Why should bump stocks not be banned? They can facilitate the murder of a large number of people...

>nobody has done what should have been done yet
Bunch of new fags around here I swear to god.

SHALL
NOT
BE
INFRINGED

In that case select fire m4's should be legal.

>hurrr im retarded durrr so im gonna post this dank meme image i found on leddit instead of an argument

Attached: image.jpg (190x266, 16K)

You're supposed to just post the SHALL and then wait for a combo.

why?

>calling others newfags
>not simply posting SHALL or simply ignoring the thread
you have to go back

>denying usefulness of full auto
>you should believe me because I said "feral nigger" and am clearly not a gungrabbing libtard
If I need select-fire, I'll get it.

Attached: 20.png (131x203, 70K)

People are faster and more accurate.
It would be better if you gave them to everyone because they're shit.
youtu.be/grgfKJT4Z48

Why should guns not be banned? They can facilitate the murder of a large number of people.

why not, you literal cum guzzler?

So I can fight back in equal force if my government becomes tyrannical and attacks me.

That's zoomers not millennials

Nobody "needs" to tell people what they "need". Hate when this is a person's only argument for gun control. It's loser think. Its not my fault you have a crippled imagination.

That's a bad smuggie.
>fighting a platoon on your own
retarded
From US v. Miller:
>The Court cannot take judicial notice that a shotgun having a barrel less than 18 inches long has today any reasonable relation to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia, and therefore cannot say that the Second Amendment guarantees to the citizen the right to keep and bear such a weapon.
Going off the "reasonable relation to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia" being what qualifies as a weapon protecting a gun, M4's shouldn't be prohibited under the NFA.

Sage, report, hide.

Because the human finger is literally faster than a bump stock

>implying the best home defence weapon isn't a M2 HMG pointing down a chokepoint in the house

Not the same user.
I agree 100%. However to successfully defeat that in court. One would have to be in a actual militia. And I'd guarentee the government would use the exscuse that not even enlisted soldiers are aloud to take their M4s back home. They are kept at the armory. So the militia would have to have a armory similar in concept to the militaries armory.

As soon as a civil war breaks out. All capable Ar15s will be modified the best we can. To mimic full auto. And it can be done.

>their M4
Its not even owned by the soldiers.
Maybe if the US Army had every soldier pay for their purchase of a M4 then sure they can consider letting them bring it home, but its not even the soldiers' property.

Bumpstock threads are full of shills, concern trolls, and idiots who are doing a great job of getting people to ignore and hide this incredibly relevant information regarding Trump's bumpstock "ban".

scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/kisor-v-wilkie/
>"Issue: Whether the Supreme Court should overrule Auer v. Robbins and Bowles v. Seminole Rock & Sand Co., which direct courts to defer to an agency’s reasonable interpretation of its own ambiguous regulation."
foac-pac.org/Scotus-Agrees-To-Hear-Case-That-May-Ultimately-Undermine-Atf/Legal-News-Item/1019
>"Auer deference specifically keeps the courts from calling down regulatory bodies overstepping their bounds unless they’re particularly egregious. You know, things like the ATF potentially declaring things like bump stocks as machine guns despite them not having anything to do with how many rounds can be fired with a single pull of the trigger."
thetruthaboutguns.com/2018/12/ttag-contributor/breaking-supreme-court-grants-cert-in-case-that-could-end-deference-to-regulatory-agencies-challenge-atf-regulatory-power/
>"For gun owners, we need only look at the behavior of the BATFE in its shifting interpretations of firearms laws and regulations, which the courts have largely let stand because of Auer and Chevron deference."
townhall.com/tipsheet/bethbaumann/2018/12/11/scotus-plans-to-hear-a-regulatory-case-that-could-be-a-huge-win-for-gun-owners-n2537371
>"The real win, however, would be for gun owners. Specifically, if Congress decides to rule in Kisor's favor, it means the Department of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) could be reigned in. Right now, there are legal gray areas as far as implementing laws go."

Attached: 1536644149215.gif (300x214, 2.58M)

Relevant

Attached: 1547240072535.png (845x933, 72K)

It's the bill of RIGHTS not the bill of NEEDS

A bump stock actually makes you less effective than just shooting normally

because full auto fire can be achieved by a shoestring or a wire coathangar. You are retarded. Commerical bumpstocks are also overpriced as fuck and impractical.

Honestly idgaf if bumpstocks are banned for these reasons. A bumpstock is literally just a modified stock with sliding buffer tube. Banning them does quite literally nothing and if it serves as a gambling chip for further political leverage I'm fine with that.

you ought to stop projecting your homosexual fetishes on other people and just come out of the loset. Its 2019, its no big deal. just dont be one of those faggots who wears rainbow tube tops and nipple piercings that feels the need to tell everyone. your gonna make it user. i believe in you.

Because bump stocks are obscure pieces of meme gear that hardly anyone heard of before that dude shot up a country concert in Vegas.
>taking the b8 this hard
It is Jow Forums user, here everyone is one way or another a complete faggot.

Exactly why should people limit their options of self-defense because a bunch of rich people said we should?