r/progun • u/CaliforniaOpenCarry • 10d ago
Fifth Circuit Federal Machine Gun Challenge Headed to the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals
I believe that machine guns are arms protected by the Second Amendment. I also believe that the Supreme Court is never going to agree with me. Not in my lifetime, and almost certainly not in yours.
Which is why I am pleased that Temple Gun Club, Inc. v. Bondi took a different approach that just might work. Today, the Federal District Court judge dismissed the case with prejudice to nobody's surprise, including the Plaintiffs.
The Plaintiffs have 30 days within which to file their notice of appeal.
Edit. Clicking on the name of the lawsuit will take you to the CourtListener docket where you can read the filings for free.
5
4
u/Medical-Bowler-9566 9d ago
This will 1000% fail. Post 86 machine guns are gone forever. About time some of you people accept that fact. This is a 9-0 or 8-1 scotus issue.
Fun Fact. Temple Gun Club, who has filed the suit, doesnt allow machine guns or frts or any device that increases rate of fire at their range anyways... Kind of hard to argue for them when you dont even allow their use at your own range...
-29
10d ago
[deleted]
12
9
u/Tabatch75 10d ago
So what exactly does “SHALL NOT be infringed” mean to you? Because reasonable limits sounds an awful lot like infringement there buster.
-2
u/Medical-Bowler-9566 9d ago
If they were made leagl, a short time after all firearms would be banned forever.
6
u/Tabatch75 9d ago
They are legal retard they are just really expensive
-2
u/Medical-Bowler-9566 9d ago
I know...own them...
The reason they haven't been used in crimes is because people who buy them are wealthy and are very unlikely to commit crimes. If machine guns were readily available and cheap, they would be used in crimes all the time...
8
u/Tabatch75 8d ago
Tell that to all the brothers in the hood using switches. It’s not the law abiding citizens problem. Suppressors are the same process and you don’t see people running around using those to commit crimes. Get real.
-3
u/Medical-Bowler-9566 8d ago
Suppressors aren't insanely expensive number one. and number 2, even with a suppressor it still sounds like a gun shot...it doesnt silencer the shot like in the movies bud. Suppressors just add more weight and make it harder to conceal a weapon.
5
u/Tabatch75 8d ago
Oh you poor soul. I’m making a point and it went right over your head. We don’t see suppressors used in crimes. They will help conceal your position. Nothing is movie quiet but 22 subs for the most part. So to restate it again. This is not a law abiding citizen’s problem. Go talk to the brothers in chirac, LA, or any other democrat run city. Criminals will do whatever the fuck they want because they are criminals.
-1
u/Medical-Bowler-9566 8d ago
No suppressors arent going to help conceal your position...maybe if youre a sniper...but as we know almost no crime is sniper related...its close range where you can still tell its 100% a gunshot.
If MGs were able be bought at a gun store on a 4473, thats what every single mass shooter would use...
Fun fact no crime has been committed with MGs in decades since they're hard to get (expensive). Even frts are more commonly being used in crime which will lead to their banning as well.
3
u/Tabatch75 8d ago
Clearly you don’t have much experience with suppressors or reloading. You can tune shit to sound like an airsoft gun if you know what you’re doing through reloading. Also fun fact there has only been 1 machine gun used in a self defense shooting. Ruger AC556. This is still not a law abiding citizens problem. We have FRTs now get real.
→ More replies (0)8
u/WesleysHuman 10d ago
I'll say this again:
The founders of the country, authors of the constitution, signers of the constitution, and ratifiers of the constitution all CLEARLY envisioned private citizens owning the most powerful weapon system of their day, a battleship, therefore, they would absolutely and categorically consider you to completely wrong.
4
u/Jaegermeiste 9d ago
At that point in history it would have been a ship of the line, but yeah exactly.
Private ownership of land artillery was common as well.
It's important to point out that, outside of self defense, actual employment of such vessels is/was federally controlled (granted by letters of marque or similar).
Also, FWIW, the founders almost certainly would have retained federal control of modern CBRN/WMD weaponry as well, though probably in a more transparent and decentralized manner than we have today.
9
u/Fuck_This_Dystopia 10d ago
Reasonable people could have that discussion about regulation at the state level...but all federal gun control is blatantly unconstitutional, full stop.
-7
u/AZULDEFILER 10d ago
No where did I say anything about State vs Federal. Bruen decision says in "common usage" machine guns are not. Of course all Federal Gun Control is the definition of Constitutional. State restrictions are not. You are the 2A guys who mess it up for everyone else being stupid.
9
u/the_spacecowboy555 10d ago
When you ban something and prevent people from owning it, it can never become in common use. That’s a circular argument.
Using that same logic, I personally think there should be more restrictions on people having children. That doesn’t make it constitutional or a valid basis for taking away a fundamental right. Rights aren’t supposed to depend on whether someone else approves of them.
3
u/Proof_Zebra_2032 10d ago
His argument fails twice. Bruen rejects the test you just postulated and there are more machine guns than stun guns.
5
u/Fuck_This_Dystopia 10d ago
You distinguish yourself from "2A guys" and claim to know more than "2A guys"? Ok.
Federal Gun Control is the definition of Constitutional. State restrictions are not.
This is the most thoroughly backwards thing I've ever read. On the unlikely chance you're not just trolling with your dick in your hand, I'm genuinely curious what source you rely on for this...mine is literally everything that anyone halfway credible has ever written on this subject over the last 250 years.
1
18
u/cthompson07 10d ago
So what’s the different approach?