Log in

More Than Bump Stocks

06/18/2024 2:16 PM | Anonymous

More Than Bump Stocks

Beware of liberal judges, they do not believe in the United States Constitution and will destroy your rights to achieve their goal – which is to destroy your rights.  Doubt that?  Let’s look at the recent decision on ‘Bump Stocks.’

Some quick background.

Semi-automatic firearms require a separate trigger pull for each shot.  Automatic firearms, (machine guns) require only one trigger pull for continuous shooting.  This has been the law since 1934.

After a “Bump Stock” was used in a 2017 mass shooting in Las Vegas, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) issued an interpretive rule concluding that "Bump Stocks" are machine guns, even though they require a trigger pull for each shot.

Michael Cargill, owner of Central Texas Gun Works, sued the government after he was forced to surrender several "bump stocks" under the ATF's rule. He argued that ATF incorrectly identified bump stocks as machine guns, and overstepped its power in banning them.

A Texas-based U.S. District Court first approved the ATF rule, but an appeals court overruled it and sent it back to the District Court.  The second time around, the District Court judge agreed that the ATF rule was illegal and likely to be rejected by other courts.

Of course, the Biden Administration appealed and the case eventually went to the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS.)

The Supreme Court struck down the ATF ban on bump stocks.  SCOTUS found that the ATF did not follow federal law when it banned bump stocks.  The 6-3 majority opinion written by Justice Clarence Thomas was joined by fellow conservatives John Roberts, Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett.

This decision needs in depth examination as it highlights why leftist judges are such a danger to the Constitution.

Justice Clarence Thomas outlined the issue when he wrote, "This tragedy (the Las Vegas shooting) created tremendous political pressure to outlaw bump stocks nationwide. Within days, members of Congress proposed bills to ban ‘bump stocks.’ 

But the bills did not pass and so did not become law.  That’s how the Constitution works!  Congress must pass laws to put them in effect.

Instead, the ATF acted and outlawed “Bump Stocks.”

Why did SCOTUS rule against ATF?

In essence, the law Congress passed in 1934 and amended several ties afterwards clearly states that a machine gun requires only one trigger pull for continuous shooting.  A ‘Bump Stock’ helps to fire rapidly but requires a separate trigger pull for each shot.  A ‘Bump Stock’ does not make a gun into a machine gun as defined in existing law.  The ATF violated a law Congress passed.

Liberal Justice Sonia Sotomayor, joined by liberal Justices Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson, dissented from the majority arguing that the majority got it wrong.  That’s fair, to question a decision.  Both sides do it, all the time.

But then Sotomayor goes too far when she is quoted as saying that it’s “deeply regrettable” Congress has to act.

At the highest judicial level, liberals like Sotomayor find it ‘deeply regrettable’ that proposed laws - that they like - have to go through the work of being passed by a Congress elected by “We the People’ in order to become laws!  They would much prefer their favorite proposals just be enacted by some executive agency appointees without ‘We the People’ having any say.  After all, Liberals know best!

This is not the first time Sotomayor has expressed dissatisfaction with the constitutional steps needed to pass a law and prefers executive agency shortcuts.  In another dissent, when a Barack Obama executive order was overruled by SCOTUS, Sotomayor complained that the people should not have to wait for Congress to act.

Justice Alito spoke for Conservatives when he wrote a short, separate concurring opinion on ‘Bump Stocks’ to stress that Congress can change the law to equate ‘Bump Stocks’ with machine guns.  He doesn’t regret that Congress has to pass a law for it to be in force; it might then reflect the will of the people and not just the will of the liberal elite. 

That’s it in a nutshell.  Liberals want to bypass the Constitution whenever it’s convenient - for them - and they will rule as such if they can get a majority.  The Constitution has no meaning to liberals like Sotomayor when it works against them.  Conservatives believe laws should be enacted following the Constitution, whether or not it is convenient.

The way to prevent liberal judges from ‘legislating from the bench’ is to vote.  Donald Trump explained it when he spoke at the National Rifle Association's Annual Meeting in Texas about not voting.

"But one thing I'll say, and I say it as friends, we've got to get gun owners to vote, because you know what? I don't know what it is. Perhaps it's a form of rebellion, because you're a rebellious people, aren't you? But gun owners don't vote. What is that all about?"

"If gun owners would vote, we would swamp them at levels that nobody's ever seen before.  So, I think you're a rebellious bunch.  So, let's be rebellious and vote this time."

A 2nd Amendment Defense Organization, defending the rights of New York State gun owners to keep and bear arms!

PO Box 165
East Aurora, NY 14052

SCOPE is a 501(c)4 non-profit organization.

{ Site Design & Development By Motorhead Digital }

Powered by Wild Apricot Membership Software