Posts Tagged machine guns

Judge Dismisses Compensation Lawsuit For Bump Stocks

A federal claims court this week dismissed a lawsuit from bump stock owners that had alleged the U.S. government was improperly forcing them to destroy their devices without compensation.
Bump stock owners filed the $500,000 lawsuit in March, after a federal reclassification of bump stocks as machine guns effectively outlawed their possession. The reclassification was prompted by the October 2017 mass shooting in Las Vegas.

, , , , , ,

No Comments

Gun Laws America REALLY Needs

From The Federalist:

For various reasons, perhaps including his waffling on guns, it is not certain that Trump will be reelected in 2020. But if he stops listening to members of his family who support gun control, if the Republican Senate quashes Democrats’ gun schemes, if Trump is reelected, if the Republicans hold the Senate, and if they re-take the House of Representatives—a lot of ifs—he and the Republicans could change federal gun laws for the better.
Aggressively pursuing these changes and explaining to the American people why the changes are warranted would help protect the right of the people to keep and bear arms. By now, supporters of that right should have figured out that they will never win the war to protect it if they remain catatonic when the opportunity to pass good laws exists, then cower when Democrats and the liberal-left media attack in the minutes, hours, and days after a high-profile crime involving a gun.

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

No Comments

Op-Ed Doesn’t Understand What Returning To ’60s Gun Laws Would Mean

From Washington Post:

My proposal is simply that we revert to the gun laws that prevailed in the United States around 1960. From a public-safety standpoint, that was far from a perfect world. The cheap revolvers called “Saturday night specials” ruled the night in many cities. Loopholes as to the sale and registration of long arms allowed the importation of the mail-order rifle that Lee Harvey Oswald used to kill President John F. Kennedy in 1963.

, , , , , ,

No Comments

The National Firearms Act Primer

From Guns.com:

Introduced into the 73rd Congress on May 28, 1934, as H.R. 9741 by U.S. Rep. Robert “Bob” Doughton, a North Carolina Democrat, the legislation sailed through Capitol Hill in less than a month. For historical perspective, the country was amid the Great Depression and lawmakers in the same Democrat-controlled Congress also sped the Securities Act, which established the Securities and Exchange Commission, and the National Industrial Recovery Act, which established the Public Works Administration, to the waiting hands of President Franklin Roosevelt for signature. The measure passed both chambers on a voice vote, with no record of which lawmakers approved it.

, , , , , , , , , ,

No Comments

ATF’s Continued Bad Rulings

From The Federalist:

As Davis noted, in 2010 the agency said bump stocks weren’t “machineguns,” that a bump stock “performs no automatic function when installed. In order to use the installed device [the bump stock], the shooter must apply constant forward pressure with the non-shooting hand and constant rearward pressure with the shooting hand.”

Rejecting its 2010 determination, the BATFE now says that a bump stock causes a semi-automatic firearm to fire “in a manner that allows the trigger to reset and continue firing without additional physical manipulation of the trigger by the shooter.”

, , , , , , , , , , ,

No Comments

Enforcing Unconstitutional Laws

From Bearing Arms:

The answer to that is that I believe the laws on the book need to be enforced, even if they’re wrong. They need to be enforced until they’re no longer on the books. By arguing that unconstitutional laws shouldn’t be followed–an argument I understand completely–you open the door for people to make that same argument about any number of other subjects.

, , , , , ,

No Comments

Machine Guns On Trial

From Ammoland:

A panel for the United States Third Circuit Court of Appeals has affirmed a district court ruling and sided with the government against a man who was authorized by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives to manufacture a post-1986 machine gun through a trust, only to have the permission rescinded and his property confiscated. In doing so, and by ignoring founding intent behind the Second Amendment, the panel ruled the right of Americans to own militia-suitable firearms can not only be infringed, but that it’s not even a right.

, , , , , , , , , ,

No Comments