Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Trampling the constitution. Federal bump stock ban

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Trampling the constitution. Federal bump stock ban

    Regardless of what your position on bump stocks is, the way the feds are going about banning them is clearly and patently unconstitutional. Come Tuesday, bump stocks will be illegal. Owners have to either turn them in to the government or destroy them themselves.
    The problem here is that owners are not going to be compensated for their property loss due to government action. That clearly violates the 4th, 5th, and 6th amendments of the constitution, as this law represents an eminent domain taking.

    What the feds want to do is avoid paying out something on the order of $100 million to compensate owners and businesses for their loss of property.

    I for one, think this is an abomination of disregard for clearly defined standing in law. Worse, if the government gets away with it, what else can they take without compensation?

    https://www.cnbc.com/2019/03/25/trum...t-tuesday.html

    https://thecrimereport.org/2019/03/2...e-federal-ban/

  • #2
    Crazy contraption

    Comment


    • #3
      If only we had a president that truly cared about the constitution. This is what happens when you elect a liberal, big-government president.
      "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
      - Benjamin Franklin

      The new right wing: hate Muslims, preaches tolerance for Nazis.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by TactiKill J. View Post
        If only we had a president that truly cared about the constitution. This is what happens when you elect a liberal, big-government president.
        It wasn't the President this time (and I'd have said the same thing with Obama at the wheel). It was an unaccountable bureaucracy, and unelected civil servant executives in an agency known for rogue and idiotic actions, the ATF (remember Waco?) that did it. They ruled administratively that bump stocks are a form of "machinegun" and therefore illegal. They did it on the sly too for the most part keeping their action as quiet as possible.

        Comment


        • #5
          President Donald Trump said Monday he is “writing out” so-called bump stocks, which allow semi-automatic weapons to mimic the firing speed of fully automatic weapons.

          “Bump stocks, we are writing that out. I am writing that out,” he said, addressing a group of state governors at the White House. “I don’t care if Congress does it or not, I’m writing it out myself."
          https://www.politico.com/story/2018/...-stocks-424693

          Again, Trump is always so eager to bypass congress and do whatever he personally wants. In this case, violating constitutional rights. As I said, at his core he's nothing more than a big-government liberal.

          The Trump administration rolled out a new federal regulationTuesday officially banning bump-fire stocks.

          Those who possess the devices, which make it easier to fire rounds from a semi-automatic weapon by harnessing the gun's recoil to "bump" the trigger faster, will have 90 days to turn in or otherwise destroy them from the date that the final rule is published in the federal register -- likely this Friday -- according to senior DOJ officials.
          https://www.cnn.com/2018/12/18/polit...ban/index.html

          The above from Dec 18 2018
          "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
          - Benjamin Franklin

          The new right wing: hate Muslims, preaches tolerance for Nazis.

          Comment


          • #6
            Okay...

            But, my issue isn't with the ban. I could care less. Bump stocks really are a non-necessity for virtually anyone to own. That aside, I simply want the government to compensate owners full and fair market value for their property.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
              Okay...

              But, my issue isn't with the ban. I could care less. Bump stocks really are a non-necessity for virtually anyone to own. That aside, I simply want the government to compensate owners full and fair market value for their property.
              Liberals argue that assault rifles are non-necessity. So where does it end?

              That aside, I still say this is the result of electing a president who favors big government and is liberal. He doesn't care that confiscation without fair payment is a violation of the constitution. If he did, this would not be happening.
              "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
              - Benjamin Franklin

              The new right wing: hate Muslims, preaches tolerance for Nazis.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by TactiKill J. View Post

                Liberals argue that assault rifles are non-necessity. So where does it end?

                That aside, I still say this is the result of electing a president who favors big government and is liberal. He doesn't care that confiscation without fair payment is a violation of the constitution. If he did, this would not be happening.
                The point I'm making is there are laws regarding confiscation of personal property. If assault rifles got banned, then the government should be willing to pay each and every owner full and fair market value for the weapons they are now required to turn in.
                This isn't something new, but it is an accelerating trend. For or against more gun control, you should be appalled, enraged, and against the government taking people's property without proper compensation. This was a big issue with the crown and British government when this country was formed. That's why there are several amendments in the Bill of Rights concerning it.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
                  Okay...

                  But, my issue isn't with the ban. I could care less. Bump stocks really are a non-necessity for virtually anyone to own. That aside, I simply want the government to compensate owners full and fair market value for their property.
                  Procedural (or not) regulation notwithstanding....I don't see the government paying anything to owners. If they did, it would be for pennies/nickels on the dollar under the threat to owners of being charged with a felony if found with one after the fact.

                  Two years ago I watched people shooting these things at the famous Knob Creek Shoot in Kentucky. Great way to blow through lots of ammo without coming close to hitting your target. You may have a point about how the law is enacted, but given the nature of the item and it's association, I doubt much sympathy will be found for it to challenge how the law was enacted.

                  As far as I'm concerned, people were dumb enough to buy the junk in the first place, so their loss.
                  You'll live, only the best get killed.

                  -General Charles de Gaulle

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post

                    The point I'm making is there are laws regarding confiscation of personal property. If assault rifles got banned, then the government should be willing to pay each and every owner full and fair market value for the weapons they are now required to turn in.
                    This isn't something new, but it is an accelerating trend. For or against more gun control, you should be appalled, enraged, and against the government taking people's property without proper compensation. This was a big issue with the crown and British government when this country was formed. That's why there are several amendments in the Bill of Rights concerning it.
                    I don't know what gives you the impression that I'm not concerned. I am concerned, but I'm also not naive. At this stage, I understand that a President and his administration can violate the constitution, as such it becomes paramount that we elect President's who would uphold it instead of tearing it down. That's the only solution. Why beat around the bush? Stop electing people who think the government can answer all our problems, stop electing people who don't give a damn about the constitution. Until you and millions of other Americans do so we'll continue to have President's like Bush, Obama and now Trump who violate our constitutional rights.

                    So yes, I understand they should be compensated, I also understand Trump doesn't care that they should be compensated and obviously most Americans don't either including yourself despite what you claim. If you truly cared you would not be deflecting blame from the person responsible for this. If you truly cared you would not support a President who said he wants to remove guns without due process. You wouldn't have voted for someone who has a track record of being anti-gun. Nor would you be arguing that assault rifles should be confiscated as long as the government pays their owners. No one who truly values the constitution would do and say the type of things you have.
                    "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
                    - Benjamin Franklin

                    The new right wing: hate Muslims, preaches tolerance for Nazis.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
                      Regardless of what your position on bump stocks is, the way the feds are going about banning them is clearly and patently unconstitutional. Come Tuesday, bump stocks will be illegal.
                      Private ownership of fully automatic firearms has been banned for more than 30 years.
                      Converting a semi-automatic into a full auto is also illegal.
                      If the federal government decides that a Bump stock is an attempt to circumvent the law then their current action would be legal, and no compensation required - although possibly subject to a court challenge

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Freebird View Post

                        Private ownership of fully automatic firearms has been banned for more than 30 years.
                        Converting a semi-automatic into a full auto is also illegal.
                        If the federal government decides that a Bump stock is an attempt to circumvent the law then their current action would be legal, and no compensation required - although possibly subject to a court challenge
                        Five minutes and a file will do much the same. This is all pointless. Btw a empty .44 casing alligator clipped behind the trigger will make a Mac-10 rock and roll.

                        Just a bit of gun trivia.
                        Credo quia absurdum.


                        Quantum mechanics describes nature as absurd from the point of view of common sense. And yet it fully agrees with experiment. So I hope you can accept nature as She is - absurd! - Richard Feynman

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by TactiKill J. View Post

                          I don't know what gives you the impression that I'm not concerned. I am concerned, but I'm also not naive. At this stage, I understand that a President and his administration can violate the constitution, as such it becomes paramount that we elect President's who would uphold it instead of tearing it down. That's the only solution. Why beat around the bush? Stop electing people who think the government can answer all our problems, stop electing people who don't give a damn about the constitution. Until you and millions of other Americans do so we'll continue to have President's like Bush, Obama and now Trump who violate our constitutional rights.

                          So yes, I understand they should be compensated, I also understand Trump doesn't care that they should be compensated and obviously most Americans don't either including yourself despite what you claim. If you truly cared you would not be deflecting blame from the person responsible for this. If you truly cared you would not support a President who said he wants to remove guns without due process. You wouldn't have voted for someone who has a track record of being anti-gun. Nor would you be arguing that assault rifles should be confiscated as long as the government pays their owners. No one who truly values the constitution would do and say the type of things you have.
                          Trump is supported by the NRA,thus he is not anti-gun .

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
                            Regardless of what your position on bump stocks is, the way the feds are going about banning them is clearly and patently unconstitutional. Come Tuesday, bump stocks will be illegal. Owners have to either turn them in to the government or destroy them themselves.
                            The problem here is that owners are not going to be compensated for their property loss due to government action. That clearly violates the 4th, 5th, and 6th amendments of the constitution, as this law represents an eminent domain taking.

                            What the feds want to do is avoid paying out something on the order of $100 million to compensate owners and businesses for their loss of property.

                            I for one, think this is an abomination of disregard for clearly defined standing in law. Worse, if the government gets away with it, what else can they take without compensation?

                            https://www.cnbc.com/2019/03/25/trum...t-tuesday.html

                            https://thecrimereport.org/2019/03/2...e-federal-ban/
                            Shhiit house lawyer

                            Eminent domain refers to the power of the government to take private property and convert it into public use.
                            "Ask not what your country can do for you"

                            Left wing, Right Wing same bird that they are killing.

                            you’re entitled to your own opinion but not your own facts.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by TactiKill J. View Post

                              I don't know what gives you the impression that I'm not concerned. I am concerned, but I'm also not naive. At this stage, I understand that a President and his administration can violate the constitution, as such it becomes paramount that we elect President's who would uphold it instead of tearing it down. That's the only solution. Why beat around the bush? Stop electing people who think the government can answer all our problems, stop electing people who don't give a damn about the constitution. Until you and millions of other Americans do so we'll continue to have President's like Bush, Obama and now Trump who violate our constitutional rights.

                              So yes, I understand they should be compensated, I also understand Trump doesn't care that they should be compensated and obviously most Americans don't either including yourself despite what you claim. If you truly cared you would not be deflecting blame from the person responsible for this. If you truly cared you would not support a President who said he wants to remove guns without due process. You wouldn't have voted for someone who has a track record of being anti-gun. Nor would you be arguing that assault rifles should be confiscated as long as the government pays their owners. No one who truly values the constitution would do and say the type of things you have.
                              Just more Loony Tunes
                              "Ask not what your country can do for you"

                              Left wing, Right Wing same bird that they are killing.

                              you’re entitled to your own opinion but not your own facts.

                              Comment

                              Latest Topics

                              Collapse

                              Working...
                              X