Unless the government is taking the bump stocks and issuing them to the police and military, how is it a taking requiring compensation under the Fifth Amendment?The Annoyed Man wrote: ↑Sun Dec 02, 2018 9:59 pmI predict that is what will end up being decided by SCOTUS - not whether or not gov’t has the authority to ban/control a certain type of firearm, that’s already been settled (incorrectly in my opinion) - but whether or not gov’t can take property that WAS legally purchased in good faith, without compensation for the value of the property taken.srothstein wrote: ↑Sun Dec 02, 2018 3:30 pm A better question would be if it would constitute a taking under the Fifth Amendment requiring the government to pay you fair market value for it. I think it would.
When the government uses eminent domain to take private land to build roads, et cetera, that requires just compensation to the owner for the private property taken for public use. However, if the government bans something, that's different than taking it for public use.nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation
If my car fails the emission test and Texas refuses to renew the registration, should the State of Texas be required to pay compensation?