in a heartbeat if SCOTUS hadn't.It was about the only thing Trump ever did that was right, even gun nuts hate him for that infraction of their inalienable rights.
This goes way beyond just voting for president.Actually you have no idea who I vote / voted for other than Trump twice and I also voting for Clinton once for President.
Hey and guess what, Trump is the one that banned Bump Stocks. Holy Shit!
Always leave an out and all that?This bit of information is in and of itself so damning that nothing else is required.
I mean if you guys are building exclusive clubs then per definition... Well you get the point.This goes way beyond just voting for president.
Please tell us for which party you voted for in any other elections - for both your senator, congressional rep, and local races. It's as simple as that because one party is for gun nuts and one isn't.
Funny…I’ve managed to control an M-16 on full auto fairly nicely. Of course it took lots of practice, but I’ve shot thousands upon thousands of rounds thru the m16 during my years in the military.I have mixed feelings. I have never had the slightest inclination to shoot up a crowd, or a school, or anywhere else, but if I really wanted to do the most damage, I would not want an automatic because that just empties the magazine and wastes most of the bullets which are not infinite like in some video game, and aiming would be poor as well. You don't have a "great deal of control" of a rifle bouncing back and forth, beyond use for mass shootings where you don't care that much who you hit, and most bullets don't hit anyone, is more about terrorism.
I'm not arguing that bump stocks wouldn't result in more deaths in certain dense crowd situations, but rather that there's a lot of other situations where some lunatic wasting their ammo seems like not such a bad thing. I've never used a bump stock on an AR15, but was in the military and familiar with an M16 and am pro gun ownership, but more restrictive than it is currently.
Rather than bump stock bans, I'd rather there were a FAR more restrictive standard to own assault weapons and AR15 (among others) be classified as one nationally, because that's what it is misused for. Yes I am stating the obvious, but the point is, limiting the accessibility of guns, present and future models, worthwhile to put a bump stock on to begin with, not just automatics. "Assault Weapon" needs redefined.