Gun Owners of America enters court over Bumpstock Ban! - Polidicks

https://twitter.com/GunOwners/status/1103761786606702593 Gun Owners of America's Press Release Note for Mods: Not many news sites outside of Twitter are posting about this, but this is pretty big news. I will be updating once more news sources become available. Hopefully the GOA wins this case, and kicks back this overreaching bullshit. You want to argue about fast-rate of fire weapons, get rid of the NFA, and we'll talk.

I look forward to an age where the largest pro-2a groups spend their time and resources fighting government overreach in the courts and using legal methods, as opposed to sucking Russia's dick and giving gun advocacy a bad name.

Yup. Good reason I'm not a member of the NRA even though I hold the 2nd Amendment to be sacred and inviolable.

What's the main purpose of bump stocks? To spray and pray bullets at a target?

fun

Let's trade Bump Stocks for SBR's and Suppressors.

I don't get the "fun" of firing inaccurately, expending unnecessary ammo to hit targets. I've been to the range and I like shooting for target practice, but I like hitting where I aim and challenging myself to hit the precise spot I am going for. If you hit a target with a bump stock, it is luck. A bullseye with a bump stock is meaningless, and demonstrates no skill in the handling of firearms. If you want an automatic weapon, take the necessary steps to obtain the required license and acquire one. I don't think it is overreach for the government to say it is unlawful to structurally alter a firearm to make it fire as it was not intended to.

So what kind of hobbies do you have so I can sperg out and call them unnecessary. Hobbies are inherently unnecessary and silly. That's what we do for fun so we dont go batshit crazy. I'm not a gun guy, but I'm saying this because you're missing the point. It literally is, just for fun. Bumpstocks serve no actual purpose other than to be fun.

I'm quite curious what the families of the 59 killed and those 442 struck by gunfire at the Route 91 Harvest music festival would have to say to that. There is a difference between purpose and function. Sure, for the majority of people who own or who have owned them, they are a fun way of making their bang bang stick go bang bang faster, but for Stephen Paddock, it allowed him to injure and kill a lot more people than would otherwise be achievable in the span of time of the shooting, while allowing him to avoid tripping the red flags that would come with going through the process of acquiring a large arsenal of fully automatic weapons.

People have repeatedly addressed bump stocks in other threads: You literally don't even need a bump stock to accomplish the same effect as a bump stock. So banning them accomplishes exactly nothing.

Yeah, I'll just get right on that and fill out my Form 1 to make a machine gun- but wait, I can't, because the machine gun registry was closed in 1986. Bump stocks only exist because automatic weapons, which were heavily regulated, were rendered effectively unattainable to anyone who doesn't have $10k+ to blow. So instead of paying $200, filing an application form, submitting fingerprints, and undergoing an extensive background check process (taking 6-12 months) to own a machine gun, any shmuck could buy an unregulated bump stock. So sure, reopen the machine gun registry- which had a regulatory scheme so effective that in fifty years of its existence, only two homicides were ever committed with registered MGs, one of which was self-defense and the other was committed by a crooked cop- and then I'll be happy with reclassifying bump stocks as MGs. Make anyone who wants to spray bullets for fun undergo the strictest evaluation to ensure that they're responsible, mentally sound, and of clean record. I see no problem with that, just actually give us the option.

I fly radio control planes, and build radio control cars. You see some dickweed in the news every week with his drone flying into an airport. I already have to register my planes, should I get further punished because of some asshole doing something wrong?

We don't ask the victims of crimes what we should do because we understand they are fucking biased. "I bet the most biased people in the world on the issue would disagree with you!" No shit bud

I'll admit it wasn't a logical argument, and I'll rescind it. I was pretty affected by footage of the shooting, so forgive me my illogical appeal to emotion.

I will defeat the NRA with the clenched fist of truth.

If EA ever reboot Command and Conquer properly they can just outsource the FMVs to the NRA.

Yes.

Exactly! No reason to punish the majority because a minority can't control themselves.

It's no different from doing burnouts in a sports car. It's just fun to raise some hell, tear shit up and make noise once in a while. It's not about skill. But yes, bump stocks are stupid and I hate them. I would be OK with banning them if there was actually a legal process by which one could feasibly obtain a proper automatic, but there isn't. They're utterly inaccessible to the middle class and below.

Not to derail or be mean, I'm strictly here to help but the word you wanted was effected. Affected is a verb, effected is a noun. They basically mean the same thing, however the subject placement is different in regards to what word is used. The proper phrasing for affect in this instance would have been "The footage affected me greatly, please forgive my appeal to emotion." Also I wouldn't call your initial reactions or viewpoints illogical, they're grounded in logic, but driven in the wrong direction by over-reaction which honestly is justified to some degree. It's hard to look at something as complex as gun control and figure out what needs to be done, especially when the common denominator present is literally always this one object which is way easier to define and identify than the motives and mental state of the people who used said objects.

Uh, both affected and effected are adjectives, and 'effected' means 'put into effect', so I'm pretty sure the usage of affected was correct. Eg 'I was affected by the footage on TV' versus 'A bump stock ban was effected by executive fiat' Merriam-Webster has an article, the first example (Darryl Dawkins) is relevant here. (we now return to your regularly scheduled gun discussion)

I seriously don't know what I would do without my hobby of shooting guns the way the founders intended.

Affect is a verb/ transitive verb, not an adjective. Effect is a noun. You should maybe read that article you posted instead of derailing with the snide "well actually.." post you gave there friend.

He actually did use "affected" correctly in his post though.

Did I misread his post? That's a definite possibility, lemme check.

Affect is a verb that is occasionally used as a noun, effect is both a verb and a noun, affectED is the adjective form of the verb. The page I linked gives, as an example, "It affected my interplanetary funksmanship." That's virtually identical to 'I was pretty affected by footage', just past rather than present tense. The page also says 'Affect, when employed as a verb, most commonly carries the meaning of "to produce a material influence upon or alteration in." Things may very well affect your interplanetary funksmanship, but they are unlikely to effect it. The use of effect as a verb is not as common as that of affect, and it generally has the meaning of "to cause to come into being" or "accomplish."' Not trying to be snide, but you were trying to correct someone who was right to begin with, and now I'm confused as to why you're doubling down when I just linked to a page that explains this pretty clearly.

Do I have to call the grammar Nazis on you guys? But seriously, the purpose of bump stocks is to make the act of bump firing a gun easier for the user. Nothing more. Bump firing can still be done from the shoulder without a bump stock, and it will still suck at hitting anything compared to just using proper shooting technique.

No. No he fucking isn't.