GETTING YOU REAL NEWS...

Type to search

Trump’s Bump Stock Ban Initiated After Long Saga

2nd Amendment All Daily News Politics The 45th

Trump’s Bump Stock Ban Initiated After Long Saga

Share

Ever since the horrible events that unfolded in Las Vegas and Parkland, Donald Trump has promised the American people that he will enact a federal ban on bump stocks. The firearm attachment harnesses the recoil of a semi-automatic rifle, which allows a gun to fire with a single pull of the trigger (the recoil allows for continuous fire by “bumping” the gun back). The bump-stock was used as an accessory during the Las Vegas shooting, permitting Stephen Paddock to shoot onto the festival-goers with increased efficiency.

The ban has been praised by political analysts as an example of bi-partisan support, as well as giving Trump some legislative breathing room as the Democrat-majority house takes office, considering gun control will towards the top of their agenda.

In terms of intra-party politics, Donald Trump has sparked outrage amongst the pro-Second Amendment community, as they believe that not only is the ban a violation of constitutional rights but that the bump stock ban will give Democrats the go-ahead for more gun-control legislature.

In terms of the judiciary take on the issue at hand, there have been several cases in favor of a bump stock ban. After former Florida governor Rick Scott (R) banned bump stocks last spring, a class action lawsuit was filed against the state government stating that bump stock owners should be refunded.

Judges rejected this case swiftly, mentioning that bump stocks were not considered to be under the category of the legal definition of arms (firearms and ammunition). In a more recent lawsuit this past week in Maryland, a federal judge upheld the bump stock ban. Once again the judge believed the lawsuit could not provide enough evidence of a violation in constitutional rights.

Prosecutors pointed to the recent Supreme Court case District of Columbia v Heller, however, the judge concluded that the case only regarded the unconstitutional implementation of trigger locks and reaffirmed the use of arms in non-militia instances (i.e. self-defense).

Expect more to come in the ensuing weeks in terms of lawsuits …

Noah Giglietti is a Lead Contributor for The Daily Lead.

Tags:

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: