• Dkarma@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    68
    ·
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    She’s basically saying it’s irrelevant that one trigger pull equals one bullet fired. That has nothing to do with “being a machine gun”. That is just how semi auto guns work.

    How would you outlaw this? You’d have to outlaw belt loops too because functionally they do the same thing.

    Her argument is invalid. A goose walks like a duck and flaps like a duck and looks like a duck but it’s not a fucking duck.

    The idea that accessories like a pistol grip and stock choice and flash suppressor “make a gun into a machine gun” despite one bullet per trigger pull is simply not true and disingenuous.

    Sotomayor should be ashamed. She’s saying a dog is a duck if you glue on wings and webbed feet.

    • kbin_space_program@kbin.run
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      54
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      Its not one per trigger pull, since the action of the machine results in another round firing unless you move your finger off the trigger.

      • SkyezOpen@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        The bump stock itself facilitates moving your finger so the trigger can reset. Pedantic, sure, but that’s literally why the bump stock was designed that way. High rate of fire while not technically being an assault weapon.

    • inb4_FoundTheVegan@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      That has nothing to do with “being a machine gun”. That is just how semi auto guns work.

      This sort of "X is X no matter what changes, it is always X" essentialist thinking is why conservites are increasingly getting frustrated and loosing touch with the more complex reality the rest of the world occupies. This is the same line of thinking that keeps y’all upset about trans rights and understanding systemic racist.

    • shalafi@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      12
      ·
      5 months ago

      You’re arguing with an anti-gun audience that knows nothing about any of this. All they know is, “Guns bad!” (Wait till they find out about the shoestring conversion kit.)

      Tell you what guys: Grab an AR-15 with a bump stock and I’ll square off with mine, which is, well, stock. Good luck.

      It was a poorly written ruling with poor reasoning. If y’all want to bitch, bitch at Congress to create a solid definition of “machine gun” that’s a little newer than the 1930s. I’d be right behind it.

      Or, we could forget the whole notion of “law” and “precedent”, just go with “feels”. (Which seems to be lemmy’s take on anything more complex than jaywalking.)

      • corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        15
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        5 months ago

        You’re arguing with an anti-gun audience that knows nothing about any of this. All they know is, “Guns bad!” (Wait till they find out about the shoestring conversion kit.)

        Former infantry here.

        Guns should only be used by trained professionals who know not to pull the trigger.

        The AR-15 is a tool for people who can’t aim well.

        The only purpose for a bump-stock is to turn murder into mass-murder. It has no other purpose.

        ‘Till’ is a cash-drawer or a ploughing action.

        Begin attacking my cred as per the trend.