USA – -(Ammoland.com)- The Department of Justice anticipates issuing a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) that would interpret the statutory definition of “machinegun” in the National Firearms Act of 1934 and Gun Control Act of 1968 to clarify whether certain devices, commonly known as “bump fire” stocks, fall within that definition,” a Tuesday Federal Register notice advises. “Before doing so, the Department and ATF need to gather information and comments from the public and industry regarding the nature and scope of the market for these devices.”
The document comment period ends on January 25, the notice continues, providing ways to send them in either by mail or via a submission form. The notice also provides background information, including a summary of claimed statutory authority as well as the ”justification” for the proposed rule, which unsurprisingly relies heavily on last October’s Las Vegas music festival murders to make the case that such controls are needed. Seeing as how investigators have been tight-lipped, that an inconsistent narrative has resulted in plenty of distrust and no small amount of “conspiracy theories” and an FBI estimate that a final report could not be ready until the anniversary of the killings, apportioning blame to bump stocks that are owned by plenty of Americans who don’t abuse them seems more than a bit of a rush to judgment.
Even more problematic would be that they would be proving new restrictions would make a bit of difference outside of infringing on the rights of those inclined to obey such edicts. After all, “bump firing” can not only be accomplished with a shoestring, another item ATF once claimed regulatory jurisdiction over, but also with a finger.
As long as the subject is the federal government adding items under National Firearms Act authority (something nowhere delegated to it in the Constitution), it’s relevant to note another ludicrous overreach, such as the time a few years back when ATF’s Firearms Technology Branch deemed “Chore Boy copper cleaning pads, along with fiberglass insulation,” a firearm, subject to registration and a $200 transfer tax (read the letter here).
It’s also fair to look at the records and the environment that will apply to owners of bump stocks should the rule pass. Felony prosecutions occur even though the records are “seriously flawed.” Indeed, when it comes to the National Firearms Registration and Transfer record, an Office of Inspector General survey of ATF’s Industry Operations Inspectors noted:
“OIG asked how often there was a discrepancy between the inventory and what the NFRTR said the inventory should be: 46% of inspectors said either ‘always’ or ‘most of the time.’ (Only 5% reported ‘never’). How often was the discrepancy found in the NFRTR? 44% said always or most of the time, only 6% said ‘never.’”
And from a few years before that:
“In a major victory for those of us arguing that the National Firearms Registration and Transfer Record (NFRTR) is insufficient for criminal proceedings, Dr. Fritz Scheuren, “the” statistician in the United States (possibly the world), today informed the 10th District Court that the NFRTR is insufficient for criminal proceedings.”
Add to that an issue with conflicting ATF rulings making compliance problematic – indeed, ATF’s previous ruling on bump stocks was that they were outside the Bureau’s purview. And the lack of consistent and comprehensive rules has resulted in a legal complaint, because they’ve known about the problem for years:
In 2005, the Congressional Research Service published a memorandum regarding ATF firearms testing procedures. Among other things, it revealed that the ATF has “over 300 cubic feet of classification letters stored in file cabinets.” The Bureau hasn’t scanned any of these documents into a searchable database to assure consistency of interpretation, to identify and resolve regulatory conflicts. The extent to which this inconsistency has grown and compounded in intervening years is unknown and unknowable without a major organization and review effort.
How adding bump stocks into the mix will do anything beyond muddling the mix even further is not explained, but then again, this isn’t about “common sense gun safety laws” or “stopping the violence” or “getting guns off the street” – this is about politics, and representative are grateful to get a pass on accountability if the bureaucrats can take the heat instead of having to vote on a “bipartisan” bill, which is also in the works. And giving the green light to the regulatory vs. legislative approach is NRA:
“The National Rifle Association is calling on the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATFE) to immediately review whether these devices comply with federal law. The NRA believes that devices designed to allow semi-automatic rifles to function like fully-automatic rifles should be subject to additional regulations.”
One additional wrinkle – by not being a “qualified product,” bump stocks may not be covered by the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, so having ATF reclassify them may absolve manufacturers from legal liability – although adding a transfer tax could conceivably kill the market.
Here’s the thing: Hard core gun owner advocates are having real problems with establishment types crafting compromises on mental health, on “Fix NICS” and on bump stocks. Republican majorities are in the House and in the Senate, and a Republican president is in the White House. They wouldn’t be there were it not for gun owners. Why are we talking more “gun control”? And in spite of those majorities, it’s beginning to look like the much-trumpeted “national reciprocity” trade-off may be “going nowhere”.
“[T]he Senate version … remains in the Senate Judiciary Committee and may never be presented for a vote as Democrats, and some Republicans, challenge supporters’ claims that national reciprocity would clarify confusion in negotiating the state-by-state matrix of concealed carry laws.”
Note no one who owes his position of power to gun owners is talking about challenging the Hughes Amendment. And far be it from anyone to propose overturning NFA ’34 altogether. Talk about something that clearly infringes on the very arms that have “some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia [or] that [are] part of the ordinary military equipment, or that … could contribute to the common defense.”
Instead, we’re being asked to help provide cover to rationalize yet another Intolerable Act, and this one with the sanction of our “gun rights leaders.”
If that doesn’t sit well with you, submit a comment on the proposed rule.
What should you say?
Feel free to use any of the arguments presented here, or post insights of your own and share them with the rest of us in comments.
About David Codrea:
David Codrea is the winner of multiple journalist awards for investigating / defending the RKBA and a long-time gun owner rights advocate who defiantly challenges the folly of citizen disarmament.
In addition to being a field editor/columnist at GUNS Magazine and associate editor for Oath Keepers, he blogs at “The War on Guns: Notes from the Resistance,” and posts on Twitter: @dcodrea and Facebook.
McVeigh used a U-Haul truck and bags of fertilizer. Who’s calling for regulation on those items?
oldvet
I wonder as to how long they will hold that position.
Oldvet:
In my view, if the local news outlet pays this dirtbag 10 cents, their judgment can be called into serious question, that being my take. Others will no doubt feel differently.
@OV, If he holds his evil little breath, he will turn mighty blue! Gas went up here, too. But thanks to your warning we filled up.
@Albbac2 concerning your remarks about thedickact you mentioned Snopes. I have to agree with Nottinghill that paying attention to Snopes is very similar to believing what the huffington post or washington post has to say. They lean very far left and anything they say about a gun issue would, in my opinion, be the opposite of the actual truth. From what I can find the dick act is still active and totally ignored by the elite bunch.
PLEASE!!! Tell me that no one here is using snopes for fact checking… or anything else. I MEAN REALLY!!!
@Oldvet, I read your post on the swatting shooting and just prior to that I read an article in our local paper about the whole thing. The article was written by the Wichita news paper. At least the LEO has a handle on this mess but it is too bad they can’t hang them at high noon on the town square.
@OV, thanks for the update, and good for Kansas!
One poster here opined to the effect that he thought people here would have submitted Public Comment opposed to regulatory game the AFT might play with Bump Stocks. Perhaps so, perhaps not, judging from my own personal experiences with people. At my club at one general membership meeting, members were pissing and moaning over and about proposed legislation and or regulatory antics that would ill effect gun rights. When I had the opportunity, I posed the following question to the general membership. On any matter of concern to you, gun related or otherwise, when did you last contact your elected… Read more »
Alan, I made that statement only because of your almost denigration of us by implying that we haven’t posted to that site and are only making comments here.
If we haven’t by now, your constant “beating the dead horse” isn’t going to convince those you believe haven’t.
The whip has been put away, I will leave the horse in peace.
In caseI blew this away, instead of posting it, the following might be worth the moment it takes to read. The ATF/BATFE are also involved with alcohol and tobacco, where they seem to function pretty much without problem. MIght that be a result of the fact that the ATF’s bureaucratic masters and it’s management types smoke and drink? One wonders. In any case, re getting rid of the agency, as some suggest, consider the following. Many years ago, I believe it was back in the 1920’s or thereabouts, some young congressman got annoyed at “government” antics, and sought to curb… Read more »
Heed the Call-up-
It,s not a question of “government knowing who we are”. In my view the necessity is as follows. The ATF needs to disappear beneath a pile of adverse public comment re this Bump Stock foolishness, which I suspect boils down to the following. It is the proverbial Trojan Horse behind or within which lurks even more hostile to rights regulatory scams.
‘
Alan, agreed, too, mentioned in a prior post about the “need” for this agency. My point was that I would believe most of the “regulars” here have no qualms about posting a comment at that site. Every firearms rights group I belong to has also requested that we post to that site.
As stated in other posts, there is no such thing as compromising with the antis. How does one compromise on a right that “shall not be infringed”? That is why I joined these groups, to fight back against infringements on our rights.
At the possible risk of repeating myself, how many contributors to or readers of this discussion have taken the small trouble to engage in the PUBLIC COMMENT the ATF supposedly seeks regarding it’s proposed regulations and Bump Stocks.
Alan, I would suspect most of us have, since we are firearms owners and most post here regularly. It’s not like the government doesn’t already know who we are.
WIld Bill:
Read history. The agencies that came and went before the ATF aka the BATFE are/were hangovers from Prohibition. When Prohibition was repealed, employment had to be found for former Prohibition Agents, government employees are never dispensed with, so other agencies were created to provide employment and pay checks for what would have become former government agents. This cabal, via various name changes having become the BATFE, the latest in a parade of nomes de guere.
@Albbac2,Yes , and not contrary to anything that I have written. How much taxpayer money would be saved if the BATFE were decommissioned, personnel retired or transferred to ICE, and equipment redistributed to federal agencies that have a purpose?
WIld Bill
Time and inclination allowing, see a comment I posted, expect it will appear sooner or later, on government employment and the ATF/BATFE? You might get a chuckle out of it, though I submit that there is also food for thought therein. I intended to address it to you, though I believe I blew that aspect.
@ Wild Bill Correct as usual ATF and many alphabet agencies that rule through regulation are also unConstitutional. “Under our Constitution, Congress makes the laws, and the President enforces them. The powers of “making” and “enforcing” are separated so that the President and Congress may act as a “check” on each other.” “But 100 years ago, Congress starting passing laws they had no constitutional authority to make, and delegated the details to be written by agencies within the Executive Branch. This process continued and resulted in the Code of Federal Regulations which contains the huge body of regulations made by… Read more »
@GMB, Spot on accurate. You get five gold stars for the research!
Curb the ATF and the firearms related antics thereof, while leaving inanimate objects the hell alone.
Repeal The Hughes Amendment to the Firearms Owners Protection Act. This legislative POS was attached without a recorded vote, and never should have been allowed. By the way, what became of Congressman Hughes, another gift to the legislative process from the police state of New Jersey. Having fire light automatic weapons, I personally have little interest in the genre, though obviously others feel differently.
Has the ATF made PROMINENT PUBLIC NOTICE of their REQUEST FOR PUBLIC COMMENT on their PROPOSED REGULATIONS? If so, where did this PROMINENT PUBLIC NOTICE appear and also when? Note, comment in The FEDERAL REGISTER might satisfy legal requirements, but as for PROMINENT PUBLIC NOTICE, it doesn’t begin to come close, nor does it begin to cut the mustard. In the final analysis, it might boil down to the following. How much of this administrative, bureaucratic crap are the citizens of this country willing to put up with from government agencies, presumably the servants of the people, or have I… Read more »
The fact they are even considering public comment shows how effing st’oo’pid they really are.
@5WV, the Adminsitrative Procedures Act requires a notice and comment period.
@Albbac2 the BATFE should not be an agency at all, and the BATFE has a long history of dishonesty and an anti Second Amendment agenda.
So how come they still exist, friends in high places, though they are also involved in things other than firearms.
So how come they still exist, friends in high places, though they are also involved in things other than firearms, alcohol and tobacco.
What would the proposed regulation actually say/do? We don’t know. The example given by the BATFE of regulation is https://www.atf.gov/firearms/docs/ruling/2006-2-classification-devices-exclusively-designed-increase-rate-fire/download in which a redoing of a semi-auto rifle to let the action/barrel to slide back/forth by spring action under the force of recoil and therefore the trigger could hit the shooter’s finger (after the first shot) and cause subsequent discharges until empty or until the shooter’s finger is moved away. Hmm – that does make it sound close to a machinegun, and the BATFE classified it as such. The “bump stock” (or “slide stock”) (I’ve never seen one) sounds as… Read more »
Henry:
In my view, which might be prejudiced, regarding anything to do with firearms, I would not trust the ATF beyond the distance that I could throw them, if that far. That might constitute a pretty sad comment on an agency of our government, but that is my view of the thing. Additionally, the DOJ doesn’t stand especially high in matters of regard either.
Henry et al:
Interesting comment and questions raised. Have you given the ATF the benefit of your thinking on this matter via public comment? I did a week or so ago. Have others here so done? If not, what are you waiting for.
.
I have unfortunately SEEN TOO MANY so-called pro-2A and pro-gunners on this thread whom seem to be falling either into or for this anti-gunner BS. A fully machinegun is actuated by it’s sear not by any spring assisted part act on the stock or barrel. Maybe more of us should actually look at the way our weapons operate and other weapons before we JUMP INTO THE SOCIALIST BAG! You start talking about springs, spring assisted and/or triggers will do nothing but give the other side ammo against us. Besides a bumpstock IS NOT required to bump fire a weapon, rifle… Read more »
Henry, that document is not describing a “bump stock”. Regardless, we are still allowed to purchase and possess automatic weapons, albeit, they must be pre-ban, manufactured before 1986. So the argument against automatic weapons is a moot point – they are legal. The next question is why should we allow a federal agency regulate a right that “shall not be infringed”?
@Be good, The issue is not “… argument … seems to be concerned that any device which can speed up firing (such as reducing trigger pull at all, maybe as the result of a “trigger job”) would therefore be classified as a machine gun.” The issue is: whether any governmental agency can infringe upon the Right of the people to keep and bear arms.
This proposed legislation and proposed regulation is entirely too open ended, It does not just address the “bump fire” stocks but according to interpretation can affect many,many more facets of firearm ownership and the desire to make one shoot better,easier or more efficiently. I am opposed to any open ended regulation that does not spell exactly what will be regulated–I urge reconsideration based on fact, and on the wishes of the people not a knee jerk reaction and ploy by anti-gun activists. Remember the intention of the 2ND Amendment and follow the constitution of the United States.
Dean Seller:
Having seen your post, your comments to the AFT seem misdirected, unless I have misunderstood. Without going into a long explanation of the process involved in the legal purchase of an automatic weapon, aka a machinegun, bring a whole lot of money, check with either the local ATF office for details, they should be able to help, or find a Class 3 Dealer and speak with them. Class 3 dealers are licensed to sell and transfer machine guns, the local gun store likely isn’t.
In case I blew previous post, I might have, contact information concerning pending ATF regulations of Bump Stocks can be sent as below noted. Comment period runs through 25 January, and time passes quickly. Written comments must be submitted to ATF no later than thirty (30) days after publication in the Federal Register. Comments should be identified by docket number (2017R-22), by any of the following methods: – Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. ( Click the Leave a Comment Button) – Fax: (202) 648-9741 – Mail: Vivian Chu, Mailstop 6N-518, Office of Regulatory Affairs, Enforcement Programs and Services, Bureau of Alcohol,… Read more »
Oldvet:
Perhaps a side issue, but might it be possible that some police are overly impressed with the authority granted them by the citizenry, possibly mistakenly, or might some be plain Trigger Happy?
ON BUMP STOCKS
At the risk of being a nag, a risk I’m willing to take, the public comment period on the latest in administrative, bureaucratic antics of the wonderful mob commonly known as The ATF, more properly The BATFE runs through 25 January, 2018. Speak now or or cry later. The choice is yours to make.
I appreciate many of the comments made here in the remarks section. To many of them I say “dam straight on that.” I think the folks at the BATFE are stuck enforcing a bunch of “BS” laws and regulations. Like many of you I think we should strike the NFA laws from the books. They are antiquated, unnecessary and are a big hassle for the law abiding. I believe the standing rulings by the BATFE on the bump stock should remain unchanged. You don’t need to punish the entire United States population for the act of a few. I think… Read more »
@Steven, Wasilla, Alaska
“I appreciate many of the comments made here in the remarks section. To many of them I say “dam straight on that.” I think the folks at the BATFE are stuck enforcing a bunch of “BS” laws and regulations. Like many of you I think we should strike the NFA laws from the books. They are antiquated, unnecessary and are a big hassle for the law abiding.”
Especially as the laws and regulations are Unconstitutional.
A passing historical note. The National Firearms Act of 1934, and New York’s infamous Sullivan Law are a couple of the less than admirable remnants of FDR. Dumb legislation examples by the NFA and Gun Control Act of 1968 are also the fault of congresses past, not to forget the fax that the current congress, House of Representatives and U.S. Senate have failed to repeal legislative garbage above referenced.
Reduce the amount of RED TAPE and make work antics for government employees, as you so sensibly suggest is something I suspect will never happen. As example of that theorem is the following. Many years ago, some young congressman, possibly annoyed at the number of government employees, cannot imagine why, offered the following proposal. That the number of government workers employed by The Bureau of Indian Affairs not exceed the number of American Indians whose affairs they supposedly looked after. Needless to say, that proposal was shouted down.
@Oldvet I heard about that but didn’t know what swatting ment. That is really tragic that an innocent person got killed because of something done by a knothead in commiefornia.It would seem to me that the knothead and the LEO share in the cause of the murder. Whether the victim was shot immediately or after he was given “commands” don’t carry much weight with me because he wasn’t armed. City of Wichita better bend over and grab their ankles.
@Oldvet Wichita, Ks.and I always thought of that area as a good area full of polite people and farms.Then a commiefornia @sswipe invades Wichita and pulls a really cruel trick that went the way he had planned. Now there are several victims to this. I agree they should drag (literally) both of them back and have a hanging similar to what they would have done in the old days. I realize I have no business playing judge but I would be open to judging this one.
Thanks for the info.
So as all the cops and SWATters assemble around the house with their AR’s, plate carriers, and night vision apparently nobody said “Hey, did anybody call the house to see if the perp wants to talk?” Of coarse if they did that the homeowner would have replied “WTF are you talking about?”
No let’s not do that, let’s just throw a searchlight and bullhorn on the house and practice our Ninja tactics on the soon-to-be dead person.
What did happen. Your comment is the first I’ve seen, though I may have been looking the other way.
ALL:
Go To The Following to Comment On ATF Proposal for Bump Stock Regulations.Read down a bit for contact addresses.
OK gunnies, you now have the opportunity to, in a polite, thoughtful manner tell the BATFE to take their latest politically inspired wet dream and stick it where the sun doesn’t shine. Despite the all to understandable temptation to speak bluntly, the thoughtful, polite form for comments would be more appropriate. However you couch your comments, you here have the opportunity to speak. Do not let it pass unused, later on crying about results you are unhappy with.
We already have too many gun laws. We do not need another one. We actually need to roll back many in place today !
If the government keeps going at this,,,,,,,,,,,,we are all going to end up being criminals because of the change of unconstitutional laws. Oh well, the good news is as I get older the thought of going to prison for ‘life’ doesn’t seem like such a long time. Also, I get three hots and a cot and more sex than I’ve had in twenty years. What’s not to like?
In California, it would appear that the intent of the anti-gun cadre is to make it a choice between surrendering firearms or becoming a criminal. Under the Constitution, as I recall, it is illegal to pass a law just to make it possible to prosecute someone.
Up until & after Las Vegas no rifle equipped with a bumpstock has been used in a crime. Besides a discoverable motive for the crime why did he use semiauto rifles when he took more time than it takes to legally take possession of several machine guns? He had the means to acquire belt feed machineguns which would have been much more effective for his evil purpose.
The problem is, to make comments answering their questions, you have to include your name and address. That provides a guide for robbers to know w where to break in and steal them, as well as the rifles to which they are affixed!
What to do to explain how they don’t meet the definition of a machine gun and their other questions of cost and use?
The end result might possibly be the death of some of the robbers, they having been shot by homeowners. Otherwise, concerning the possible risks of commenting, possibly so. For those who fear this, may the chains rest lightly on your shoulders.
BIll:
Not to worry, for the police are there to protect you, aren’t they. Might they serve some other purpose? Say it isn’t so Joe,, say it isn’t so.
According to the GCA of 68 the ATF “could” determine the bump stock to be a machinegun. The ATF is required then to declare a “General Amnesty” for no less than 30 days and no more than 90 days, and must not be concurrent. So if the ATF declares them and since they did provide guidance at the time that the product was lawful they could even be mandated by a court to have one (writ of mandamus). BOTTOM line: General Amnesty is just that….meaning you can register any machinegun not just a bump stock. There is no provision in… Read more »
My prediction is that they will declare them machineguns and ban them completely even though bumpstocks obviously don’t meet the definition required to fall under federal regulations governing machineguns. They know damn well that when they do that, that there will be a good 4yrs or longer of litigation before any court rules on the matter. In the mean time, everyone will be required to destroy them or turn them in…And in no way will they have an amnesty…Also, the judge overseeing any case, will no doubt, be a liberal judge.
now is the time for all good people to wake up and stop allowing the rights in the constitution to be trampled on by the govt. remember that this country was founded on principles not allowed by the previous rulers. we have the opportunity to live up to the constitution for ALL AMERICANS.
@Mr ABJ, I presume that you mean, we should send our comments to the BATFE, communicate with our Congressional and Presidential employees, contribute to candidates that have not been corrupted yet, and vote in the primaries. In fact drag, if necessary, every voting eligible member of our families down to the polling place to vote for the not corrupted yet candidate. I like your enthusiasm.
Welfare for lawyers, the trampling of constitutional rights aside. What the hell is going on in this country seems, sad to note, an ever more appropriate question.To bad such answers as are offered are so inappropriate.
Think that this Amnesty, if declared,would be properly publicized? Forgive me a silly question, I couldn’t resist.
Is the ATF required to make PROMINENT DISPLAY of this notification? I wonder.
laws that were used for someone to purchase this device, were LEGAL AT THE TIME OF PURCHASE what congress is in HOPES of now for ATF to now pass some EX POST FACTO RULING to now make them UNLAWFUL TO OWN. and ALL GUN LAWS ARE UNCONSTITUTIONAL AS HELL. CONGRESS OR THE GOVT HAS NO AUTHORITY TO BAN, RESTRICT, OR CONFISCATE ANY OF THEM. as I’ve suggested here a couple of times now i will again. READ THE DICKACTOF1902.COM this act can NEVER BE REPEALED, AND GUN CONTROL IS NOT ALLOWED. this law also explains the DIFFERENCE IN THE MILITARY,… Read more »
Does the Dick Act still exist? Not certain of the following, but according to Snopes, however you might value their output, the Dick Act has been “interpretated”. Y the courts and also amended by The Congress. Whatever exactly it said when passed, what does it say today. I do not know.
Does the Dick Act still exist? Not certain of the following, but according to Snopes, however you might value their output, the Dick Act has been “interpretated” by the courts and also amended by The Congress. Whatever exactly it said when passed, what does it say today. I do not know.
In my opinion, both the National Firearms Act of 1934 and Gun Control Act of 1968 are unconstitutional under the second amendment and should be abolished. The original intention of the second amendment was to allow individuals to have the same arms as the military in order to protect themselves from a corrupt government that would seek to subdue them. That being said, if you have the money to waste on ammo firing a bumpstock or anything that increases the rate of fire, and you are doing so in a safe manner, go ahead and have fun. A firearm, no… Read more »
@ Todd
This !
Todd.
you absolutely 1000% CORRECT.
folks here need to read this that i have known about for years now, it’s called thedickactof1902.com
it explains the difference in the military, national guard, and militia.
and this act can NEVER BE REPEALED, AND NO GUN CONTROL.
so check it out.
Geez, there is absolutely zero proof that the rifle with the slidefire stock was even used in the massacre. The only FACT about the rifle in question is the media has shown an image of it resting on a bipod in the room. FACT, slidefire stocks don’t work when resting on bipods. Try it. However, as has already been stated, changing the rules to regulate ANY OBJECT that can alter the rate of fire on a firearm, would include your finger. This in effect would require a tax stamp for any multi shot firearm. This would eventually put every semi… Read more »
@TF: You point is absolutely correct. That is one of, well two of the facts that I commented on in my response to the ATF.
The funny part is you can “bump fire” an AR-15 by bouncing a fixed stock off of your thigh as long as you let your trigger finger float a bit. Look it up on You Tube.
I’ve never shot with a bump stock but from what I have gathered it is a real ammo waster and the speed of shooting is not that much faster than normal shooting. Bump stocks are not their priority, their priority is the rifle itself. If they get one camel nose under the tent it won’t take long for the whole camel to be inside the tent. In other words, they will just keep taking gun rights away from us. I have no desire to own a bump stock but I have no interest in giving them any leverage.
Correct. An AR fires once for every pull of the trigger. The Bump Stock fires once for every pull of the trigger. There is no appreciable increase in the firing rate. The mechanics of the firing system (magazine, bolt, trigger, gas block, ejection) is the same. On the other hand, full auto utilizes a sear such that one pull of the trigger leads to multiple shots. The rifle will fire until the trigger is released or the magazine empties.
Whatever your thoughts PLEASE fill out the ATF Form (Link above in article or below):
https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2017/12/26/2017-27898/application-of-the-definition-of-machinegun-to-bump-fire-stocks-and-other-similar-devices#open-comment
If we all stand together we may have an impact.
Sincerely
@Ben, Thank you for the link to the BATFE form. I used it, diplomatically. I also kept the link for later use. And you are right about standing together.
My Pleasure Bill
Ben:
Thought that I had posted the contact link. It does not seem to be there though. Glad to see that you posted it. I sent comment yesterday.
There is no earthly use for a bump stock in a civilian population! Except to make somebody feel macho .I have owned guns over 70 years, Hunter , ran a gun shop 10 years, had a F. F.L. shot competition locally when you tried to hit something rather than how fast you could run thru your ammo. It is not a question how you can convert a gun, it is a question keeping it legal, for the good of mankind.
Rod, no “Earthly” reason for them? Obviously that is not true or they’d not have been invented, sold, bought and used. Based on your theory, we might as well ban any implement that might hurt someone, including paving stones, tree branches, and water – too many people drown each year.
@ Rod the Kid
“It is not a question how you can convert a gun, it is a question keeping it legal, for the good of mankind.”
If you don’t mind,where Constitutionally is that located?
That same opinion could could be used by anti-gunners justify banning semi-autos based on the fact that you can fire much more quickly than with a black powder, bolt or lever action weapon.
We do not want such definition applied to our 2A rights do we?!
Well, Rod, I don’t mind you coming to that conclusion for yourself. So don’t buy one because a man ought to do what he thinks is best for him. I do mind you coming to that conclusion for me (and all the rest of mankind). I conclude that bump stocks are for entertainment, and that makes it perfect for a civilian population.
As for the non civilian population, we do not spray and pray.
Then you object to innovation? Every long gun I have ever owned has been modified in some way or another in order to fill a purpose. I put scopes on them. I modified triggers. Bedded stocks. More. Not one thing I ever did made my firearms more or less deadly. They are simply tools. Some are for hunting game. Some are for use in the line of duty. Some for fun at the range. The Bump Fire stock is no different. It does not turn an AR into an M16/M4. You can, as indicated, do the same thing with string… Read more »
Who, I wonder, defines your qualification, that being “for the good of mankind”?
Just another knee jerk reaction, “feel good for the weak minded” rule with the force and effect of law. Another infringement on our God given Constitutionally enumerated, Civil Rights. And another usurpation of Congress” authority and responsibility to legislate.
When the FCC ignored the citizenry and killed Net Neutrality, the message was clear. The people no longer have control of their government, and it will do whatever it wants to do.
That ‘so-called’ net neutrality was a facade and in name only. It was scheme to control and tax the internet and much more. Google, Facebook Youtube and Twitter have been using it as a censorship tool with great effectiveness
The internet was just fine from its inception until 2015 when Net Neutrality was first implemented. Let free market capitalism do the heavy lifting, not the government! Most of the imbeciles who support Net Neutrality probably don’t even realize it has only been around for 2 years. Good god.
DONE… and with specificity !!!!
I guess they are going to have to cage Jerry Miculek since he can fire an AR with his finger as fast as some full autos. Maybe it’s time to go hunting…after all what exactly IS the 2nd amendment for? Screw these gooberment defacto psychopaths that are trying to run our lives.
I bet he could pop off 100 rnds in under 6-7 secs.
More people have been slaughtered with hamers and trucks than bump fire stocks. When is the government going to ban them?
Yes, there are many ways to fire a semi-auto rifle at higher than average rates. If the issue is rate of fire, since it is still one round per trigger “pull”, will people with faster than normal reflexes be committing felonies when they operate their firearms?
I see how fast competitive shoot, should that be regulated, too?
The next logical progression in this is – what many anti-gunners are already calling for – banning semi-auto firearms. In the words of the anti-gunners, we need to do something, vote these Fascists out of office – on both sides of the aisle.
I believe the bump stock IS a device which converts a semi-automatic firearm, into a machinegun. Listen to the audio tape of the shooting in Las Vegas. You can jerk around with string, your finger, or anything else you want, to try and find a ‘comparison’, but you are on a fool’s errand. And please don’t tell me that people with arthritic fingers, need this device. I am an NRA member, and have been shooting all my life, including in the Marine Corps. I believe the bump stock should be regulated.
Robert C. Hunt, no, bump stocks do not convert semi-auto rifles to automatic. If you truly are an NRA member and firearm owner, you would know that since you should know the definition of semi-auto. Does anyone “need” any device or firearm? One can just lay down and die, too. One doesn’t “need” to live. With about 7 billion people on Earth, we don’t need people to live to your age. Should we ban old people as the Inuits did? That would solve the population, pollution and “global warming” problems. The 2A isn’t about “needs”, it’s about rights, and the… Read more »
@Heed, I believe that you have caught and unmasked a troll. Be warned though, the bag limit is three trolls and six in possession.
I’ve owned a bump stock for a few years now, still haven’t used it however. Here’s what I posted: one infringement on top of another infringement on top of another infringement etc. Unconstitutional acts by unconstitutional agencies are NULL and VOID. Free Americans do NOT need the “blessings” or anything else resembling such, from the ATF, in order to exercise our God Given freedoms. Anyone who says otherwise reveals themselves as those that thirst after the lives, liberty and property of others
If the government can regulate bump stocks, it can regulate trigger pull weight or muzzle velocity or whatever. Very few give a hoot about bump stocks but here’s the real issue. The U.S. Congress won’t buy such a bill because it’s a very poor investment and states should come to grips with it. In fact all gun laws are poor investments. Administration of them costs tens of millions, accomplishes nothing and annoys the most lawful, peaceable segment of our population. Bump stocks are just part of the leftist howl heard after every shooting. The bump stock is only rarely seen… Read more »
“CRIMINALS DON’T OBEY LAWS. ONLY PEACEABLE, LAWFUL CITIZENS OBEY LAWS”
Criminals write the laws. Being peaceable has nothing to do with obeying the edicts of a group of people of such low morals and suspect character that they choose to go into government. I do not cause harm to anyone else through force or fraud. But I definitely do not “Obey”.
Being an NRA member means you have the capacity to mail in a fee. Congratulations. If you had a thorough understanding of the BATFE definitions of what constitutes a fully-automatic weapon you would realize you are incorrect. No disrespect intended. Thank you for your service.
@TO: “Being an NRA member means you have the capacity to mail in a fee. Congratulations. If you had a thorough understanding of the BATFE definitions of what constitutes a fully-automatic weapon you would realize you are incorrect. No disrespect intended. Thank you for your service.”
I think most of us here are thinking more differently buttttttt I’ll just speak for myself. Specifically, how is “Gene Ralno” comment incorrect?
No one needs a device which can type faster than they can cogitate. Such devices serve no good benefit as it has been repeatedly proven that rapid wordsmithing leads to trouble.
I just sent in an email with my opinions to the ATF, my only comment is that as per my recall is that sense 1930 no one in this county has or has permission to have an automatic weapon unless you go through a two year waiting list from the ATF and then only if you have an FFL License a bump stock dose not make an automatic weapon it only helps you shoot a little faster but you still have to pull the trigger each time. But when they try to pass a law which is the case in… Read more »
Robert:
In polite terms, your belief is wrong. As to Bump Stocks and your belief that they should be regulated, take a look at the history of the antics of the anti gun movement and consider the following. Where does the “regulation” you advocate end?