DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Palus Politicus Cargill vs Garland

I posted a link to a reference that details that.

It seems you feel making the tool he used to commit this horrific crime legitimate and legal is the perfect solution. Awishing to use heroin can find it if they're determined enough so maybe heroin should be legal? So increasing the number of rounds he could fire that rapidly had no impact on how many people he was able to kill? You should inform the victims families of that.

There is no reason other than how quickly a machine gun expends rounds that would have ever have caused them to become illegal.

It took over an hour before police made contact with Paddock after he started shooting into the crowd. Over 3600 seconds. At one round a second, well you can figure that one out. He only fired about 1000 rounds. One for every 3 seconds. Having loaded and read magazines had more to do with this than a bump stock.

Machineguns weren't made illegal in 1934. So I see you didn't bother reading anything that might actually have facts and not just panic porn.

BTW.. bump stocks are still not machine guns and Mr Cold Cheese on a Cold Burger on a Cold grill couldn't get his horribly named bill through.

It is called “closing the loophole” to eliminate an omission not contemplated at the time it was written.

Bump stocks reduce the accuracy of the gun. That much was evident in Las Vegas when quantity was more important than accuracy.

Which is all to say bump stocks are not machine guns and the ATF attempted to reclassify them through executive action instead of legislative action and were told they cannot do that.

In essence they have been told they can’t do it through executive actions or legislative actions. Damn the people who want to control these types of guns. Let the bullets spray from my cold blooded hands!

My interpretation is that SCOTUS said it had to be legislative.

You mention how long it was before police made contact with the shooter. What you didn't say was how many rounds he fired in what amount of time. He fired 11000 rounds in 11 minutes. A bump stock makes a weapon PERFORM like a machine gun. Trying to twist that into something else isn't going to work. And yes, they made machine guns illegal in 1934 because criminal gangs were killing mass amounts of people with them. WHEN they outlawed machine guns doesn't change WHY they outlawed them.

And when you make a weapon perform like a machine gun with a part made solely for that reason it too should be against the law. And it was until the SCOTUS decided that it was okay to manufacture and use a part that made such a weapon PERFORM like a machine gun.


[video:youtube][/youtube]

Can you see the difference? Can you hear the rate of fire at the Las Vegas shooting? All of your empty words to the contrary can't change that.

Senate GOP blocks effort by Democrats to pass bump stock ban after Supreme Court ruling

https://www.cnn.com/2024/06/18/politics/senate-bump-stock-ban-bill/index.html

Was anyone expecting sanity on this issue from the GOP?

SCOTUS told the ATF they cannot change a statue through executive action. They must do so through legislative action.

I have not found anything that puts his number of rounds in that order of magnitude. You will need to cite a source for that. I have seen as high as near 1100. Until you can cite a source you are wrong and everything else you said is irrelevant.

I never expect sanity from then, surprisingly they showed some.

Yes, I know that people such as yourself want semi automatic weapons that spit out rinds like a fully automatic weapon be in the hands of everyone. I'm not sure if it's because you actually want to see more corpses at mass shootings or for the upcoming civil war so many of your ilk keep threatening. But either way nothing good can come from it. I know, I know...... Mah rights! Freedimb! Murica!

Goal post move. It's really all you have.

Then why are you upholding the Senate keeping them legal? That only accomplishes one thing. Increases rapidity of rounds expended. You don't hunt with a weapon firing in a fully automatic manner. You can't accurately target shoot with a weapon that expends rounds that quickly.

The only thing they're good for is aiming into a mass of people closely together to create a higher casualty count. So why do you support that is now an option for every American who can purchase a firearm?

First you claimed it was the method by which the law was passed you objected to. You said it should have gone through congress. Now when congress refuses to pass the law you support them not passing the law. That in and of itself is moving the goal post. And as per usual, rather than address it you deflect by blaming the person who is asking after you are the one who moved the goal post. But I'm not surprised you would rather blame me for asking you than you actually addressing the question. It's a typical way people dodge things they don't wish to address them these days.

It should be the congress that changes the law.

I don't agree with a ban on bump stocks.

Those two things are consistent.

Moving the goal posts is claiming 11000 rounds were fired then saying someone wants everyone dead because you cannot admit you made stuff up again.

Lay off the panic Kool aid. It would do you good.

9-11 minutes.



11 minutes



OVER 1100 rounds.

Las Vegas massacre gunman fired over 1,100 rounds, sheriff says

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/las-ve...man-fired-over-1100-rounds-sheriff-says/

Still deflecting from answering the question by questioning the actual facts of what those concert goers went through that night I see.

So not the 11000 you said then?

Since now you have evidence it was even more rounds than that does it make you feel better about supporting the Senates decision not to ban bump stocks? I see you're still avoiding addressing my question like the plague. I'm not surprised by that.

Still cannot admit you were wrong.

It wasn't 11,000 like you clamed. Not even close to it.

I have shown you that it was actually more than 1100 in a 9-11 minute time frame. Its not my fault you are in denial of the facts. Anyone who bothers to watch the videos of the shooting can hear just how rapidly a bump stock makes a weapon fire. I'm sorry that your closely help personal beliefs outweigh facts in your world. There are full length videos of the entire shooting but the gun is firing far too rapidly for me to keep count as they are fired. I'm sure that law enforcement which has confirmed the amount if rounds that were expended slowed the video down to get an accurate count. But according to you they must be lying too. Yes, they are all part of the deep state in an effort to lie about how many rounds were fired in Las Vegas at a mass shooting in an 11 minute time frame.

According to the video you posted:

30 round mag.
AR-15.

In semi auto you can empty it in 6 seconds. 5 rounds per second.
With a bump stock, that goes to 4 seconds. About 7 rounds per second.
With a full auto, 2 seconds - 15 per second.

According to the video you posted.

Try it arch. Try to fire off 1100 rounds in 11 minutes or less by squeezing the trigger. It seems your claim is that a man can squeeze a trigger 1100+ times in 11 minutes or less. Watch how quickly your trigger finger slows down after some rounds. You may be correct for a couple of hundreds of rounds or so if even that. But after that it doesn't work that way. You may be able to empty a 30 round magazine that quickly at first, but not for long.

1100 != 11000

Do you see how YOU were wrong now? I don't think it can be more obvious.

I don't know what you're talking about. I guess you don't either. I based my numbers off the video you posted.

Maybe he didn't watch the video and just googled and blind posted. That really does seem to make the most sense at times.

For him, generally. He googles headlines that say what he wants, posts them, and when I read the actual article, too often it says exactly what he didn't want it to say.

Watch, tomorrow around 9-9:30, he'll be here to lambaste me for stating what everyone can see.

Panic porn needs to get you hooked. Some are addicted to it.

j/c

I spent the last 5 minutes or so wading into the weeds to a point I almost couldn't see my way out.

Numbers.
Rounds per minute.

All of this convo is well and good, I suppose, but: it still skirts around the central issue. The SCOTUS just made it legal for your neighbor down the street to purchase an accessory that makes his firearm more potentially lethal by an order of magnitude. And you don't know what's going on in your neighbor's house or head... or when/where he decides to aim his newly juiced-up tool.

That s# chills me to my core.
Can anyone converse about that aspect of this story?

Can anyone openly discuss the repercussions of such a decision?

There were precious few executive orders issued by POTUS45 that I approved of, but this was one. And I approved 100%. Still do. This SC just wiped that public protection away. For all of us.
And we all have neighbors. Neighbors who live on our we don't really know.

Are We The People safer, for this decision? Was our collective good served by this?
How does this decision impact you, when it's framed like this?

We should be able to have a couple/few different conversations about this SCOTUS decision.
Real Life is always lived in the nuances.

SCOTUS made the right call legally. TheATF overstepped their authority. Agreeing with the end or not, we can't have the executive deciding to change laws. Consider an executive that decides abortion is now covered under federal murder definitions. It seems far fetched but when you continue to let the executive one up the last one you will end up with horrible orders.

Bump stocks were not defined as machine guns for about 10 years, a position the ATF repeatedly took. Then one madman uses one and the ATF reverses course.

What does this mean for public safety? If you ask the alarmists, we are all going to die because of this. In reality it means very little. We are no more safer or at risk. There has been one mass shooting utilizing bump stocks. A mass shooting that saw a madman plan and train prior. I do not believe the bump stocks (he had lots of rifles at the ready), he had a position of elevation and he had 22,000 people penned in and distracted. Planning, preparation and circumstance played more of a role in this that a pieces of plastic.

That neighbor down the street could have already owned a bump stock, or they could just not care about the legality of it to start with. Usually people that are willing to commit murder, especially mass murder, aren't overly concerned about what's legal and what isn't. BUt there are so many things that neighbor could be buying legally that would be dangerous. How about gun powder? But enough to blow up the block. In Baltimore I am not allowed to store more than 5 pounds of smokeless powder without a permit. There's no one checking. The City doesn't pop by for an inspection to see if we have some. One doesn't need to be clever to to avoid people noticing how much you are buying.

Seriously, the upset on this is more sportsball politics.

Calling reality panic porn won't change the reality.

Colorado A.G.

Statement from Attorney General Phil Weiser regarding Supreme Court decision rejecting national bump stock ban

“The purpose of a bump stock is to turn a firearm into an automatic weapon, or what is known as a machinegun under federal law. A common-sense reading of the law shows that bump stocks are exactly the type of device that Congress wanted banned nationwide under federal gun laws. The 2018 rule by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms defining bump stocks as machineguns was designed to prevent mass shootings and save lives. The only people who benefit from today’s dangerous Supreme Court decision rolling back the national ban on bump stocks are shooters who want to kill as many people as possible with a firearm.

“Today’s decision increases the risk of more deaths from gun violence. And it will put law enforcement at greater risk when they respond to dangerous calls. Despite this setback, we will continue to enforce and defend Colorado’s common sense gun safety laws and do all we can to prevent the senseless tragedies caused by gun violence that have claimed far too many lives.”

--------------------------------------------------------------

Attorney General Schwalb Leads Coalition Urging Supreme Court To Uphold Ban on Bump Stocks

WASHINGTON, DC – Attorney General Brian L. Schwalb led a group of 23 state attorneys generals urging the U.S. Supreme Court to uphold a federal rule banning bump stocks, devices that effectively convert semiautomatic firearms into illegal automatic weapons. In an amicus brief filed in Garland v. Cargill, the coalition urges the Supreme Court to overturn an appellate court’s decision striking down a 2018 regulation that clarified that the federal law banning machine guns also bans bump stock-type devices. The attorneys general assert that the rule aligns with longstanding policies prohibiting automatic weapons and argue that overturning it would pose a threat to public safety and the safety of law enforcement officers.

“Bump stocks were deliberately developed and marketed to circumvent federal law banning civilian use of automatic weapons,” said Attorney General Schwalb. “These devices are designed to convert semiautomatic firearms to illegal machine guns, with foreseeable tragic and deadly consequences. We urge the Supreme Court to prioritize public safety and the safety of law enforcement officers by upholding a reasonable, well-established rule classifying bump stocks as banned automatic weapons.”

https://oag.dc.gov/release/attorney-general-schwalb-leads-coalition-urging

Yes, you can play some gotchya moments and label common sense with some lame name, but this is what it is. These devices were made with the only intent being to make a semi automatic weapon perform as a fully automatic weapon.

And no arch, I didn't expect you would engage your brain and listen to how fast a weapon with a bump stock actually fires compared to a semi automatic. No surprise there.

But there's one thing about it one can be sure of. Now that the SCOTUS has settled this matter and there are so many nut jobs out there threatening civil war, I will make sure to have my bump stocks. One thing I won't risk is being outgunned by a bunch of Whack A Moles. Because I'm fully aware of what a bump stock accomplishes unlike those who refuse to admit it. And no amount of BS coming from the likes of you can or will change that.

And when the Senate refused to pass legislation to ban bump stocks you supported it. This has never been about how the law was enacted. It was about bump stocks staying legal. If not you wouldn't have supported the senate insuring they remained legal.

You didn't try to quote Democratic AGs like their word on bump stocks was anything more than the party line of "guns bad, ban ban ban" did you? Like I said.. panic porn, and we can add confirmation bias.


Shocked I am shocked. (does that need purple?)

I can actually have more than one opinion on things, and they are congruent.

The executive should not be changing law, or promulgating laws when they conflict with statutory law. This is how our country is supposed to work. This is how it was written in the foundational document, this is what the supporting text written by the founders says.

Bump stocks are merely an accessory. I have never supported gun bans. Not for accessories, not for arms, not for ammo.

Those two things exist in harmony. The Cargill case does allow for my belief against bans but I can still believe the government went about it incorrectly. The did the wrong thing for the wrong reason. I understand that doesn't mesh with your need for outrage porn.

What doesn't mesh is your agenda is about keeping bump stocks legal rather than how they became illegal. Otherwise you wouldn't have supported the senate keeping them legal. This isn't difficult.

"We are aware of a device called a bump stock ... that enables an individual to speed up the discharge of ammunition," Clark County Sheriff Joe Lombardo said during a news conference on Tuesday afternoon, though he declined to give more details. The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives is working with the FBI to assess Paddock's weapons.

https://www.npr.org/2017/10/03/5553...use-a-device-that-helped-him-fire-faster

GREEN BAY, Wis. (WBAY) - The Supreme Court on Friday struck down a Trump-era ban on bump stocks, a rapid-fire gun accessory that was used in the deadliest mass shooting in modern U.S. history.

The ruling is sparking reactions nationwide. In our area, a retired police chief spoke about what he thinks this ruling means for public safety and community concerns.

The high court maintains that banning gun accessories that allow semiautomatic rifles to fire more quickly is unlawful. In response, Richard Myers, a retired police chief from Appleton and the vice chair of the non-partisan group Police Leaders for Community Safety, wanted to highlight that deadly massacre in Las Vegas. In that instance, a gunman used bump stocks to fire over 1,000 rounds into a concert crowd.

The gunman killed sixty people and wounded hundreds more; it was the deadliest mass shooting by one person in American history. Myers says bump stocks have turned semi-automatic rifles into automatic weapons by allowing the gun to fire continuously without constant trigger pulls.

Myers says the high court’s ruling allows people with ill intent to get a bump stock and turn a firearm into a weapon capable of mass casualties.

“Prior to Vegas and some of these incidents, we never worried about going to large public events. Now I think there’s a certain degree of fear, and this ruling by the courts is going to increase that fear,” said Myers.

Retired UW-Madison police chief and the chair of Police Leaders For Community Safety Sue Riseling also said she was disappointed by the decision. She says bump stocks have no sporting or hunting use, and tend to only be used for attacks rather than personal safety.

This ruling, according to Riseling, is not about the Second Amendment, but rather about legislative procedure.

“It’s innocent life put at risk because some individual who shouldn’t have these weapons not only has them but can enhance them and increase their lethality, that’s where we as police leaders say common sense says there’s no bona fide use for a bump stock,” said Riseling.

Police Leaders for Community Safety say it’s now calling on Congress to act by passing legislation that would ban bump stocks.

https://www.wbay.com/2024/06/14/local-police-leaders-respond-scotus-bump-stock-ruling/

Ex-ATF officials says bump-stock OK was mistake

https://www.ctpost.com/local/article/Ex-ATF-officials-says-bump-stock-OK-was-mistake-12706343.php

Let me guess, these people are Democrats too?

No amount of facts will make any diffrerence to you.

So I'll ask you again, what purpose do bump stocks serve that cause you to support they remain legal? Because the only ability they serve is to help make the body count higher.

You read every third word then ripped off a nonsense reply again didn't you?

• The executive should not be changing law, or promulgating laws when they conflict with statutory law. This is how our country is supposed to work. This is how it was written in the foundational document, this is what the supporting text written by the founders says.
• Bump stocks are merely an accessory. I have never supported gun bans. Not for accessories, not for arms, not for ammo.

The first is not dependent on the second. I understand anything more complicated than "bump stock bad must ban" is difficult for you to work out logically but I am not sure I can dumb this down any more for you.

Mmmm hmmm. Supporting anyone can legally purchase a device to create an even larger amount of corpses and casualties. And you can stop using that BS line about "Any madman can...." If they didn't want to prevent mad men from killing more people other fully automatic weapons would be legal. Let me guess, there is no such thing as a fully automatic weapon?

The only one that needs things dumbed down for them is you. Somehow you can't seem to understand that everyone can see that your priority #1 is keeping them legal. Everything else is secondary.