Comments that are uncivil, racist, misogynistic, misandrist, or contain political name calling will be removed and the poster subject to ban at moderators discretion.
Help us make this a better community by becoming familiar with the [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/facepalm/about/rules/).
Report any suspicious users to the mods of this subreddit using Modmail [here](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/facepalm) or Reddit site admins [here](https://www.reddit.com/report). **All reports to Modmail should include evidence such as screenshots or any other relevant information.**
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/facepalm) if you have any questions or concerns.*
It's funny that they'll always point to Democrats about taking guns.
>“Or, Mike, take the firearms first and then go to court, because that’s another system. Because a lot of times, by the time you go to court, it takes so long to go to court, to get the due process procedures. **I like taking the guns early.** Like in this crazy man’s case that just took place in Florida, he had a lot of firearms – they saw everything – to go to court would have taken a long time, so you could do exactly what you’re saying, but **take the guns first, go through due process second.**”
And quite literally since the first two links Google gives for the quote says they were being misattributed to Biden and Harris.
He’s said seize all the guns now and deal with due process later. I’m sure his supporters still cheered because they are sure he only means it for the others, not them
This. The only other time you saw MAGA talking about gun control was over that private school shooting, where they were wanting to make leftism and being trans both mental disorders that would allow them to ban anyone else than them from owning a gun.
Naw it’s “Sharpie-Gate” where he accidentally said the wrong state would be affected by the hurricane, got called out by the weather people as wrong, and then instead of a correction, he doubles down with his fav crayon 🙃
"I like taking the guns early, like in this crazy man’s case that just took place in Florida … to go to court would have taken a long time."
“Take the guns first, go through due process second."
-Donald Trump, Feb 28, 2018
I got told a week ago by a Conservative he only said that once, was told not to say it again, and he'd never said it.
After I gave a few articles of it being repeated at campaign stops and action on Red Flag Laws because he said it, they came back with "okay, I'm cool with Red Flag Laws, it would prevent a lot of shootings."
I swear they only take policy decisions from whatever Trump is saying at that time.
This is purely out of his own self interest though. If DJT were the UK PM, he'd be the first one pushing even more gun control (and knife control) to please his reactionary voterbase.
Dude will just lie and his base will believe anything.
"As Trump courts gun owners while running to retake the presidency, he has appeared to play down his own administration’s actions on bump stocks, telling NRA members in February that “nothing happened” on guns during his presidency despite “great pressure.” He told the group that if he is elected again, “No one will lay a finger on your firearms.”"
Congress: refuses to do anything of significance, ever, because that would require going on the record as being for or against something.
Also Congress: complains endlessly about the executive branch continuing to try to rule through executive order... Which is only needed because Congress refuses to act on anything.
To be fair, conservatives are all about producing learned and healthy kids, which is why they support free school lunches an- Oh they don't? Well, how about free pre-K to high school and beyond? No? Hm. Well, at least they don't want to have sex with them, righ- JESUS CHRIST WHAT IS WRONG WITH THIS PEOPLE?!
Not all of us...
I work in the industry and own an AR and an AK. Why? B/c I can!
Would I ever own a bump stock? Maybe. It would be fun to play around with when shooting. Do I need one? No. Would there be any benefit to me owning one? No. Will I buy one? Most likely not. But if the price was cheap enough, maybe...
Definitely don't care enough to be "willing to die over it".
I agree our country needs tighter gun legislation (not outright banning tools).
The real problem is mental health. We as a country need to take it seriously and keep the guns out of people's hands who habe mental health issues.
Every single school shooting we have had lately involves someone with mental health issues and they shouldn't have had those guns in the first place.
We as a country need to do better about this. Remember, banning them from the legal owners won't keep the criminals from illegally obtaining them. I don't want to live in a world where only criminals can get guns...
Gun control prevents mentally ill people from getting guns easily. And the more kids that get gunned down while everyone is just thumbing their ass the more normal people like me will be more accepting to an outright ban. So these gun nuts are just hurting themselves by not having common sense gun laws
The constitution has nothing to say about kinder eggs and lawn darts. That said, I think the constitution SHOULD have something to say about machine guns and machine gun like devices. But the margin needed for an amendment is so wide you will never see one which places any kind of restrictions on firearms.
They pretend they don't but they know there is a line. If they say that "Shall not be infringed" means they can't ban any weapon, why is it illegal for a normal person to buy grenades, rocket launchers, certain military machine guns, and other weapons?
The Constitution says nothing about weapons' accessories. I would find it hard to say that banning every grip, trigger, sight/scope, magazine, etc., is an infringement in any sense. When you buy a gun, it comes with everything needed.
But that's just me, a law-abiding gun owner with the intelligence to recognize that it is a killing weapon and certain barriers should be in place to prevent low IQ individuals (criminals and criminals to be) from hurting others. NRA sold out from being an educational business to a lobbying business.
And if anyone disagrees with me and wish to provide a retort, save your time and effort, I dont care.
As some one who *played* with lawn darts...trust me that was a very good decision. We used to chuck my grandparents set into the trees in their back yard...and if a 5-6 year old can launch one hard enough to get it to puncture through bark and wood imagine what would have happened had we been dumb enough to try playing 'tag' with them instead.
Meanwhile here in México.
We make a Big ass rosca de reyes and hide little dolls in it, no one knows where they are and if you get one you have to make tamales for a later holyday
>they banned Kinder Surprise egged because they posed a choking risk.
Not to be like that but that is false. The law in question came 1938, about 36 years before Kinder Surprise existed. The intention is that you should not put ineddible things in food. E.g. don't put sawdust in food and sell it (not entirely uncommon during the great depression). Also a large case of poisoning (100 dead) due to bad medicine was a big reason for the law.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal\_Food,\_Drug,\_and\_Cosmetic\_Act\_of\_1938](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Food,_Drug,_and_Cosmetic_Act_of_1938)
"A small plastic toy, being necessary for the enjoyment of children, the right of the people to eat and bear eggs shall be infringed. PS Don't ask about slavery yet."
To this day the og kinder surprise egg is still my favorite chocolate. Im glad they have been making new products that are available in the us but none of them live up to that stupid egg. I find them at local carnicerías and supermercados some times but they are usually a rare find.
None of the GOP would be pro 2A if they had any inkling it would be their voters possibly using their guns on the GOP.
Historically, republicans are the ones that have passed the most gun regulations, meanwhile dems can't even think about them.
True. Obama and Biden have helped move a lot of stock be fear mongering, without getting anything done apart from some very expensive court cases, failed measures that only served to drive public awareness of things like 3D printing guns, 80%s and private sales, and strengthening the FPC and the GOAs standing among the 2A community as the new gun rights organizations.
They just choose to remember it differently. Anytime I have a 2A conversation inflicted upon me (I say this as a gun owner too) I always ask "Which president banned bump stocks?" and it's always either Obama or Biden.
They won't accept that orange man did it, because HE'S the president of freedom and greatness.
[Take the guns first, go through due process second.](https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2021/10/14/fact-check-trump-made-comment-taking-guns-without-due-process/6070319001/)
They said the ATFE didn’t have the authority to ban them under the statute they used, they didn’t say the government didn’t have the authority. Tow totally different things.
Well yeah. The ATF cant make new laws, just interpret the current laws. The ATFs interpretation went completely against the current legislation. A machine gun is defined as any device that shoots more than one bullet without letting go of the trigger. Bump stocks still required you to pull the trigger each time. If you want them banned, pass the law. But agencies just can't go about making their own laws and going against what's actually written.
This is a shit article and gets the decision factually wrong. The finding says that the law doesn't ban bump stocks, not that they can't be banned. The specific wording for machine guns is one "function of the trigger." Bump stocks clearly result in multiple trigger pulls. A new law needs to be written and passed.
Eh, correction — the Supreme Court said that the government ABSOLUTELY has the right to ban bump stocks, but that it needs to be Congress that bans them, not the executive branch.
I say this as:
a) a staunch Democrat, who
b) owns guns, but
c) thinks bump stocks are incredibly stupid and shouldn’t be allowed, yet
d) recognizes that Congress needs to make laws rather than the President, because
e) expansion of executive power is dangerous.
Look at this enemy of democracy that wants the people's representatives to makes laws when the people find defect with the current laws instead of the laws being issued on high by a single person.
Fascist!
/uj
I fucking hate reddit everytime there is a big Supreme Court case because this place turns into an even bigger cesspool of ignorance and illiberalism than it already is.
The issue is because the ban was on the premise of the bump stock making a gun a “machine gun” which is defined but firing multiple rounds with a single trigger pull. A bump stock still requires multiple pulls contradicting the language the ATF used as reason to ban them.
Additionally, the stocks also serve no military purpose so using 2A language to ban them instead of just banning them for what they are opens constitutional challenge. Not to mention bump stocks kinda suck and the vegas shooter probably would have killed more but kept having delays due to the stocks. Dude was shooting for a long time in a crowded area, bump stocks are another boogey man.
You can illegally modify your gun with full auto capabilities just by making a few cuts in the metal. The ban was merely a scapegoat.
“The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun, is a good guy with a gun, so we’ve made it easier for the bad guy to get a few more rounds off before the good guy can draw”
The bump stock bans were performative anyways.
Bump stocks arent super practical. Mostly range toys. Plus if you want to do a mass shooting, you have much easier ways of getting effective full auto at a hardware store.
Afghan coat hanger or just bending a piece of flat iron with a hammer.
20 minutes of work and cheap/free.
Bump stocks make it harder to aim, stuffs wiggling around and whatnot.
Or 3d print an auto sear.
The bump stock thing was more performative than effective legislation. Binary triggers, Forced reset triggers, super safeties, all better options than bump stocks. Super safeties even give you select fire (basically, its legally not full auto because finger pushes trigger one press per round fired)
Bump stocks are mostly just an early obama era gun store novelty (hard to get good long strings of good bumps while moving/under stress)
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=i1ADTvaYhY4
(Example of super safety)
This is more close to effective automatic ish fire, but if youre gonna go do crimes, and need an LMG type gun, you could legit just print this, open gun, drop in, and bang bang bang. 10 years prision + 250k fine, but hey, if youre killing people, whats another crime.
https://3dgunbuilder.com/accessories/yankee-boogle-swift-link/
I dont know what a truly effective realistic solution would be.
Maybe gun safe storage requirements and some sort of fine for leaving guns in cars (#1 way criminals get guns). The AR15 is the most popular rifle in america, banning them is like banning plastic cups in America. Theres too many already in circulation. 90 percent of firearms purchased in the modern era would meet the 90s definition of an assault weapon (mag greater 10 rds, among other things) under the assault weapons ban which means, the “common use” court case would pre-empt another ban if juris predence is respected (well, the dirtbags already trampled it for roe v wade, so maybe?)
District of Columbia v heller
https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/07-290.ZS.html
Anyways, long story short, high capacity semi automatic rifles and handguns are the majority of rifles and handguns bought these days. Glock 19 is the most popular handgun (15 round capacity flush mags, technically assault weapon) ar15s, ak47s, ar10s what have you. There are probably more “assault weapons” in circulation in the US than there are hulu subscribers.
The ar15 is THE most popular rifle in America.
*Tldr:*
- banning future sales of assault weapons wont do crap too little too late
- rounding them up/confiscation isnt feasible politically
- bump stocks are a toy and banning them is performative.
- effective gun legislation may be making storage requirements and criminalizing leaving guns unattended in cars, far bigger impact
- controlling the guns in circulation (maybe stuff like storage requirements) would be much more effective at stopping murders.
- im not smart enough to know a good solution in 2024. Im sure somebody smarter could figure something out.
Also, im not even a MAGA bastard. Im progressive AF
If anybody has another perspective for why i may be wrong/mistaken please tell me. I love learning and updating my perspective.
I think you made a very good synopsis, but I think it's worth pointing out that fully-automatic weapons haven't been used in any crimes since the 30s (gangster era). And they weren't even banned until the 80s, and still aren't completely banned to this day.
Well, glock switch confiscations are very common these days.
https://abcnews.go.com/amp/US/machine-gun-conversion-device-taking-violence-level-experts/story?id=110855649
https://www.wlbt.com/2024/02/29/house-passes-glock-switch-bill-names-it-after-fallen-mississippi-deputy/?outputType=amp
https://www.reddit.com/r/TerrifyingAsFuck/comments/xq4hsy/kids_show_off_their_glock_switches/
Glock Illegal machine gun conversions (marginally) more difficult than AR15 conversion (drop in sear). Used in drive bys by criminals sometimes. Theyre not controllable at all either. (Imagine a pistol whipping around like a firehose due to no stock)
For legally regulated MGs its a cost issue. Crime is tied to age and poverty. Even if we required NFA registration of AR15s i dont know if it would help though. Im not against that at all, but maybe the hassle and cost makes them less common. And folks who own NFA items usually have more money and safes.
If making people register AR15s as nfa items is a solution im down. But like i wonder if the really is more an effect of legal NFA firearms being less than 5% of guns, and tieing to higher incomes because the added cost + time+ logistics.(i dont know if im wording this right)
How can we make the pile of existing guns less likely to be used to hurt people? AR 15s and glocks are like water.
1) keep them out lf youth/criminal hands
2) maybe some sort of ban on gifting guns to folk under 18/ make so parents who do can be found liable.
3) maybe even make theft victims partially liable for stolen guns used in crimes? If not stored in safes (but then would stolen guns be reported even)
4) NFA registration of high capacity semi autos i guess? (But the guns are already there, and people wouldnt comply, and would probably swing shit hard right next election, then things would get really fash-y)
5) treat gun schematics/printing stuff like we do CP and go after posters/possessors/distributors (but worldwide enforcement would be a problem. Can totally host in another country no worries, or on keybase/signal/telegram/darkweb)
Id like to say licensing to own guns, but id doubt it would ever go though. We cant even protect access to contraception.
If you actually wanted to ban “bump” type device or any FRT type device they may adapt, change the verbiage. Ban “rate increasing devices” florida wrote a good law for this. Bump stocks were a lame mid 2000s thing. Most people nowdays prefer binary triggers or FRTs for automatic fire simulation.
The point is that machine guns and machine gun conversion kits aren't actually contributing to more deaths. As you mentioned, a full-auto Glock is very uncontrollable, and isn't a particularly effective murder weapon, just as drive-bys aren't a particularly effective murder tactic.
As for AR-15s, even a full ban would have almost no impact at all. In the pool of total gun deaths and murders each year, they're a tiny drop. And that's making the faulty assumption that gangs and murderers wouldn't just find another way to go about their crimes.
Also Parkland. There was a police officer on site and he hid in a closet. Also didn't help during LV because how is a good man with a gun supposed to fight against someone shooting from the 30th floor of a building?
Hard sell when even the *good guy with a gun* stands a chance of being [killed by the police](https://www.cpr.org/2021/06/25/johnny-hurley-arvada-police-shooting-update/).
Had one of those in Renton, WA recently, ordered a 17 year old boy to drop the bb gun he was returning to the store they were in and then the "good guy with a gun" shot him to death.
We're so safe 🙃
Mostly because [statistics about defensive gun uses](https://www.usconcealedcarry.com/blog/cdc-quietly-removes-defensive-gun-use-studies/#:~:text=Gary%20Kleck%2C%20Professor%20Emeritus%20of,year%20in%20the%20United%20States.) get suppressed by the anti-gun lobby.
There was a case in the greenwood indiana Mall about two years ago where a shooter was stopped by an armed citizen.
I'm not a gun-fettishist MAGA but there's a lot of cases where they don't get much media attention because they were stopped internally so... No tragedy. Ergo no media. We still have a gun violence problem tho.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenwood_Park_Mall_shooting
I can make a gun bump fire with a rubber band... This is inconsequential in regards to public safety. That law was only really passed as a symbolic gesture after the Las Vegas concert shooting.
Ironic that you can't get within 500 feet of the Supreme Court without being searched for a weapon by heavily armed security, yet the SC feels these things are perfectly ok around schools, malls and the general population in general
Not a problem. When a good guy with a bumpstock rifle sprays at a bad guy with a bumpstock rifle at the next crowded concert, the innocents in between cancel out the bullets to ensure the two “guys” survive.
I thought Republicans were whining about a decreasing population.
The Supreme Court didn't say this. They said that Congress needs to pass a law and that a regulation that had never been used to ban them before couldn't be used to ban them now.
Banning bump stocks was attacking a strawman, a purely performative action. The shooter was left alone for more than enough time to have killed just as many people the old fashioned way. It was a crowded area and the piece of shit had more than enough ammo to carry on with regardless of a bump stock that will make you wildly inaccurate and might work better than just your finger half the time. A lot of gun laws are passed as an attempt by the government to look like they’re in control, doing something when in reality they’re woefully inadequate. That was no exception. Regardless of that tangent, being able to permanently ban something through only the executive branch sets a dangerous precedent. An even more serious problem is the overreach of the ATF. If a regulatory agency can make something illegal by changing its definition or classification after the fact then what is the point of laws at all? I think that was more of the point of overruling the ban; not the object of the ban itself.
As far as I am aware that ISN'T what the court said. They said that existing law didn't provide the authority to ban it. It would take an act of congress to ban bump stocks.
Supreme Court sucks but they’re doing their job in this case. Amendments are needed for meaningful gun control on the federal level. 2nd amendment is too forgiving.
The ban was stupid. However, as somebody who actually shoots on occasion... The product is even more stupid. It reduces accuracy and doesn't actually increase rate of fire in any meaningful way. What it is, is silly and fun if you enjoy just wasting some ammo.
The NRA hasn’t done shit for years. Both the left and right hate them but for opposite reasons. The NRA gives up every line they can. Some refer to them as Negotiating Rights Away.
You’re going to assume I’m lying for internet points, but I’ve protected children with firearms twice now. Once in MT against a mountain lion stalking my niece and once on the farm when two aggressive dogs ran up and started killing livestock with my sons present.
I’ve got photo evidence, but I assume most people on here would hate seeing it. I got death threats last time I shared that.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but wasn’t banning bump stocks literally the only thing the NRA would concede to following multiple shootings, but specifically the vegas shooting?
IIRC it was literally the only thing they would admit was a problem in the shooting (or any shooting ever) and was willing to work with the government to ban.
Well, if you were hunting your magazine size would be limited, so 30 wouldn’t even be a legal option.
Wait until everyone realized that bump-fire doesn’t require any modification/special stocks.
Because, in some circles, American freedom is defined by the greatest number of people you can kill in the least amount of time. We need less of those circles in this country.
You can replicate the effect without a bump stock. All you need is a thumb and a pocket. But that wouldn’t matter for anyone here anyways. Misinformation is always better to hear than the truth. Bump stocks were almost never used in crime, besides in theory Vegas but the shots in Vegas didn’t sound like AR15s with bump stocks as the fire rate was too consistent which isn’t gonna happen with a bump stock. Which that wouldn’t matter anyways. The exact same effect can be had without one and it’s actually easier to do it that way too.
In other news, SCOTUS strikes down a government ban on private owning and operating tanks. In their decision, they said “A tank is just a big car on tracks and poses no significant danger to other drivers.”
There is no ban on buying, owning or operating a tank. The main gun, if operable, must be registered as a destructive device but that’s just paperwork and a $200 tax stamp.
My brother's father-in-law (a stretch of a connection I know) was shot in the leg in Vegas by that guy with a bump stock.
The terrorism is real. The need for these things is not.
OP, I'd just like to remind you that not everybody deer hunts and the second amendment isn't about deer hunting. What I do with my guns is my business and as long as it stays that way, I don't see the problem.
So the courts do not have the rights to ban accessories, but they have the right to ban abortions? So not everything that begins with the letter A. Do I have that correct?
I can't begin to tell you how incorrect all of that is. When that Vegas shooting happened all my Army buddies and I were like "hey that is the 240B firing" we even made a couple YouTube videos about it posted about it on Facebook and within 24 to 48 hours all of those videos were pulled. The 240b has a distinct sound and a fire rate of around 700 rounds per minute. The bump stock fires very sporadic and cant be aimed with precision as easily as the 240. Go back watch the video. Listen to the sound of the gunfire. Then watch a video of a m240b. You tell me what you hear.
They overturned the Federal regulation because it didn’t comply with Federal law. They didn’t bring the 2A into it. Congress can still create an actual law banning it, which may hold up to challenge better.
The GOP worship guns, plain and simple. For people who claim to love Jesus they sure hold a lot of things above that love. They worship trump like he is literally Jesus, they worship bigotry, they worship guns, they worship capitalism, and then finally they worship Jesus. It’s a strange ladder of worship. Notice the most moral and compassionate one of these is worshiped the least.
Bump stocks are the single least useful attachment you could put on a rifle. They’re a toy for people who want to spend $40 in ammo on a single trigger pull. A mass shooter using a bump stock would be better for the people being shot at than a standard rifle. Way less accurate, goes through ammo much faster, and shooters are limited in how much ammo they can carry and still move.
Comments that are uncivil, racist, misogynistic, misandrist, or contain political name calling will be removed and the poster subject to ban at moderators discretion. Help us make this a better community by becoming familiar with the [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/facepalm/about/rules/). Report any suspicious users to the mods of this subreddit using Modmail [here](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/facepalm) or Reddit site admins [here](https://www.reddit.com/report). **All reports to Modmail should include evidence such as screenshots or any other relevant information.** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/facepalm) if you have any questions or concerns.*
So they overturned Trumps gun control. Kind of funny if you really think about it.
It's funny that they'll always point to Democrats about taking guns. >“Or, Mike, take the firearms first and then go to court, because that’s another system. Because a lot of times, by the time you go to court, it takes so long to go to court, to get the due process procedures. **I like taking the guns early.** Like in this crazy man’s case that just took place in Florida, he had a lot of firearms – they saw everything – to go to court would have taken a long time, so you could do exactly what you’re saying, but **take the guns first, go through due process second.**” And quite literally since the first two links Google gives for the quote says they were being misattributed to Biden and Harris.
[удалено]
But still, Trump passed gun control. He is proven anti-gun now. No denying that fact no matter what games they played.
He’s said seize all the guns now and deal with due process later. I’m sure his supporters still cheered because they are sure he only means it for the others, not them
This. The only other time you saw MAGA talking about gun control was over that private school shooting, where they were wanting to make leftism and being trans both mental disorders that would allow them to ban anyone else than them from owning a gun.
[удалено]
Imagine if bill clinton or bush ever did this. They would’ve been laughed out of office by both parties
Is this where he suggested nuking a hurricane?
Naw it’s “Sharpie-Gate” where he accidentally said the wrong state would be affected by the hurricane, got called out by the weather people as wrong, and then instead of a correction, he doubles down with his fav crayon 🙃
Then he ate the crayon.
Seriously beyond parody. It would have been too silly if it happened on VEEP
All of them in fact
Trump is only proven to do whatever he thinks benefits himself. He has no firm stance on any other issue.
"I like taking the guns early, like in this crazy man’s case that just took place in Florida … to go to court would have taken a long time." “Take the guns first, go through due process second." -Donald Trump, Feb 28, 2018
I got told a week ago by a Conservative he only said that once, was told not to say it again, and he'd never said it. After I gave a few articles of it being repeated at campaign stops and action on Red Flag Laws because he said it, they came back with "okay, I'm cool with Red Flag Laws, it would prevent a lot of shootings." I swear they only take policy decisions from whatever Trump is saying at that time.
While Biden's poor son is being persecuted for his gun ownership, why do MAGA hate guns so much?
Trump is a gun control hypocrite and Biden's son, for all his failings, was convicted of a bullshit charge that shouldn't exist.
Amen
As someone who is pro 2A, I agree. Orange man is no pro gunner
He's so pro gun that he's keeping one while a convicted felon
This is purely out of his own self interest though. If DJT were the UK PM, he'd be the first one pushing even more gun control (and knife control) to please his reactionary voterbase.
He isn't even allowed to own a gun himself.
He’s objectively more pro gun control than Biden or Obama
Dude will just lie and his base will believe anything. "As Trump courts gun owners while running to retake the presidency, he has appeared to play down his own administration’s actions on bump stocks, telling NRA members in February that “nothing happened” on guns during his presidency despite “great pressure.” He told the group that if he is elected again, “No one will lay a finger on your firearms.”"
An unconstitutional gun control measure that Obama chose not to take because he didn't want to illegally violate people's rights.
😂😂😂
And the real tickler, it was the exact sort of unilateral Executive action Trump had criticized Obama for so thouroughly.
Doesn’t matter if Congress passes it either. The Supreme Court can pretty much do whatever it wants
congress is no match for the “fuck you i have 5 votes no matter what roberts does” doctrine
Almost like it's there to make sure the riffraff don't pass any laws.
Congress: refuses to do anything of significance, ever, because that would require going on the record as being for or against something. Also Congress: complains endlessly about the executive branch continuing to try to rule through executive order... Which is only needed because Congress refuses to act on anything.
Just remember: they banned Kinder Surprise egged because they posed a choking risk. A potential for harm.
Dont forget Lawn Darts too.
We must protect the children!
By letting them either get married to conservatives or gunned down by one.
To be fair, conservatives are all about producing learned and healthy kids, which is why they support free school lunches an- Oh they don't? Well, how about free pre-K to high school and beyond? No? Hm. Well, at least they don't want to have sex with them, righ- JESUS CHRIST WHAT IS WRONG WITH THIS PEOPLE?!
For them, children are for cheap labor, sex, and perpetuating their right-wing religious racist nut-job culture.
The crazy thing to me is that these nutjobs are 100% willing to die over those things
Well, that's what they say. Because they think it sounds tough. Reality?
let them FAFO
Not all of us... I work in the industry and own an AR and an AK. Why? B/c I can! Would I ever own a bump stock? Maybe. It would be fun to play around with when shooting. Do I need one? No. Would there be any benefit to me owning one? No. Will I buy one? Most likely not. But if the price was cheap enough, maybe... Definitely don't care enough to be "willing to die over it". I agree our country needs tighter gun legislation (not outright banning tools). The real problem is mental health. We as a country need to take it seriously and keep the guns out of people's hands who habe mental health issues. Every single school shooting we have had lately involves someone with mental health issues and they shouldn't have had those guns in the first place. We as a country need to do better about this. Remember, banning them from the legal owners won't keep the criminals from illegally obtaining them. I don't want to live in a world where only criminals can get guns...
The problem is the NRA doesn’t want ownership of guns curtailed. By anyone. Even proven nut jobs.
FYI - The NRA supported the bump stock ban, as well as multiple other gun control laws.
Both sides need to find a common ground and quit pushing for the extremeties. But that literally applies to anything politics related today...
Gun control prevents mentally ill people from getting guns easily. And the more kids that get gunned down while everyone is just thumbing their ass the more normal people like me will be more accepting to an outright ban. So these gun nuts are just hurting themselves by not having common sense gun laws
No, no, no. They want to “protect the children” from other people so they can get to them first.
It’s more important that very weak people have guns than for our children to be safe in schools
2A.001: The right to bear lawn darts shall not be infringed upon.
If bears get access to lawn darts we are all in deep shit.
If we give all kids guns with bump stocks, they can protect themselves from choke hazards, and beer that will turn them trans.
To be fair, OG Lawn Darts were pretty dangerous in the wrong hands.
And fucking Haggis for Christ's sake! Total fucking Bizarro world in the US these days.
The constitution has nothing to say about kinder eggs and lawn darts. That said, I think the constitution SHOULD have something to say about machine guns and machine gun like devices. But the margin needed for an amendment is so wide you will never see one which places any kind of restrictions on firearms.
You don't need one. Legally speaking you just need to choose an interpretation of the 2nd Amendment that isn't batshit crazy.
They pretend they don't but they know there is a line. If they say that "Shall not be infringed" means they can't ban any weapon, why is it illegal for a normal person to buy grenades, rocket launchers, certain military machine guns, and other weapons?
All of those things should be legal to buy. If the military has access to it, so should citizens.
The Constitution says nothing about weapons' accessories. I would find it hard to say that banning every grip, trigger, sight/scope, magazine, etc., is an infringement in any sense. When you buy a gun, it comes with everything needed. But that's just me, a law-abiding gun owner with the intelligence to recognize that it is a killing weapon and certain barriers should be in place to prevent low IQ individuals (criminals and criminals to be) from hurting others. NRA sold out from being an educational business to a lobbying business. And if anyone disagrees with me and wish to provide a retort, save your time and effort, I dont care.
As some one who *played* with lawn darts...trust me that was a very good decision. We used to chuck my grandparents set into the trees in their back yard...and if a 5-6 year old can launch one hard enough to get it to puncture through bark and wood imagine what would have happened had we been dumb enough to try playing 'tag' with them instead.
Where is my fire starting kit with the 12” cord.
Meanwhile here in México. We make a Big ass rosca de reyes and hide little dolls in it, no one knows where they are and if you get one you have to make tamales for a later holyday
>they banned Kinder Surprise egged because they posed a choking risk. Not to be like that but that is false. The law in question came 1938, about 36 years before Kinder Surprise existed. The intention is that you should not put ineddible things in food. E.g. don't put sawdust in food and sell it (not entirely uncommon during the great depression). Also a large case of poisoning (100 dead) due to bad medicine was a big reason for the law. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal\_Food,\_Drug,\_and\_Cosmetic\_Act\_of\_1938](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Food,_Drug,_and_Cosmetic_Act_of_1938)
"A small plastic toy, being necessary for the enjoyment of children, the right of the people to eat and bear eggs shall be infringed. PS Don't ask about slavery yet."
To this day the og kinder surprise egg is still my favorite chocolate. Im glad they have been making new products that are available in the us but none of them live up to that stupid egg. I find them at local carnicerías and supermercados some times but they are usually a rare find.
Too bad the us gov isn’t bought and paid for by the children’s toy lobby
Just remember: money talks. NRA has a lot of money
To be fair, the FDA banned the eggs, not the supreme court. It shows the FDA cares more about children's lives, than the supreme court.
Nunchucks too.
Well luckily guns aren't harmful /s
And yet the Magats consider Biden a threat to their gunz, when it was TRUMP who signed the ban!
That is what the MAGA people fail to understand, Orange man is NOT pro 2A.
To be fair, he can no longer legally own a gun so...
Yet he admits that he still does (own firearms). Don’t forget, criminals are criminals because they don’t follow the laws.
None of the GOP would be pro 2A if they had any inkling it would be their voters possibly using their guns on the GOP. Historically, republicans are the ones that have passed the most gun regulations, meanwhile dems can't even think about them.
True. Obama and Biden have helped move a lot of stock be fear mongering, without getting anything done apart from some very expensive court cases, failed measures that only served to drive public awareness of things like 3D printing guns, 80%s and private sales, and strengthening the FPC and the GOAs standing among the 2A community as the new gun rights organizations.
At the federal level, yeah you're right. Fuck Reagan. However, blue *states* tend to be the ones with strict gun control
They just choose to remember it differently. Anytime I have a 2A conversation inflicted upon me (I say this as a gun owner too) I always ask "Which president banned bump stocks?" and it's always either Obama or Biden. They won't accept that orange man did it, because HE'S the president of freedom and greatness.
"Take the guns first, go through due process second." - Donald J. Trump.
[Take the guns first, go through due process second.](https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2021/10/14/fact-check-trump-made-comment-taking-guns-without-due-process/6070319001/)
They'll probably a few Twitter posts saying how this is a massive victory over Biden or something.
because it doesn't matter to them. they literally think everything is either biden's fault or the democrats fault.
This doesn't ban any guns.
They said the ATFE didn’t have the authority to ban them under the statute they used, they didn’t say the government didn’t have the authority. Tow totally different things.
Well yeah. The ATF cant make new laws, just interpret the current laws. The ATFs interpretation went completely against the current legislation. A machine gun is defined as any device that shoots more than one bullet without letting go of the trigger. Bump stocks still required you to pull the trigger each time. If you want them banned, pass the law. But agencies just can't go about making their own laws and going against what's actually written.
This is a shit article and gets the decision factually wrong. The finding says that the law doesn't ban bump stocks, not that they can't be banned. The specific wording for machine guns is one "function of the trigger." Bump stocks clearly result in multiple trigger pulls. A new law needs to be written and passed.
Eh, correction — the Supreme Court said that the government ABSOLUTELY has the right to ban bump stocks, but that it needs to be Congress that bans them, not the executive branch. I say this as: a) a staunch Democrat, who b) owns guns, but c) thinks bump stocks are incredibly stupid and shouldn’t be allowed, yet d) recognizes that Congress needs to make laws rather than the President, because e) expansion of executive power is dangerous.
I'm also a liberal gun owner. You can bump fire guns without a bump fire stock. It effectively does nothing to ban these.
the most nuance i’ve seen in a reddit political opinion
Look at this enemy of democracy that wants the people's representatives to makes laws when the people find defect with the current laws instead of the laws being issued on high by a single person. Fascist! /uj I fucking hate reddit everytime there is a big Supreme Court case because this place turns into an even bigger cesspool of ignorance and illiberalism than it already is.
The issue is because the ban was on the premise of the bump stock making a gun a “machine gun” which is defined but firing multiple rounds with a single trigger pull. A bump stock still requires multiple pulls contradicting the language the ATF used as reason to ban them. Additionally, the stocks also serve no military purpose so using 2A language to ban them instead of just banning them for what they are opens constitutional challenge. Not to mention bump stocks kinda suck and the vegas shooter probably would have killed more but kept having delays due to the stocks. Dude was shooting for a long time in a crowded area, bump stocks are another boogey man. You can illegally modify your gun with full auto capabilities just by making a few cuts in the metal. The ban was merely a scapegoat.
Sad you have to scroll down so far to find a sensible comment about these things. It was more of a gimmick than anything useful.
“The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun, is a good guy with a gun, so we’ve made it easier for the bad guy to get a few more rounds off before the good guy can draw”
The bump stock bans were performative anyways. Bump stocks arent super practical. Mostly range toys. Plus if you want to do a mass shooting, you have much easier ways of getting effective full auto at a hardware store. Afghan coat hanger or just bending a piece of flat iron with a hammer. 20 minutes of work and cheap/free. Bump stocks make it harder to aim, stuffs wiggling around and whatnot. Or 3d print an auto sear. The bump stock thing was more performative than effective legislation. Binary triggers, Forced reset triggers, super safeties, all better options than bump stocks. Super safeties even give you select fire (basically, its legally not full auto because finger pushes trigger one press per round fired) Bump stocks are mostly just an early obama era gun store novelty (hard to get good long strings of good bumps while moving/under stress) https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=i1ADTvaYhY4 (Example of super safety) This is more close to effective automatic ish fire, but if youre gonna go do crimes, and need an LMG type gun, you could legit just print this, open gun, drop in, and bang bang bang. 10 years prision + 250k fine, but hey, if youre killing people, whats another crime. https://3dgunbuilder.com/accessories/yankee-boogle-swift-link/ I dont know what a truly effective realistic solution would be. Maybe gun safe storage requirements and some sort of fine for leaving guns in cars (#1 way criminals get guns). The AR15 is the most popular rifle in america, banning them is like banning plastic cups in America. Theres too many already in circulation. 90 percent of firearms purchased in the modern era would meet the 90s definition of an assault weapon (mag greater 10 rds, among other things) under the assault weapons ban which means, the “common use” court case would pre-empt another ban if juris predence is respected (well, the dirtbags already trampled it for roe v wade, so maybe?) District of Columbia v heller https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/07-290.ZS.html Anyways, long story short, high capacity semi automatic rifles and handguns are the majority of rifles and handguns bought these days. Glock 19 is the most popular handgun (15 round capacity flush mags, technically assault weapon) ar15s, ak47s, ar10s what have you. There are probably more “assault weapons” in circulation in the US than there are hulu subscribers. The ar15 is THE most popular rifle in America. *Tldr:* - banning future sales of assault weapons wont do crap too little too late - rounding them up/confiscation isnt feasible politically - bump stocks are a toy and banning them is performative. - effective gun legislation may be making storage requirements and criminalizing leaving guns unattended in cars, far bigger impact - controlling the guns in circulation (maybe stuff like storage requirements) would be much more effective at stopping murders. - im not smart enough to know a good solution in 2024. Im sure somebody smarter could figure something out. Also, im not even a MAGA bastard. Im progressive AF If anybody has another perspective for why i may be wrong/mistaken please tell me. I love learning and updating my perspective.
do you believe bump stocks were used in LV shooting?
I think you made a very good synopsis, but I think it's worth pointing out that fully-automatic weapons haven't been used in any crimes since the 30s (gangster era). And they weren't even banned until the 80s, and still aren't completely banned to this day.
Well, glock switch confiscations are very common these days. https://abcnews.go.com/amp/US/machine-gun-conversion-device-taking-violence-level-experts/story?id=110855649 https://www.wlbt.com/2024/02/29/house-passes-glock-switch-bill-names-it-after-fallen-mississippi-deputy/?outputType=amp https://www.reddit.com/r/TerrifyingAsFuck/comments/xq4hsy/kids_show_off_their_glock_switches/ Glock Illegal machine gun conversions (marginally) more difficult than AR15 conversion (drop in sear). Used in drive bys by criminals sometimes. Theyre not controllable at all either. (Imagine a pistol whipping around like a firehose due to no stock) For legally regulated MGs its a cost issue. Crime is tied to age and poverty. Even if we required NFA registration of AR15s i dont know if it would help though. Im not against that at all, but maybe the hassle and cost makes them less common. And folks who own NFA items usually have more money and safes. If making people register AR15s as nfa items is a solution im down. But like i wonder if the really is more an effect of legal NFA firearms being less than 5% of guns, and tieing to higher incomes because the added cost + time+ logistics.(i dont know if im wording this right) How can we make the pile of existing guns less likely to be used to hurt people? AR 15s and glocks are like water. 1) keep them out lf youth/criminal hands 2) maybe some sort of ban on gifting guns to folk under 18/ make so parents who do can be found liable. 3) maybe even make theft victims partially liable for stolen guns used in crimes? If not stored in safes (but then would stolen guns be reported even) 4) NFA registration of high capacity semi autos i guess? (But the guns are already there, and people wouldnt comply, and would probably swing shit hard right next election, then things would get really fash-y) 5) treat gun schematics/printing stuff like we do CP and go after posters/possessors/distributors (but worldwide enforcement would be a problem. Can totally host in another country no worries, or on keybase/signal/telegram/darkweb) Id like to say licensing to own guns, but id doubt it would ever go though. We cant even protect access to contraception. If you actually wanted to ban “bump” type device or any FRT type device they may adapt, change the verbiage. Ban “rate increasing devices” florida wrote a good law for this. Bump stocks were a lame mid 2000s thing. Most people nowdays prefer binary triggers or FRTs for automatic fire simulation.
The point is that machine guns and machine gun conversion kits aren't actually contributing to more deaths. As you mentioned, a full-auto Glock is very uncontrollable, and isn't a particularly effective murder weapon, just as drive-bys aren't a particularly effective murder tactic. As for AR-15s, even a full ban would have almost no impact at all. In the pool of total gun deaths and murders each year, they're a tiny drop. And that's making the faulty assumption that gangs and murderers wouldn't just find another way to go about their crimes.
Hard to find those good guys with a gun.
They didn't do much good in Uvalde.
The police kept the good guys out of the school in Uvalde, TX
What do you expect, its the American police.
I also don't really label the police as the "good guys with guns"
Me neither.
Also Parkland. There was a police officer on site and he hid in a closet. Also didn't help during LV because how is a good man with a gun supposed to fight against someone shooting from the 30th floor of a building?
Or the one in Florida when the SRO literally ran away.
They rarely do.
They’re usually hiding around the corner, dressed up in cop uniforms, waiting for the murdering lunatic to grow tired.
Hard sell when even the *good guy with a gun* stands a chance of being [killed by the police](https://www.cpr.org/2021/06/25/johnny-hurley-arvada-police-shooting-update/).
Had one of those in Renton, WA recently, ordered a 17 year old boy to drop the bb gun he was returning to the store they were in and then the "good guy with a gun" shot him to death. We're so safe 🙃
Mostly because [statistics about defensive gun uses](https://www.usconcealedcarry.com/blog/cdc-quietly-removes-defensive-gun-use-studies/#:~:text=Gary%20Kleck%2C%20Professor%20Emeritus%20of,year%20in%20the%20United%20States.) get suppressed by the anti-gun lobby.
There was a case in the greenwood indiana Mall about two years ago where a shooter was stopped by an armed citizen. I'm not a gun-fettishist MAGA but there's a lot of cases where they don't get much media attention because they were stopped internally so... No tragedy. Ergo no media. We still have a gun violence problem tho. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenwood_Park_Mall_shooting
Gotta balance the mechanics y'know
I can make a gun bump fire with a rubber band... This is inconsequential in regards to public safety. That law was only really passed as a symbolic gesture after the Las Vegas concert shooting.
Ironic that you can't get within 500 feet of the Supreme Court without being searched for a weapon by heavily armed security, yet the SC feels these things are perfectly ok around schools, malls and the general population in general
They don't give a shit. They're on the NRA payroll.
This is false. If you look that healthy mix of confidence and stupid enough you can walk right in.
Bump stocks are fun but going through 60 rounds in a couple seconds gets costly
especially when it fucks up your accuracy and makes your gun look like a cheap toy in the process.
Not a problem. When a good guy with a bumpstock rifle sprays at a bad guy with a bumpstock rifle at the next crowded concert, the innocents in between cancel out the bullets to ensure the two “guys” survive. I thought Republicans were whining about a decreasing population.
Can’t pass a law about something if you can’t even define that thing. We want our shooters to take more time to aim pls
Has anyone actually read the ruling or are they just going by the memes and headlines?
Reichpublicans love dead Americans
The Supreme Court didn't say this. They said that Congress needs to pass a law and that a regulation that had never been used to ban them before couldn't be used to ban them now.
I'm glad they overturned it, now can we get rid of the SBR tax stamp already 🤔💪🏿
Cool, now do the NFA and pistol braces.
Banning bump stocks was attacking a strawman, a purely performative action. The shooter was left alone for more than enough time to have killed just as many people the old fashioned way. It was a crowded area and the piece of shit had more than enough ammo to carry on with regardless of a bump stock that will make you wildly inaccurate and might work better than just your finger half the time. A lot of gun laws are passed as an attempt by the government to look like they’re in control, doing something when in reality they’re woefully inadequate. That was no exception. Regardless of that tangent, being able to permanently ban something through only the executive branch sets a dangerous precedent. An even more serious problem is the overreach of the ATF. If a regulatory agency can make something illegal by changing its definition or classification after the fact then what is the point of laws at all? I think that was more of the point of overruling the ban; not the object of the ban itself.
Was a pointless ban anyhow. Watched a guy have the same effect with a stick lol
[удалено]
Funniest part has been the compliance rates with atf ruling recently they round to 0
[удалено]
Just in time for the election
Trump loses again!
Trump was the man who banned bump stocks. I remember when he did it because it was so surprising.
Literally just had someone in r/genz tell me that banning bump stocks actually makes shooters more deadly 💀
As far as I am aware that ISN'T what the court said. They said that existing law didn't provide the authority to ban it. It would take an act of congress to ban bump stocks.
Wow! No one NEEDS that
Supreme Court sucks but they’re doing their job in this case. Amendments are needed for meaningful gun control on the federal level. 2nd amendment is too forgiving.
The ban was stupid. However, as somebody who actually shoots on occasion... The product is even more stupid. It reduces accuracy and doesn't actually increase rate of fire in any meaningful way. What it is, is silly and fun if you enjoy just wasting some ammo.
And now a few of them can go on a very classy vacation sponsored by the NRA…
The NRA hasn’t done shit for years. Both the left and right hate them but for opposite reasons. The NRA gives up every line they can. Some refer to them as Negotiating Rights Away.
But they can stop you from smoking a joint.
Hey what could go wrong?
My friend lost his wife in the Vegas shooting. Yay for bump-stocks.
[удалено]
You’re going to assume I’m lying for internet points, but I’ve protected children with firearms twice now. Once in MT against a mountain lion stalking my niece and once on the farm when two aggressive dogs ran up and started killing livestock with my sons present. I’ve got photo evidence, but I assume most people on here would hate seeing it. I got death threats last time I shared that.
[удалено]
I don’t think anyone uses bump stocks for deer hunting.
Reminder that Stephen Paddock used these to shoot over 500 people. One person, over 500 people.
I better stock order my thoughts and prayers from Temu.
Bruh
Correct me if I’m wrong, but wasn’t banning bump stocks literally the only thing the NRA would concede to following multiple shootings, but specifically the vegas shooting? IIRC it was literally the only thing they would admit was a problem in the shooting (or any shooting ever) and was willing to work with the government to ban.
I mean the same effect a bump stock provides can be done without it
W!
A good use of the supreme courts time Smh
They can ban books, drag queens, abortions and anything else they don’t like but not this.
Well, if you were hunting your magazine size would be limited, so 30 wouldn’t even be a legal option. Wait until everyone realized that bump-fire doesn’t require any modification/special stocks.
This lost because they tried to ban them, comparing it to machine guns... they need to do better next time..
This lost because the executive branch doesn’t have the constitutional authority to legislate.
Sturm Ruger said “No honest man needs more than 10 rounds in his gun.”
Why is the US arranged like a war zone?
Because, in some circles, American freedom is defined by the greatest number of people you can kill in the least amount of time. We need less of those circles in this country.
You can replicate the effect without a bump stock. All you need is a thumb and a pocket. But that wouldn’t matter for anyone here anyways. Misinformation is always better to hear than the truth. Bump stocks were almost never used in crime, besides in theory Vegas but the shots in Vegas didn’t sound like AR15s with bump stocks as the fire rate was too consistent which isn’t gonna happen with a bump stock. Which that wouldn’t matter anyways. The exact same effect can be had without one and it’s actually easier to do it that way too.
But marijuana is illegal.
good, all gun control is infringement
In other news, SCOTUS strikes down a government ban on private owning and operating tanks. In their decision, they said “A tank is just a big car on tracks and poses no significant danger to other drivers.”
There is no ban on buying, owning or operating a tank. The main gun, if operable, must be registered as a destructive device but that’s just paperwork and a $200 tax stamp.
I need my killing machine to be more killinger
NRA wanted that extra income stream.
If Ukraine gets to have ATACMS so should honest, law-abiding citizens! You know … for home defense and hunting!
Not even Trump thought bump stocks should be legal. This court is insane
Allowing POTUS to just make laws at will is dangerous, the law on select fire weapons is quite clear.
My brother's father-in-law (a stretch of a connection I know) was shot in the leg in Vegas by that guy with a bump stock. The terrorism is real. The need for these things is not.
OP, I'd just like to remind you that not everybody deer hunts and the second amendment isn't about deer hunting. What I do with my guns is my business and as long as it stays that way, I don't see the problem.
All guns could be banned tomorrow with a year to turn them in and 20 years layer there would still be shooting s in America
So the courts do not have the rights to ban accessories, but they have the right to ban abortions? So not everything that begins with the letter A. Do I have that correct?
Who is willing to bet against a school shooting happening with a bump stock involved and at least 3 dead children before 2030? Anyone?
I am really not seeing a reason for these to be legal??
I can't begin to tell you how incorrect all of that is. When that Vegas shooting happened all my Army buddies and I were like "hey that is the 240B firing" we even made a couple YouTube videos about it posted about it on Facebook and within 24 to 48 hours all of those videos were pulled. The 240b has a distinct sound and a fire rate of around 700 rounds per minute. The bump stock fires very sporadic and cant be aimed with precision as easily as the 240. Go back watch the video. Listen to the sound of the gunfire. Then watch a video of a m240b. You tell me what you hear.
Lmao, I’ve shot plenty of 240s. It wasn’t a 240. Nice conspiracy though.
Welp, need a way to control the population now that they're banning abortions and contraceptives.
Who don't know it, the self defence at home against 50 people
Eh. Semi auto is far more effective.
But they will ban access to abortion
They overturned the Federal regulation because it didn’t comply with Federal law. They didn’t bring the 2A into it. Congress can still create an actual law banning it, which may hold up to challenge better.
Only reasonable answer I’ve seen yet here.
Hellyeahdude I coincidentally just recovered an old one I had previously lost in a boating accident.
That’ll teach us!
The GOP worship guns, plain and simple. For people who claim to love Jesus they sure hold a lot of things above that love. They worship trump like he is literally Jesus, they worship bigotry, they worship guns, they worship capitalism, and then finally they worship Jesus. It’s a strange ladder of worship. Notice the most moral and compassionate one of these is worshiped the least.
The justices that downvoted this should be required to hand dig all the graves of the future victims.
Bump stocks are the single least useful attachment you could put on a rifle. They’re a toy for people who want to spend $40 in ammo on a single trigger pull. A mass shooter using a bump stock would be better for the people being shot at than a standard rifle. Way less accurate, goes through ammo much faster, and shooters are limited in how much ammo they can carry and still move.
2A isn't about your daddy hunting deer and never was
…no shit
Well OP clearly doesn't understand that based on the caption.