Grumpy Dem senator lashes out at Justice Thomas after bump stock ruling: ‘No legitimate use for these’

Two-fold fear-mongering from a Democratic senator further advanced attacks on Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas while defending faceless bureaucracy in the name of gun-grabbing.

“He’s not being honest about what this does, and it is incredibly dangerous.”

(Video: CNN)

Friday, the Supreme Court issued a 6-3 ruling in the case of Garland v. Cargill determining that the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) had “lacked statutory authority” in their endeavor to ban bump stocks through a regulatory rule change.

The latest leftist failure at eroding not only the Second Amendment, but representative government as well, hadn’t stopped New Mexico Sen. Martin Heinrich (D) from pivoting to the favored narratives opposing the rights of law-abiding citizens.

“I find this ruling to be incredibly offensive,” he told CNN host Brianna Keilar when prompted Friday before contending, “This ruling will undoubtedly cost innocent American lives. There’s just no legitimate use for bump stocks.”

Writing for the majority, Thomas was cited by Keilar as stating, “A bump stock does not convert a semi-automatic rifle into a machinegun, any more than a shooter with a lightning-fast trigger finger does.”

She also played a video from YouTuber Zach Nelson who offered a demonstration of an AR-15 being fired with and without a bump stock, prompting her to call out the “undeniable difference.”

In response to that snippet, Heinrich proceeded to accuse, “It’s just not honest. I know these mechanisms. I’ve seen not just the videos, but I’ve used some of these weapons. He’s not being honest about what this does, and it is incredibly dangerous. There’s no legitimate use for these. Who is going to use these bump stocks? It’s going to be street gangs and cartels and mass shooters. And, you know, innocent Americans are going to die because of this decision. I find it incredibly troubling.”

What had been left out of the reporting on Thomas’ opinion was how the justice had covered the specifics that remained unchanged for semiautomatic firearms equipped with a bump stock as he wrote, “The firing cycle remains the same. Between every shot, the shooter must release pressure from the trigger and allow it to reset before reengaging the trigger for another shot.”

“A bump stock merely reduces the amount of time that elapses between separate ‘function’ of the trigger. The bump stock makes it easier for the shooter to move the firearm back toward his shoulder and thereby release pressure from the trigger against his finger very quickly thereafter,” wrote Thomas. “A bump stock does not convert a semi-automatic rifle into a machinegun, any more than a shooter with a lightning-fast trigger finger does. Even with a bump stock, a semiautomatic rifle will fire only one shot for every ‘function of the trigger.’ So, a bump stock cannot qualify as a machingun under…definition.”

Supreme Court Bumpstocks by Zerohedge Janitor

The justice added that ATF’s argument, “rests on the mistaken premise that there is a difference between a shooter pushing the firearm forward to bump the trigger against his stationary finger. ATF and the dissent seek to call the shooter’s initial trigger pull a ‘function of the trigger’ while ignoring the subsequent ‘bumps’ of the shooter’s finger against the trigger before every additional shot. But [the code] does not define a machinegun based on what type of human input engages the trigger–whether it is a pull, bump, or something else. Nor does it define a machinegun based on whether the shooter has assistance engaging the trigger. The statutory definition instead hinges on how many shots discharge when the shooter engages the trigger. And, as we have explained, a semiautomatic rifle will fire only one shot each time the shooter engages the trigger–with or without a bump stock.”

Despite the logic presented and the fact that the Supreme Court decision didn’t rule out an act of Congress that could ban bump stocks, Heinrich insisted on peddling fear, even resorting to invoking the oft-memory-holed 2017 Las Vegas shooting.

Meanwhile, attacks on Thomas, as well as his conservative peer, Justice Samuel Alito, had continued with further scrutiny of the jurist’s trips that were reportedly paid for by GOP donor and close friend, Harlan Crow, prompting Democrats to suggest ethics concerns warranted oversight and scrutiny.

Kevin Haggerty

Comment

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. If a comment is spam, instead of replying to it please click the ∨ icon below and to the right of that comment. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.

Latest Articles