Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Amishman

(5,893 posts)
20. The problem is the letter of law says they aren't by the exact definition of the statute
Fri Jun 14, 2024, 11:21 AM
Jun 2024

This is one of my biggest pet peeves - poorly written laws.

Badly written laws come in two forms - those written too vaguely and end up impacting areas they shouldn't, and those written too precisely that they create loopholes. This is a clear example of the latter.

These devices were carefully designed to exploit a loophole in the definition of what is a machine gun. This isn't going to be popular, but this should have been a 9-0 to strike down the ATF rule. It is not the courts job to do what it right, it is their job to rule based on law and the constitution. But at the same time, in a perfect world where our politicians are all intelligent and reasonable people, this would immediately be followed by a new law to change the definition of a machine gun to close this loophole.

Recommendations

7 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

They're machine guns, period Johnny2X2X Jun 2024 #1
The problem is the letter of law says they aren't by the exact definition of the statute Amishman Jun 2024 #20
If only HUNTER BIDEN had owned a bump stock FakeNoose Jun 2024 #50
Sotomayor said if a bird walks and quacks MOMFUDSKI Jun 2024 #2
Ducks are legal Kaleva Jun 2024 #13
Bump stocks MOMFUDSKI Jun 2024 #22
But machine guns are legal don't you agree? Kaleva Jun 2024 #23
Only if you go through a lot of hoops. bluesbassman Jun 2024 #32
Why don't you just kcr Jun 2024 #36
I've been warning about bump stocks for over 10 years Kaleva Jun 2024 #58
That thread is a trip down memory lane sarisataka Jun 2024 #59
I've been called a gun grabber and a gun nut over the years Kaleva Jun 2024 #60
Over the years we have sometimes butted heads sarisataka Jun 2024 #62
How many Traildogbob Jun 2024 #3
If the ShitGibbon somehow wins this country is going to look like the Wild West of old with NoMoreRepugs Jun 2024 #4
I wish the lives of living humans were as important as guns and fetuses tulipsandroses Jun 2024 #5
This should be a campaign issue in every national race Raven123 Jun 2024 #6
Isn't it sadly amazing how much we put into finding new ways to kill people? underpants Jun 2024 #7
Why in the hell would they do that! kentuck Jun 2024 #8
Bribes Johnny2X2X Jun 2024 #12
Correct decision sarisataka Jun 2024 #9
Please, please, please send this to every Democratic leader, Please sanatanadharma Jun 2024 #11
Sadly, this is correct. BlueGrimmy Jun 2024 #14
I agree Kaleva Jun 2024 #15
That hasn't stopped SCOTUS with attacks on progressive laws kcr Jun 2024 #37
How damn low can they get? My lord. . Emile Jun 2024 #10
Silencers will be next Under The Radar Jun 2024 #16
Suppressors are legal in most of the US Kaleva Jun 2024 #21
I hope so Zeitghost Jun 2024 #38
Twisted: Passages Jun 2024 #17
Simply put... cayugafalls Jun 2024 #49
Dissent. Passages Jun 2024 #18
I think she's incorrect Kaleva Jun 2024 #24
Disagree. Passages Jun 2024 #25
You think one pull and release if the trigger can result in multiple shots? Kaleva Jun 2024 #27
Look at what she wrote. Passages Jun 2024 #31
SCOTUS ruled 6-3 that that definition didn't follow current federal law Kaleva Jun 2024 #33
Well, technically, she's wrong. yagotme Jun 2024 #26
Yes Kaleva Jun 2024 #28
Disagree. I believe she sees the similarity sensibly. Passages Jun 2024 #29
"Similarity." yagotme Jun 2024 #30
It pains me to say sarisataka Jun 2024 #34
Disagree, completely. Passages Jun 2024 #35
Disagreement does not change fact sarisataka Jun 2024 #39
I am confident she and the other two can read what constitutes a machine gun. Passages Jun 2024 #40
Ditto malaise Jun 2024 #19
This is why...... MacDo Jun 2024 #41
Unfortunately, the law as written doesn't allow Buns_of_Fire Jun 2024 #42
Bump stocks are not arms edhopper Jun 2024 #43
The ruling had nothing to do with the 2A sarisataka Jun 2024 #44
can States outlaw them edhopper Jun 2024 #48
In my non-lawyer opinion sarisataka Jun 2024 #52
Some states and local governments have outlawed them. Ocelot II Jun 2024 #54
But does this ruling edhopper Jun 2024 #55
As I understand, this ruling doesn't say the 2nd Amendment applies. BlueGrimmy Jun 2024 #47
Looks like the gunners celebrating this horrific ruling. Kingofalldems Jun 2024 #45
Statement of President Joe Biden on the Supreme Court Decision Garlan v. Cargill LetMyPeopleVote Jun 2024 #46
time's up, answer is: clear signal for refuKKKchickens to arm ASAP bringthePaine Jun 2024 #51
Actually they didn't decide the case specifically on 2nd Amendment grounds Ocelot II Jun 2024 #53
The NRA has a gleaming new RV for Clarence Thomas Blue Owl Jun 2024 #56
Trump got overruled MichMan Jun 2024 #57
Has he issued a statement? Is he trashing the scotus? spanone Jun 2024 #61
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Oh Great, Supreme Court r...»Reply #20