Regulation of Bump Stocks: ATF Prepares to Issue Final Rule Update

Author: Teresa G. Ficaretta, Esq., [email protected], 301-353-3558; Ficaretta Legal Services, LLC, www.ficarettalegal.com

Slide Fire SSAR-15 Mod Bump Fire Stock Pistol Grip
Regulation of Bump Stocks: ATF Prepares to Issue Final Rule

USA – -(Ammoland.com)- On March 29, 2018, the Department of Justice published in the Federal Register a notice of proposed rulemaking that would clarify the Administration’s position that “bump fire” stocks are “machineguns” regulated under the National Firearms Act (“NFA”) and the Gun Control Act (“GCA”). The comment period for the proposal closed on June 27, 2018. This bulletin provides an update on the progress made by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (“ATF”) in reviewing the comments and the process for issuing a final rule.

Summary of Bump Stock Proposal

The FLS Bulletin dated March 26, 2018, provides a thorough summary of the proposals in the notice of proposed rulemaking (“NPRM”). Briefly, the NPRM outlines the October 1, 2017, shooting in Las Vegas, Nevada, in which the shooter used AR-type rifles with attached bump-stock-type devices. The notice states that the devices were readily available in the commercial marketplace through online sales directly from the manufacturer and through multiple retailers. To address this threat to public safety, the NPRM proposes amending the definition of “machinegun” in regulations in 27 C.F.R. §§ 447.11, 478.11, and 479.11 to add the following language:

For purposes of this definition, the term “automatically” as it modifies “shoots, is designed to shoot, or can be readily restored to shoot,” means functioning as the result of a self-acting or self-regulating mechanism that allows the firing of multiple rounds through a single function of the trigger; and “single function of the trigger” means a single pull of the trigger. The term “machinegun” includes bump-stock-type devices, i.e., devices that allow a semiautomatic firearm to shoot more than one shot with a single pull of the trigger by harnessing the recoil energy of the semiautomatic firearm to which it is affixed so that the trigger resets and continues firing without additional physical manipulation of the trigger by the shooter.

The NPRM would overrule prior inconsistent ATF classifications of bump-stock-type devices so that all qualifying devices would be regulated as machineguns. Because machineguns manufactured after 1986 may not be lawfully possessed by persons other than law enforcement and the military, once the final rule is effective all bump-stock-type devices in the hands of consumers would be contraband. The NPRM states that consumers would have the option of destroying the devices or delivering or mailing them to the nearest ATF office. Any such devices manufactured or imported after the effective date of the final rule must be marked, registered, transferred pursuant to ATF approval, and distributed only to law enforcement and the military.

Comments on the Proposed Rule

During the comment period ATF received over 180,000 comments. The regulations.gov website indicates that 130,766 comments were submitted through the rulemaking portal. The remainder of the comments were submitted to ATF via fax, mail, or other delivery. Comments were submitted by members of the firearms industry, industry trade groups, special interest groups, law firms, Members of Congress, veterans, victims of firearms violence, and consumers. ATF officials advise that comments supporting the proposal to ban bump-stock-type devices outnumber the comments opposing the proposal.

Comments supporting the regulation of bump-stock-type devices state the following reasons:

  • The devices present a threat to public safety;
  • Lives would be saved if the devices are banned;
  • There is no need for consumers to have the devices because they do not improve the accuracy of firearms or provide enhancements relating to sporting use;
  • The devices are military in nature and should not be allowed for civilians; and
  • The devices allow people to circumvent the ban on civilian possession of machineguns.

Comments opposing a ban on bump-stock-type devices fall within the following general categories:

  • The devices are only accessories and should not be regulated as machineguns;
  • ATF was correct in its prior (non-machinegun) classifications of the devices and should stick with those rather than bowing to political pressure;
  • ATF has no legal authority to regulate the devices under the current statutory definition of “machinegun;
  • Attempts to regulate bump-stock-type devices as machineguns are unconstitutional; and
  • Rather than banning the devices through regulations, Congress should enact legislation.

Process for Issuing Final Rule

The Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. § 551 et seq., requires federal agencies to publish in the Federal Register a general notice of proposed rulemaking and give interested persons an opportunity to submit comments thereon. Agencies must consider and address all comments in the final rule. Even if the comments are primarily negative, agencies are free to adopt the proposals in the NPRM as long as the final rule addresses the comments and articulates a rational basis for the proposals adopted.

ATF officials advise they have detailed additional employees to the Office of Regulatory Affairs to assist in reviewing the comments. The agency hopes to complete their review and forward a draft final rule to the Department of Justice within the near future. Review at Justice is likely to take several months, then the final rule will be submitted to the Office of Management and Budget for review.

Pursuant to an Executive Order issued in 1993, the Office of Management and Budget has 90 days to review a final rule. The 90-day time period may be extended once for an additional 30-day period. Once OMB approves the final rule, it will be published in the Federal Register. The Administrative Procedure Act requires that the final rule be published not less than 30 days before its effective date, unless the agency articulates “good cause” for making it effective sooner. If ATF publishes a final rule banning bump-stock-type devices and requiring consumers to destroy them, the agency may delay the effective date beyond 30 days. This would afford possessors more time to comply with the destroy or surrender requirements. Consumers who continue to possess unregistered bump-stock-type devices after the effective date will risk criminal prosecution and/or seizure and forfeiture of the devices.

Litigation Challenging the Final Rule

Another provision of the Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 706) sets forth the scope of judicial review when aggrieved parties file suit challenging an agency’s final rule. The statute allows a reviewing court to set aside a final rule if it is arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, otherwise not in accordance with law, or in excess of statutory authority.

There are rumors in the firearms community of interest in filing suit challenging a final rule banning bump-stock-type devices. Domestic manufacturers of the devices would have an interest in challenging a ban because of the economic impact. Consumers who currently possess the devices and are required to destroy them or face criminal prosecution would also have standing to file suit. Finally, firearms industry groups and special interest groups representing sportsmen could participate in litigation challenging a regulation banning the devices.

Reviewing courts applying the arbitrary and capricious standard generally give significant deference to federal agencies. Federal courts will set aside a regulation only if there is a clear error of judgment, the agency failed to adequately explain its decision, or the decision clearly exceeds the scope of the statute. Plaintiffs challenging a bump-stock ban will likely have an uphill battle. Nonetheless, litigation challenging the regulation could result in a preliminary injunction that maintains the status quo and restrains ATF from implementing the regulation pending judicial review. If so, the Administration would be prevented from banning the devices until a court rules on the merits of the case.

Conclusion

The Department of Justice and ATF have expended considerable effort in rulemaking that will likely result in banning bump-stock-type devices. Once the final rule is effective, manufacturers of the devices may be driven out of business, as there is little or no interest in such devices by the military and law enforcement. Consumers who currently possess the devices will be required to destroy or surrender them by a specified date or risk criminal prosecution. The final rule will result in a significant economic impact on these parties.

The benefit, according to the Department of Justice, is enhanced public safety.


Ficaretta Legal ServicesThis bulletin is for informational purposes only and is not intended to be construed or used as legal advice. Receipt of this bulletin does not establish an attorney-client relationship.

Please contact me with questions about this bulletin at [email protected] or (301)358-3553.

Teresa G. Ficaretta
Attorney at Law
Direct Dial: 301.358.3553
Admitted in Maryland and D.C.
[email protected]

Ficaretta Legal Services, LLC
15480 Annapolis Road, Suite 202, #419
Bowie, MD 20715

www.ficarettalegal.com

This message is from a law firm and is intended only for the use of the Addressee(s) named above. This message may contain CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION WHICH ALSO MAY BE LEGALLY PRIVILEGED. If you are not the intended recipient of this message, or the employee or agent responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use, dissemination, distribution or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please immediately notify the sender by telephone and delete the message and all attachments.

70 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
billydean
billydean
2 years ago

This is just another step to make it easier for them to ban all guns if they so choose to. People better wake up and fight this decision..see how easy it is for the liberals to take away our Gun rights with a stroke of the pen. Next thing they will ban all Ar’s….

mr. Smith
mr. Smith
2 years ago
Reply to  billydean

I am a gun owner. Why is the Liberal accused of this ban? We have Conservative president and Congress. So how is the Liberal able to pass this level of legislation?

PC Web
PC Web
3 years ago

Thanks for sharing !

Capt Ed McCourt USMC (ret)
Capt Ed McCourt USMC (ret)
3 years ago

Soooooooo, Happy I live in Arizona!

Semper Fi
Machete Eddie

Blade
Blade
3 years ago

So just this mean rubberbands won’t be banned or not? Seems to work as well if not better than a bumpstock for some of us.

Stan
Stan
3 years ago
Reply to  Blade

Attorney General Sessions wrote in the proposal that rubber bands and belt loops would be legal. Real physics requires you to pull the trigger for every shot. No one should ever comply with a law that is based on “movie physics” as if the bump stock some how pulls the trigger for you. Changing the definition of machine gun to this movie magic definition is either a pure lack of knowledge or a clever fake attempt to appease the anti gun minds knowing the physics is false.

You Guess
You Guess
3 years ago

The whole issue is NOT bump stocks or no bump stocks. The REAL ISSUE is “they” have NO RIGHT whatsoever to tell law abiding people, (NOT STRAWMEN), what they may and may not have or do. They are just arrogant people who, somehow are deranged enough to actually believe that they, as human beings, (sometimes legally defined as “monsters”), have the right to “parent” other grown human beings, only because they have made up some lame document called Parens Patriae, which they THINK somehow gives them the right to be our “Mommy and Daddy.” HOW ARROGANT IS THAT!!! ALL OF… Read more »

Willard
Willard
3 years ago

To make a point, please do not threaten the Trump administration with voting for someone else on this topic. As a non-politician, Trump is still mired in the swamp and cleaning it up as he finds the responsible gators – the leakers to the fake news media, those even now employed by those media, are still enjoying security clearances and are leaking information which is spun to attack Trump. Every American service man and woman who had a security clearance and was discharged was debriefed and the clearance ended with signed acceptance that no information learned could be divulged for… Read more »

Jim Macklin
Jim Macklin
3 years ago
Reply to  Willard

President Trump was opposed by Democrats and many RINOs, to say nothing about the communists, etc. He is draining te swamp as fast as he can with opposition from too many in Congress [ from both Parties ]. The ship of state is afloat in the swamp and there are so many leakers the bilge pump is barely able to keep up with the onslaught. IF the 2018 elections go well, President Trump will appoint and the Senate will confirm more Constitutional Justices who will work with Justice Thomas and they will consider ALL the gun laws from 1934 to… Read more »

Wild Bill
Wild Bill
3 years ago
Reply to  Willard

@Willard, I disagree with your first sentence, and can not get by it. I think that we should pressure the President and pressure him hard. This is the perfect issue to slap down the BATFE swamp creatures and slap them down hard. BATFE is a sub agency of the Dept of the Treasury. President Trump can order the Secretary of the Treasury, and the Sec. Tres. can give orders to the BATFE.
Write, call, email!

R GUNN
R GUNN
3 years ago

I can’t imagine an owner of a bump-stock destroying it or turning it in. Banning them will simply make criminals out of law-abiding citizens.

Tommie Thompson
Tommie Thompson
3 years ago
Reply to  R GUNN

And I’m sure that criminals and unbalanced individuals will obey this new law too! After all, it’s the law!
What a bunch of Crackhead Idiots!

Nottinghill
Nottinghill
3 years ago

There is real hope here… I see and feel it in the discourse. People writing the president as they should, as everyone of us should also do.
Brothers and sisters… Thanks!!!

Nottinghill
Nottinghill
3 years ago
Reply to  Nottinghill

https://gunpowdermagazine.com/gun-owners-call-for-nixing-nics-and-taking-the-fbi-to-court/
Gun Owners Call for Nixing NICS and Taking the FBI to Court

Richard L.
Richard L.
3 years ago

We need to start using Thomas Jefferson’s wisdom in this battle whenever we talk to Politicians.
“The remedy for evil men is not the abrogation of the rights of law abiding citizens. The remedy for evil men is the gallows.” Thomas Jefferson

Johnny
Johnny
3 years ago

I’m a gun collector and really have no use for one of these. But there are thousands and thousands of people that own these that are hurting absolutely no one! And having lots of fun with them. ” We The People ” are getting sick of these regulations that the goverment are placing on us law abiding citizen! And I know soon the “People” are going to take up Arms and fix the problems of this over reaching goverment. This day is coming and surprised it hasn’t happened yet. ” We The People ” are the largest armed military in… Read more »

LIBERTY FOR THE PEOPLE
LIBERTY FOR THE PEOPLE
3 years ago
Reply to  Johnny

THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNTIED STATE OF AMERICA PROTECTED THE BUMP STOCK BY THE WORDS TYRANT. NOW HOW WOULD A TYRANT WIN IF NOT TO BAND THE BUMP STOCK?
THE BUMP STOCK ARE PROTECTED UNDER THE CONSTITUTIONS OF THE UNITED STATE OF AMERICAN PLEASE READ AND STUDY THE TYRANT WORDS. THANK YOU.

truckman
truckman
3 years ago

I hope we can get this in court if they ban these things because they are legel as far as that goes according to the constitution we are suppose to be able to own any gun the miltary has to defend ourselfs aganset a goverment gone wrong

Neg
Neg
3 years ago
Reply to  truckman

They use the term “single pull of the trigger” to represent a machine gun. I see they do not understand how the bump stock works. If used as designed it allows the rapid multiple depression of the trigger. The AR will not fire multiple times with a single pull. This needs to go to court to have the definition/wording corrected and the legality cleared

William Hamilton
William Hamilton
3 years ago

The following is what I sent to POTUS, I suggest you do the same: “Hon Donald Trump, If you let the BATFE ban bump stocks, we firearms owners will not support the next election. Will you let the BATFE cripple your presidency? No Second Amendment. No second term.? Primary Concern…The 2nd Amendment was created to provide “The People” the means to counter the forces of restrain a tyrannical government, and had NOTHING to do with the sport of hunting. It has everything to do with equalizing the effectiveness of “The People” in any engagement with the forces of a tyrannical… Read more »

Jim Macklin
Jim Macklin
3 years ago

Your suggestion is guaranteed to get anti-gun democrat- socialists elected. The President is not a dictator and there are too many democrats and RINOs in Congress.
The SCOYUS has ducked many decisions over the last 200 years. They try to limit their opinions to as little as possible because they don’t want to make changes with unplanned consequences.
But your ultimatum of “we won’t vote for you” is bad politics and can only result in destruction.

1776 Patriot
1776 Patriot
3 years ago

While I appreciate your straight-ahead, take no prisoners, thinking, it’s best to keep in mind the old saw, “Politics is the art of the possible”, which means, “It’s not about what’s right or what’s best. It’s about what you can actually get done”. It’s associated with , a political philosophy of setting pragmatism over your ideological goals. Getting everything you want is impossible, and often, you have to severely compromise in order to get anything you want at all. But in the end, refusing to compromise means you get nothing whatsoever. President Trump is bound by the same realities as… Read more »

Wild Bill
Wild Bill
3 years ago
Reply to  1776 Patriot

, I did not take Mr. Hamilton’s polite missive as an ultimatum. I think that the pres., if it ever gets to him, won’t either. He is merely expressing his opinion to his elected official. Nothing could be more quintessentially American!

Richard L.
Richard L.
3 years ago

Read the ruling by the District Court of Illinois in United States Vs. Rock Island Armory ( The case was dismissed against RIA) . http://constitution.org/2ll/court/fed/us_v_rock_island.htm The enactment of 18 U.S.C. § 922(o) in 1986 removed the constitutional legitimacy of registration as an aid to tax collection. This is because the government interprets and enforces § 922(o) to disallow registration, and refuses to collect the tax. Farmer v. Higgins, 907 F.2d 1041, 1042-44 (11th Cir.1990), cert. denied, 498 U.S. 1047, 111 S.Ct. 753, 112 L.Ed.2d 773 (1991). Thus, § 922(o) undercut the constitutional basis of registration which had been the rule… Read more »

RON K.
RON K.
3 years ago

And when they say all legal registered Sub and Machineguns are contraband And must be turned in or destroy what will happen?When they can change this they can look and change all.And don’t give me that Senate and act of Congress b.s.That will come to pass also. like May1986 did. They just wait for the timing…SAD DAY IN AMERICA.

Jim Macklin
Jim Macklin
3 years ago

Does a bump stock function without the secondary function of the person operating the trigger by the action of pushing the firearm forward to pull the trigger the second or subsequent times? There is no return recoil spring. A one armed person cannot operate a bump stock. It takes two operations to fire the firearm. The trigger finger pulls the trigger and the gun fires and recoil collapses the firearm, lifting the trigger finger off of the trigger. The trigger resets. Then the person pushes the gun forward and the trigger contacts the trigger and the trigger is operated a… Read more »

Jimmy Killian
Jimmy Killian
3 years ago
Reply to  Jim Macklin

Exactly!
Excellent.

James Kennedy
James Kennedy
3 years ago

My concern regarding the language of the “Final Rule Notice” is that: 1. Primary Concern…The 2nd Amendment was created to provide “The People” the means to counter the forces of restrain a tyrannical government, and had NOTHING to do with the sport of hunting. It has everything to do with equalizing the effectiveness of “The People” in any engagement with the forces of a tyrannical government. 2. The bump stock, by itself, does NOT do anything. It is simply an accessory. The action of the bump stock allows the operator to hold their trigger finger in a defined position and… Read more »

Wild Bill
Wild Bill
3 years ago
Reply to  James Kennedy

Kennedy, I concur. Now take the time and trouble to tell the pres. at whitehouse.gov/contact or just write him a letter. We need to educate him up to the fact that five million voters need not support him.

Jim Macklin
Jim Macklin
3 years ago
Reply to  Wild Bill

Wild Bill says: July 24, 2018 at 4:33 PM @JAMES Kennedy, I concur. Now take the time and trouble to tell the pres. at whitehouse.gov/contact or just write him a letter. We need to educate him up to the fact that five million voters need not support him.” So just who do you know that you can support who has a chance to be elected? There are Primary Elections going on NOW. In November if the solid pro-Second Amendment candidates, probably Republicans and not RINOs, then President Trump will be able to to what you want. But supporting THIS President… Read more »

Wild Bill
Wild Bill
3 years ago
Reply to  Jim Macklin

Macklin, Please come to our monthly poker game. It is penny ante, but if you come down we will be glad to increase the the table stakes.

Wild Bill
Wild Bill
3 years ago
Reply to  James Kennedy

Kennedy, The only way out of this is to educate Trump up to the fact that five million gun owners do not have to support him. Then there will be no gun accessory ban. whitehouse.gov/contact or just write an old fashioned letter.

Jim Macklin
Jim Macklin
3 years ago
Reply to  Wild Bill

And if gun owners do as you suggest and vote fore somebody else, just who would that be? Trump is attacked daily by the NYT, WaPo, Democrats and some Republicans. He has a slim margin officially from his party. In fact President Trump Is doing a miraculous job getting Justices selected and confirmed to the SCOTUS and judges to the lower courts. But schumer is slow walking everything. Letters and phone calls published and sent to the President telling him to do miracles or you’ll vote for somebody else just encourage schumer to hold out and wait for you to… Read more »

Wild Bill
Wild Bill
3 years ago
Reply to  Jim Macklin

Macklin, What you write is accurate, but I did not suggest that we not vote for Trump. The Trump administration wants what every administration wants … a second term.
I am saying that we educate the president to the fact that if gun owners do not get what they want, then he may not get what he wants.
The local paper asked me, the other day, Was I still a Trump supporter. I said that I’d like to vote for Trump again, but Trump is letting the BATFE betray American citizens.

Jim Macklin
Jim Macklin
3 years ago
Reply to  Wild Bill

WE, all of us including President Trump want a second term so he can replace as soon as RBG and Sonia Maria Sotomayor realize that they are looking at 6 more years and retire. Then President Trump and the SCOTUS will fix the swamp.
But “threats” will be heard and broadcast by the leftwing MSM and the swamp will rise.

Wild Bill
Wild Bill
3 years ago
Reply to  Wild Bill

Macklin, I did not suggest that we threaten anyone, either. I wrote that we educate the president, and I recommend firm but diplomatic language.
BATFE is the very essence of the swamp that you want to drain. BATFE is just about to set more gun banning precedent, based upon clear and obvious lies. I think that this is the exact time to push the swamp drainer to drain the BATFE portion of the swamp.

Jim Macklin
Jim Macklin
3 years ago
Reply to  Wild Bill

In an election you can do three things: Stay home Vote for the Democrat or Libertarian or Vote for President Trump. Not voting at all is in effect a vote for the Democrat. As much as I’d support some Libertarians [ not all are pro-Second Amendment] the effect is a vote cast for a Democrat. The Libertarians don’t have a platform and a campaign except every four years. You have to spend times, 24/7/365×4 to become a national party that can gather more than 7% of the votes. 7% is enough to swing the election to the Democrat. History Lesson:… Read more »

Jim Macklin
Jim Macklin
3 years ago
Reply to  James Kennedy

Shotgun trap shooters used “release triggers” for a while. The idea was to control flinching. The ATA banned release triggers as a safety hazard. The binary trigger is the dumbest idea I can think of. Any combat soldier knows that ammo must be conserved and unless you’re just trying to suppress the enemy, accurate single shots that hit the target conserve ammo and increase combat effectiveness. Maybe that is a significant difference between Special Forces and Seals and ordinary serving soldiers? Being old and poor I’d rather spend the money a bump stock costs on a few more PMAGS od… Read more »

Mark
Mark
3 years ago

The Justice Department Storm Troopers are on the verge of making ALL bumpstocks illegal and FELONS of all owners that fail to relinquish said illegal bumpstocks WITHOUT COMPENSATION. Or will you be one of the many on this site and others that have in the past beaten their chests and made statements, and I paraphrase, “THEY CAN TAKE MY BUMPSTOCK FROM MY COLD DEAD HANDS”!!! I doubt any of the bumpstock blowhards will follow through on that hollow threat. PLEASE let me know if I miss the story of a “Bumpstock Patriot” going down in a blaze of spring actuated… Read more »

Wild Bill
Wild Bill
3 years ago
Reply to  Mark

Here is what I have been sending to the POTUS:
“Hon Donald Trump,
If you let the BATFE ban bump stocks, we firearms owners will not support the next election. Will you let the BATFE cripple your presidency?
No Second Amendment. No second term.?

Bob
Bob
3 years ago

The problem that I have with this goes beyond the “bump-stock” issue. The words “self-acting or self-regulating” concern me to no end. This phrasing sounds like another slippery slope to banning any and all semi-auto’s. According to dictionary-dot-com, self-regulating means: 1. adjusting, ruling, or governing itself without outside interference; operating or functioning without externally imposed controls or regulations. 2. functioning automatically. Self-acting means: acting by itself; automatic. The bump-stock does not act alone. It takes outside manipulation to cause it to fire in a more rapid manner. It never fires automatically and can only fire more rapidly by manual manipulation… Read more »

Paul Fitch
Paul Fitch
3 years ago

Article I, Section 9 states “No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed”. This would prohibit Congress from making a law to apply retroactively. Hence, any “bump-stock” legally purchased cannot, by the Constitution, be made illegal.
This clause in the Constitution was put there because the British would make up laws to punish people for things they didn’t like after the person had done them and then would put them in jail or hang them for the offense..

Docduracoat
Docduracoat
3 years ago
Reply to  Paul Fitch

Paul, You misunderstand ex post facto. It was legal to buy bumpstocks in the past. Even after the ban, it will continue to be legal to have bought them in the past. No one can prosecute you for your past legal conduct. The bumpstocks have been declared contraband. You will be required to destroy your legally acquired property once the ban goes into force. That has been thru the courts several times when cocaine was declared contraband. No one was prosecuted for buying cocaine when it was legal. People had to get rid of their legally bought cocaine, and later… Read more »

Quatermain
Quatermain
3 years ago

“the October 1, 2017, shooting in Las Vegas, Nevada, in which the shooter used AR-type rifles with attached bump-stock-type devices” Has anyone seen ONE verified chain of custody projectile fired from one of Paddocks rifles? Just ONE?

Matt in Oklahoma
Matt in Oklahoma
3 years ago
Reply to  Quatermain

Nah and even if they did present evidence of anything in Vegas at this point no one believes it.

Jimmy Killian
Jimmy Killian
3 years ago
Reply to  Quatermain

Exactly!
Excellent.
NO! The investigation is ongoing. Ballistics analysis is not available for reported and the condition of recovered Firearms is also Relevant.Iffact it is probable increased barrel temperature may have seized the function of the Firearms.

Doug
Doug
3 years ago

What happened to the clause in the Constitution that says the people will be duly compensated for property surrendered? How much is the government going to pay the people for these Legally owned devices? Some people bought these legally for close to $400 and now they are wanting them to “surrender or destroy” them without any due compensation?

Mark
Mark
3 years ago
Reply to  Doug

Zero, Zip, Nada. “No money for you” says the Bumpstock Nazi!!!

Docduracoat
Docduracoat
3 years ago
Reply to  Doug

You are referring to the takings clause in the 5th amendment of the bill of rights in the US constitution. This has been adjudicated to only cover actual seizing of your property and using it for the public good, or giving it to someone else. Like when they take your house to build a bridge or they give it to a developer to build a mall. When the declare legally acquired property contraband they do not have to compensate you as they are not seizing your property. Like when cocaine was declared illegal. Probably every house in America had some… Read more »

Wild Bill
Wild Bill
3 years ago

The devices do not present a threat to public safety because the devices diminish the accuracy of firearms making it far more difficult to hit any target. There is no research or even a modicum of evidence to indicate that lives would be saved if the devices are banned. BATFE is abusing its discretion to attempt to determine what any American citizen needs or does not need relating to sporting use or any other use. The devices are not military in nature because no military in the world uses them or has ever used them, and BATFE usurps the authority… Read more »

vab
vab
3 years ago

The one thing that everyone is ignoring is this:
Only CONGRESS has the Constitutional authority to make, modify, or change laws. This new RULE is changing a definition in the National Firearms Act of 1934. I fail to understand how a federal agency can change the wording in a LAW. Please…someone explain to me how it can be that the ATF is now a member of Congress and can do something only Congress has the authority to do.

Wild Bill
Wild Bill
3 years ago
Reply to  vab

@vab, They can’t. Congress wants them to. The POTUS is ignorant and needs educating. The S. Ct is quietly uncommitted. BATFE could be gone with the stroke of a pen. BATFE is a creation of the Dept. of the Treasury. Every elitist in America wants BATFE to control us even beyond any authority that it may have. Please join my “No Second Amendment. No second term.” campaign. I send two messages per day to whitehouse.gov/contact. If the 30,000 people per day that visit ammoland would each send two messages to Donald Trump per day, then that extra 60,000 messages per… Read more »

Mark
Mark
3 years ago
Reply to  vab

A LAW is different from an ACT. An ACT DOES NOT require an Act of Congress & the National Firearms ACT is just that, an ACT, so “they” can do whatever the hell they want. Sorry Charlie…

Wild Bill
Wild Bill
3 years ago
Reply to  Mark

@mac, “An Act” is short hand for an Act of Congress. An act is what the thing is before being signed by the President. Then the Act becomes a statute, but the statute still may not be “law”. If the S.CT says that the statute is contrary to some provision of the Constitution, then the statute is not law, but it is said to be null and void. I believe that the NFA is an Act of Congress; made into a statute by the signature of the POTUS; and is not law because the NFA offends our Second Amendment Civil… Read more »

U R Lackingcommonsense
U R Lackingcommonsense
3 years ago

The current ATFE ruling states that a weapon may not fire more than once per trigger pull.
That is exactly what is happening with bump stocks, aka slide fires. One round per trigger pull.
The ruling as it currently stands is adequate.

I personally know people that can do this without the sliding stock, just by merely holding their trigger finger stiff and pushing the weapon forward, allowing it to “bounce” against their shoulder.
Is the ATFE going to ban their fingers, hands or perhaps the entire arm?

Gunny1951
Gunny1951
3 years ago

@UR lacking- You may not be aware of this fact, but Bancy Pelosi and Diane Feinstein have (jokingly of course!) thrown out there the possibility of requiring trained, highly skilled individuals with the ability to “fast fire” a firearm might be subject to surgical modification of tendons and ligaments so as to remove the ability to do so, or possibly tattoo and register their fingers. They were talking about people like Jerry Miculek, and other highly skilled sportsmen. These leftist scumbags have no moral boundaries and given an opportunity will never stop in their quest to disarm ALL Americans. Their… Read more »

Gregory
Gregory
3 years ago

As the ATF had formerly ruled them as legal if they now change their standing they must provide just compensation as required under the 5th Amendment or grandfather those made and sold before the rule takes affect.

1776 Patriot
1776 Patriot
3 years ago

How about instead we just make the ATF illegal?

Wild Bill
Wild Bill
3 years ago
Reply to  1776 Patriot

@1776 Pat, The statutes that the Batfees’ enforce are already contrary to the Civil Rights of Americans that are clearly stated and enumerated in the US Constitution. The false authority to make rules “with the force and effect of law” clearly usurps the exclusive authority to legislate given to Congress. Every Congress, S. Ct., POTUS, and AGUS or Director of the Treasury since 1934 could have made this all go away. Our every branch of government wants us disarmed. Elitists want us disarmed. The church wants us disarmed. Every other country on this planet wants us disarmed. Trump is the… Read more »

Matt in Oklahoma
Matt in Oklahoma
3 years ago
Reply to  Wild Bill

Unfortunately Trump isn’t for but instead totally against bumpstocks. He sold out, the NRA sold out so its just another day where water is wet, sky is blue and politicians don’t support. We aren’t being attacked as hard but we aren’t gaining much ground either. Look at the status of Nationwide Cary and that Suppressor Bill.

Gunny1951
Gunny1951
3 years ago

@Matt in Oklahoma- with you on this. I was highly disappointed with NRA stance on this issue as well as POTUS’. OOTUS has also softened on his campaign stance re: MASR’s. I have written and called NRA and whitehouse.gov concerning these issues. Wild bill has assessed the whole problem with the bureaucratic “batfee” completely correctly. It was created and allowed to remain piwerful by Congress’ willingness to trample our Constitution. All in the name of so-called “public safety”. If we do not stand up to be counted what more can we expect. Everyone I know wrote or emailed objections to… Read more »

Docduracoat
Docduracoat
3 years ago

President Trump has done more gun control in one year than President Obama did in 8 years!
I love Trump but he and the republicans take us gun people for granted.
What are we going to do…vote Democrat?
We need more good 2 A supporting Supreme Court judges.
It just makes me angry that bump stocks and silencer deregulation and national concealed carry are gone.
And the president supports red flag gun seizure laws!
President Obama would have loved those laws also.

Wild Bill
Wild Bill
3 years ago
Reply to  Docduracoat

, it isn’t done yet. What we can do is email and write to the POTUS to educate him up to the fact that five million of us voting firearms owners do not have to support him.
Without our vote in the midterms the libtards could cripple his presidency, I don’t think that he understands that.

BILL
BILL
3 years ago

Way to stick together, stand up and fight there gun owners. 180,000 comments, from how many gun owners? That’s pathetic. That’s why we will ultimately loose, because we can not stand TOGETHER.
I don’t own a bumpshock. I am not interested in bumpshock. I am a hunter. I’m a waterfowler. I’m a collector. AR 15s are ugly, blah, blah blah. And on and on and on and on.
Ever notice how dems and the left stick together no matter what? That’s how they get shit done fools. Decided we liose.

Allen Thompson
Allen Thompson
3 years ago

I think that everyone who wants these bumpstocks banned should leave them alone. First no one in the media and two thirds of the population didnt even know what they were r that they even existed untill that idiot in vegas used one. Leave them alone and dont ban them.

Nottinghill
Nottinghill
3 years ago

‘Red State Nightmares and Blue (derangement) State Wet Dreams’ or ‘How I Started to Love My Illegalized Accessories and Got Some Sleep’.by Dr. Strangelove.

James E Worrell
James E Worrell
3 years ago

Why can’t you purchase a tax stamp to possess the bump stock like you can purchase to possess a machine gun?

Doug
Doug
3 years ago

So you want to pay a $200 tax stamp and be required to get permission from the ATF any time you want to keep it anywhere other than your address they have on the “Tax Stamp” which takes several months to get.

Docduracoat
Docduracoat
3 years ago
Reply to  Doug

Yes.
I would gladly pay the $200 fee and wait 8 months if I get to keep my bump stock.
I have two of them and use them all the time.
After this rule goes into effect I will be forced to destroy them
Better to pay a fee and wait than to destroy them!

Nottinghill
Nottinghill
3 years ago

not to mention… IT’S A [email protected] ACCESSORY! Suppressors, short barrelled rifles and many others are still stuck in NFA with such thinking.