Whew, thank supply-side Jesus. I was really wondering how I'd defend my family from tyrannical apache helicopters or my home from intruders without a bumpstock...
On a side note I listened to some of the arguments of this case in front of the court and holy shit these Justices are both dumb and arrogant.
Man, if only a Dem had won in 2020 and had the last four years to fix it...
Of course, they'd need a Dem majority in the House and Senate, and it would help if that president wouldn't shut up during the election about how he's a "Senate whisperer" that could get Republicans to vote with the Dem party.
Man, just think if Biden would have won 2020 and the whole damn nation banded together in a southern state's dual Senate run off and we got him 50 D senators.
Abortion rights might have even been codified into law!
Friendly reminder that bump stock bans and anything related to fire rate is, at best, performative and more often outright malicious compliance/legislature.
The two most common types of ammunition used in mass shootings are 9mm pistol rounds and 5.56 nato/.223 rifle rounds. Neither of which overpenetrate soft tissue to any meaningful degree*. Once you are at the semi-automatic fire rate it is just wasting ammo as you pump a dozen rounds into one kid desperately trying to protect their Bluey doll from the hell that is the second amendment.
This is a big chunk of why the only people in the military who are even "allowed" to fire in full auto are machine gunners. Anyone else is either in an incredibly specific situation or just wasting ammo. And its why so many militaries throughout the decades have outright disabled automatic fire on their infantry rifles.
If we ACTUALLY care about half measures to protect people from mass shootings? Magazine capacity is the way to go. Because the lives saved by murderers needing to reload their emotional support assault rifles will be a lot higher than those saved by making it take a bit longer to dump a magazine into one innocent child.
And, obviously, the real answer is actual gun control and firearm bans. Bare minimum is treating semiautomatics with the same restrictions as automatic weapons. If you want to hunt or target shoot you can use a revolver or bolt action.
*: The 5.56 is a particularly evil round due to its tendency to tumble/yaw upon entering the human body. So you get tiny entrance wounds and massive exit wounds.
The billionaires are well-served having frequent mass murders — it keeps minorities in check, and encourages traumatic active-shooter drills in schools.
Don't forget, you and/or your children can DIE AT ANY MOMENT! THERES NO TIME TO THINK OR PLAN AHEAD FURTHER THAN TOMORROW!
And the only thing that matters is stopping the other party from winning elections, so never ask for more than your offered or that means you want the other team!
The whole thing is just the wealthy using basic psychology to ensure no matter what happens, they win.
They might have a preference, but for them it's always win/win and for the other 99% of us always lose/lose.
Just a question of how much they win by and how much we lose by.
Any hoppy frood knew this decades ago:
The President is always a controversial choice, always an infuriating but fascinating character. His job is not to wield power but to draw attention away from it.
Seriously, everyone could have ignored the issues and let it stand because society is better for it. But there are legitimate actors who believe it is their right to own these and they need them for their defense.
Gun nuts are some of the most obnoxiously entitled people on the planet. In large part because they define themselves by how much money they have given gun companies and feel like they have a constitutional amendment specifically for them. Any time something is taken away from them they cry harder than a toddler who was told they can't have chicken nuggets for dinner.
As for bump stocks specifically? A lot of the smaller gun companies were pushing for similar "loophole" devices and, thus, have been focusing a lot of sponsor money on gun youtubers to talk about how they aren't covered by the assault weapon ban because it is very specifically about "multiple rounds from a single pull of the trigger". So now they are "technically correct" on top of it.
It's so weird ...they want a gun "for self defense" but it firing once per second is not enough.
So the goal shifts to something that fires 3x per second ... "now that is stopping power".
But it does not stop firmly enough, need to find a way to fire that same small gun 9x or 27x per second, now that is self defense!
If someone invents a two handed minigun that goes 100rps and is not unweildy I bet some of the gun nuts will want it legalized to use as domestic weapon for self defense.
Because hey, hitting someone with 100 bullets might stop them, right?
