I think that it's Project 2025, but everything else you described is spot on.
You went into a ton of detail, thank you. But it is meaningless under the original definition of the act.
"The term shall also include the frame or receiver of any such weapon, any part designed and intended solely and exclusively, or combination of parts designed and intended, for use in converting a weapon into a machinegun, and any combination of parts from which a machinegun can be assembled if such parts are in the possession or under the control of a person."
A bump stock modifies the frame of the gun which converts it into a fully automatic weapon. Don't just get stuck on the trigger part of the action. The act covers everything, you just can't cherry pick a single clause and ignore everything else. Otherwise they just might make you into one of Trump's Supreme Court justices.
Thank you for your detailed explanation.
The problem appears to be a lack of enforcement of already established law. Well, if you were permitted to ignore the law why the hell wouldn't you? That is my entire thesis. Stop allowing "important" public figures flout the law.
I'm not sure of the person you refer to (sorry, not American) but surely that's the problem. Not applying the law equally. Can a common murderer or thief decide that a legal direction doesn't apply to them?
So much twaddle and dancing around definitions. You could definitely qualify for a spot on Trump's Supreme Court.
All they are a modification to turn a semiautomatic gun into a full automatic weapon. That's it. All the intricate dribble into the contrary doesn't change that. Water is wet, sky blue, and modifications allowing automatic fire are machine guns.
What I find fascinating is the total number of numbskulls and cartoon villains, all collected under the Trump banner, and that lunatic mob may very well take government.
What's the hell wrong with American voters?
Never said he was. The constitution doesn't have categories of importance.
That excellent quote of the text you provided spells out that any modifications to a gun that allows any more than a single shot is to be prohibited. A court that is very big on textual meaning, as it purports to be, would readily agree, unless bias is in the driver's seat.
This conservative supreme court despised regulatory agencies . For decades the US government has relied upon such agencies as subject experts and has allowed them to regulate their areas. This court just wants to reverse this common sense and established way of doing things. I might remind you that the bump stock thing wasn't a democrat initiative, but a bipartisan Trump one.
I disagree with the accuracy of what you just said, but 100% agree with your sentiments.
I actually looked up the legalisation one time. Congress described a machine gun and gave all the definitions that were forbidden to alter it to make it automatic fire. It was pretty comprehensive, particularly given that it was written in the 80s. However this supreme court said that the magic words 'bump stock' wasn't in the legalisation. Words that didn't even exist until 2003, or thereabouts. The court ignored the legislative text completely.
And I don't believe that you are a gun nut at all. You seem perfectly reasonable and make a good point.
I think that arresting a Supreme isn't going to happen. For a start the legal machinations and appeals will take at least two years. But, a subpoena is at least fighting back, and a threat. What is the alternative? Hand wringing?
The Conservatives wake up each and every day actively trying to destroy the American republic. Do you think that overturning Roe was just luck? That was a 25 year process. I'm not advocating violence, but just not taking it when your balls get stomped. There are shocking things that can be done. Boosting the bench to overcome the current bias, bringing in terms limits, and subpoenas for corruption. The subpoena won't necessarily lead to impeachment or arrest, but it will bring out every little dirty detail in public. Do you think that's not a threat to a dirty bench?
Not so, I believe that Steve Bannon is going to the lockup for ignoring his in a week or so. I don't fancy that the supremes will want to risk that. It just takes will to apply the law. That's it.
Of course, the Dems will huff and puff and do nothing.
I'm not calling the insurrectionists good people, I'm calling the defenders of the constitution who might catch an AR 15 round good people.
Subpoena them one by one and confront them about specific issues. For instance Thomas and all those billionaire friends who keep dropping money in his lap. Congress committees have the power to do this.
Let sunlight into the dirty little acts of corruption and impeach. Hit them instead of just complaining all the damn time. Also, six or seven year term limits. Then every single president will get a chance to appoint a couple and the bench makeup will be more balanced.
I guess my point is not that they'll necessarily be successful, it's more that a great many good people won't go home to their families that night.
They weren't successful last time and the Republican Congress welcomed the traitor-in-chief back to DC last week as a hero.
The Republicans get away with so much despicable action and each time the Dems get pants by the audacity of the attempt. That's how we are here now.
The conservatives will try absolutely anything, up to and including armed insurrection. Now with AR15s, and probably with bumpstocks fitted.
Don't think that it could never happen. The MAGA element love being underestimated.
In a way, he is. He's now claiming that black people will relate to him now as he is a fellow victim of systemic judicial persecution.