It's Trumps ban... Are you guys all right? like do you do zero research? You're about to Re elect the guy who signed this...Hello? Are you a bot or Human?
we could argue that ATF is more dangerous then mass shooting, they are a hit squad, Bryan Malinowski did not even get the chance of a trial. and if we look back last 40 years how many murders are behind ATF
According to the US Constitution only the Legislative Branch can create a law. A rule, regulation or mandate is not a law and should have no hold over citizens.
@@arthurpendragon3000 But rules, regulations and mandates being made by the government can be PART of a law and authority can be given to MAKE those as part of a law that Congress passes. That is what a lot of people are forgetting and this is SETTLED SUPREME COURT LAW dating back to the 1860's, prior to the Civil War.
@@christopherkidwell9817 Chevron Deference is what causes many 3 letter agencies to create this rule making. However, the SC is going to be passing a ruling of Chevron either this month or in Oct. I believe it's June. The problem is 3 letter agencies have been abusing Chevron Doctrine for decades. To empower the agencies authority and/or their agenda(s).
HA! like that will ever happen. No they don't care about our safety, only theirs. That's why they want to take the guns. Even the tiniest concept that we might have any force projection of any kind terrifies them. Even if it's laughable we could DO anything.
@@gaberesendez6492 You should also understand the reason why he let it pass. With the shooting that had just taken place the public was demanding action despite not knowing anything about guns. Trump could have gotten an actual bill passed, but chose to leave it to the ATF because it would be much easier to overrule them when it got to the courts. It was all a play to look like something was being done, when he knew that it would never hold up in court.
@@CCook-wv1gk Agreed, Trump is no moron when it comes to finding loopholes. In short, it was a bad call at first but long term the man knew it was the best call it as he knew it wouldn't hold up in court. Now on the other side, we have Reagan who went way further but is still remembered as one of the best presidents ever. If Trump gets elected again, then I have no doubt he'll stop giving an inch and go full payback against the left. After all, I'd be angry beyond belief for wasting countless dollars only to be charged with a BS felony by people who care more about communism than their own freedoms.
@@gaberesendez6492no, he didn't. that's MSM fake news editing his words. his "take the guns first" quote was SPECIFICALLY about an already convicted criminal. it's been over FOUR YEARS, educate yourself already
Cool. Now declare the ATF to be unconstitutional because having an agency dedicated to regulating how civilians own firearms is clearly an infringement.
When Marvin Heemeyer modified his bulldozer and destroyed buildings in granby, Colorado did the democrats try to ban bulldozers? No? Then leave my rights to modify my firearm alone
Not just that the local government there harassed that man to his breaking point because he didn't want to sell them his land. They wanted to build there and he refused so they made his life hell to force him to change. Instead he fought back and made sure to target only those who wronged him. Sadly he didn't account for the basement and the weight of the bulldozer but honestly with all this crap going on I don't blame Killdozer one bit.
To quote my good friend Mark Smith, of The Four Boxes Diner.. "We don't measure constitutional rights by virtue of how criminals can misbehave or abuse something."
65% of all U.S. counties don't have a single psychiatrist or mental health workers at all, what the hell is gun laws going to do to fix that? I'm not giving up my rights over something that can be fixed by better management of the country.
Just make it illegal, that'll stop it. /s No one cares until it affects them or they perceive it as affecting them. Then less education about the subject with information manipulation and you more bs.
@@Indian_Kamala there have been 0 casings or bullets linked to the guns in that hotel room by forensics. period. When the SWAT team entered that room all windows were intact so there was no shooting from that hotel room. That is what the body cams revealed.
@@jjmckay6man1well really, how long would it take them to move a BCG to a gun with a Bump stock to make it fit the narrative if the wanted the forensics?
such a thing never happens, they force you to spend 99% of your allowed time trying to explain away the tirade of nonsense they spew whenever they open their mouths. Its like you're debating mathematics, they are doing interpretive dance and the host is nodding along like "yes, good point what is your response to that?"
As soon as you start with facts on them, they become unhinged and start personal attacks and you never get to finish your point anyway...its almost not even worth trying anymore...
Sometimes. The Supremes in the last twenty years have significantly expanded the governments power of imminent domain to allow taking of private property for commercial interests.
@@pgb1858 Show us where in the history and tradition that there was a restriction on what the people could own as set forth as the Bruen decision directs the government to do.
Someone's going to have to get a case to them that actually makes that argument. It wasn't addressed in this case, because there was a much simpler way to win
@@mitchelltriplett7974 undid OWEbombas fuhrerbefels banning the reimportation of milsurps and automatically placing certain vets on the NICS prohibited list without due process and appointing 3 constitutionalist judges that are garnering 2A wins (including, ironically overturning the bumpstock ban) even as i type. MAGA 2024!!!!
SCOTUS didn't go around congress, the ATF did, and that's the issue. They shouldn't be asking how to get around SCOTUS, they should be asking why the ATF is going around congress - that was the entire issue here.
You don’t have to be a gun scholar or an aficionado to understand that bump stocks were not use the night of the Vegas massacre. Colion just made it clear that using bump stocks for rapidfire makes the gun highly inaccurate. So there is no way in hell that they were used to take out 60 people, I smell a conspiracy.
Whata perfect business model. Steal alch, tobacco, guns, drugs, bombs, from everyone, and sell them back to people. 90% profit.. Only expense is rent for the building, and paying labor wages. But, if ATFBE owns the building, no taxes either. Win Win Win Win
a Bumpstock is a Bumpstock, not a Gun, a Glass of Water is a Glass of water. We the People could have stop this, but We the people were like hell yea not and not do anything and let the Gov lie to us.
There are a lot of private ownership of grandfathered machine guns - has anyone heard of any of them being used in a mass shooting? Not to mention that new sales of machine guns were banned in 1986 and despite them being called a danger to society they allowed pre-1986 machine guns to remain in private ownership. Why?
Responsible owners have millions of firearms and billions of rounds. If we were the problem you would hear about it, right. Murphy is revoltingly stupid. Peace from Oregonia. ✌
The SCOTUS needs to approve every law that Congress passes to make sure they pass Constitutional muster. It would save EVERYBODY a whole lot of time and expense.
@@Sir.VicsMasher Absolutly. Witnesses even said they were shootig from helocopters. One guy cant kill that many peoplpe. Kills are about 1 in 20 hits and he supposedly hit 50 people. F f
Did that dude really just say that equipping a bump stock effectively turns a rifle into a machine gun because you only have to pull the trigger once to fire multiple rounds? I guess adding a stock affects the trigger and internals of the firearm. Being a Marine Corps veteran, that's a new one for me. 😂😂😂
Yes. This was never about Bumpstocks in of themselves. It was about the ATF being able to retroactively reinterpret law to make certain guns or gun accessories ex post facto illegal. While I still won't buy a bumpstock (they are a novelty that only wastes ammo), I am glad this SCOTUS action eliminated the ATF's ability to, in effect, make new retroactive laws themselves.
How are legislators that continually act in a manner that attempts to bypass Constitutional restrictions not in violation of their oath of office? How are their attempts to bypass the Constitutional restrictions not being viewed as an attack on our Constitution? Why are civilians who were involved with J6 accused of an insurrection for attempting to stop a Constitutional process but a politician violating his oath of office to nullify a Constitutional process not being held to the same standards as the citizens he was elected to serve? As long as politicians are permitted to repeatedly and knowingly violate their oath by introducing legislation they already know is in direct violation of SCOTUS rulings, and the limita imposed upon them within the Constitution with utter impunity these activities will not stop. They know that they can tell SCOTUS to piss up a rope and do whatever they want in direct nullification of the SCOTUS and the Constitution and the worst that they will ever face is potential Censure or losing a reelection bid. Without consequences for their actions that mirror the seriousness of their actions it will not stop. They need to start facing federal charges in criminal courts that carry prison time if convicted. How can we expect them to take their duty to the American people seriously if their actions against the American people are not taken seriously? If I violate federal laws, if I openly defy decisions made by Supreme Court Justices, if I behave in a manner that deprive people of there Civil Rights, or if I attempt to circumvent due process of any function of our Federal Government I would certainly be facing incarceration but because a politician won the last election they were running in they get a free pass? The minute that elected, or appointed officials are not requiredt to obey the same laws as the citizens then we no longer have government officials we have Rulers who don't serve the public but instead control their subjects. George, Thomas, Andrew, and their associates did not put up with such bullshit indefinitely. They reached a point where they determined that the property, wealth, comfort, or even their own lives were not worth having if the price to have them was subjugation by a Tyrannical ruler who viewed them as subjects to control and not citizens worthy of Human Rights. At what point do we begin to realize these same principals? When does a life lived at the mercy or whim of lesser men stop being worthy of living if it costs us what our ancestors fought and died for?
@@Mitch_Conner75926 I'm guessing that you haven't actually read the opinion. If you had, you'd know that there was no Second Amendment argument raised by either side. The case was based on the Administrative Procedures Act. It was about a regulatory agency exceeding its authority and rewriting the statutory definition of a machine gun.
The problem is people don't understand their rights and are willing to allow the ATF and others to take away their rights without them knowing. ATF rule is not the law. They have an agenda of disarming you. Thanks Colion.
Nowhere does the 2A authoritize the government to have any say on guns. In fact, it is the only right enumerated as absolute, and the restriction is on them, not us.
The NFA was created by Congress in 1968. This was a unconstitutional law because the 2nd amendment says shall not be infringed. That means Congress is not allowed to pass any law that takes away the 2nd amendment rights from any citizens. The Congress didn't have the right to create the NFA. It was a go around the constitution and started a 3 letter agencie. The alphabet agencies are now making rules. They cannot make laws.
@@ronnydowdy7432 OP had it right : the NFA (which is ostensively a tax) was passed in 1934, the GCA (the law that created the ATF) was passed in 1968. However I agree that the GCA is an unconstitutional over reach.
@@ronnydowdy7432 The NFA was passed in 1934, and it WAS NOT a "BAN" on ANY firearm OR firearm accessory, as so many people keep claiming (even the idiots on SCOTUS claimed that the NFA "banned machine guns" when it ABSOLUTELY DID NOT!). It simply imposed what was, at that time, an extremely cost-prohibitive $200 "tax" on machine guns, suppressors and short-barreled rifles and shotguns. $200 in 1934 was basically ten times the cost of the average pistol (which was about $20). Even at that time, the government believed that it was UNCONSTITUTIONAL for them to outright BAN firearms of ANY kind! So they created a loophole to make machine guns, suppressors, and SBRs/SBSs too expensive for the vast majority of Americans to afford with that $200 tax on top of the cost of the firearm/accessory. But ANYONE who could afford the $200 tax could buy as many full auto machine guns as they wanted from 1934 up until May 19, 1986 (which I will get to in a second). 1968 was the GCA...the "Gun Control Act". The 1968 GCA had nothing to do with machine guns. What people keep ignoring for some reason is the ACTUAL BILL THAT BANNED MACHINE GUNS IN THIS COUNTRY, the disgustingly named "Firearm Owners Protection Act" that was signed into law by Ronald Reagan in 1986. This is the bill that BANNED the sale of ANY AND ALL machine guns manufactured after May 19, 1986 to civilians. It also required ALL civilian-owned machine guns to be registered with the gestapo and put on the NFA registry...and ONLY the machine guns that were willingly put on the registry by their owners can be bought and sold by civilians today. That is why "transferrable machine guns" (which means they can be transferred between civilian gun owners) are insanely expensive today. Because there are only a few hundred thousand TOTAL machine guns of all makes and models that are on the NFA registry as "transferrable machine guns". The 1986 FOPA, or more accurately, the "Hughes Amendment" (which is the amendment that was added to FOPA that banned machine guns) is the ACTUAL bill that needs to be gotten rid of in order to allow civilians to buy machine guns again. Every gun owner in America would pay a $200 tax to be able to buy a machine gun for the same price as a semi-auto rifle. But we can't, because American traitor Ronald Reagan signed what is still to this day THE ONLY PERMANENT FEDERAL GUN BAN IN AMERICAN HISTORY into law in 1986. And just to be clear...FOPA/the Hughes Amendment will NEVER, EVER, EVER be repealed or overturned by SCOTUS. PERIOD! It will never happen. There are probably five total Republicans in the House AND Senate combined who are willing to repeal that bill and allow civilians to buy machine guns again. It's NEVER going to happen. The one and only extremely unlikely possibility is that a Republican President is elected who would "open up the NFA registry", which any President CAN do on his own, without needing approval from Congress or anyone else. "Opening up the NFA registry" would allow gun owners to add any gun they wanted to the NFA registry. Those firearms could then be LEGALLY converted to full-auto machine guns and would become legally transferrable machine guns on the NFA registry. In other words, it would allow gun owners to add what would probably end up being MILLIONS (depending on how long the registry was "opened" for) of new machine guns to the registry, which would dramatically decrease the prices for all machine guns now that the supply went up by hundreds of thousands or millions of new machine guns.
@@gusnewberry125it is a 7.62 caliber machine gun. The point being the different weapons have different sound, signatures, and the audio from the shooting sounds nothing like a a bump stock firing but exactly like a 240B
yea... they DO, the good ones, FULL AUTO. FFS. but he DID make the example that hunters and NO ONE ELSE ever used these in any shooting or hunting. your point was one that i thought initially but if you think about it, NO lol NO
@timothywhieldon1971 No, wrong. A machine gun is way more accurate than a bump stock. They use machine guns, not bump stocks, because even the more accurate machine guns are wildly inaccurate, waste ammo, and are less effective than accurate semi auto fire. Hell, modern military doctrine demands soldiers use semi auto fire 99% of time because they've found its better. Only machine gunners and mounted MG gunners use fully automatic fire usually and they're the minority of the unit, and their primary role is suppression and destruction of cover, not killing.
@@AtlantaGunz We have massive shootings all the time with AR 15s keep that energy when Biden uses the executive branch to ban 30 round mags You don't need a 30 round mag You don't have actual political beliefs you are a trump voter
@@AtlantaGunz let me guess ypu were outraged by the AR pistol brace ban But you voted for a president who's set the precedent for the executive branch to ban lawfully purchased gun accessories without compensation under penalty of felony Let me guess God guns and Trump sticker om the back of your suburban
If Trump hadn't, congress under democrat control was going to amend the NFA from "one function of the trigger" to "rate of fire." Then any thing faster than a bolt action would be a machine gun. If conservatives don't sweep the next election, after this ruling, you can bet the anti gunners are going to push that at every turn.
“The Supreme Court is wrong “ The unconstitutional NFA : anything that fires more then one bullet with one trigger pull Nope they got it 100% right according to the laws Edit: dang I started a war in comments 😂 just to clarify this whole thing with the bump stock was 100% a rule not law but you would have still went to prison for 10 years if found with one bc of the unconstitutional and tyrannical ATF
Nope they know the facts from the leftie spin of false information. I ask you please in depth explain what a bump stock is and how it works. In your own words not regurgitated false information. Maybe you can learn something if you think for yourself. I will be anticipating your FACTUAL response.
Thank you!!! When Harold Ford Jr. brought that up on The Five with Katie Pavlich on the panel, I was PISSED that she didn't explain. I thought I had lost my mind.
The Constitution is the Supreme Law of the Land. Nothing trumps the Constitution, not even the Supreme Court. The Constitution Limits the Government, NOT the People.
All the things coming out of the mouths of anti-gunners has been ridiculous and shocking even for that bunch. The lies have been compounded way more than normal.
I'm tired of the BS these politicians are arguing about the decision. The main reason why the Supreme Court voted against the ATF is because of their overreach.
Since these people HATE THE CONSTITUTION AND THIS COUNTRY SO MUCH, why don't they JUST FIND SOMEWHERE THEY ALIGN WITH IDEOLOGICALLY, AND GO THERE, OR SOMEWHERE OTHER THAN AMERICA...
soo then i assume u aren’t voting for trump then? since he pushed the ATF to do this bullshit thus allowing them to continue to go on their bullshit rampage on his watch smh ooo and he was a big advocate for red flag laws as well
The ATF is just a federal govt agency, while they have the authority to create and enforce policy and rules, they do not have the authority to create new laws. This power is vested in congress. If the ATF doesn't stop overstepping, it would be in congress best interest to disband the ATF.
being able to enforce a policy or rule is the same as authority to create new laws. You are just saying... instead of "murder" lets called it "life halting". It's subversive and corrupt language. Per the Constitution only Congress can make laws, or rules, or policies that can be enforced on citizens. Congress does not have the power to give any agency these "law, rule, policy" writing/creating powers. Congress can only create agencies to "enforce" the "laws, rules, policies" Congress creates. Every crime the ATF, IRS, FBI, FCC, TSA, or any other of the alphabet agencies commit should be brought forth to Congress and Congress BLAMED and summarily prosecuted as the "Real Overseers" of all of this.
Congrats does not have the power to chang the 2nd amendment. The 2nd amendment rights are clear that they shall not be infringed. That means Congress cannot make laws that infringe upon the 2nd amendment. Congress created the NFA a 3 letter agency in 1968. This agency started making rules and the ATF is enforcing these rules and now the ATF is making their own rules and enforce them too. Rules are not laws. Know you're Rights!!!
@@ronnydowdy7432 They can do whatever they want as evidenced by history. It will continue until citizens form up as per the framers and 2a indicate and stop it.
@@ronnydowdy7432 The bill of rights and constitution CAN be changed as it has been changed 27 times. But to add to, amend or repeal any amendment requires a super majority in BOTH houses of congress(290 in the house and 67 in the senate) and 3/4 of states(38 states)
REMEMBER-ATF ruled that an 18 inch bootlace was 'a machine gun' and that if you had bronze Chore Boy scrubbing pads then it was 'Constructive possesstion' of a suppressor.
Well said Colion! As usual, you are right at the tip of the spear on the view. Bumpstocks are HORRIBLY INACCURATE! The whole gun is literally jumping around, and guess what's on the rifle? The SIGHTS!
The ATF should be held to the same zero tolerance policy they impose on FFL'S. Therefore they should be closed and lose all power to operate as a law enforcement agency. That's the standard they hold everyone else too.
Senator Murphy is one of those politicians through his deliberate ignorance of his understanding of the Constitution, and he is helping show us why the anti-corruption ACT must get passed in every state
@@ish7957 that logic and way of thinking implies that the accessory of the gun is at fault for the crime that happened, which is not the case. For example, should OTF knives be banned because a serial killer decided to stab people? Or should you only punish the criminals that misuse rights and leave the law abiding citizens alone? Just good for thought.
You explain why a lawsuit needs to be filed that would put all the anti gun laws down in one single swing. If I had the money to pay for the lawyer I would file the suit.
@@refugeehugsforfree4151yep. I'm not a fan of Biden as much as the guy above, but know who's responsible for this crap. Neither he nor Trump are good picks for 2a protections.
All ATF "rules" need to be overturned and the atf should be disbanded for exceeding their authority.
It's Trumps ban... Are you guys all right? like do you do zero research? You're about to Re elect the guy who signed this...Hello? Are you a bot or Human?
Amen Brudda!!
Sure, but it won't
How bout prosecuted for unlawful acts and reckless endangerment that ended in an unjustified homicide of Malonoski
we could argue that ATF is more dangerous then mass shooting, they are a hit squad, Bryan Malinowski did not even get the chance of a trial. and if we look back last 40 years how many murders are behind ATF
Hearing anti-gun people talk just gives me a headache 🤦🏻
Same
Stay away from MSNBC commentators, then. I was shocked at the blatantly anti-freedom whining I heard after the Supreme Court decision.
Id rather listen to baby shark on repeat.
@@SeanBook001baby shark is a banger
same, i could feel my frustration rising and my tolerance plummeting
The three letter agencies do not create laws and rules are not laws. Period.
According to the US Constitution only the Legislative Branch can create a law. A rule, regulation or mandate is not a law and should have no hold over citizens.
@@arthurpendragon3000 But rules, regulations and mandates being made by the government can be PART of a law and authority can be given to MAKE those as part of a law that Congress passes.
That is what a lot of people are forgetting and this is SETTLED SUPREME COURT LAW dating back to the 1860's, prior to the Civil War.
@@christopherkidwell9817 Chevron Deference is what causes many 3 letter agencies to create this rule making. However, the SC is going to be passing a ruling of Chevron either this month or in Oct. I believe it's June. The problem is 3 letter agencies have been abusing Chevron Doctrine for decades. To empower the agencies authority and/or their agenda(s).
How about background checks on people crossing our border illegally, before they let them in the country.
Agreed.
No that’s makes too much sense! Yea certain people coming over are more dangerous than our guns sitting in our houses!
HA! like that will ever happen. No they don't care about our safety, only theirs. That's why they want to take the guns.
Even the tiniest concept that we might have any force projection of any kind terrifies them. Even if it's laughable we could DO anything.
They do, tho😂 Fox News has been lying to you😂
dats Rayycycstsisms!
The Bump Stock ban was one of Trump's worst moves, glad it was overturned.
u forgot to mention he also pushed hard for red flag laws as well and some states imcluding nevada followed suit 🤦🏽♂️
@@gaberesendez6492 You should also understand the reason why he let it pass. With the shooting that had just taken place the public was demanding action despite not knowing anything about guns. Trump could have gotten an actual bill passed, but chose to leave it to the ATF because it would be much easier to overrule them when it got to the courts. It was all a play to look like something was being done, when he knew that it would never hold up in court.
He still should have thrown hillary in jail
@@CCook-wv1gk Agreed, Trump is no moron when it comes to finding loopholes. In short, it was a bad call at first but long term the man knew it was the best call it as he knew it wouldn't hold up in court. Now on the other side, we have Reagan who went way further but is still remembered as one of the best presidents ever.
If Trump gets elected again, then I have no doubt he'll stop giving an inch and go full payback against the left. After all, I'd be angry beyond belief for wasting countless dollars only to be charged with a BS felony by people who care more about communism than their own freedoms.
@@gaberesendez6492no, he didn't. that's MSM fake news editing his words. his "take the guns first" quote was SPECIFICALLY about an already convicted criminal.
it's been over FOUR YEARS, educate yourself already
The Supreme Court got it RIGHT....
Cool. Now declare the ATF to be unconstitutional because having an agency dedicated to regulating how civilians own firearms is clearly an infringement.
Should the mormons be allowed to practice polygamy?
This
HOW DARE the SC hand down rulings that are consistent with the history of our country and the Constitution.
One could drill down further and say SCOTUS simply, and rightly, upheld the letter of the law as well #SeparationOfPowers #WordsMeanThings
@@DomoArigatoRobot0 damn straight! Hope everyone picked up on my sarcasm.
Right? Lmao 😂
When Marvin Heemeyer modified his bulldozer and destroyed buildings in granby, Colorado did the democrats try to ban bulldozers? No? Then leave my rights to modify my firearm alone
Not just that the local government there harassed that man to his breaking point because he didn't want to sell them his land. They wanted to build there and he refused so they made his life hell to force him to change. Instead he fought back and made sure to target only those who wronged him. Sadly he didn't account for the basement and the weight of the bulldozer but honestly with all this crap going on I don't blame Killdozer one bit.
can i modify my trigger to go full auto? just a mod right?
OSHA now determines that as a fully automatic assault dozer.😂
@@moosehand8721😂😂😂
@@warrenpeasdo it
"How do we work around the supreme court?"
That statement alone tells you the type of people we are dealing with...
It's a valid question. The Supreme Court is corrupt and compromised
This. This stupidity is scary.
To quote my good friend Mark Smith, of The Four Boxes Diner..
"We don't measure constitutional rights by virtue of how criminals can misbehave or abuse something."
He's a really sharp guy, and runs a great channel. 👍✌️
65% of all U.S. counties don't have a single psychiatrist or mental health workers at all, what the hell is gun laws going to do to fix that? I'm not giving up my rights over something that can be fixed by better management of the country.
And the anti gun folks don’t have any plans to fund mental health infrastructure at all.
@@NobodyHasToAgreeAllTheTime No, they don't, but they more than happy to spend tons of money on Ukraine.
Indeed
Just make it illegal, that'll stop it. /s
No one cares until it affects them or they perceive it as affecting them. Then less education about the subject with information manipulation and you more bs.
The politicians need mental health.
And they are still hiding all the information on that Las Vegas guy.
what information? He's deceased right? They tried to go after that woman right?
Where's the hard drive?
@@gewglesuxany details. They released a name. No motive, no details, work history, ideology, internet activity.
@@Indian_Kamala there have been 0 casings or bullets linked to the guns in that hotel room by forensics. period. When the SWAT team entered that room all windows were intact so there was no shooting from that hotel room. That is what the body cams revealed.
@@jjmckay6man1well really, how long would it take them to move a BCG to a gun with a Bump stock to make it fit the narrative if the wanted the forensics?
They never quit and are always wrong. Thank you Sir.
I would never want one, but I glad they check the ATF.
You would wreck any anti-2A activist in a legitimate, rational debate grounded in facts.
He has, multiple times.
such a thing never happens, they force you to spend 99% of your allowed time trying to explain away the tirade of nonsense they spew whenever they open their mouths. Its like you're debating mathematics, they are doing interpretive dance and the host is nodding along like "yes, good point what is your response to that?"
As soon as you start with facts on them, they become unhinged and start personal attacks and you never get to finish your point anyway...its almost not even worth trying anymore...
which is why they wont debate him anymore.
agreed. but what use could you possibly have for a bump stock? just to have fun?
So much for respecting the courts decision
Need more Courts like this.
They aren't in the pocket of anyone or anything but the citizen and the constitution.
No, no, no. The undefined boogeyman ,"Far Right" did this and his sinister cousin, "Alt-Right," watched from the shadows!
Sometimes. The Supremes in the last twenty years have significantly expanded the governments power of imminent domain to allow taking of private property for commercial interests.
😂😂😂😂 sure buddy
ATF owes me $400. They are about to get sued
Those lawsuits for dammages are going to come next.
It would be cool if they could just y'know, declare the NFA unconstitutional like it is. Instead of half measures
How is it unconditional?
The NFA and the GCA!
@@pgb1858 What does "shall not be infringed" mean to you?
@@pgb1858 Show us where in the history and tradition that there was a restriction on what the people could own as set forth as the Bruen decision directs the government to do.
Someone's going to have to get a case to them that actually makes that argument. It wasn't addressed in this case, because there was a much simpler way to win
"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
Take em first, due process later... MAGA?
Which Founding Father said that? I can't remember.
@@betsyburns1825Benjamin Franklin
@@mitchelltriplett7974 undid OWEbombas fuhrerbefels banning the reimportation of milsurps and automatically placing certain vets on the NICS prohibited list without due process and appointing 3 constitutionalist judges that are garnering 2A wins (including, ironically overturning the bumpstock ban) even as i type. MAGA 2024!!!!
@@betsyburns1825Benjamin Franklin.
Abolish the NFA. Abolish the ATF.
abolish AIPAC and Federal Reserve
Freedom is first.
SCOTUS didn't go around congress, the ATF did, and that's the issue. They shouldn't be asking how to get around SCOTUS, they should be asking why the ATF is going around congress - that was the entire issue here.
Bumpies are back on the the menu.
God bless America
And I'm still not buying one.
From what I’ve read they were never off the menu as very few were turned in and I’m pretty sure not many chopped up the ones they didn’t turn in.
@@FinalLugiaGuardian should have never sold yours
@FinalLugiaGuardian that is your right. Always was. I am not buying one either, but we may if we choose.
I don't buy the Vegas thing. I watched the videos and lots of things just don't add up.
WE STILL DONT KNOW THE REAL STORY ON VEGAS.
You don’t have to be a gun scholar or an aficionado to understand that bump stocks were not use the night of the Vegas massacre. Colion just made it clear that using bump stocks for rapidfire makes the gun highly inaccurate. So there is no way in hell that they were used to take out 60 people, I smell a conspiracy.
It was a cia job
It wasn’t any bumpstock that was a belt fed machine gun without a doubt.
@@greggreed3840funny how I commented the same thing and got deleted
@@adfdasdfadfadsfareae just got under the radar I guess.
"Shall not be infringed" seems pretty clear to me.
The ATF can only make rules, Not laws.
ATF should be either reorganized into a store or defunded completely.
ATF = Absolutely Tyrannical Fascists
Whata perfect business model.
Steal alch, tobacco, guns, drugs, bombs, from everyone, and sell them back to people.
90% profit.. Only expense is rent for the building, and paying labor wages.
But, if ATFBE owns the building, no taxes either.
Win Win Win Win
Lol. Exactly!
a Bumpstock is a Bumpstock, not a Gun, a Glass of Water is a Glass of water. We the People could have stop this, but We the people were like hell yea not and not do anything and let the Gov lie to us.
All of the fun in one shop.
There are a lot of private ownership of grandfathered machine guns - has anyone heard of any of them being used in a mass shooting? Not to mention that new sales of machine guns were banned in 1986 and despite them being called a danger to society they allowed pre-1986 machine guns to remain in private ownership. Why?
Responsible owners have millions of firearms and billions of rounds. If we were the problem you would hear about it, right. Murphy is revoltingly stupid. Peace from Oregonia. ✌
Tannerite is next.
@mikewilliams7218
Shhhh don't give them ideas
@@timothyavendt677 I know, but they are fools worried about the wrong things. Ban marbles and birdhouses.
The SCOTUS needs to approve every law that Congress passes to make sure they pass Constitutional muster. It would save EVERYBODY a whole lot of time and expense.
That's not SCOTUS job. That's Congress job.
They can't rule on a law if no one hasn't been hurt by it yet. Even then, it has to go up through the process of being challenged.
Another win, and more to come👍🏾👊🏾💯🦅🇺🇸
How can I go around the law of the land? Crazy they just say this like it's no big deal.
I heard that Vegas shooter, That was a BELT FED MACHINE GUN .
And witnesses there said there was a shooter on the ground .
LVPD body cam you can hear belt fed after the shooter was found dead
It also sounded a lot louder than a 5.56.
Wish the real evidence would come out
@@Sir.VicsMasher Absolutly. Witnesses even said they were shootig from helocopters. One guy cant kill that many peoplpe. Kills are about 1 in 20 hits and he supposedly hit 50 people. F f
Did that dude really just say that equipping a bump stock effectively turns a rifle into a machine gun because you only have to pull the trigger once to fire multiple rounds? I guess adding a stock affects the trigger and internals of the firearm. Being a Marine Corps veteran, that's a new one for me. 😂😂😂
It always worked for me with my stick gun when i was a kid.
These folks are cowards. Plain and simple. And because they’re scared, we apparently have to lose freedom.
More like they are all scared/threatened and then paid
@@claponclapoff6Agreed. They aren't scared. They want to control us.
They’re kommie kriminals.
They aren't scared. They want control.
Most bullies are cowards.
It doesn't matter what you own, what matters is who controls what you won.
Agree with bumpstocks or not; The ATF has no right to create laws.
Yes. This was never about Bumpstocks in of themselves. It was about the ATF being able to retroactively reinterpret law to make certain guns or gun accessories ex post facto illegal.
While I still won't buy a bumpstock (they are a novelty that only wastes ammo), I am glad this SCOTUS action eliminated the ATF's ability to, in effect, make new retroactive laws themselves.
They didn't.. Trump and Congress passed the law😂
@@ish7957 The Congress did no such thing. Trump acted unilaterally.
@FinalLugiaGuardian So then it wasn't the ATF creating new laws?
@@ish7957 Trump acted through the BATF. Trump gave the order. The ATF performed the unilateral action.
Thank God there are some Chief Justice who have a brain in their heads.
ATF takes it right on its nose
Trump* It's Trumps ban not ATF.
Pretty sure they take it up the......
Well it’s neither one now. Trump was wrong! Trump 2024!@@refugeehugsforfree4151
@@dustinfinlinson3203 ASS
Repeal NFA
As always, thank you.
How are legislators that continually act in a manner that attempts to bypass Constitutional restrictions not in violation of their oath of office? How are their attempts to bypass the Constitutional restrictions not being viewed as an attack on our Constitution? Why are civilians who were involved with J6 accused of an insurrection for attempting to stop a Constitutional process but a politician violating his oath of office to nullify a Constitutional process not being held to the same standards as the citizens he was elected to serve? As long as politicians are permitted to repeatedly and knowingly violate their oath by introducing legislation they already know is in direct violation of SCOTUS rulings, and the limita imposed upon them within the Constitution with utter impunity these activities will not stop. They know that they can tell SCOTUS to piss up a rope and do whatever they want in direct nullification of the SCOTUS and the Constitution and the worst that they will ever face is potential Censure or losing a reelection bid. Without consequences for their actions that mirror the seriousness of their actions it will not stop. They need to start facing federal charges in criminal courts that carry prison time if convicted. How can we expect them to take their duty to the American people seriously if their actions against the American people are not taken seriously? If I violate federal laws, if I openly defy decisions made by Supreme Court Justices, if I behave in a manner that deprive people of there Civil Rights, or if I attempt to circumvent due process of any function of our Federal Government I would certainly be facing incarceration but because a politician won the last election they were running in they get a free pass? The minute that elected, or appointed officials are not requiredt to obey the same laws as the citizens then we no longer have government officials we have Rulers who don't serve the public but instead control their subjects. George, Thomas, Andrew, and their associates did not put up with such bullshit indefinitely. They reached a point where they determined that the property, wealth, comfort, or even their own lives were not worth having if the price to have them was subjugation by a Tyrannical ruler who viewed them as subjects to control and not citizens worthy of Human Rights. At what point do we begin to realize these same principals? When does a life lived at the mercy or whim of lesser men stop being worthy of living if it costs us what our ancestors fought and died for?
Nothing in the 2nd amendment says anything about rate of fire
the left don't realize that it's vague on purpose
This case had nothing to do with the Second Amendment
@@jeffreygunn3530It was a firearm accessory. So it directly had something to do with the second amendment 😂 stop your garbage.
Tell that to Trump.
@@Mitch_Conner75926 I'm guessing that you haven't actually read the opinion. If you had, you'd know that there was no Second Amendment argument raised by either side. The case was based on the Administrative Procedures Act. It was about a regulatory agency exceeding its authority and rewriting the statutory definition of a machine gun.
The problem is people don't understand their rights and are willing to allow the ATF and others to take away their rights without them knowing. ATF rule is not the law. They have an agenda of disarming you. Thanks Colion.
Nowhere does the 2A authoritize the government to have any say on guns. In fact, it is the only right enumerated as absolute, and the restriction is on them, not us.
Thanks loads Mr. Colion Noir. Once again you speak with extreme correctness about abused politics!
If our rights had not been violated in 1934 by passing the NFA there would be no such thing as a bump stock. Just saying.
The NFA was created by Congress in 1968.
This was a unconstitutional law because the 2nd amendment says shall not be infringed.
That means Congress is not allowed to pass any law that takes away the 2nd amendment rights from any citizens.
The Congress didn't have the right to create the NFA.
It was a go around the constitution and started a 3 letter agencie. The alphabet agencies are now making rules. They cannot make laws.
@@ronnydowdy7432 OP had it right : the NFA (which is ostensively a tax) was passed in 1934, the GCA (the law that created the ATF) was passed in 1968. However I agree that the GCA is an unconstitutional over reach.
@@josephphillips7949 thanks for the information
@@ronnydowdy7432 The NFA was passed in 1934, and it WAS NOT a "BAN" on ANY firearm OR firearm accessory, as so many people keep claiming (even the idiots on SCOTUS claimed that the NFA "banned machine guns" when it ABSOLUTELY DID NOT!). It simply imposed what was, at that time, an extremely cost-prohibitive $200 "tax" on machine guns, suppressors and short-barreled rifles and shotguns.
$200 in 1934 was basically ten times the cost of the average pistol (which was about $20). Even at that time, the government believed that it was UNCONSTITUTIONAL for them to outright BAN firearms of ANY kind! So they created a loophole to make machine guns, suppressors, and SBRs/SBSs too expensive for the vast majority of Americans to afford with that $200 tax on top of the cost of the firearm/accessory. But ANYONE who could afford the $200 tax could buy as many full auto machine guns as they wanted from 1934 up until May 19, 1986 (which I will get to in a second).
1968 was the GCA...the "Gun Control Act". The 1968 GCA had nothing to do with machine guns.
What people keep ignoring for some reason is the ACTUAL BILL THAT BANNED MACHINE GUNS IN THIS COUNTRY, the disgustingly named "Firearm Owners Protection Act" that was signed into law by Ronald Reagan in 1986. This is the bill that BANNED the sale of ANY AND ALL machine guns manufactured after May 19, 1986 to civilians. It also required ALL civilian-owned machine guns to be registered with the gestapo and put on the NFA registry...and ONLY the machine guns that were willingly put on the registry by their owners can be bought and sold by civilians today. That is why "transferrable machine guns" (which means they can be transferred between civilian gun owners) are insanely expensive today. Because there are only a few hundred thousand TOTAL machine guns of all makes and models that are on the NFA registry as "transferrable machine guns".
The 1986 FOPA, or more accurately, the "Hughes Amendment" (which is the amendment that was added to FOPA that banned machine guns) is the ACTUAL bill that needs to be gotten rid of in order to allow civilians to buy machine guns again. Every gun owner in America would pay a $200 tax to be able to buy a machine gun for the same price as a semi-auto rifle. But we can't, because American traitor Ronald Reagan signed what is still to this day THE ONLY PERMANENT FEDERAL GUN BAN IN AMERICAN HISTORY into law in 1986.
And just to be clear...FOPA/the Hughes Amendment will NEVER, EVER, EVER be repealed or overturned by SCOTUS. PERIOD! It will never happen. There are probably five total Republicans in the House AND Senate combined who are willing to repeal that bill and allow civilians to buy machine guns again. It's NEVER going to happen.
The one and only extremely unlikely possibility is that a Republican President is elected who would "open up the NFA registry", which any President CAN do on his own, without needing approval from Congress or anyone else. "Opening up the NFA registry" would allow gun owners to add any gun they wanted to the NFA registry. Those firearms could then be LEGALLY converted to full-auto machine guns and would become legally transferrable machine guns on the NFA registry. In other words, it would allow gun owners to add what would probably end up being MILLIONS (depending on how long the registry was "opened" for) of new machine guns to the registry, which would dramatically decrease the prices for all machine guns now that the supply went up by hundreds of thousands or millions of new machine guns.
@@johnnytyler5685 thanks you for sharing this information with me.
Las Vegas shooter had a 240B not a bump stock.
Change my mind
Absolutely right.
Whats a 240B?
@@gusnewberry125it is a 7.62 caliber machine gun.
The point being the different weapons have different sound, signatures, and the audio from the shooting sounds nothing like a a bump stock firing but exactly like a 240B
Better buy up before they do this again…
If they were so deadly our military would be using them. But they are not using them.
yea... they DO, the good ones, FULL AUTO. FFS. but he DID make the example that hunters and NO ONE ELSE ever used these in any shooting or hunting. your point was one that i thought initially but if you think about it, NO lol NO
@timothywhieldon1971 No, wrong.
A machine gun is way more accurate than a bump stock.
They use machine guns, not bump stocks, because even the more accurate machine guns are wildly inaccurate, waste ammo, and are less effective than accurate semi auto fire.
Hell, modern military doctrine demands soldiers use semi auto fire 99% of time because they've found its better.
Only machine gunners and mounted MG gunners use fully automatic fire usually and they're the minority of the unit, and their primary role is suppression and destruction of cover, not killing.
@@mjay6245 i never said it was. looks like you are arguing with yourself there.
The ATF has no authority to write laws. End of conversation.
It's funny how all these gun grabbers don't know the first thing about guns.
Those Two's Complete and Glaring Ignorance is Blatantly Obvious to Anyone that Does!
Its not funny, its disgusting.
Ignorance breeds fear & that where gun grabs are coming from - Fear.
That's why we have to keep working to get them (people like senator Murphy) out of office.
Glad at least the Supreme Court is standing up for our constitution and bill of rights!
Great analysis Colion! You’re correct. They persuade based on ideology and emotion, not logic, truthfulness and interpretation of law.
This man is a hero !
There should be no laws on guns.... SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED
Tell that to 150 million Trump voters
@@optimisticallycynical.814 Im a trump voter. That law was in response to a massive shooting. I'm talking about all gun laws in general.
@@AtlantaGunz We have massive shootings all the time with AR 15s keep that energy when Biden uses the executive branch to ban 30 round mags
You don't need a 30 round mag
You don't have actual political beliefs you are a trump voter
@@AtlantaGunz Just own it , You can pretend to care about the debt as well haha
@@AtlantaGunz let me guess ypu were outraged by the AR pistol brace ban
But you voted for a president who's set the precedent for the executive branch to ban lawfully purchased gun accessories without compensation under penalty of felony
Let me guess God guns and Trump sticker om the back of your suburban
About two years ago The FBI came out and said that they’re not sure if a bump stock was used in Vegas
Really, you got a source for that? I've heard some mixed things on the Las Vegas incident, also still have no motive from the FBI.
Well to be fair, if Trump hadn’t banned bump stops to began with, we wouldn’t have needed the Supreme Court to overturn it.
As anti 2a as Biden is, idk why he’s on this thumbnail and not trump
Trump requested they do it. ATF actually banned them by rule. Yes Trump shares blame as well as the ATF.
It taught the democrats to go after braces
And it gave us this ruling because of it. This is a huge win, three letter agencies just got stripped of their ability to make up new laws to enforce.
If Trump hadn't, congress under democrat control was going to amend the NFA from "one function of the trigger" to "rate of fire." Then any thing faster than a bolt action would be a machine gun. If conservatives don't sweep the next election, after this ruling, you can bet the anti gunners are going to push that at every turn.
Thank you very much ❤️
You are a patriotic honorable man
I got your 6 C.N
Those two playing how many lies can we tell within our time limit.
I could care less about bump stocks but banning parts for guns is ridiculous!
“The Supreme Court is wrong “
The unconstitutional NFA : anything that fires more then one bullet with one trigger pull
Nope they got it 100% right according to the laws
Edit: dang I started a war in comments 😂 just to clarify this whole thing with the bump stock was 100% a rule not law but you would have still went to prison for 10 years if found with one bc of the unconstitutional and tyrannical ATF
There is only one gun law the second amendment no exceptions
Nope they know the facts from the leftie spin of false information. I ask you please in depth explain what a bump stock is and how it works. In your own words not regurgitated false information. Maybe you can learn something if you think for yourself. I will be anticipating your FACTUAL response.
But they're supposed to vote on feelings not laws(sarcasm)
They vote on what looks the scariest. We could make an m1 Garand full auto but they would be fine with it cause it looks old.
No they are not wrong.. they overturned a law that was unconstitutional
My question is "how do we get rid of MSNBC" ? #FJB
Thank you!!! When Harold Ford Jr. brought that up on The Five with Katie Pavlich on the panel, I was PISSED that she didn't explain. I thought I had lost my mind.
The Constitution is the Supreme Law of the Land.
Nothing trumps the Constitution, not even the Supreme Court.
The Constitution Limits the Government, NOT the People.
These guys are 100 % ok with just lying through their teeth. Imagine that marriage.
Vote against any politician that goes against the Bill of Rights.
"I'm too stupid to understand the Bruen decision, so I'm gonna say its too complicated for anyone else to understand it" - Senator Dippy Mc Shits
I'm so glad I left CT, Chris Murphy is one of the major problems with the state.
All the things coming out of the mouths of anti-gunners has been ridiculous and shocking even for that bunch. The lies have been compounded way more than normal.
I'm tired of the BS these politicians are arguing about the decision.
The main reason why the Supreme Court voted against the ATF is because of their overreach.
How come there is little to no information about the Las Vegas shooter?
Since these people HATE THE CONSTITUTION AND THIS COUNTRY SO MUCH, why don't they JUST FIND SOMEWHERE THEY ALIGN WITH IDEOLOGICALLY, AND GO THERE, OR SOMEWHERE OTHER THAN AMERICA...
Because for the Leftoids, the issue is not the issue, their real goal is their revolution.
soo then i assume u aren’t voting for trump then? since he pushed the ATF to do this bullshit thus allowing them to continue to go on their bullshit rampage on his watch smh ooo and he was a big advocate for red flag laws as well
Move them to Germany.
Keep telling the truth my friend. You are a great l information resource for all.
Give the power back to the people.
Next, the SC needs to overturn the ATF.
Long overdue
The ATF is just a federal govt agency, while they have the authority to create and enforce policy and rules, they do not have the authority to create new laws. This power is vested in congress. If the ATF doesn't stop overstepping, it would be in congress best interest to disband the ATF.
Congress is never going to disband the ATF though.
being able to enforce a policy or rule is the same as authority to create new laws. You are just saying... instead of "murder" lets called it "life halting". It's subversive and corrupt language. Per the Constitution only Congress can make laws, or rules, or policies that can be enforced on citizens. Congress does not have the power to give any agency these "law, rule, policy" writing/creating powers. Congress can only create agencies to "enforce" the "laws, rules, policies" Congress creates.
Every crime the ATF, IRS, FBI, FCC, TSA, or any other of the alphabet agencies commit should be brought forth to Congress and Congress BLAMED and summarily prosecuted as the "Real Overseers" of all of this.
Congrats does not have the power to chang the 2nd amendment.
The 2nd amendment rights are clear that they shall not be infringed.
That means Congress cannot make laws that infringe upon the 2nd amendment.
Congress created the NFA a 3 letter agency in 1968.
This agency started making rules and the ATF is enforcing these rules and now the ATF is making their own rules and enforce them too.
Rules are not laws.
Know you're Rights!!!
@@ronnydowdy7432 They can do whatever they want as evidenced by history. It will continue until citizens form up as per the framers and 2a indicate and stop it.
@@ronnydowdy7432 The bill of rights and constitution CAN be changed as it has been changed 27 times. But to add to, amend or repeal any amendment requires a super majority in BOTH houses of congress(290 in the house and 67 in the senate) and 3/4 of states(38 states)
Did Amy Barrett say a bumpstock is equivalent to a rubber band? If she did, then good on her. 🇺🇸
REMEMBER-ATF ruled that an 18 inch bootlace was 'a machine gun' and that if you had bronze Chore Boy scrubbing pads then it was 'Constructive possesstion' of a suppressor.
When disarming America is the point, any lie is worthy of massive broadcast.
murphy needs to be held accountable for his actions.
*Ct. Native, Chris Murphy makes me sick*
NPR reported "a claim" that it could help a shooter fire 800 rounds per minute. lol.
NO THE COURT DID NOT GET IT WRONG; The ATF DOES NOT WRITE LAW.
I bet none of these clowns know anything about guns at all .
That so-called expert is wrong and never held a pew pew.
Well said Colion! As usual, you are right at the tip of the spear on the view. Bumpstocks are HORRIBLY INACCURATE! The whole gun is literally jumping around, and guess what's on the rifle? The SIGHTS!
The ATF should be held to the same zero tolerance policy they impose on FFL'S. Therefore they should be closed and lose all power to operate as a law enforcement agency. That's the standard they hold everyone else too.
Senator Murphy is one of those politicians through his deliberate ignorance of his understanding of the Constitution, and he is helping show us why the anti-corruption ACT must get passed in every state
Questions like "how do we go around the Supreme Court [to ban guns]," is why we have the Second Amendment.
Guns weren't banned. Bump stocks were. The constitution says nothing about bump stocks 😂
@@ish7957still a gun accessory. A thing that no government three letter agency has the right to regulate
@CriticalPopulistAnarchist They absolutely have the "right," more like authority, to regulate accessories. Why? Because they're accessories
@@ish7957 that logic and way of thinking implies that the accessory of the gun is at fault for the crime that happened, which is not the case. For example, should OTF knives be banned because a serial killer decided to stab people? Or should you only punish the criminals that misuse rights and leave the law abiding citizens alone? Just good for thought.
@CriticalPopulistAnarchist We've outlawed some types of knives. Sooo, I don't think you want to use it as an example lol
Total control is their vision. F them....
I love it when the Supreme Court gets it RIGHT ☺️
You explain why a lawsuit needs to be filed that would put all the anti gun laws down in one single swing. If I had the money to pay for the lawyer I would file the suit.
FJB FJB FJB and all who voted for him
Biden didn't ban bump stocks trump did so FDJT FDJT and everyone that voted for him
? Trump signed the Bump stock ban.
@refugeehugsforfree4151 yes right but he don't went the congress to pass more gun control !!
@@refugeehugsforfree4151yep. I'm not a fan of Biden as much as the guy above, but know who's responsible for this crap. Neither he nor Trump are good picks for 2a protections.
It was an administrative rule, he signed nothing - that said, yeah! My 45 and hopefully 47 won’t Fu+’ it up so grandly again.
Why does that senator blink so much ??? Lier lier !!
The left: "No one is above the law"
Also the left: "How do we go around the Supreme Court?"
THE LAW, DOES NOT CARE ABOUT HOW YOU FEEL.
AHHHHH, some do. there are literal laws that put people in jail for talking bad about others.
@@timothywhieldon1971 ya, it's called communism.
5 years is too slow for freedom to be allowed.
And Republicans nominated the same Socialist for president.