Diane Feinstein won't settle for regulation. She wants to ban sales and ownership of bump fire stocks.

The NRA is catching hell for its apparent acquiescence to the effort to restrict the sale of bump fire stocks. As Wayne LaPierre stated last night, NRA merely wants to “look at that and see if it’s in compliance with federal law, and it’s worthy of additional regulation.” But merely allowing the ATF to reverse itself and regulate these currently legal accessories under the Gun Control Act of 1968 or, more likely, the Nation Firearms Act, isn’t going to fly with DiFi.

Senator Diane Feinstein, the sponsor of a bill that would outlaw the sale and possession of bump fire stocks — making it a felony to own one — won’t be satisfied with mere regulation. In a statement issued today, Di makes it clear that she won’t settle for anything short of an outright ban.

Diane Feinstein's statement on the need to ban bump fire stocks.

Di obviously sees putting bump fire sales under NFA regulation as a weak, half measure. The NRA is angling for a regulatory “solution” to the bump fire question rather than a legislative one. Who will prevail? Pop some popcorn and watch what happens.

92 Responses to Feinstein: ATF Can’t Regulate Bump Fire Stocks…We Need a Law

  1. There it is: as angry as we are with the NRA
    over this perceived betrayal, their move has been to undercut this much-more-difficult-to-undo law that the gun bigots are pushing.
    Something will happen: I’ve decided a rule change is better than a law… we need to choose our battles. Sux, yes, but that’s why we hate politics.

    • Feinstein’s lying when she saying the ATF can’t regulate them. They have the authority. What really worries the witch is the fact that the ATF has already approved them and may do so again if asked to re-review the matter. I know one – leaving this in the hands of self-serving, lying politicians will lead to their ban. Just look at how Ryan and the other RINO cowards are back pedaling.

      • Under the COTUS, they have NO AUTHORITY.

        The rule of law is a farce. There exists only men with power and guns. You Obey one group or the other out of fear.

        • Finally somebody gets it. People keep confusing legality and morality. Your morality may coincide with legality, but when it doesn’t, you have to kneel to the jackbooted thugs. You just can’t win unless being suicidal, in which case you’ll take some of them with you.

          Been that way since the beginning of time.

          Democracy is overrated. A strong constitution that cannot be modified and infringed whatsoever is highly underrated.

        • James in AZ:
          Democracy IS highly overrated. That’s why the founding fathers of this country called it “mob rule”, and “the tyranny of the majority”. Its all in the debates and the federalist papers. So, after much debate, they settled instead on a Constitutional Republic. You know, as in: “… and to the REPUBLIC for which it stands…”, or “The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government”. -US Constitution, article 4, section 4

    • No, it hasn’t. They’re giving her law credibility because RINO’s and Democrats alike can vote for the ban and say “Even the NRA supports banning these!”. You’re suffering from Stockholm syndrome if you think that the NRA is trying to help is in any way.

  2. I’d rather see ATF regulation. The dems will add riders, possibly even something like a standard capacity magazine ban or a limit on firearms purchases. And the cowards, I mean Republicans, will be put in an almost impossible position. Enough will cross the aisle to get the bill passed. The NRA’s position is the smart one,

  3. Bullshit. The bumpfire stock has been on the market for nearly 8-10 years with zero homicides to this point?

    What other products have an equivalent 5.8 deaths per year rate that you are planning to ban along with the bumpfire stock?

    • Hell, look up a video of the shooting. That’s clearly not the sound of a bump fire rifle, that sounds like something belt fed (RPK, maybe?). I’ve talked to multiple police officers who came to the same conclusion. He may have had a bump fire rifle in his room, but he certainly didn’t use it to shoot anyone.

      • That is exactly what I thought when I first heard it, but others have opined that the rate of fire is too slow and too inconsistent to be belt fire.

        • It’s way too slow for a bump fire. It would be quick bursts (or just a quick magazine dump) if it were bump fire. Something at that pace sounds like an older belt fed rifle, like some from say Vietnam.

        • Its perfect for a 240bravo. If you aren’t familiar with the sound, here’s a video on it:

        • The reason it seems slower than a normal bump-fire stock is because he was using 100 round mags. The extra weight was slowing it down.

    • This entire incident reeks of being custom tailored to pro gun arguments often used. Everything was legally bought, some rifles were bought in California, no illegal modifications were made.

      Clearly an attempt to make the point that any ownership of guns is bad.

      I think the only way to beat this is vehemently make the point that the homicide rates in the UK and Australia actually increased with their strict gun control laws, the homicide rate in the US continued to decline in the same period, and point out that civilian owned guns very clearly are used more often to save lives than to take them in the US, and that used to be the case in the UK and Australia as well.

      Also that there is no correlation between strict gun control laws and low murder rates. As many countries have high murder rates and strict gun control as have low murder rates and strict gun control, also the countries that have the lower murder rates had those lower murder rates before they had strict gun control, so there can not be a causal link between the two.

      Probably worth pointing out that mass murder by truck and explosives have been routinely more deadly, too.

  4. Okay, so the battle lines are drawn and we can see that the NRA is much smarter than they are given credit for, and much smarter than most of our commenters.

    If the Dems have their way, bump stocks are banned. Period. If the NRA has its way, bump stocks will be re-evaluated by the ATF and probably regulated. There is no third option.

    And BTW, the Dems were using this disaster to argue against silencers. ‘Memba that? Guess what — they stopped that bullshit and now have different raw meat to chew on.

    We all knew that bump fire stocks were toast as soon as this massacre was linked to their use. You pick your poison.

    • Tax stamp $200 suppressor
      Tax stamp $200 machine gun
      Tax stamp $5.00 explosive device
      Tax stamp $ ???? Bump stock

      How much are you willing to pay??? If my numbers are wrong its because I’m going on memory only.

      • Well, how much you are willing to pay depends on who you are and where you are. Me? I would be willing to pay $0.00. Aside from the fact that California already bans them, and the fact that we have a ten round mag limit that you would empty in three seconds or less, I personally wouldn’t want to own such a silly piece of junk. But I agree with Ralph: no way should we allow the Democrats to write a bill to ban them–and anything else they can slide in under the radar.

      • No tax stamp can be issued….. The Hughs Act prevents this. What has to happen is all 360 Million Americans need their fingers and thumbs amputated to prevent the firing of any firearms. While they’re at it they might as well take everyones toes while they are at it. Fingers and toes are devices that increase the rate of fire of a semiautomatic firearm. Tyranny incarnate ! ! see the Automatic Gunfire Prevention Act Dianne Franken-Fienstien

    • What happened to the ATF not being able to dictate new laws? Are we just going to give up on that and let them ban everything once the democrats are back in charge? Because that’s what we’re ordering up right now.

      • Congress, as the lazy SOB’s that they are, has given administrative agencies “Rule-making Authority”. The agencies use this rule-making authority to decide if something fits within the law or not. One has to have the $$ to fight in court if you disagree with their rules. A winning example was Thompson Center when the ATF accused them allowing people to make unregistered SBRs using the Contender frame. The ATF lost.

    • OR they can’t do anything because you know they won’t stop at Bumps and add what will amount to poison pills….

    • And then the next shooter uses X contraption, well let’s just ban that. Then the next time it’s Y contraption, whelp, let’s ban that. Then the next one uses Z contraption…see how this goes? It’s still boiling the frog slowly in the pot.

      The correct response is: no ban, no legislation. Why? Because murder is already illegal and the law stating as such didn’t stop this guy. So tell me how banning any sort of contraption is going to amount to anything?

      Besides, I don’t see anyone calling for the banning of large trucks and last I checked somebody mowed down like 80+ people with one of those so…

  5. WHO THE F IS THE NRA THINKING THAT THEY SPEAK FOR EVERYONE?

    IT”S NOT THEIR SAY TO “OPEN ANYTHING FOR REVIEW OR EXAMINE THE LEGALITIES”

    Until the NRA haS 100% of the population as members, the NRA and the fing mouse in their pocket can stand the F by.

    WE can negotiate the citizenry of the NRA AND ITS MEMBERS if that’s the case. (As long as we’re all talking sh_t).

      • It’s not my ‘proposal’, it’s what is described and prescribed in Paragraph 2nd of the Declaration of Independence.

        Don’t look to me for marching orders in the event, just don’t fall too far behind. There’s US and there’s THEM, the NRA just proved themselves to be a wet ca-ca THEM. We don’t want anyone with us, who isn’t “with us”.

  6. Its very sad so many people were killed and injured.
    I don’t care what terrible act happened to them or their families. Anyone who wants to take away my civil rights is evil. Especially if they have private or government armed security with machine guns.

  7. I have not seen this written anywhere, does anyone know if the proposed bill would grandfather in the bump stocks bought before the inaction of the ban?

      • Dude, I’m not saying I agree with the ban. I am simply asking someone who might be knowledgeable about the proposed Bill and what it says. Me asking the question does not mean I support it either way. I’m just trying to become informed on what the proposed legislation actually says.

        • Doesn’t matter what it says. The answer is no.

          Coming from Feinkensten, we know it won’t say “Congress shall fund the distribution of Bump-Fire systems, and, in their absence, associated arms, to every bona-fide U.S. Citizen.”

        • FWCG….There is no way a bump-fire/slide fire stock will be seen in the wild after the gun grabbers are through with this. Except those lost in boating accidents of course. No Dem will allow it and no RINO seeking job security will allow it. Your, er, I mean your “friends” stock is history.

    • She wants them outlawed completely meaning that if you own one currently you would magically be made a felon overnight by the mere fact that you own contraband.

      Anyone else see the problem with a government having the power to declare things verboten and create criminals out of thin air? Actions – you know things like murder, theft, assault, fraud – those are things that laws can and should attempt to restrict or reduce. And we all know that by sheer fact of anything being illegal it won’t stop anyone if they are willing to face the potential punishment for it. But banning an object and deeming it an act of unlawfulness is beyond absurd.

      This brings me back to people calling for “felons” to have their 2nd amendment rights revoked for life…well, I’m guessing if you’re the owner of a bump stock and are now thinking about being a magically deemed felon you might be reconsidering that position, no???

      • The main reason I am asking is because if it does not have a grandfather clause in it, the law may be struck down in court due to the ex post facto Clause of the Constitution. I am just trying to become informed on the proposed legislation to figure out what the best course of action would be moving forward to continue to defend our rights and what legal options we would have. Simply put, I am trying to be educated on the situation.

        • I don’t think the ex post facto thing works that way. If a ban passed Congress and was signed by Trump tomorrow, and went into effect next week, you would have until then to get rid of any you owned. Get caught with them after the deadline and it’s a crime that occurs the moment you get caught. Ex post facto would mean it gets signed tomorrow and you’re a felon because you owned them last week, and anyone else whose credit card number is attached to a receipt.

        • Right idea, wrong avenue.

          In this case it would be the government depriving you of something of value. You’d be better off working through the 4A as opposed to going ex post facto since any ban would have a delayed effect (i.e. must dispose of it by some specified date in the future)

  8. Again, we don’t give up unalienable rights, much less, do so because some ISIS / ANTIFA MF abused their right.

    F Feinstein and her whole Fing state, we hunt communists around the globe as a National Strategic Policy to protect our National Interests.

    REPEAL the GCA and close the gravy-sucking ATF&E.

  9. She’s actually correct (Holy shit! A Democrat knows how the separation of powers work?). There is no regulation the ATF can apply to them that isn’t a ban. Only two groups can write federal law: Congress and a group of 3/4ths of the States.

    The NRA’s request the ATF “regulate” them can only mean two things: The NRA wants a ban or the NRA wants to totally throw the Constitution out the window and have the ATF write new law. Both are more than enough reason to toss the NRA

    • Actually it makes me think it’s all part of NRA’s master plan. Knowing this would be the response they can now claim “whoa! We never agreed to that!” They force congress to act knowing they won’t..hopefully

      • If they were as smart and crafty as you think they are, they wouldn’t have chosen an excuse that relied on the people upset having no idea how the government works. You can’t claim you want the ATF to reexamine something, then claim you want it “regulated” and not banned: The ATF has no power to regulate.

    • Or ATF agrees to take another look at whether or not a bump stock is a machine gun, and in six months releases a lengthy and expensive report saying they were right the first time? The media will fabricate half a dozen more Trump scandals by then, and nobody will be paying attention.

      • OR, a “new catagory” of “weapon” will be enshrined as being the ‘frankensteining’ of two permitted items that create something that is “not permitted”. F dat, f em all.

  10. Ok Diane… You want to ban them? What do we get in exchange, because you simply don’t have the votes to override a presidential veto.

    • She’ll get too greedy and tack on a few extras that will amount to poison pills…I hope this was part of the plan all along…

      • Her extras are triggers and how light they can be to induce rapid fire.

        The vagueness of that statement could include regular aftermarket triggers as well so be careful what you all wish for. Those who want to kick bumpfire stocks to the curb your fancy, aftermarket triggers are included too.

        • I don’t want bumpfires kicked to the curb. Just thinking when she tries to reach beyond the outrage of the day she’s going to kill this whole discussion herself…

        • If you want to get completely ridiculous about it (almost like a Democrat would), a crunchy 9lb factory trigger might break in over time and get smoother/lighter, thus enabling more rapid rates of fire than when it was new.

  11. Here is the particularly troubling aspect of Feinstein’s letter and legislative intent:

    Legislation would make crystal clear that Congress is banning all devices that allow a weapon to achieve an automatic rate of fire, regardless of how a weapon is altered. Such legislation can and will save lives, and Congress should act immediately.

    What is Feinstein’s “automatic rate of fire” threshold? Does that mean anything above 2 rounds per second? What about 6 rounds per second?

    Unfortunately, the ill-defined “automatic rate of fire” and “all devices” verbage means Congress and/or the ATF could declare several aftermarket triggers as illegal, which is absurd and obscene.

    We seriously have to quash this legislative endeavor.

    • In Progressive/Communist speak: semi-automatic _is_ automatic… In the same way a Browning 1911 Automatic is an automatic.

    • No they can’t. NRA only agreed to a review by ATF while maintaining their stance on gun rights (see their statement). This may have been more shrewd than I gave them credit for…

      • NRA “agreed to”? What are you talking about? They are a lobbying force and have no force of law whatsoever, only power to influence members of Congress. “Should be subject to additional regulations” – interpret that how you will, but anti gun Congress can say that their bills do just that.

        • Agreed to was a poor choice of words. Let’s say “endorsed” and I would use that loosely. Again, point being this would go no where in Congress. My guess is that Feinstein adds additional bans on top and it gets killed..

        • It’s a total abdication of the high-ground, and a total deflation of a VERY STRONG (historically so) position held by the NRA just days ago. A G A I N MFs, we don’t (AND SHOULD NOT HAVE TO) EVEN DISCUSS the loss of a portion of one of our rights JUST BECAUSE SOME ISIS / ANTIFA AHOLE CHOSE TO ABUSE THAT RIGHT WHILE ATTACKING US.

          F dat. The NRA is a toilet-paper tiger. (and not the good soft kind that still holds up good to sh_t, it’s the soggy (with piss because foreign nationals either don’t know what it’s for or get a kick out of hosing down your toilet paper), yellowed roll suspended on a coat hanger in a 160 degree Fahrenheit port-a-potty just north of the PX at Al Asad AFB in Iraq). NOT JUST “WORTHLESS” AS IT TOO DELETERIOUS TO MUSTER ENOUGH POSITIVE QUALITIES TO RISE TO THE TITLE.

          The NRA just ALSO sh_t all over whatever mandate the President and the (R) Legislative Branches have to move towards greater (a/k/a: THE FING CORRECT AMOUNT OF) gun rights.

          F em all.

    • “IF YOU LIKE YOUR BUMP-STOCKS, YOU CAN KEEP YOUR BUMP-STOCKS” – Wayne Hussein LaPierre, NRA Caliphaturd

      “IF YOU CAN’T KEEP YOUR BUMP-STOCKS, SEND IN YOUR REGISTRATION FEES AND WE CAN FIGHT FOR THE NEXT 40 YEARS TO TRY TO MAKE POSTERS OF THEM LEGAL” – Wayne Hussein LaPierre, NRA Caliphaturd

  12. ATF can in fact reverse or modify its previous administrative ruling that a bumpfire stock does not fall within the legal definition of a machine gun.

    This is why and how – from a previous and recent post: http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2017/10/robert-farago/breaking-nra-veep-wayne-lapierre-didnt-say-ban-bump-fire-stocks/#comments

    “There IS actually a difference between a semi auto equipped with a bump fire stock, and a semi auto without one.

    A bump fire stock does not *simulate* full auto fire, it is in fact a device which (even if poorly and inefficiently) enables mechanical automatic fire.

    A properly equipped full auto mechanism (usually) has three components. A reciprocating bolt, an auto sear which while the trigger is depressed will take over the function of actuating the trigger each time the bolt reciprocates, and (usually) a mechanism which disengages the auto fire system, returning the firearm to single pull semi auto operation.

    Mechanically, a ‘bump stock’ is a mechanism which allows the entire receiver to reciprocate, and relies upon the operator’s stationary finger as the auto sear. The feature which allows the gun to return to semi auto operation, rather than being a receiver mounted selector, is a stock mounted selector which for semi auto operation locks the stock into a traditional stationary position.

    One can argue the semantics endlessly, but in effect the bump fire stock could easily be reclassified as a machine gun (and probably will) with a simple administrative ruling from ATF.”

    • This line of reasoning puts us back to the situation where a shoestring is a machine-gun. The simple fact is that the gun itself does not change. If we concede that a semi-automatic rifle can be a machine-gun, they will demand a ban on ALL semi-automatic rifles, with or without a shoestring.

      • I absolutely guarantee you that if you use a shoestring in a manner which enables mechanical automatic fire where ATF agents are present, you won’t need a ruling, but you will need a lawyer.

        You can explain to the special agents who are tackling you, and reading you your rights, that your shoestring (rubber band, paper clip, butter knife, etc.) is not legally a machine gun.

        Anything you attach to a firearm that facilitates mechanical automatic fire is ALREADY classified as a ‘machine gun’ under current regulations.

        I was actually a bit shocked when ATF ruled that bump fire stocks were not (adminstratively) machine guns. I fully anticipate that a new ruling on bumpfire stocks will be forthcoming, and that they will be classified (like drop in auto sears) as ‘machine guns’.

        • It’s a how many rounds fired per movement of the trigger finger – issue. They were trying to be cute with the legislation and it bit them in the ass with the bump-stock/fire systems.

          NO using a shoestring / rubber band (YMMV legally, but that is not a flaw in what I’ve said, it’s because you haven’t killed enough MF’s threatening your liberties so that they feel it is a waste of time to even try it) TO PULL THE TRIGGER ON YOUR SEMI-AUTOMATIC RIFLE IS NOT ILLEGAL.

      • Tfred—- Under the Automatic Gunfire Prevention Act 2017, your shoelaces will be classified as devices. Your shoelaces will be banned. Possession of a shoelace will be a trip to a federal prison of “not more than 5 years and a $250,000 fine. No “Components” of firearms, no devices, no shoelaces, etc.” possession of a shoelace is a fellony under the AGPA.

        LOL

    • This has been my point. If they can declare a glove that you wear on your hand and is not even attached to the rifle a violation, then a bumpstock is well within their reach. Dems now are clamoring for banning all semi auto rifles since they have finally figured out they can all be converted and its the rate of fire, not the cosmetics that matter. The ATF has banned open bolt semi auto’s based on the fact they are too easy to convert. The sad truth is that any gun including a bolt action can serve as a basis of a full auto if you have a machine shop.

      • The glove-thingy hasn’t yet been adjudicated (and might not, just due to the cost [FU legal system]).

        AGAIN it’s a “how many rounds per pulls of the trigger” issue. The glove thing is only one pull of a finger on anything to get continuing fire, so (although the glove pulls the trigger multiple times) it’s a quasi-bust.

    • MDH—— You just simply do not understand the evil / tyrannical “Automatic Gunfire Prevention Act of 2017.
      This Bill will enable the BATFE to remove the Magazine, Ammunition, Trigger, Bolt, Recoil Spring, Firing pin, Etc. All of these “Parts or components” allow a higher rate of fire in a semiautomatic firearm. Senator Feinstiens perfect world would be to limit the rate of fire of a semiautomatic firearm to “”””0″”””” rounds per lifetime.

  13. I say agree to registration and tax stamp on Bump Fire Stocks. Congress would just repeal the Hughes Amendment to the FOPA and reopen the Machine Gun part of the NFA registry so new items can be added. Problem solved.

    • Wishful thinking.

      You are already past your last fall-back position. You are in a rout, and the enemy is picking off your element’s tail units.

      You can’t sacrifice an inch.

      They have nothing to trade either, THAT ISN’T ALREADY YOURS.

      • You should re-read what I wrote and think about the implications of getting rid of the Hughes amendment and re-opening the MG registry. That is the trade. We agree that Bump Fire devices have to be registered and they have to remove Hughes so new items can be added to the registry. With Hughes gone any new items could be registered….

  14. I wish Senator Diane Feinstein would just retire or something!! that dusty old mummy is older than both of my grandparents when they DIED and still works???

    is she even relevant anymore? can she or does she even know how to e-mail? or does she put a stamp on the screen?

  15. Dems don’t give a rat’s ass about bump stocks, Obama’s BATFE approved them, they are going to legislate rate of fire. See ya Competition triggers, improved grips, VFG’s and anything else they can say improves the shooters ability to get off a quicker 2nd shot. Get a Dem President? Semi auto’s will be regulated You can not give 1 inch, ever.

  16. “Since The Zelman Partisans do value free and armed people, having an understanding of history when wanna-be tyrants like Feinstein succeeded, we utterly oppose this legislation.”

    http://zelmanpartisans.com/?p=4458

    And yes, the NRA could have said the same thing, instead of saying “Obama’s ATF let a terrorist have bump stocks, and we urge the ATF to reconsider”.

  17. An appeal to the cooler heads here…

    ATF cannot act outside of Federal law.
    The definitions of semi-auto and full-auto firearms operations are found in Federal statutes. DiFi is merely recognizing the fact that ATF cannot create law and ban through regulation something that does not meet the definition of an illegal device. She is admitting that it will take new legislation to outlaw bump-fire stocks. This is good for gun rights, the peoples representatives will have to act and be held accountable for any new restrictions.

      • The ATF&E’s biggest weapon is DELAY. They are the Kings of “We’ll get back to you. You stand the F by” is all the sh_t they gotta pull to bog this down until your great-grandchildren can’t remember you or what you were standing up for.

        Let cooler heads finally chill their ass hats enough and until the point of intolerable discomfort.

  18. Bumpfire stocks saved lives.

    Imagine if this guy had fired 400-500 aimed shots into a crowd of 23,000, instead of spraying wildly. Nobody tried to stop him for quite a long time. He had all the time in the world to keep shooting until there were no targets remaining in front of him (how long does it take to evacuate a fenced concert venue stuffed with 23,000 people? 20, 30 minutes in the best of cases? Now throw paniced/injured/dead concert goers into the mix)

    • “Bump Stocks saved Lives”

      If you needed to overthrow your tyrannical government, a Bump-Fire stock might hold-you-over while you asked that government (that you were busy overthrowing) if you could [pretty-please] have full auto weapons to help get the job done.

      If a weapon is used against us (and I’m loosely throwing a wide net over / to include: REAL FING U.S. citizens) then we have the right to parity with that weapon, and should not tolerate our ahole neighbors who needed a job (“gov’t”) binding our hands for the people who don’t give a flying F what that government says.

  19. I want to know how you can leglislate physics. Bump fire is using the recoil of the gun with forward force on the gun to use a trigger finger that holds still. Put your thump in a beltloop, push forward on the rifle and use the trigger finger of the hand in the beltloop. The gun will rock back and forth, just like a bumpfire stock. This is physics and will work with any semi auto, with some practice.

    Note: I did not say it is accurate and don’t like playing with live ammo not going exactley where I want it to go, but that is how it is done.

  20. Diane says:
    “Legislation would make crystal clear that Congress is banning all devices that allow a weapon to achieve an automatic rate of fire, regardless of how a weapon is altered.”

    So are Jerry Miculek ( and any other such legendary people) going to have their fingers banned?

  21. Feinstein’s rant proves the NRA’s point.

    The NRA is cutting off the need for legislation before they can grind the meat & binder for their sausage – and that’s why she’s howling like a ruptured duck.

  22. Send goverment to sahra and the desert ist out of sand in under 5 years and the fed print new virtual “sand” ore tax your send and sell it back to you ………..

  23. Wayne LaPierre betrays the American people Dianne Feinstein betrays the Constitution all is normal in the world

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *