Bleh, and just as i posted i saw a blurb "AFT vows to work with congress .. " 

Going to end up banning it all, via law, and then decades of suits to try to get to SCOTUS to strike them down, if they have not been packed or subverted ( someone said 2 justices are going to be retiring during the next presidential term.  this could be the end of everything ).

I think today's attempt at explicit banning bump stocks by congress failed.  ( which is basically what SCOTUS said to do..  )

And while it doesn't matter now to do too much research since the bill has to be redone/introduced as regular process and will change, i think they were trying to add ALL semi auto weapons to the NFA.    "we didn't take your rights, as you can have them, but you gotta pay and register"

Hmm so something so clear as the bump stock rule being invalid, took nearly 8 years just to get to court to be nullified. Will take decades for the next one after congress passes an actual law banning them, IF it ever gets to SCOTUS...  Look how long the unconstitutional NFA has stood.. 

I wonder how many people went to jail for having one, and sat there waiting for it to be overturned.  

Our founders would be ashamed of us.

SCOTUS punched freedom in the nose today.

It wont last long. Now that SCOTUS told congress "well, just make a law" its just a matter of time.   It also means states that have banned them explicitly, they stand.  

They could have said "banning bump stocks is unconstitutional" but they didn't.  And I know why they did what they did ( staying in their lane and sticking with a ruling on the case in front of them, to avoid issues down the road ) but unfortunately it set things up for a lot of future restrictions.  "Fine, we will get congress to do it"

Same issue with a lot of other executive branch over-reach. Just says "go get it in law, then you are good". Sure, may get struck down eventually on real grounds, but most laws 'stick' until then.. decades.. 

Bump stocks are a bad idea, just legalize full auto.  No one should be prohibited from carrying any weapon they want.  If I want a turret on the back of my truck that can wipe out an entire army of invaders in under a minute, I am guaranteed that by the Constitution.  Anyone who is against that IS THE ARMY OF INVADERS and deserves to be shot hundreds of times.

I agree, however the ones that will shoot and kill you, and your dog, do not believe that. 

Something i told a kid once "ya, the sign says you have the right of way, but it wont matter if you get killed by a car for not looking first to see if they slow down" " so look first anyway"

Sat Jun 22 2024 12:29:26 EDT from IGnatius T Foobar

I am guaranteed that by the Constitution. 

May not make it thru, and it will be struck down, eventually... years?  But i guess there is now a push to get the ATF reclassify Glocks as machine guns since its 'too easy to convert'.

If they do this and dont get slapped down immediately, expect AR-15's next..

One source:

https://www.nraila.org/articles/20221107/gun-controller-wants-glocks-regulated-like-machineguns

Dammit, its the date, it is the correct story but there were newer versions from this week as its being pushed 'again'.  ill have to dig that up. 

Trump shooting: 

"Law enforcement sources told CBS News the suspect was shooting with AR-style rifle from 200-300 feet away."

Commence expanded attack on rifles. The left  just loves these events.

lol   of course she does. Evil white guy and evil scary guns. 

"During Monday's airing of The View, host Joy Behar suggested a "20 year-old white guy" buying 50 rounds of ammunition "should be reported.""

Most of that side of the fence operates that way really. They just happen to have a TV show.

Sun Jul 21 2024 11:48:45 EDT from IGnatius T Foobar

 The View always pounds on the table. 

I think in her honor i should go take a 'large capacity' magazine with a 'scary black rifle", with an "evil arm brace" that lets you fire millions or rounds a second, or something, and throw small pieces of copper coated earth killing lead down wind, at some "white trash play zone". 

Oh and yes i know an arm brace does not act like a bump stock ( even if they could "increase rate of fire to millions per second!" ). which is part of my point, she has no clue what shes talking about.

And i'm still debating on registering this stupid thing as an SBR, its really too long for a brace and still be practical, since i cant read ( previous post, ordered wrong barrel ). And too short for a stock ( without the tax ).   I have others, but this one needs to be broken in.  Sort of wish i got in on the 'free tax stamp day' during the brace fiasco this spring.  Its not like they don't already know what we have, so now its most a cost/hassle concern. 

Too long in the 'usability' standpoint, not a legal issue.   Tho i did tell it before, so sorry for a repeat: 

I had an extra lower that needed a purpose that i had forgot about. Ran across it during some of the cleaning i was doing.  I had a 9mm AR rifle and 9mm pistol. And a 223 pistol. Was wanting 223 rifle to match out the set.  Put it on the back burner, "ill do it later, no rush "  A week or so later happened to see some scratch/dent complete upper+barrel kits on sale online.  Jumped and bought it.  Turns out i cant read, or hit the wrong button, but instead of a 16 like i thought i got, it was a 10..  Sure i could have just got another barrel but the upper was still short enough that i really should replace that too.  But honestly didn't want to futz with starting over, in effect.

My 2 AR pistols are like in the 4" range. ( the 223 even has a short buffer tube. 2" if i remember right., and a special bolt to handle that ) They work fine with a brace. But 10, is long enough for me that the balance is wrong and takes both hands and is awkward.  But, as an SBR with a real stock, it would be fine as its not too short to be off balance there. 

Sun Jul 21 2024 13:38:37 EDT from zelgomer

How is it too short for a stock but too long for a brace? I'm guessing that means it's 14.5. Why can't you put a brace on a 14.5?