Lawsuit argues AR-15 illegal

This forum is for general legislative discussions not specific to any given legislative session. It will remain open.

Moderator: carlson1

User avatar

Topic author
TexasJohnBoy
Banned
Posts in topic: 2
Posts: 1999
Joined: Sun Mar 22, 2015 4:21 pm
Location: North Texas

Lawsuit argues AR-15 illegal

#1

Post by TexasJohnBoy » Mon Jul 08, 2019 11:37 am

https://reason.com/2019/07/03/relying-o ... e-illegal/

Relying on the Same Illogic That Trump Used to Ban Bump Stocks, a New Lawsuit Argues That Customizable Rifles Are Illegal
The plaintiffs, parents of a woman who was murdered in the Las Vegas massacre, argue that bump stocks like the ones used in that attack convert semi-automatic rifles into illegal machine guns—a position that has been endorsed by the Trump administration. Therefore, they argue, AR-15s are themselves illegal, since the federal definition of machine guns includes firearms that "can be readily restored to shoot, automatically more than one shot, without manual reloading, by a single function of the trigger."
TSRA Member since 5/30/15; NRA Member since 10/31/14


Havens
Junior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 41
Joined: Tue May 21, 2019 1:12 pm

Re: Lawsuit argues AR-15 illegal

#2

Post by Havens » Mon Jul 08, 2019 11:55 am

988614BD-D290-461B-ADBF-F9B90948A815.jpeg
I may be out of line
EDC: Sig P938
Tactical pistol: Sig P226 tacops
Hunting sidearm: Glock 40 10mm
Game rifle: Remington 700 weatherby 7mm pre buyout
Currently training for Spartan races in order to get into shape for Run n Gun matches

User avatar

The Annoyed Man
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 6
Posts: 25283
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2008 12:59 pm
Location: North Richland Hills, Texas
Contact:

Re: Lawsuit argues AR-15 illegal

#3

Post by The Annoyed Man » Mon Jul 08, 2019 12:51 pm

TexasJohnBoy wrote:
Mon Jul 08, 2019 11:37 am
https://reason.com/2019/07/03/relying-o ... e-illegal/

Relying on the Same Illogic That Trump Used to Ban Bump Stocks, a New Lawsuit Argues That Customizable Rifles Are Illegal
The plaintiffs, parents of a woman who was murdered in the Las Vegas massacre, argue that bump stocks like the ones used in that attack convert semi-automatic rifles into illegal machine guns—a position that has been endorsed by the Trump administration. Therefore, they argue, AR-15s are themselves illegal, since the federal definition of machine guns includes firearms that "can be readily restored to shoot, automatically more than one shot, without manual reloading, by a single function of the trigger."
Good luck with that. The bumpstock ban notwithstanding, an AR15 still only fires one round per function of the trigger—bumpstock or no bumpstock. And since the ban, there’s no lawful way (just like before bumpstocks were invented) to convert an AR15 to fire at the same rate as a fully automatic weapon.
Give me Liberty, or I'll get up and get it myself.—Hookalakah Meshobbab
I don't carry because of the odds, I carry because of the stakes.—The Annoyed Boy
My dream is to have lived my life so well that future generations of leftists will demand my name be removed from buildings.

User avatar

tbrown
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 3
Posts: 1685
Joined: Thu Mar 17, 2011 4:47 pm

Re: Lawsuit argues AR-15 illegal

#4

Post by tbrown » Mon Jul 08, 2019 5:06 pm

The Annoyed Man wrote:
Mon Jul 08, 2019 12:51 pm
Good luck with that. The bumpstock ban notwithstanding, an AR15 still only fires one round per function of the trigger—bumpstock or no bumpstock. And since the ban, there’s no lawful way (just like before bumpstocks were invented) to convert an AR15 to fire at the same rate as a fully automatic weapon.
An AR-15 with a bump stock only fires one round per trigger pull, the same as an AR-15 without one. A bump stock is not required to bump fire an AR-15. It can be "readily" done without a bump stock.



Any intellectually honest person who supported the Trump administration classifying bump stocks as MG must also support reclassifying AR-15 as MG, because they can be "readily" bump fired without modification. To do otherwise is intellectually dishonest.
sent to you from my safe space in the hill country


Soccerdad1995
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 3884
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2016 8:03 pm

Re: Lawsuit argues AR-15 illegal

#5

Post by Soccerdad1995 » Mon Jul 08, 2019 5:20 pm

tbrown wrote:
Mon Jul 08, 2019 5:06 pm
The Annoyed Man wrote:
Mon Jul 08, 2019 12:51 pm
Good luck with that. The bumpstock ban notwithstanding, an AR15 still only fires one round per function of the trigger—bumpstock or no bumpstock. And since the ban, there’s no lawful way (just like before bumpstocks were invented) to convert an AR15 to fire at the same rate as a fully automatic weapon.
An AR-15 with a bump stock only fires one round per trigger pull, the same as an AR-15 without one. A bump stock is not required to bump fire an AR-15. It can be "readily" done without a bump stock.



Any intellectually honest person who supported the Trump administration classifying bump stocks as MG must also support reclassifying AR-15 as MG, because they can be "readily" bump fired without modification. To do otherwise is intellectually dishonest.
Bump firing is a shooting technique. If bump firing is bad, because we want to limit the rate of fire, then it's a very, very, slippery slope that does not end well. Have you ever seen Jerry Michulek (sp?) speed firing a revolver? You quickly reach a logical conclusion that all guns must be banned. The fact that the SCOTUS refused to review the first domino here is troubling. But on the bright side, they also never said that the bump stock ban WAS constitutional, either. If a lawsuit like the one in this thread makes it to them, then hopefully they will be forced to review the entire issue.
Ding dong, the witch is dead


QB
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 668
Joined: Wed May 10, 2006 7:38 pm
Location: Carrollton, TX

Re: Lawsuit argues AR-15 illegal

#6

Post by QB » Mon Jul 08, 2019 7:06 pm

Well......"can be readily RESTORED........" Per the definition of "restore", none of my AR15s can be restored to shoot more than one round per pull of trigger because they never originally could! Nothing to "restore" on my rifles.
"You may find me one day dead in a ditch somewhere. But by God, you'll find me in a pile of brass."~~ Tpr. M. Padgett

User avatar

03Lightningrocks
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 4
Posts: 8469
Joined: Tue Apr 08, 2008 5:15 pm
Location: DFW area

Re: Lawsuit argues AR-15 illegal

#7

Post by 03Lightningrocks » Mon Jul 08, 2019 7:35 pm

If the Democrats get control of the House and Senate, it will be all out war on firearms and they will use any justification they can to outlaw our firearms.

User avatar

narcissist
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 478
Joined: Sun Jun 09, 2019 10:09 am

Re: Lawsuit argues AR-15 illegal

#8

Post by narcissist » Mon Jul 08, 2019 8:03 pm

03Lightningrocks wrote:
Mon Jul 08, 2019 7:35 pm
If the Democrats get control of the House and Senate, it will be all out war on firearms and they will use any justification they can to outlaw our firearms.
:iagree: I must add it will be a actrul War on our soil if they try, just hope all gun owners, law enforcement, military personnel, ex-military ect. Follow the oath they took and we all stand together to fight these outrageous attempts to disarm Law Abiding Citizens. Kinda like the movie "Law Abiding Citizen" but worse!
One of my biggest mistakes in life...Is Believing people will show me the same love I've shown them. :reddevil

User avatar

The Annoyed Man
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 6
Posts: 25283
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2008 12:59 pm
Location: North Richland Hills, Texas
Contact:

Re: Lawsuit argues AR-15 illegal

#9

Post by The Annoyed Man » Mon Jul 08, 2019 8:32 pm

tbrown wrote:
Mon Jul 08, 2019 5:06 pm
The Annoyed Man wrote:
Mon Jul 08, 2019 12:51 pm
Good luck with that. The bumpstock ban notwithstanding, an AR15 still only fires one round per function of the trigger—bumpstock or no bumpstock. And since the ban, there’s no lawful way (just like before bumpstocks were invented) to convert an AR15 to fire at the same rate as a fully automatic weapon.
An AR-15 with a bump stock only fires one round per trigger pull, the same as an AR-15 without one. A bump stock is not required to bump fire an AR-15. It can be "readily" done without a bump stock.



Any intellectually honest person who supported the Trump administration classifying bump stocks as MG must also support reclassifying AR-15 as MG, because they can be "readily" bump fired without modification. To do otherwise is intellectually dishonest.
That is the exact opposite of my point. My point is that the AR15 was never (since 1986) able to be lawfully converted to fully automatic fire, and (B) a bumpstock is not an auto sear. It’s still one round fired per trigger pull. Rate of fire is determined by how fast the trigger can be pulled.......just like ANY semiautomatic weapon. The danger of this lawsuit is that it could end up illegalizing ALL semiautomatic long guns....and of course the plaintiffs are well aware of that.
Give me Liberty, or I'll get up and get it myself.—Hookalakah Meshobbab
I don't carry because of the odds, I carry because of the stakes.—The Annoyed Boy
My dream is to have lived my life so well that future generations of leftists will demand my name be removed from buildings.

User avatar

Texas_Blaze
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 2
Posts: 393
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2013 4:55 pm

Re: Lawsuit argues AR-15 illegal

#10

Post by Texas_Blaze » Mon Jul 08, 2019 8:37 pm

03Lightningrocks wrote:
Mon Jul 08, 2019 7:35 pm
If the Democrats get control of the House and Senate, it will be all out war on firearms and they will use any justification they can to outlaw our firearms.
Dems had the Presidency, Senate and House in 2008-2010. My gun ownership remained unchanged until 2019 when I became a criminal for owning a piece of plastic accessory.

User avatar

03Lightningrocks
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 4
Posts: 8469
Joined: Tue Apr 08, 2008 5:15 pm
Location: DFW area

Re: Lawsuit argues AR-15 illegal

#11

Post by 03Lightningrocks » Mon Jul 08, 2019 8:42 pm

Texas_Blaze wrote:
Mon Jul 08, 2019 8:37 pm
03Lightningrocks wrote:
Mon Jul 08, 2019 7:35 pm
If the Democrats get control of the House and Senate, it will be all out war on firearms and they will use any justification they can to outlaw our firearms.
Dems had the Presidency, Senate and House in 2008-2010. My gun ownership remained unchanged until 2019 when I became a criminal for owning a piece of plastic accessory.
Yeah, they were preoccupied with destroying our healthcare system.

User avatar

The Annoyed Man
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 6
Posts: 25283
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2008 12:59 pm
Location: North Richland Hills, Texas
Contact:

Re: Lawsuit argues AR-15 illegal

#12

Post by The Annoyed Man » Mon Jul 08, 2019 8:48 pm

QB wrote:
Mon Jul 08, 2019 7:06 pm
Well......"can be readily RESTORED........" Per the definition of "restore", none of my AR15s can be restored to shoot more than one round per pull of trigger because they never originally could! Nothing to "restore" on my rifles.
Exactly. Even if it were lawful for you to drop in the necessary parts, you’d still have to machine the lower receiver on the inside to accept the parts. Absent that machining, there’s nothing to restore. Whoever ends up representing the defense merely has to point this out.
Give me Liberty, or I'll get up and get it myself.—Hookalakah Meshobbab
I don't carry because of the odds, I carry because of the stakes.—The Annoyed Boy
My dream is to have lived my life so well that future generations of leftists will demand my name be removed from buildings.

User avatar

Texas_Blaze
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 2
Posts: 393
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2013 4:55 pm

Re: Lawsuit argues AR-15 illegal

#13

Post by Texas_Blaze » Mon Jul 08, 2019 8:52 pm

03Lightningrocks wrote:
Mon Jul 08, 2019 8:42 pm
Texas_Blaze wrote:
Mon Jul 08, 2019 8:37 pm
03Lightningrocks wrote:
Mon Jul 08, 2019 7:35 pm
If the Democrats get control of the House and Senate, it will be all out war on firearms and they will use any justification they can to outlaw our firearms.
Dems had the Presidency, Senate and House in 2008-2010. My gun ownership remained unchanged until 2019 when I became a criminal for owning a piece of plastic accessory.
Yeah, they were preoccupied with destroying our healthcare system.
Sorry I thought you said something about firearms.

User avatar

03Lightningrocks
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 4
Posts: 8469
Joined: Tue Apr 08, 2008 5:15 pm
Location: DFW area

Re: Lawsuit argues AR-15 illegal

#14

Post by 03Lightningrocks » Mon Jul 08, 2019 8:58 pm

Texas_Blaze wrote:
Mon Jul 08, 2019 8:52 pm
03Lightningrocks wrote:
Mon Jul 08, 2019 8:42 pm
Texas_Blaze wrote:
Mon Jul 08, 2019 8:37 pm
03Lightningrocks wrote:
Mon Jul 08, 2019 7:35 pm
If the Democrats get control of the House and Senate, it will be all out war on firearms and they will use any justification they can to outlaw our firearms.
Dems had the Presidency, Senate and House in 2008-2010. My gun ownership remained unchanged until 2019 when I became a criminal for owning a piece of plastic accessory.
Yeah, they were preoccupied with destroying our healthcare system.
Sorry I thought you said something about firearms.
I was but when you hopped in the way back machine, I thought I would try and explain the difference in then and now. If the dems had control of both today, we would have also lost the weapon that piece of plastic connects to.


Ike Aramba
Junior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 38
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2016 10:06 am
Location: Missouri City Texas

Re: Lawsuit argues AR-15 illegal

#15

Post by Ike Aramba » Tue Jul 09, 2019 11:07 am

TexasJohnBoy wrote:
Mon Jul 08, 2019 11:37 am
https://reason.com/2019/07/03/relying-o ... e-illegal/

Relying on the Same Illogic That Trump Used to Ban Bump Stocks, a New Lawsuit Argues That Customizable Rifles Are Illegal
The plaintiffs, parents of a woman who was murdered in the Las Vegas massacre, argue that bump stocks like the ones used in that attack convert semi-automatic rifles into illegal machine guns—a position that has been endorsed by the Trump administration. Therefore, they argue, AR-15s are themselves illegal, since the federal definition of machine guns includes firearms that "can be readily restored to shoot, automatically more than one shot, without manual reloading, by a single function of the trigger."
:thumbs2:

AR-15s are machineguns by the same logic that makes bumpstocks machineguns.
"Eastern European intellectuals, reading 1984 in clandestine editions, were amazed to find that its author had never visited the Soviet Union. How, then, had he captured its mental and moral atmosphere? By reading its propaganda, and by paying attention..."

Post Reply

Return to “General Legislative Discussions”