T Nation

Trump: The Second Year


But it answered the question. I don’t believe the Federal Government has the legitimate authority to regulate even possession of nuclear weapons, so I certainly don’t believe it has the authority to regulate possession of anything else.


Based on what?


Clarify your question, if you don’t mind.


See above. I’m not sure how else to clarify


I’m of the opinion that the Federal Government doesn’t have the legal authority to ban any object in a State if that State doesn’t want it banned.


I was asking @zecarlo to clarify his question. If I’d been paying attention, I’d have noticed it wasn’t you asking the question and ignored it.


It’s the night before Christmas and America’s 8 year old President is tweeting like mad. All I want for Christmas is anyone else to lead the country.


Aight, let’s try role play. You’re now a SCOT judge. Govt body passes a law banning/limiting an accessory used exclusively with arms. In your response, are you citing the 2nd amendment is the reason this law is unconstitutional?




If a body is passing a law in direct conflict with the 2nd amendment does it matter? All states are subject to it’s restrictions irt making laws


You’re getting a lump of coal! But it’s American coal. The best and lumpiest coal in the world!


That’s a very modern interpretation. I do not buy it.

“However true, therefore, it may be, that the judicial department, is, in all questions submitted to it by the forms of the Constitution, to decide in the last resort, this resort must necessarily be deemed the last in relation to the authorities of the other departments of the government; not in relation to the rights of the parties to the constitutional compact, from which the judicial as well as the other departments hold their delegated trusts.”
-James Madison


Just for shits and giggles:

What parts of a gun make it a gun and what parts are accessories?

Do you really need sights or a scope?

How about the stock and butt? Sure, they enable you to hold it comfortably and shoot accurately, but are they necessary for a rifle? All you need for an actual rifle is a bored barrel that imparts rotation to the bullet.

Or the configuration of parts that make semi auto possible? Why isn’t bolt action enough?

I’m sure you see where I’m going with this. What an accessory is and what constitutes a “gun” or fire arm is open to massive legal and engineering arguments.


Absolutely. I 100% agree. That’s why I thought it weird he considered a bump stock ban to be full stop not touching the 2A.

Fair enough. Have a good one


I’d consider this just as a thought experiment: leave a fully intact and functioning bullet with casing, charged and ready to fire in a prison. Supermax even. Wait about a week. Someone will get shot.

With what?

A gun.


Relying on precedent, how could a bump stock ban touch the 2A while the 2A apparently permits machine gun(actual arms, and not a silly toy created because of unconstitutional bans) restrictions?


Hence asking for your interpretation of 2A. That was the entire point of making you a judge in the thought experiment


You didn’t ask for my interpretation of the 2A. This was your post:

I then asked which government passed the law, but you answered my question with a question. If a State passed the law, I would not judge. It would be none of my business. If the Federal Government passed the law, I would judge it unconstitutional. I would cite the fact that nowhere in the Constitution is the Federal Government authorized to ban or limit that object.


Got it, tyty.


That’s why I focused on the NFA rules so much. Before 1934 you could buy a full auto 30-06 BAR through mail order no questions asked. But the 34, 68 and subsequent regulations exist, and they define anything that fires more than 1 bullet per trigger pull as NFA tax stamp territory. So I don’t know how bump stocks EVER got around that.

For instance with 30 minutes and a milling machine I can make a semi auto AK-47 full auto. I’m an accountant FFS. a real machinist needs 5 minutes. That action is a federal felony without a tax stamp. But at various times a bump stock, which accomplishes the exact same thing was legal. I’m confused.

What should be regulated or not is a whole other ball of wax.