Just released Cargill ruling. What we all already knew…between this and latest ruling on pistol braces, nice to see courts supporting 2A.

Unanimous decision?

6-3 with the usual Soto, Jackson and Kagan I suspect

6-3

I haven't read the decision, but there is a good argument that Wide Open Triggers and the Glock Switch are legal.

I want to read the decision and I'll double check, but I'm pretty confident that a switch is just an aftermarket set of G18 conversion parts.

Should be legal, probably isn't.

normaleagle05 said:

---

I want to read the decision and I'll double check, but I'm pretty confident that a switch is just an aftermarket set of G18 conversion parts.

Should be legal, probably isn't.

---

The switch does technically convert a glock to full auto though doesn't it? Whereas the bump stock allowed for faster re-engagement, but was technically considered additional trigger pulls.

Hope this is a sign of things to come for forced reset triggers

It's crazy. I was down at the pond this morning, and there mine was, just sitting on the shoreline. I figured I would never see it again after losing it in that boating accident so many years ago.

Unfortunately Alito made it clear that if Congress were to create legislation defining a bump stock as a MG, he would likely agree with it and not see it as unconstitutional.

The argument of the case was that the ATF has no authority to create what amounts to legislation on this issue, which they don't. But then again, anybody that has actually read the Constitution knows this already.

Irish 2.0 said:

---

normaleagle05 said:

---

I want to read the decision and I'll double check, but I'm pretty confident that a switch is just an aftermarket set of G18 conversion parts.

Should be legal, probably isn't.

---

The switch does technically convert a glock to full auto though doesn't it? Whereas the bump stock allowed for faster re-engagement, but was technically considered additional trigger pulls.

---

The fact that this even had to be addressed shows how bad things are.

Simple solution - put the firearm in a vice. Depress the trigger and hold it. If it only fires 1 round, it is not a fully automatic. If more than one round continually fire, it is an automatic.

Whether or not you can fire faster or slower through external actions is completely irrelevant and any moron with a double digit IQ could tell you this.

Bump stock, binary trigger, etc. - only a single round and a single round only would fire - semi automatic
Glock switch - all rounds would fire until the magazine is empty = fully automatic

The rate of fire is nowhere in the equation. You could have a fully automatic weapon that fired 1 round per minute, but so long as it fires continuously on a single pull of the trigger, it would meet the definition of fully auto. How fast a semi-auto can fire does not negate the fact that one must activate the trigger for each and every round fired.

Who cares? Can't hit crap with them anyhow

2040huck said:

---

Who cares? Can't hit crap with them anyhow

---

Stephen Paddock on line 1.

Glock switch affects sear engagement with a single trigger pull and in my view that is still illegal per the definition.

2040huck said:

---

Who cares?

---

Anyone who doesnt like unelected bureaucrats arbitrarily making felons out of citizens for possessing a piece of plastic they specifically said was okay to possess previously.

schmellba99 said:

---

Unfortunately Alito made it clear that if Congress were to create legislation defining a bump stock as a MG, he would likely agree with it and not see it as unconstitutional.

The argument of the case was that the ATF has no authority to create what amounts to legislation on this issue, which they don't. But then again, anybody that has actually read the Constitution knows this already.

---

Exactly. This is a MUCH bigger decision than bump stocks.

Now have SCOTUS tell ATF than a can is just a muffler and since Meineke doesn't need a year and a stamp to put one on a car you shouldn't have to do the same for your rifle.

BenderRodriguez said:

---

2040huck said:

---

Who cares?

---

Anyone who doesnt like unelected bureaucrats arbitrarily making felons out of citizens for possessing a piece of plastic they specifically said was okay to possess previously.

---

This was done by an elected moron issuing an executive order for the ATF to ban the bump stock.

Irish 2.0 said:

---

normaleagle05 said:

---

I want to read the decision and I'll double check, but I'm pretty confident that a switch is just an aftermarket set of G18 conversion parts.

Should be legal, probably isn't.

---

The switch does technically convert a glock to full auto though doesn't it? Whereas the bump stock allowed for faster re-engagement, but was technically considered additional trigger pulls.

---

Which is what I'm saying SHOULD be legal.

Spore Ag said:

---

6-3 with the usual Soto, Jackson and Kagan I suspect

---

The "wise Latina," the diversity hire, and the reasonable liberal...but still liberal.

You need practice.

Best links for toys?

A Reddit forum said this site went live almost immediately.

https://www.firequest.com/AB227.html

Time to check the family tanks and playas.

All Bump Stocks Lost In Boating Accidents Back In 2017 Miraculously Wash Up On Shore https://t.co/c4LDQLEHnV pic.twitter.com/XhIVWi7XSj

— The Babylon Bee (@TheBabylonBee) June 15, 2024

My comments got deleted? Wtf soft?

hunter2012 said:

---

Time to check the family tanks and playas.

All Bump Stocks Lost In Boating Accidents Back In 2017 Miraculously Wash Up On Shore https://t.co/c4LDQLEHnV pic.twitter.com/XhIVWi7XSj

— The Babylon Bee (@TheBabylonBee) June 15, 2024

---

Rising and ebbing tides of ponds caused by the moon's gravitational pull is truly spectacular. God works in mysterious ways.

Beat me to it. I love the Bee.

I guess boating accidents involving firearms and components is a lot more common that I thought.

Mathguy64 said:

---

Now have SCOTUS tell ATF than a can is just a muffler and since Meineke doesn't need a year and a stamp to put one on a car you shouldn't have to do the same for your rifle.

---

The ATF did not define, or decide that a suppressor needed to be stamped and registered. The National Fire Arms Act (1934) passed by Congress and signed into law by FDR, amended in 1968 and again in 1986 (Signed by Regan!) decided that. The SC cannot simply overturn the law with out a legal challenge of which I believe there have been a few and the law has been upheld.

The only way to remove the tax and registration of suppressor is for congress to amend the law. But they are to busy doing nothing but sending our money to other countries and driving up the national debt.