|
|
|
NOTE!
This is a real-time comments system. As such, it's also a
free speech zone within guidelines set forth on the Post
Comments page. Opinions expressed here may or may not
reflect those of KeepAndBearArms staff, members, or
any other living person besides the one who posted them.
Please keep that in mind. We ask that all who post
comments assure that they adhere to our Inclusion
Policy, but there's a bad apple in every
bunch, and we have no control over bigots and
other small-minded people. Thank you. --KeepAndBearArms.com
|
The
Below Comments Relate to this Newslink:
SC: Columbia, S.C., Approves A Rare U.S. Ban On The Use Of Bump Stocks
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
The city of Columbia, S.C., has banned the use of bump stocks, the attachment that dramatically accelerates the rate-of-fire of semi-automatic rifles. Columbia is believed to be the first, or one of the first, U.S. cities to enact such a ban.
Bump stocks allow semi-automatic rifles to fire bullets nearly as rapidly as automatic weapons The ban is meant to prevent the device's use, not its sale — a discrepancy that Columbia officials say is due to a state law that bars cities from regulating firearms or firearm components. |
| Comment by:
mickey
(12/21/2017)
|
December 20, 2017:
A lawsuit has been filed to stop the City of Columbia’s new ban on bump stocks and trigger cranks.
Mark Schnee, a Columbia attorney, filed the suit today, saying the ban on the gun parts is prohibited by state and federal law as well as a violation of a court order. |
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.' The right of the whole people, old and young, men, women and boys, and not militia only, to keep and bear arms of every description, and not such merely as are used by the militia, shall not be infringed, curtailed, or broken in upon, in the smallest degree; and all this for the important end to be attained: the rearing up and qualifying a well-regulated militia, so vitally necessary to the security of a free State. Our opinion is that any law, State or Federal, is repugnant to the Constitution, and void, which contravenes this right. [Nunn vs. State, 1 Ga. (1 Kel.) 243, at 251 (1846)] |
|
|
