298 Comments

Mitch The Terrible, Terrapin of the Senate, will be pleased to take personal credit for the next bump stock massacre, but he's going to have to share it with LaPierre and the conservative knuckleheads of SCOTUS.

Expand full comment

(In the voice of Walter Cronkite, my old hero):

And this just in. An Indianna court resumed arguments today regarding the lawsuit of Muncie furniture varnisher Verlard Murgleflurgle. He invented a device called the "Bump Drink," that fills multiple cups with just one push of a soda fountain lever. "But the soda fountain doesn't know it's doing anything different," Mr. Murgleflurgle argued, "It just does what it always does. It helps disabled people buy fifteen drinks for themsevles."

Expand full comment

It's positively insane that the notion that the function is the same as a machine gun but the wording of the statute isn't exactly defined to cover that function so "we guess it's cool" is the vibe from SCOTUS.

Add to that the fact that as the gun is no longer stabilized against the shoulder and is essentially free floating while it fires the accuracy is practically zero - perfect for firing into crowds but essentially useless for marksmanship. See also Glock switch, which does the same thing but utilizes a single trigger pull so ILLEGAL!

I'm so tired of all of this Originalist bullshit.

Expand full comment

The Usanian constitution has been obsolete since 1808, when Tom Jefferson pointed that out. He also observed (in 1824, to Daniel Webster) that Andrew Jackson was an asshole.

Expand full comment

When one of the OG creators of the Declaration of Independence suggests that the Constitution needs to be revisited every score of years or so then the idea that it is a document that should respond to the times instead of some commandments carved in stone then perhaps that concept needs to be revisited. We used to add Amendments on the regular, but the ossification of the party system has made it practically impossible.

Add to that the fact that a solid number of our legislative body are stone cold ignorant about science and we end up with a completely dysfunctional system of governance.

Expand full comment

People very commonly describe this SCOTUS as "corrupt", and they are -- but not just in the "sailing around on Leonard Leo's yacht snorting coke off a stripper's ass" way (although probably that, too).

They're not "corrupt" in the fun, decadent way.

They're not even "corrupt" in the Scrooge McDuck/Mr. Burns money fight way.

They're MALEVOLENT.

They wish to do harm and inflict suffering, and they very often succeed.

They are ACTIVELY EVIL.

When viewed through this lens, everything about them suddenly makes sense.

I'm usually a pretty flexible person, but you can't change my mind about this, and I'm 99% sure nobody can come up with a single one of their actions that doesn't support my theory.

Expand full comment

I wouldn't even try because you're correct. Not only is the cruelty the point, the malevolent evil is the point.

Expand full comment
Mar 2·edited Mar 2

Ta, Dok. Whatever happened to the "well regulated militia" that begins the 2nd? Ammosexuals make me sick, and make a lot of people dead. 🤮

Expand full comment
founding

What is a machine gun? Any firearm that fires repeatedly when the trigger is held back with no further action on the part of the shooter. Kind of spoils the mystery doesn't it?

Expand full comment

People with arthritis and other physical problems must also be able to kill as many people as they possibly can. Is that what the gun-humper lawyer is saying? Why is that there never seems to be an argument regarding the first four words of the Second Amendment, "A well-regulated militia..."? Millions of randos with military grade weapons, meant for warfare, are not "well-regulated" or, even in their cosplaying, fevered wet dreams, "militia". Oh, right, to protect themselves and belongings from the marauding bands of marauders that Fux News tells them are streaming over the border and rampaging through suburban America. I wonder why there's never any coverage of any of that. Oh, wait. I think I know.

Expand full comment

“ The gun knows what it is; it’s the stupid, fleshy meatbags who have things confused.”

Wait, I thought ammosexuals always argue that guns are just inanimate objects whose existence can never be blamed for the mass carnage they cause.

Expand full comment

I want a t-shirt that says "I'm Pro-Life, repeal the 2nd amendment!

Maybe there should be a movement to repeal it, even if it takes a generation or few. Worth "shooting" for?

Expand full comment

Took 'em fifty years, but they got rid of Roe. What else do we have to do?

Expand full comment

I spy with my eye

The GOP lie

That babies must live

So children can die.

~ Burma Shave

Expand full comment
Mar 1Liked by Doktor Zoom

Fucking hell, it's back to "It's a magazine not a clip therefore your argument is invalid!!"

Expand full comment

"Oh sorry! We *misused* your precious terminology!"

They like to split hairs and pretend that if the average person says “clip” instead of “magazine” their opinion is invalid as to whether these KILLING MACHINES should be allowed to be sold to GUN NUTS who want to MURDER CHILDREN.

Expand full comment

Basically, and while I’m absolutely a pedant in most situations, such as in podium vs lectern, the technical term is “magazine” and the vernacular is “clip” so fuck them.

Expand full comment

They know it. They're only saying that to end the conversation.

Expand full comment

A horse is a horse, of course of course. But if it talks is it still considered a horse?

Of course.

Expand full comment

The way things are going, it's probably more likely that a Republican Congress would repeal the 1934 machine gun law than that the Supremes will uphold the ATF's logic & administrative ruling - and even more likely if they do. Not kidding.

Expand full comment
founding

There is a more recent law that says, "The next and final major change for machine gun ownership came with the Firearms Owners' Protection Act of 1986 (FOPA), which loosened some ownership restrictions. However, the bill codified some gun control measures, and prohibited civilian ownership or transfer of machine guns made after May 19, 1986." https://nationalinterest.org/blog/reboot/yes-machine-guns-are-legal-here-comes-all-catches-163921 for more detail.

Expand full comment

Don’t give them ideas.

Expand full comment

OH THE PEDANTRY

Expand full comment

OH THE INANITY

Expand full comment

I can imagine a little trigger pulling machine. I could probably build it in a week or two.

Expand full comment

Yep, a 60 RPM motor geared 1:2 to drive a cam on the trigger for 120 rounds/minute. Cake.

Expand full comment
founding

Careful. "Internally, the firearm is not altered. As in all semi-automatic firearms, only one round is fired with every stroke of the trigger. This makes the "trigger crank" avoid classification as a machine gun within the definitions used by United States federal law, so as stated in an IRS revenue ruling[1] and various other private-letter rulings by ATF.[2][3] However, a battery-powered "trigger crank" (and by extension Gatling gun) is a machine gun as was determined by the ATF in 2004." - wiki "Trigger Crank"

They are referring to modern multi-barrel autocannons. Only one man portable (theoretically) exists. The M134 (Ol' Painless) that. Jesse Ventura carried in <i>Predator</i>

Expand full comment

That was my favorite gun in Predator.

Expand full comment

Manual trigger cranks exist.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trigger_crank

Expand full comment

Yes

"In other Supreme Court news, yesterday the court seemed poised to overturn the ban on bump stocks because Neil Gorsuch is confused by intransitive verbs. I wish I were making that up.

My latest in

@thenation"

https://twitter.com/ElieNYC/status/1763254443770806513

more in The Nation

Expand full comment

nra, they lie, you die.

Expand full comment