@[email protected] to [email protected] • 16 days agoSupreme Court rules gun 'bump stocks’ ban is unlawfulwww.cnbc.comexternal-linkmessage-square151fedilinkarrow-up1270arrow-down16
arrow-up1264arrow-down1external-linkSupreme Court rules gun 'bump stocks’ ban is unlawfulwww.cnbc.com@[email protected] to [email protected] • 16 days agomessage-square151fedilink
minus-square@[email protected]linkfedilinkEnglish5•16 days agoMy point is, they did not rule a ban unconstitutional, since they asked where it was in the constitution.
minus-square@[email protected]linkfedilinkEnglish3•16 days agoI read it as asking where in the Constitution there is a right to bump stocks. Did you read as asking where the ban is?
minus-square@[email protected]linkfedilinkEnglish2•16 days agoAnd there is no constitutional right to bump stocks. They just ruled there is no current law against it. If there was a constitutional right to them, you couldn’t ban them even with a law. I didn’t say he was asking where the ban is.
My point is, they did not rule a ban unconstitutional, since they asked where it was in the constitution.
I read it as asking where in the Constitution there is a right to bump stocks. Did you read as asking where the ban is?
And there is no constitutional right to bump stocks. They just ruled there is no current law against it. If there was a constitutional right to them, you couldn’t ban them even with a law.
I didn’t say he was asking where the ban is.