Sotomayer Doesn't Understand Guns

[Cow Poke]

... That meant you found yourself constantly changing, or worse reloading, magazines....

OR worser yet, prematurely out of ammo completely.

[rogue06]

I remember something about the Ghost Dance which was prohibited on the Res, and which Sitting Bull promoted.

That I believe why he was supposed to be arrested but it looks like they were to execute him if they couldn't arrest him -- shooting him in the head and chest when the crowd started to get violent.

[Diogenes]

First of we're not comparing the different ways that people are killed, we're talking about, or comparing number of murders over time with numbers of murders at one time.
We're simply talking about mass shootings period.

Shooting bullets into a crowd will always result in more more causalities and injuries simply due to the fact there are more people. We're also about enacting legislation which shouldn't be done on such small occurrences.

And it seems that I have a difference of opinion with many here concerning the interpretation of the law, or I should say how a justice should interpret the law.

Leftists are known for judicial activism and aren't textualist.

So, first off, an AR-15 equipped with a bump stock according to my research can fire between 400-800 rpm which means it can be comparable to a fully automatic machine gun.

Show the research.

I would assume that the rpm is dependent on the experience/ability of the shooter, but nonetheless the rpm can be comparable to a machine gun.

Again, act like I'm from Missouri and show me.

As far as the legal mechanism involved which defined a machine gun, the single function of the trigger finger. I could be wrong, but it's the way it read to me and I noticed it's also the way that the ATF defined it i.e. that with the bump stock there is only a single function of the trigger finger, from that point on it is the recoil of the gun that bumps against the finger, not that the shooter is pulling the trigger each time.

Thomas expounds on this.

So,, with that in mind, I don't agree with Thomas or some of you here that a Judge leaves his common sense at the door and simply interpret the exact wording of the law, I think you use your common sense, interpret the intent of the law, and all things being as above, if the weapons are comparable, then that was the intent of the original law. I agree with Sotomayor. If it walks like a duck........

You agree with judicial activism, not surprising.

[Diogenes]

Oh you chump! You actually think that 'the left' doesn't understand guns or this, or that...........

The Left demonstrably doesn't understand guns.

you must be so thick to plump half your country's people in to 'scared and stupid'.

Seeing as my nationality is disputed, I wouldn't limit my comments to my country

More waffle from you. VFF guns are quite unnecessary for civilians to own.

.........you think that 'the left' are scared, yet you imagine yourself being attacked by hordes of......... what, exactly?
And in your crazy imaginings who exactly are you killing............. Americans? Such madness.

Multiple home invaders is a reasonable scenario and overwhelmingly most crime is committed by people from the same country as the victim in all countries.

[Cow Poke]

....
During WW1 German machine guns were set up if possible to cross an attacking force from either flank and EVERY bullet would hit a soldier.....EVERY bullet.....

Still laughing at this.

[eider]

The bolded part was why most folk with experience with Stens loathed them. Practically speaking, there is nothing worse than going into a firefight with an unreliable weapon.

Still most isn't all and they had their fans, like your buddy.

RSM Harald wasn't my buddy, he was such a important figure in the British Army that his title was 'Mr' even when addressed by senior officers.

Similarly the Czech .32 Skorpion machine pistol was adored by some people ........

I expect it was.......some people would have just known them like no others, I guess.

[eider]

Still laughing at this.

Ignorance sitting at back of class, sniggering?
Stay ignorant.

[eider]

The Left demonstrably doesn't understand guns.

And yet you quake in fear of them in your dreams?

Multiple home invaders is a reasonable scenario and overwhelmingly most crime is committed by people from the same country as the victim in all countries.

You might benefit from explaining this dream to a psychotherapist. I doubt that one could help you but you never know......it could be worth trying.

[eider]

The problem, as has been shown, virtually all firearms can be your "VFFs." I even posted a video of someone using an old-fashioned single-action revolver meaning not just one bullet per pull of the trigger but you have to manually pull back the hammer between each shot.

A perfect example here of a gun nerd trying to show all how much he knows. Pathetic.

[Terraceth]

So, first off, an AR-15 equipped with a bump stock according to my research can fire between 400-800 rpm which means it can be comparable to a fully automatic machine gun. I would assume that the rpm is dependent on the experience/ability of the shooter, but nonetheless the rpm can be comparable to a machine gun.

It does seem comparable. But the law doesn't say that a weapon's rpm decides whether it is a machinegun.

As far as the legal mechanism involved which defined a machine gun, the single function of the trigger finger. I could be wrong, but it's the way it read to me and I noticed it's also the way that the ATF defined it i.e. that with the bump stock there is only a single function of the trigger finger, from that point on it is the recoil of the gun that bumps against the finger, not that the shooter is pulling the trigger each time.

The problem is that even with a bump stock, you still are actually pulling the trigger multiple times, even if you are doing it extremely quickly. (it also must be concluded to be done "automatically" which the majority opinion took issue with as well)

Interestingly, if one looks at the last edit on the Wikipedia article on bump stocks prior to the Las Vegas shooting that caused the desire to ban them (thus, the last version before it became a real political issue), we see:

"None of these techniques fire more than one round with a single trigger pull, rather they compensate for biomechanical limitations associated with how fast a finger can repetitively pull the trigger."

This backs up the interpretation that because there is only one round per trigger pull, it does not count as a machinegun according to the legal definition. Obviously, this is just Wikipedia, but it's striking to me that it admits such a thing, at least before it became a political issue.

Most likely, if they knew this sort of thing was a possibility, they probably would've written the law a little differently. But it makes sense they wouldn't write a law about machineguns taking into account an invention that didn't exist yet. According to the law they did write, I do not think bump stocks on a rifle change it to a machinegun; this may be a loophole, but a loophole doesn't disappear just because it was unintended. I went into the opinion without having a particularly strong opinion on either side, read both majority and dissent, and concluded the majority had the better argument.

So,, with that in mind, I don't agree with Thomas or some of you here that a Judge leaves his common sense at the door and simply interpret the exact wording of the law, I think you use your common sense, interpret the intent of the law, and all things being as above, if the weapons are comparable, then that was the intent of the original law. I agree with Sotomayor. If it walks like a duck........

People should simply interpret the exact wording of a law, not the intent. Lawmaker's intent can certainly be used to aid in interpreting the text, but it should never be of higher priority than the text itself. Exact wording should virtually always beat out intent. This is especially the case in something like this, where we got a very precise definition of machinegun. Indeed, I think Sotomayor's duck analogy was weak and hurt her opinion; she would've been better if she hadn't used that analogy at all. Because it doesn't matter if something is like a duck, but whether it is a duck.

[Cow Poke]

Ignorance sitting at back of class, sniggering?
Stay ignorant.

I never snigger. Ever.

[Cow Poke]

A perfect example here of a gun nerd trying to show all how much he knows. Pathetic.

What has happened to you? You used to be able to actually discuss things in a calm and respectful manner.

[rogue06]

Oh you chump! You actually think that 'the left' doesn't understand guns or this, or that........... you must be so thick to plump half your country's people in to 'scared and stupid'.


More waffle from you. VFF guns are quite unnecessary for civilians to own.



.........you think that 'the left' are scared, yet you imagine yourself being attacked by hordes of......... what, exactly?
And in your crazy imaginings who exactly are you killing............. Americans? Such madness.

Look up the Asian storeowners standing on the roofs of their businesses with AR15s during the Rodney King riots. They were the only reason that their stores weren't looted and burned to the ground.

[rogue06]

Still laughing at this.

I think someone has been getting their "facts" from movies.

[rogue06]

I never snigger. Ever.

Snigger? No. Snicker? Definitely. You did that a lot when I'd get shot down trying to sweet talk one of the Olsen twins.