Court Rules Bump Stocks Are Not Machine Guns

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • JAL

    Expert
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    May 14, 2017
    1,060
    83
    Indiana
    . . .
    It wasn't that long ago that Indiana was not a shall issue state regarding handgun licenses. Few licenses were issued unless on had political muscle.
    . . .

    When was this?
    Tried looking this up. Online Indiana statutes don't go back further than 2009. I know that during the latter 1990's the sheriff in my county issued the LTCH. When he got into trouble over corruption, the ensuing investigation also revealed he was issuing them to family members, campaign donors, and social and political cronies, but few others When the ISP took over the LTCH process and Indiana became a "shall issue" state I don't know.

    John
     

    BJHay

    Marksman
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Mar 17, 2019
    231
    63
    Crawfordsville
    Actually, I don't think you are correct. Agencies can "interpret" things, but they can't legally rewrite laws. A machinegun has a specific definition in the law, and they are ignoring that and making it what they want it to be.
    You're right but that didn't stop Trump from ordering the DOJ to find a way to make bump stocks illegal. They reinterpreted the law.
    As pointed out below the Supreme Court has cracked the door and perhaps we can rein in the 4th branch of government.
    Now, if we can only get the court re reexamine the abuse of the commerce clause we might make real progress.

    Since the lawsuits were filed, the Supreme Court also ruled against the EPA which had been directed by the Biden Regime to begin regulating GHG emissions without being given the authority by congress to do so. That decision seems very relevant to what the ATF is trying to do here too.
     

    BE Mike

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    16   0   0
    Jul 23, 2008
    6,846
    113
    New Albany
    When was this?
    Permits to carry a handgun were issued by the sheriff in each county. One had to demonstrate a need. The permit was restricted to carrying a specific handgun (verified by serial number). The discretion for the permit was solely on the sheriff. In the 1980's an attorney of the opposite political party of the sheriff was denied a permit and took it to court. The attorney won and the rest is history, as they say. And yes "not that long ago" is based on one's perspective.:oldwise:
     

    Kirk Freeman

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    8   0   0
    Mar 9, 2008
    46,075
    113
    Lafayette, Indiana
    Tried looking this up. Online Indiana statutes don't go back further than 2009. I know that during the latter 1990's the sheriff in my county issued the LTCH. When he got into trouble over corruption, the ensuing investigation also revealed he was issuing them to family members, campaign donors, and social and political cronies, but few others When the ISP took over the LTCH process and Indiana became a "shall issue" state I don't know.

    John
    Schubert v. DeBard was 1980. 42 years ago.
     

    BJHay

    Marksman
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Mar 17, 2019
    231
    63
    Crawfordsville
    Gun owners would be much better off without the slobs who take their semi-auto rifles and pistols out and tear up ranges and the woods, shooting as fast as they can and leaving their trash behind.
    Perhaps you're conflating two issues.
    If any shooter, regardless of firearm, is shooting against range rules and causing damage or leaving trash behind then it's a problem but unrelated to semi-autos.
     

    Jaybird1980

    Grandmaster
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    3   0   0
    Jan 22, 2016
    9,137
    113
    NWI
    Permits to carry a handgun were issued by the sheriff in each county. One had to demonstrate a need. The permit was restricted to carrying a specific handgun (verified by serial number). The discretion for the permit was solely on the sheriff. In the 1980's an attorney of the opposite political party of the sheriff was denied a permit and took it to court. The attorney won and the rest is history, as they say. And yes "not that long ago" is based on one's perspective.:oldwise:
    I remember in the 90's when I first applied there were still boxes to check for reason why. I think it was, Hunting, Target Practice, Self Defense and maybe another.
     

    Ingomike

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    6   0   0
    May 26, 2018
    15,645
    113
    North Central
    Permits to carry a handgun were issued by the sheriff in each county. One had to demonstrate a need. The permit was restricted to carrying a specific handgun (verified by serial number). The discretion for the permit was solely on the sheriff. In the 1980's an attorney of the opposite political party of the sheriff was denied a permit and took it to court. The attorney won and the rest is history, as they say. And yes "not that long ago" is based on one's perspective.:oldwise:
    They were doing as now in 1980. I have had residency in three counties and application and renewals and never encountered what you describe. I’m sure some areas were corrupt…
     

    KG1

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    66   0   0
    Jan 20, 2009
    18,489
    149
    I remember in the 90's when I first applied there were still boxes to check for reason why. I think it was, Hunting, Target Practice, Self Defense and maybe another.
    Yep. I remember a time when there were different permits like you described. I also remember that you had to submit a letter explaining the need for a self-defense/carry permit. At the time I opted not to go that route and applied for a hunting/ target practice permit which didn't require a letter explanation of need.
     

    Ingomike

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    6   0   0
    May 26, 2018
    15,645
    113
    North Central
    up till the mid 1990's I still had to go in for a personal interview with Chief LEO to renew my permit.. I had a coworker get told he had to write an essay on why he should be allowed to carry.. and that was 2002 era..
    Maybe I checked a box but that was it, and that includes Marion county. I did know a police chief that said he did interviews, he knew he could not deny, but he just wanted to personally lay eyes on just who was asking for the permit…
     

    KG1

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    66   0   0
    Jan 20, 2009
    18,489
    149
    Yep. I remember a time when there were different permits like you described. I also remember that you had to submit a letter explaining the need for a self-defense/carry permit. At the time I opted not to go that route and applied for a hunting/ target practice permit which didn't require a letter explanation of need.
    I also recall a time when there was a waiting period to take possession of a purchased firearm from an FFL but the waiting period was waved if you had a permit. That was one of the main reasons that prompted me to get one.
     

    BE Mike

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    16   0   0
    Jul 23, 2008
    6,846
    113
    New Albany
    They were doing as now in 1980. I have had residency in three counties and application and renewals and never encountered what you describe. I’m sure some areas were corrupt…
    As I understand it, before the successful lawsuit, so ably researched by Mr. Freeman, the sheriff could deny a handgun license arbitrarily. After the lawsuit, the sheriff had to demonstrate good cause to deny. I'm sure that those trained in the law and smarter than I (not difficult) could elaborate.
     

    BE Mike

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    16   0   0
    Jul 23, 2008
    6,846
    113
    New Albany
    Perhaps you're conflating two issues.
    If any shooter, regardless of firearm, is shooting against range rules and causing damage or leaving trash behind then it's a problem but unrelated to semi-autos.
    True about shooters with any firearms, but semi-autos do dominate these days. I've been the victim of these kinds of slobs and have noted their impact on ranges where I'm a member. It does get my dander up and I admit it strays from the title of the topic. As long as a gun owner acts maturely and responsibly, I have no issue with his choice of firearms or accessories.
     

    JAL

    Expert
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    May 14, 2017
    1,060
    83
    Indiana
    Gun owners would be much better off without the slobs who take their semi-auto rifles and pistols out and tear up ranges and the woods, shooting as fast as they can and leaving their trash behind.
    . . .

    So you think that the slobs who tear up stuff at ranges and leave litter are a good example?
    The claim that all users of semi-auto rifles and pistols are "slobs that tear up ranges and woods with rapid-fire, and leave trash behind", casts aspersions on an entire class of people: all users of semi-auto firearms. It is a classic ad hominem attack.

    Ad Hominem Attack:
    A rhetorical strategy where the writer attacks the character, motive, or some other attribute of the person or an entire class of people to denigrate them.

    John
     

    Site Supporter

    INGO Supporter

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    503,230
    Messages
    9,216,977
    Members
    49,762
    Latest member
    Shadow2
    Top Bottom