The National Rifle Association’s decision to stand down over the issue of bump fire stocks has generated a lot of concern, both among TTAG’s readership and elsewhere in the gun owning community. From my current vantage point on a busman’s holiday in a Northern Michigan lakeside hamlet, geographically and emotionally removed from the Potomac, I’m not worried.

This is the strongest position the NRA could have taken, and it has made me roll back some of my general concerns over whether the gun rights org’s leadership has the chops to fight for the Second Amendment during the Trump years and beyond.

The NRA has said 1) they aren’t going to oppose some sort of regulation on bump fire stocks (although LaPierre has insisted that they aren’t calling for a ban), and 2) the BATFE should review and decide whether or not bump fire stocks fall under federal regulations.

From the NRA’s official statement:

In Las Vegas, reports indicate that certain devices were used to modify the firearms involved. Despite the fact that the Obama administration approved the sale of bump fire stocks on at least two occasions, 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.

This was a smart move. For the price of giving up something that couldn’t be defended anyway, they’ve improved their strategic position in two ways:

1) The NRA dodged an incoming blow from the enemy aimed at poisoning the image of their organization in the minds of the people.

2) The NRA has taken a position that requires the enemy to attack its own allies if they want an immediate victory.

On the first point, the gun control lobby and its collaborators were already ginning up a propaganda salvo against the nation’s oldest civil rights organization. Instead of taking the blow, the NRA stepped out of the way.

“In war,” Sun Tzu tells us, “the way is to avoid what is strong and to strike at what is weak.”

Wait a minute, shouldn’t the NRA fight tooth-and-nail against every regulation that remotely affects guns?

No. As any gambler knows, you gotta know when to hold ‘em and know when to fold ‘em. In this case, the enemy has blind, ignorant, emotional fear in a mass audience and a clearly-defined target: bump fire stocks.

In opposition, the pro-bump fire stock side has…well, not much. Bump fire stocks don’t add anything to a citizen’s ability to use a rifle in defense of herself or our nation. They appear to be fashion accessories for entertainment purposes only. In fact, the SildeFire tag line is “Prepare to change the way you play.” As far as self-interest goes, we’re lucky if maybe 1/10th of 1% of gun owners actually own or aspire to get one.

We could compose a well-crafted libertarian argument for the abstract right of a man to possess anything he wants as long as he’s not harming others, and the freedom to be square pegs in round holes. But in the court of fickle public opinion, an abstract argument in the clouds falls to one based on mass fear aimed a concrete target any day of the week.

Standing against this would devalue the credibility of the NRA in the minds of people who, again, are being guided by irrational fear in the aftermath of an atrocity. People tend not to respond well to others who exacerbate their fears.

So the NRA declined the opportunity to fight on terrain that could not be defended, and that would leave them with a stain on their record in the eyes of the many whose analysis on this issue is guided by fear in the wake of the Las Vegas attack.

That was good by itself. But the NRA also laid a subtle trap for its opponents.

They said regulations should be reviewed — and they encouraged the BATFE to do so. Not Congress. Now, if the gun control left wants a quick win for which they can gain political credit, they need to endorse Steve Bannon’s position on the administrative state.

Yes, that’s right, the NRA just walked away from a losing hand and moved to the most favorable ground possible.

And, if the statement from Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-Bloombergia), is any guide, the gun control lobby is accepting those terms of battle. Mrs. Feinstein essentially declared that the BATFE does not possess the inherent authority to promulgate regulations on anything without a carefully-worded authorization from Congress.

On the one hand, if we wait for the BATFE to ‘examine’ the regulations and decide whether or not existing laws give them the authority to regulate bump fire stocks, that will be a drawn-out process. Eventually, the BATFE will either decide that it can or cannot promulgate additional regulations on bump fire stocks under existing law.

If they decide they can’t, Congress may take up the issue at that point. But that will happen months later, in a more dispassionate manner, after the heat of the moment has passed.

If the BATFE decides it can promulgate new regulations, those new regs will be subject to public comment — of the sort that derailed an Obama Administration attempt to ban certain rifle rounds in 2015. In that case, the 1/10th of 1% of people who own and care about bump fire stocks might be able to punch above their weight in the comment period.

Of course, there are ways an administrative agency can get around public comments — like choosing to change a definition. Fine. In that case the regulation on bump fire stocks gets imposed…and no one gets any political credit for it on the left.

In fact, if anyone gets ‘credit’ for it…it’s the branch of government the BATFE works for, which is currently headed by Donald J. Trump, Sr. Generally, the issue is politically neutralized. Again, if it’s a loss anyway, this is probably the least-damaging way to take it.

Mrs. Feinstein and her gun control paymasters want some sort of regulation and they want to gain politically from doing so. They know their best chance of getting both is in the heat of the moment — given a chance for passions to cool, it falls apart for them.

So they’ll try to get something pushed through Congress. But the NRA’s position is an excellent rationalization for inertia. “I agree, Dianne, something should be done, but let’s let the experts at BATFE do their review first.”

To get something passed now, the gun control lobby has to argue that there’s no point in waiting, that the BATFE doesn’t have the power to regulate items absent direct Congressional authorization. This is the position Senator Feinstein has taken.

When the gun control lobby says that regulations touching on guns have to be crafted transparently via the legislation, not crafted by unelected bureaucrats in an opaque process, well, I think that’s a step forward for everyone. They have to undermine one of the tools — the administrative state — that the state uses oppress us all.

Given the context of the moment, I’m having a hard time seeing a real down-side here.

Of course, my argument falls apart if you believe that bump fire stocks can and should be defended substantively, and that this position can either prevail on its own, or lead to a future win. I don’t see that, but you can try to convince me in the comments — have at it.

Minor edits for grammar and clarity made after publication. -JKP

250 Responses to The NRA’s Position on Bump Fire Stocks was Genius

  1. “For the price of giving up something that couldn’t be defended anyway”

    Not. One. Fucking. Mile.

    GODDAMN you people!

    1934. 1968. 1986. All dates that mark the rights we compromised away and NEVER GOT BACK!

    • Also, before someone says “but then they’ll ban semi-automatics if we don’t let them have bump stocks” well guess what that’s not happening. Every sane person knows that would lead to American Revolution 2: Electric Boogaloo.

      So either we keep the bump-stocks or get the opportunity to hit the reset button on this mess of a country. Yes please.

      • Love that electric bugaloo comment. Lol. I don’t own a bumpfire, doesn’t mean you shouldn’t be able to get one. If we give an inch they’ll think they won something. Small victories instill confidence, they’ll get balls, and go after the next thing on the current “table”, suppressors. That would be no bueno. Hillary already made the comment, think how many more would have been killed if he had silencers. Slide fires are for fun, and we have to fight for our right to party!

        • Bumpstocks are not useful for self defense or resisting government oppression . You play with them or use them as they used in Vegas. Particularly just after a mass shooting, to insist you need bumpstocks to party is effectively conceding you’ll lose the argument. Think about it. Balance the uses of a tool: partying vs. mass murder. Shall we regulate the tool or not? It’s a matter of salesmanship. You’re not going to make the partying sale.

        • We have no proof that bump stocks were used in Vegas. All we have is a picture of them in the room.
          We have a lot of audio of fully-automatic fire that is far too even to be a bump stock.
          It’s still very early yet in this story.

        • I seem to remember when ‘Ronnie Raygun’ compromised with the jackass left with amnesty – look where that got us. Whenever you compromise with the left it ALWAYS comes back to bite you!

    • My problem is where the BATFE gets to decide that anything that can reasonably increase the Rate of Fire for any firearm constitutes redesigning it as a machine gun.

      • That’s the real concern I have. You can build an equivalent to a commercial bump fire stock with a couple of pieces of PVC, some screws, and a spring. What worries me is the bat-men kicking in doors and arresting people for miscellaneous normal household materials as “constructive possession”. It’s not like they don’t have a long history of doing precisely that!

        Just more BS for the average gun owner to worry about, beyond 922R and such garbage.

        • Prior to Las Vegas , the need for BATF was itself in question. Recall the letter sent to Trump suggesting a ‘ softening ‘ of it’s asshole positions against the average Joe gun owner.
          Fact is , BATF is illegal from its start , never lawfully constituted , it grew out of prohibition and was reborn when it ended. BATF ‘s legal history is long and INTENTIONALLY confusing. Yup , still ILLEGAL !
          Read This : BATF Criminal FRAUD .

          http://www.usa-the-republic.com/revenue/BATF-IRS%20Criminal%20Report.html

        • On an AR-15 platform you can get the same effect of a bump stock with a half inch thick rubber band hooked on the trigger and wrapped around the magwell.

      • If there is a genius part of the NRA’s position, this is it.

        The ATF clearly cannot regulate/restrict bump-fire stocks given the plain wording of the law — and even people like Dianne “Palapatine” Feinstein, who hate them and want to ban them along with all modern firearms, are taking that position.

        Time is our best friend. They have to strike while the fear is fresh. The longer it takes for the bureaucracy to admit that it can’t do anything on its own, and for Congress to hammer out some sort of bill addressing it, the more likely it is that reason (and the usual play-it-safe politics as usual) takes over and the prohibitionists get nothing.

        Will it actually play out like that, or will the prohibitionists be able to ride today’s hysteria to a win? We’ll see.

    • I agree.

      1. Why in the world would we give/ want the atf to have more authority? And don’t tell me that this isn’t exactly what will happen regarding firearms and there accessories.

      2. Why are we offering the antis anything without something in return. This is the perfect bargaining chip for national reciprocity and suppressor deregulation.

      3. Every person, doesn’t matter
      Left or right agrees that no laws or legislation could have prevented this from happening so why allow them to create new ones while admitting there lack of worth in prevention.

      I am disappointed in the NRA and will be pulling my membership and dues until they prove otherwise. I understand that this was a tragic event but these will continue to happen from now until the end of humanity.

    • This^

      This was a smart move. For the price of giving up something that couldn’t be defended anyway, they’ve improved their strategic position in two ways:

      Couldn’t defend it anyways? Okay, allow me to defend it.

      1) Bump firing doesn’t require a stock, with practice you can use your hands and relaxed grip.

      2) The stock is really simple. Connected buttstock and grip, with a spring to keep it forward. As a result, it is easy to build one of these. Simple to build one. Easier to build one of these than to drill the hole for the select fire parts, but not as easy as building a AR15 lightning link:

      https://www.bevfitchett.us/ar15-to-m16-conversion/images/2703_35_37-lightning-link-dimensions.jpg

      and

      https://image.isu.pub/091107070158-a4eca25796e44fcc98cb38b22cf5d518/jpg/page_1_thumb_large.jpg

      3) As demonstrated above, making a semiautomatic, automatic, is not as difficult as it would seem. And if someone wanted one, it would not be difficult to modify to make one.

      4) The bump fire stock has a valid use. It is a range toy that quells people’s urge to manufacture illegal full auto firearms for the purpose of shooting melons in their back pasture.

      5) Banning the Bump fire stock reduces freedom in the united states. Banning things reduces the people’s freedoms. And the United States used to be about freedom. Do you still want to be about freedom? We shouldn’t ban things for the actions of some extreme few. And this is a very extreme few.

      6) Using the bump-fire stock legally and as intended, has no victims.

      7) Banning the bump-fire stock will not stop mass shootings or mass murder. They will just move to another method, so the government (and delusioned people) can ban that too. People say when will the shootings stop, but I say, when will the bannings stop? Culture and people are the root cause of this problem. Not their freedom to imagine, design, and implement tools, equipment, weapons, or the like.

      If you value liberty, please read federalist #10.

      By a faction, I understand a number of citizens, whether amounting to a majority or a minority of the whole, who are united and actuated by some common impulse of passion, or of interest, adversed to the rights of other citizens, or to the permanent and aggregate interests of the community.

      There are two methods of curing the mischiefs of faction: the one, by removing its causes; the other, by controlling its effects.

      There are again two methods of removing the causes of faction: the one, by destroying the liberty which is essential to its existence; the other, by giving to every citizen the same opinions, the same passions, and the same interests.

      It could never be more truly said than of the first remedy, that it was worse than the disease. Liberty is to faction what air is to fire, an aliment without which it instantly expires. But it could not be less folly to abolish liberty, which is essential to political life, because it nourishes faction, than it would be to wish the annihilation of air, which is essential to animal life, because it imparts to fire its destructive agency.

      The second expedient is as impracticable as the first would be unwise. As long as the reason of man continues fallible, and he is at liberty to exercise it, different opinions will be formed. As long as the connection subsists between his reason and his self-love, his opinions and his passions will have a reciprocal influence on each other; and the former will be objects to which the latter will attach themselves. The diversity in the faculties of men, from which the rights of property originate, is not less an insuperable obstacle to a uniformity of interests. The protection of these faculties is the first object of government. From the protection of different and unequal faculties of acquiring property, the possession of different degrees and kinds of property immediately results; and from the influence of these on the sentiments and views of the respective proprietors, ensues a division of the society into different interests and parties. – Federalist #10, James Madison

      • Oh – and #8.

        8) How do you legislate this??? A bump fire stock uses a finger to fire the trigger. As a result, by the operation of the bump fire stock, it meets the definition of a semi-automatic firearm – because it is still fired with a finger. Legislating it away, could be a grave mistake that the ATF will employ a strict interpretation (on the people) with it’s reading. And by strict, I mean abusive.

      • Agreed on all points, but you’re a little off on how a slide stock works. There’s no spring involved. It’s just an attached pistol grip and buttstock which can traverse rearward free of the rifle. With a spring, it’s an Akins Accelerator, which was banned by BATFE(aRBF) as a machine gun almost immediately after its announcement to the public. A slide stock operates purely on the force of your off-hand pulling the foreend away from the stock against the recoil of the cartridge firing. That’s why they’re comically inaccurate (I can barely put a standard 30 round mag in the 7 ring at 10 yards, and I’ve been playing with them for years) and legal (no mechanical device, simple or otherwise, is involved in the pulling of the trigger.)

        • Fair enough. Thanks for the info.

          On what grounds did they rule against the akins accelerator? Your finger still presses the trigger each time.

        • Well, if you’ve been playing with bumpfires for years, I’m going to assume you’ve tried to keep a 30-round mag in the 7 ring at 10 yards with a full auto? Because that is not real easy, either. If you want to HIT something, you move the selector to “semi”. Unless your target is 22,000 people.

          Hey, do you all have fun with the cheat sheet telling him how to aim? Lordy, the media acts as though a few calculations or notes scribbled on a sheet of paper should be banned, as well, since he could have never possibly hit some random folks in a shoulder-to-shoulder crowd of 22,000 without that evil piece of paper. These people are really fools.

        • To really see the difference between firing bump-fire and real full auto, check out this video. I’ve started it at 6:53 where they edit an overlay of the two firing sessions. Watch the muzzle of the bump-fire compared to the M16. The bump-fire AR15’s muzzle is flopping all over the place compared to the M16. And this is the guy’s first time firing an M16.

          https://youtu.be/g1pO49AnboI?t=6m53s

    • I love how tripe like this legitimizes the “game of thrones” that we call politics.

      The NRA nor anyone else should care what any pundit or person thinks with regard to stated position on ththe 2nd amendment. The correct response is “shall not be infringed”. Then they should segue into refuting the emotional machinations of those seeking to ban or restrict.

      But no instead it’s “brilliant” and “strategic”…as if it’s a game of freakin’ chess.

      Time to peacefully divorce from these people who don’t want guns and seek to form more perfect political unions with like minded citizens with the he same sets of values.

      • Mostly because they can’t; they’re simply not big enough. I can’t remember the last time Mike Bloomberg said he was going after GOA. I think that may well be because he never said it. He may not even know what GOA is.

        • Nonsense. Bloomberg knows who GOA is. With all its faults — and GOA has many — it’s GOA, a dozen or so loyal grassroots groups, and thousands of principled gun rights activists who are blocking NRA, Grover al Nor’Qu’ist, Alan Gottlieb, SAF, et ilk from accelerating their betrayals.

          -Endowment Member NRA
          -Life Member GOA
          35 years of gun rights activism, ETC

    • Out of your list of gun control laws, 1986 was, notably, a compromise package.

      We lost machine guns but we gained safe passage through all fifty states. We also gained the registry prohibition (probably not being enforced, but it is on paper), interstate sales of long guns, ammo shipping via USPS, and a couple other minor things that protect FFL holders.

      I’m not a big fan of compromise, but I thought it was worth mentioning.

      • “but we gained safe passage through all fifty states.”

        Did we, now? Travel through NJ, NY, MA, or IL. When you are arrested, demand your rights under that law. Have a nice life.

        “We also gained the registry prohibition (probably not being enforced…”

        Wow, we keep racking up those wins, don’t we?

      • We didn’t lose machine guns, the NRA surrendered them when it didn’t have to, and gained very little of any duration in return. Unnecessary compromise is not compromise. It’s appeasement and collaboration.

    • While you seem to know how to use foul language, you don’t seem to be able to process what the writer said. I notice you offer no real arguments; a lot of heat, but no argument. I think I know why.

      • History, dear Jack. He who says it simplest knows it best. Bless your heart.

        He pointed to times in our country’s history that it was popular to give ground for political expediency, but the result was more pressure on individual rights. Have a great day.

    • Don’t forget that Karl T. Frederick testified before congress in support of the NFA.
      Karl was then the president of the NRA, testifying against gun owners.

    • Johannes Paulson: a man ready to give up at a moment’s notice! A man who will repeat history because he does not remember it! A man who will throw out someone else’s rights to a government entity just for the hell of it!

      Hey Paulson, this isn’t the first time you’ve been very wrong in the SHORT time you’ve been writing for this site. This may not be your best choice of career. Hey, I think the Democrat party was hiring not too long a ago! Maybe Mike the gun guy is going to retire soon.

  2. Bumpstocks are retarded but I don’t like that they basically told the ATF to make up what you want about the laws intent.

  3. I think this is the best thing the NRA could have done. As was said, these things “fuzz the line” between a semi auto and a full auto fire arm. That is a very dangerous place for semi auto’s to be in.

    • It won’t put semi-autos in a “fuzzy” place. Even IF Americans didn’t revolt in response to a semi-automatics being banned, the Supreme Court could no longer ignore the issue and would strike it down as per Heller which says you can’t ban an entire class of weaponry. Bam. Precedent to wreck states like California or New York. And this will happen most likely with a new Trump appointment.

    • Agreed. What Feinstein’s bill seeks to do is put the federal government in the position of regulating the trigger design of semi-automatic weapons. Now that the bump-stock issue has been politicized, gun-controllers are already talking about trigger design being “unregulated”. Putting this kind of power into the hands of a gun-control government is a dead-cinch guarantee that semi-automatic weapons will be rendered virtually unusable.

      Gun controllers would love to have a law that allowed the 2nd amendment to exist—so long as guns could be made “safe” from spree killers. And without the NRA to stop them, there are enough weak-kneed elected Republicans to go along with such a law. We’ve already seen that kind of stupid argument used in defense of magazine size limits. Just think where gun-controllers would love to go if the argument were used to regulate the trigger design of semi-automatic guns. The NRA’s decision was in anticipation of just this kind of eventuality. That’s why the NRA is so effective. Like them or not, there’s really no organization out there that can do what they do.

      • Yes, the NRA is highly effective at preemptive surrender and covering up for treasonous politicians by continuing to give them phony grades after they sell us out.

      • Diane Feinstein, one year from now, if the bimp-fire ban passes: “Nobody *needs* a semi-auto with less than a 12 pound trigger pull.”

    • It’s amazing how good the hysterical sissies of the gun rights community (aka ‘prags’) are at preemptively surrendering principles they never had, for imaginary consideration. Kind of like the Sudetenland.

  4. the BATFE should review and decide whether or not bump fire stocks fall under federal regulations.

    If I remember correctly, the ATF ruled on this seven years ago in 2010.

    • Yes, they certainly did. And that was under the Obama administration. Now Trump is in charge, who even if not perfect, is much further to the side of pro-2A. The likelihood is that NOTHING will happen, and the stall tactic the NRA is using will work perfectly. The aim is to get this mess to die down, make the Democrats appear unreasonable (which they certainly are), and fade this off. Chess vs checkers.

    • Correct me if I’m wrong but, the definition of a semi-auto is one bullet per one pull of the trigger. Using a bump fire stock doesnt change this, my fear is that politicians will. They are nothing more than a novelty. I think the left will start going after other accessories like aftermarket stocks, scopes, etc. They already believe that “flash hiders” hide muzzle flash so you cant see where the shooter is.

  5. “So the NRA declined the opportunity to fight on terrain that could not be defended,”

    So the NRA declined the opportunity to fight on terrain that WAS ALREADY WON !

    And they did so in a way THAT QUESTIONED THE VERY JUDGMENT OF THE AGENCY WHO HAD ALREADY CONCEDED SAID GROUND !

    F THAT

    IF THE NRA
    ONCE
    said “we represent a sh_t-ton of your armed neighbors who are long past bring tired of your attempts to regulate them, as it is only a hindrance to their common good, as the bad guys flip you off to your face and you typically do FV<K – all about that" … THE THE GUN RIGHTS "ARGUMENT" WOULD FINSLLY BE OVER, and the next steps would be assumed by all parties would be harsher and devoid of conversation. (think that's extreme? only because you forgot that that's exactly what our founding fathers did).

    BUT THEY DON'T

    BECAUSE A "CONTINUED ARGUMENT" IS WHAT THEY'RE SELLING, cause a finished argument no longer requires dues support to continue.

    LET'S BE DONE WITH THE WHOLE ARGUMENT NOW !

    Repeal the GCA, and all fing whiners are on notice.

    • Especially with a Republican majority, the NRA could’ve pressured its phony A & B rated politicians to pass carry reciprocity 9 months ago – IF LaPew wanted to. Same way they could’ve blocked the confirmations of Sotomayor & Kagan, etc. A & B rated Dems can’t survive as politicians in pro-gun states like Montana without their phony NRA grades, money, volunteers, orange alert cards, etc.

        • It is for this purpose. They all have phony NRA grades, without which they cannot survive in pro-gun states.

        • I hear you, but NRA could’ve taken out the RINOs and phony pro-gun Dems decades ago, instead LaPew protected them, gave them phony grades so gun grabbers like Jon Tester & Max Baucus could survive in pro-gun states like Montana.

          Pepe LaPew’s still giving Queen Lindsey of Carolina a phony A, without which she could not hold office in S Carolina even as dumb as SC voters clearly are, after she betrayed the 2A community to confirm her comrades like Sotomayor & Kagan. Many other examples.

          If the NRA leadership and board were not terminally infested with corrupt self-serving scumbags, Left “Libertarian” open-border Dhimmigration amnesty chimps like John Lott coauthor Grover al Nor’qu’ist (collaborates with Bloomberg), elitist club types, the type of sportsman or collector or manufacturer (e.g. Ruger) who is willing throw anything except their own particular guns or sports or products or accessories under a bus along with any liberty that you value and they don’t, then the NRA would lay down the law, stop lying to members, stop giving phony grades and lick jobs to gun grabbers, start bouncing phony pro-gun legislators at election time. Then the pols would shape up real fast and there would be no real threat of gun control.

          Never happen. Why? Because without the protection racket, Pepe-Hearts-Cox & the rest of the vampires couldn’t shake down members for half a billion dollars a year.

  6. This 8 dimensional chess doesn’t pay the bills. The truth is, giving up anything is simply a one way ratchet where we always lose ground, never to claw it back. The way they will play it that we gave up something that should never had in the first place and they’ll figure there is plenty more where that came from.

    Anyway, I hope this analysis is right and I’m wrong. I do think the ‘pressure to act now’ will abate over time. Therefore I think a stall and wait, while conceding nothing would have worked. As it is, I think the NRA just panicked and cracked the hatch open in the submarine.

  7. The ATFs history with the ‘Adkins device’ shows they sometimes change their minds. but their rulings are odd to say the least.

    • It used a spring as a part of the mechanism aiding in making the device fire the gun faster. That is a big ATF no-no.

      The slidefire and bumpski stocks skirted being banned because they both required nothing but your hand to use. No internal parts like springs.

  8. Not buying it. If they pass legislation that bans modifying devices then we have thrown that 1% to the wolves.

    I personally do not want a slide fire stick but I don’t object to anyone owning one.

    If this passes and they word it correctly you could potentially be “giving up” your binary triggers, apex triggers, ghost triggers, cmc triggers geissele triggers and so forth because we wanted to deflect a incoming blow.

    It’s like your and your girl are at the prom and you decided to let the bully have five minutes with your date in the broom closet but you’ll have the rest of the night.

    No compromise.

    • No Compromise? That only works when you have elected “leaders” and we do not.

      Ryan already caved, gave in, blinked, the SHARE act is on HOLD. SO WE ALREADY LOST.

      You didn’t back down, nor did I nor any pro 2A’er. But we still lost the SHARE act.

      When do you see Ryan putting it back on the floor? If he does the media and lefties ramp the rhetoric up again. Ryan is to spineless to do so. And what will be taken out of it to appease “them” to bring it back up?

      You cannot win starting from that losing position. We already know what the lefties want, but Rino-Ryan already gave them something by pulling the SHARE act off the floor. And the speaker is the only one who can put it back.

      • The only reason Ryan and others can screw us is because the NRA wants them too, winks at it, encourages it. Betrayals like this have been done to us countless times and the NRA lets them keep their phony A grades, money, volunteers, orange alert cards etc. I could give you dozens of examples just from memory of phony A rated pols who kept their As after screwing us.

  9. Exactly. And who knows, the delay and distraction might save the range toy yet.

    But either way, the NRA has avoided the Gun Grabbers’ trap/plan to make the NRA name toxic among folks in the middle.

    That’s the Gun Grabbers’ real goal – to “other” the NRA such that moderate folks and politicians run away from any association. And the NRA’s primary mission right now is to make sure that doesn’t happen, even at the price of bump-fire stocks. Because if the NRA brand is made toxic among moderates, the NRA loses its power to do anything useful in the future.

    • Nonsense. LaPew is and has long been literally in bed with the gun grabbers. E.g., sucking up to Sarah Brady after Columbine, opposing teacher carry in front of congress, sabotaging efforts to eliminate “gun free” no-carry zones in Virginia and Florida.

  10. I’m sorry but I don’t agree. The people who think the NRA is the Evil Gun Lobby will continue to think so until the NRA takes the position of an outright ban on all arms… and even then they would find some issue with the NRA. Gun control is not one sweeping piece of legislation, its a series of tiny concessions over the years. Because the media glorifies the shooter, because the politicians blame the objects, we will continue to have attacks on our gun rights because the other side has determined their agenda and end goal is greater than the actual public safety.

    • But Tom – the real risk is letting those haters define the NRA for the folks in the middle. We know that the grabbers hate us and will do anything to defame the NRA and us. But what matters is if the folks in the mushy middle are convinced that the NRA is evil – in which case the NRA’s lobbying power will be greatly reduced.

      • Nonsense. The NRA doesn’t use it’s lobbying power to defend 2A. It uses it for corrupt personal access, and to sabotage 2A. Countless examples.

        And NRA sabotages the greatest lobbying power it could use for 2A, by continuing to lie to NRA members, letting anti-gun pols keep their phony A grades, funding, volunteers and orange alert cards after screwing us. The greatest lobbying power NRA has is its power to elect relatively pro-gun pols and run gun grabbers out of office, but the NRA deliberately refuses to use it on our behalf. Instead they use it against us, protecting gun grabbers for access corruption etc.

  11. Oh ya! The Homer strategy, you are bound to fail so do not try, just give up before you start. We can defend our 2nd amendment rights by criminalizing innovations in firearms design. We need more regulations whose sole intent is the suppression of the free exercise of a constitutionally enumerated right.

    A new anti-civil rights bigot strategy is born. Draconic criminal penalties for anyone who fires more than 10 rounds per minute!
    .

  12. What this analysis misses is the fact that NRA blinked way too early. The opposition had already conceded defeat whining about the fact that nothing will change because the big bad NRA won’t let it. All they had to do was keep their mouth shut and let the enemy hand them a win. Besides, does anyone think the lefty grabbers are going to give NRA a break? They have been energized and now smell blood in the water. Don’t believe me? Just check out Chris Cox’s appearance with Chris Wallace this morning. Or Wayne’s grilling over at CSNBC.

    I don’t own a bump stock because I don’t want one but I’ll be damned if I want Feinstein telling me I can’t have one. Because if they kill the bumpstock guess what’s next; “hi cap” magazines, semi auto rifles and on and on.

    Not one inch. Not one step backwards.

    • Well said. Sometimes it’s better to keep the mouth shut.
      Piece of plastic didn’t kill anyone. The crazy bastard did it.

  13. It’s amazing how much knee-jerking is going on with bump-fire stocks.
    I’m very skeptical of what really happened based on video of gunfire taking place at a lower window level at the Mandalay Bay and reports of gunfire on ground level.
    The gunfire sounded a lot like a belt fed platform.

    • http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2017/10/daniel-zimmerman/ballistic-calculations-found-las-vegas-shooters-mandalay-bay-hotel-room/#comment-3671219

      http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2017/10/daniel-zimmerman/ballistic-calculations-found-las-vegas-shooters-mandalay-bay-hotel-room/#comment-3671221

      The problem with kneeling down is the fact that it’s a concession to disingenuous people who are proposing things that wouldn’t have done anything to stop the attack. The current strategy from “gun control” groups is to maintain the fear of firearms. The NRA is playing into that by agreeing that the bump fire technique is too deadly/dangerous to go unregulated. Now the public is going to see that EVEN the NRA agrees that “gun control” is necessary and that the Vegas attack would have been less deadly if there was more laws. Fact is, the attack was less deadly because the man had a bump fire stock on his rifles and not so reliable mags. The problem with saying that to the public is that it will require a lot of work to show people who don’t want to listen in the first place.

      What should be their focus is a genuine action to reduce gun deaths from the areas Americans can without further human right restrictions. To publicize their mission statement regarding the strategy the NRA is going to actively take from this point onward to greatly reduce violence and accidents with firearms, while being honest about not being able to stop every terror attack that involves firearms.

      The public’s complaint isn’t the bump fire technique, it’s the violence/death. Reducing the deaths from gang violence and negligence will reduce the uncontrollable emotional reaction to ban the firearm when a terrorist uses one.

      The NRA should use it’s money to help fix the hood/ghettos. Help less fortunate kids go to good schools. Have a mentor program for kids with bad parents or no parents. Reach out to local governments to get gun safety put into the public school curriculum at the earliest age possible. Help fund mental health programs and work with politicians to improve the deficiencies with the mental health system. Work to improve the quality of the police force and don’t defend or go silent when bad police do something wrong. Etc.

  14. I am with the author hear but I appreciate where autismoverTexas is coming from. This one is easy to walk away from. But I agree. It stops here.

  15. An obvious strategy option? Yes. Genius? No. Even I could think it up. If I can think it up it is not genius grade.

  16. The NRA has given strength to the BATFE, they have sided with “gun control” politicians and implied that the BATFE should exist. Now Republicans have to side with the “gun control” group, the NRA learderhip and the BATFE for their upcoming elections. We have already seen Republicans calling for more laws/infringements. This puts Trump in a bad position going forward, which is why he is trying to delay the discussion.

    Why does anyone need a stock that is used for range entertainment by a few people? Why would a person need a .50 BMG at a public range if they are not taking out vehicles and aircraft? Why do people need impractical drum magazines, belts and extended magazines for fun mag dumps at the range? Why do people have to have flash hiders if they only shoot at targets at the range during the day? Why is it necessary for people to use infrared or thermal devices to shoot at the range?

    Most people don’t have or need these things. So why shouldn’t they be banned along with the bump fire stocks? Let’s just have guns with no attachments, require thin barrels for semi automatic long guns and regulate the calibers/rounds for specific purpose use that isn’t combat. Since we are at it, let’s make it illegal to have any pistol that can fire a bullet over the speed of sound.

    Come NRA, you have done it before, you can do it again. You can cut off much of the negativity toward your org by being cool with such range toy regulation, as it will keep semi auto guns safe for a little longer. That way the water only rises in temperature slowly; maybe slow enough that your current members will expire before the repeal of the human right of self preservation and private property protection using modern tools. You don’t want your members to have to get off the couch anytime soon (if ever).

  17. Genius? Hardly, but I’ll admit it’s a decent tactic. Just bait and switch the terms with the media until this all blows over. Even no the media can’t keep focus on it long enough to keep support up for legislative action.

    Even so, relenting on issues like this is exactly how we got the original Clinton era AWB. It’s a tactic that can work, but it’s a crappy and dangerous tactic.

    Also: all of this said I’m still moving forward on designing my own TEC-9 slide fire knock off. Just because Feinstein said I couldn’t have it. :E

  18. McThag suggested making bumpfire stocks NFA AOWs so the tax stamp is $5, the antis are neutered since they are now regulated and registered, and the leverage can be used to obtain something useful like SHARE, national reciprocity, and repeal the Hughes amendment, since registered machine guns have never been used in a crime.
    The critical thing is get concessions from the ATF and antis

    • The thing is they don’t concede. Never have, never will.

      So you are already advocating a losing strategy to a bunch of people who want guns gone. Period.

    • That’s interesting! Instead of conceding that “bump-fire” = machinegun, we are conceding that it falls into a classification best characterized as a “gadget gun”.

      We have a slight – yet important – mis-focus. We are NOT REALLY interested in “bump-fire”. No, we are interested in the text of a law. These are two radically different things. If a law were passed that simply banned anything “commonly known as a bump-fire stock” we could live with that. But, that’s not what we are facing. One draft bill is already manifesting text that extends beyond bump-fire to reach bounds that are not fully understandable. The blurry areas will be filled in by ATF interpretations, regulations and arrests.

      I don’t know whether we are really better off negotiating with ATF or Congress-critters. Buying time is clearly worthwhile; and, NRA is more likely buying time than throwing in the towel.

      We PotG desperately need some position to rally around. I suggest that we tell McRino that we stand for this: For any gun-control bill they bring to the floor we require two substantive gun-rights bills. We want to know where our Congress-critters stand so we know how to vote. It does us no good for a few RINOs to join with the Democrats to pass a “bump-fire” bill – but no vote by Republicans on gun-rights. We demand a roll-call vote on gun-rights bills so we can decide whether to primary those that do not stand for substantive 2A rights.

  19. Think the NRA is trying to keep this issue out of the U.S. Senate, where we have only a slim advantage. And DiFi is waiting with the Automatic Gun Fire Prevention Act.

    Which do you prefer, bump fire stocks or 3G triggers?

    • There is also this thing called the House of Representatives which is more friendly to the people.

      Even if they manage to pass a bill in the Senate it still has to come to the House.

  20. So if they ban accessories that make shooting faster… I wonder what else could be considered. Maybe nice triggers

  21. We COULD flip this to our advantage, potentially, by doing this:
    1) Regulate bumpfire/slidefire stocks like MGs, and add them to the NFA registry BUT offer an amnesty period for current owners, and reopen the MG registry for post-86 guns, leave the amnesty open ended, and never close it.
    2) Profit

    (I could be wrong, or not understand all legal aspects, so don’t roast me too bad :P)

    • The problem is you think we are dealing with moral, rational people. We are not!!

      Their idea of compromise is you give them a little then we come back later to take more while we get NOTHING in return. They never concede anything, never have, never will.

      You can’t negotiate with zealots. The only strategy is to say NO!!

      • You are correct, NO negotiation with our opposition EVER! They, “the Left” (Democrats) operate on the (Sol) Alinsky Principle ie. Whine, protest, lie (propagandize) and demand 100% of something, accept 1/3rd as a “compromise” come back in a year or so demand the other 66%, agree to take another 1/3rd, then come back for a third time and demand the last 1/3rd for total victory.

  22. I disagree. The NRA didn’t stand down, Wayne jumped up and volunteered to throw bump stocks under the bus.
    If he’d just kept his mouth shut I wouldn’t have a problem with that.

  23. Thank you, Johannes Paulsen. The NRA did the sensible thing here. It’s one thing to argue ideological purity but I’m surprised by the amount of outrage against the NRA for making a smart strategic play that will benefit all gun owners, even those who are burning their membership cards in protest.

  24. Typical gun media people afraid of all the NRA bux and revenue they lose if they actually tell the truth. So much easier to keep the NRA in your mouth right?

    Anyone who expects to get anything from this is delusional and ignoring history. You won’t get shit and the only thing coming from this is more and more creeping erosion of our rights.

    People easily forget decades upon decades of history showing this so easily. How sad.

    Not to mention everyone loves to ignore the NRAs wording on this matter. Which shows without a doubt they support the unconstitutional machine gun bans and nfa crap.

    You people are ridiculous and I cringe to think this is what the “pro gunners” are supposedly like. We are absolutely doomed, and this is the grave you all chose.

    • You are absolutely right Harrison! Anyone agreeing with the author of this cowardly tripe is an anti-gun fool of a Fud!

  25. Personally I think this is very likely to be a tempest in a teapot.

    There’s going to be a lot of screaming and gnashing of teeth but ultimately I doubt anything of substance will happen.

    The ATF probably wants exactly fuck all to do with this situation because a bump-fire stock would be pretty difficult to construe as a “machine gun” since it doesn’t really modify the gun itself. The ATF, while one of my least favorite agencies, is smart enough to understand the can of worms this would open up and they don’t want that. You can see this in their recent position on silencers which is effectively “For the love of Christ take these things off the NFA, we’re sick of dealing with them!”. To me that suggests that the last thing they want is to have to dig into the weeds on every single attachment someone could put on an AR that *might* increase firing speed because then they’re going to have to look at basically anything you could attach. Does a handstop increase firing speed? A red-dot? An ACOG? What about a laser? Different weights of BCG? Yeah, the ATF don’t want none of that bullshit.

    On top of that it would be nearly impossible to make a “bump fire stock” a “machine gun” under the current language of the NFA which statutorily defines a machine gun as “Any weapon which shoots, is designed to shoot, or can be readily restored to shoot, automatically more than one shot without manual reloading, by a single function of the trigger. (emphasis mine).

    Lefties don’t want to get into this either since it would require re-drafting the NFA which might lead to scary things like more freedom when some “right wing gun nut” inserts language that the antis don’t understand and which weakens the NFA substantially.

    As for Congress, I don’t see DiFi’s bill making it. Congress is dysfunctional as fuck and even though some people have already caved I don’t see the votes in the House or the Senate for a serious gun control bill passing and even if it did it would have to go to DJT’s desk and I don’t really see him signing it.

    Again, maybe I’m wrong, but I don’t see any of this going anywhere. It’s Sandy Hook 2.0. Nothing of substance will happen because nothing of substance can happen. Antis couldn’t pass gun control after Sandy Hook when they had both chambers of Congress plus the POTUS. It’s far, far less likely to happen now.

    • Even though I have a tendency to merely scan your endless musings I believe you NAILED it strych9. I guess I WILL mail in my next free NRA membership. Thanks Taurus…I’ve stated numerous times if Newtown wifh Barry Soetoro at the helm didn’t destroy our rights killing a bunch of white country fans won’t. And yes I’m paying off an AR15…

      • Other than the game reviews (which I’ll continue to write), game related articles and possibly some articles on gear and running the Darin Fink Memorial Sniper Adventure Challenge this year you won’t have to worry about many of my endless musings at this point.

        I used to come here mainly for the comment sections (especially the ones where people posted cool info on esoteric topics or rare guns, the breadth of knowledge here on rare or lesser known guns is amazing). They’ve gone downhill recently and I’ve just lost interest in reading comment after comment about “treason”, how the NRA fucked everyone, the impending civil war or whatever else people feel the need to rant about without actually consulting reality.

        Instead, after my LLC paperwork comes through I’m launching my own website and video channel (though possibly not on YouTube after the shit they’ve pulled). I won’t be poaching any of RF’s territory but a bunch of it might be interesting to some people here, especially hunters.

        • They’ve gone downhill recently and I’ve just lost interest in reading comment after comment about “treason”, how the NRA fucked everyone, the impending civil war or whatever else people feel the need to rant about without actually consulting reality.

          Hear, hear.

  26. “The NRA’s Position on Bump Fire Stocks was Genius”?

    Yeah flip-flopping and alienating hundreds of thousands if not millions of members/supporters is a “smart” practice for any organization.

    Here’s my question;

    If the NRA was/is willing to surrender on Bump-Stocks what else are they prepared to cave on?

    NRA = Not Reliable Advocates

    • It’s worth noting, as I posted a bit ago, that what the NRA has done is ask the ATF to do the impossible.

      A “machine gun” is statutorily defined under the NFA in such a way that a “bump fire stock” can’t be considered an MG under any reading of the current law.

      There is only one way that the ATF could conceivably regulate the slidefire stock as an MG and that’s if Congress rewrites the NFA which isn’t going to happen.

        • Because it’s already been done but your opposition is so ignorant that they don’t know that so you appear to be compromising when you already know the outcome, by definition, has already been and will once again be in your favor.

          IMHO, this is playing on the ignorance and stupidity of a fair number of people. The ATF’s position is already clear. Of course if you never heard of a “bump fire stock” until Tuesday… well, what are the chances you know that?

      • I understand that but what gets me is that the NRA opened their friggin’ mouths without thinking this through as just asking for a “review” sends the wrong message to BOTH the pro and anti 2nd Amendment sides ie. it signals that our rights can be up for negotiation and or “review” after well publicized or horrific events.

        If the NRA was to say anything after Las Vegas other than “Stephen Paddock was was a registered Democrat and NOT a member of the NRA” it should have been: “the ‘accessory’ garnering so much attention as of late is ‘legal’ and THAT determination was made by Obama’s ATF and a team of Justice Dept attorneys appointed by HIM, if you have a problem with THAT take it up with THEM”

        • I get what you’re saying here but I would point out that you’re MUCH more knowledgeable on this subject than most antis or your “average American” and that ignorance on their part is something the NRA would appear to be taking advantage of.

          I’ve already seen antis claiming they’ve got a scalp because the ATF is gonna ban the “bump stock” and from there on out they can do more and more. That’s laughable if one can read basic English but it’s also exactly where you want your enemy: thinking they’re winning when all they’re doing is spinning their wheels.

          To me, personally, the real question is what the NRA does next. As others have noted; the NRA is playing a dangerous game. When one plays dangerous games and wins one is a genius, when one loses they’re a moron. We’ll just have to see how it all comes out. I don’t see this as some sort of master-stroke. I just think the NRA played the hand they were dealt, which was a bad one, rather well considering the circumstances.

        • Here’s the thing too along with Strych9’s comments. Right after the shooting, all I saw was, “where is the NRA?” “The NRA is silent.” “The NRA is to blame.”
          If they said anything, they were going to get blasted.
          “Pray for Las Vegas. Our thoughts and prayers are with them.” Would have been called lip service. More outrage.
          “We won’t budge an inch. The killer had every right to own that accessory for his rifle.” That would have sealed the coffin.
          They had to say something so they deflected a bit. Regroup and access. And it is a dangerous game.
          We can hope that the left and the ATF eat each other but it probably won’t happen. Will it blow over? I’m thinking that’s what the NRA is hoping.

  27. Add Johannes Paulsen to the LONG list of people who just can’t seem to comprehend the meaning of “…Shall not be infringed.”
    Yet, he writes for a pro (?) 2A firearms blog. Is this Denmark? Because something stinks.

  28. Not a genius article and not a genius path by the NRA. It is acceptable to let this blow over, let Democrats get greedy and have the gun control bills die from lack of support, rightly, as after every mass shooting.

    Their main objectives should be advancing national reciprocity, HPA/SHARE, and the legal dismantling of state “assault weapons” bans. I would also like to see them put bumps into the NFA in exchange for repeal of Hughes.

  29. Does anybody in this comments section think any US Senator (r or d) vote to repeal the hughes amdt? No way. The nfa and the gca of 68 are clearly unconstitutional, but those arguments are lost, over emotion. Wrong, but they are not changing in this lifetime. They only hope is too reduce the tax stamp to $5 and make the background for nfa a nics instant check. That 6 month to a year wait isnt any more strigent background check than a nics check. It is paperwork sitting in an inbox clocking time.

  30. Overly verbose and florid prose doesn’t change the fact that any capitulation of our rights is just that; a sellout. If we start giving ground now, we’ll be on the defensive until there’s no more ground to give.

    When it comes to our civil rights, there should be absolutely ZERO ‘compromise.’ Even with over-priced range toys that have zero practical application. If we give them that, they’ll take from us everything else. Camel’s nose under the tent, and all that.

    • Disagree. The bit where I said “know when to hold ‘em and know when to fold ‘em” used cliched language that a fourth grader could understand.

      • Apparently you failed the fourth grade, because you cannot comprehend . . “shall not be infringed”. With weak kneed, soft people like you willing to compromise every time some nut goes off, we are fighting a two front war.

  31. Paulson, you are a CUCK of the highest order.

    Reaffirm an already illegal, unconstitutional agency on top of already ALL illegal and unconstitutional laws, is a fucking genius tactic? You sure you didn’t get left behind by the Brady campaign as a 5th columnist??

    A legal strategy that PRESUMES your political enemies have a legitimate basis for their argument, is losing the fight, before you even enter the arena.

    You give up one gun, one accessory, one tertiary item whatever WHENEVER some fuckwad goes apeshit postal and the cunts in MSM and GovtTerrorist legion hold it up as ‘the reason for all the gun violence’ what WON’T you give up next, as a compromise.

    The fucking FUDDs. Stand up for mundane to the grave, when the time becomes inconvenient, politically charged, and hard, or GET THE FUCK OUTTA THE ARENA.

    TTAG does not need pussies who bendover for Dianne Feinskunt at the 1st sign of that cunty govt terrorist, whenever shit gets rough.

    And really, if NRA wants to be the PR dept for Brady Campaign et al, GO AHEAD. Just STOP pretending they ‘represent’ ANY gunnies, who are firm on 2A for PRINCIPLED reasons, NOT out of some ‘toy’ utility cuntardary.

    • All other commentary about your points aside, I am really fucking sick of the word cuck.

      Somebody decided it sounded cool, and now we can’t go one fucking thread around here without someone throwing that goddamn word around.

      Right up there with libtard and commie as triggers for “Stop reading now, this person has nothing whatsoever original to say.”

      /rant

      • [Cuckold (ism?)]

        “Somebody decided it sounded cool, and now we can’t go one fucking thread around here without someone throwing that goddamn word around.

        Word.

        Any shock value that term “cuckold” might have had at one time is *gone*.

        I’ll give you an example. – Someone who actually is racist is a despicable person.

        Thanks to the Left constantly screeching “Racist!” about *anyone* they disagree with, any impact the word may have at one time had, is *greatly* diminished.

        Congratulations, Leftists. You’ve managed to make actual racism more acceptable, and far less shocking…

        (And if any of you ‘cucks’ give me any shit about this… *snicker* 😉 )

        • EDIT –

          “Right up there with libtard and commie as triggers for…”

          In all fairness, someone who actually grew up and lived under the crushing boot of Communism on their neck in my opinion has every right to hurl that epitaph if the boot, er, shoe, fits…

        • Right. But ‘shit’ is still a highly effective and novel word that everyone loves to see

    • Nelson

      Right on!

      The NRA attorneys and spokestooges carefully crafted statement on Bump-Stocks showed the world they are “testicularly challenged” ie. “cucks” and I wouldn’t be surprised to learn their wives were seeking satisfaction elsewhere.

      And before someone else complains about terminology grow a set, if reading/hearing the term “cuck” results in you being “triggered” maybe you should be on the other side.

  32. Johannes, your analysis borders on brilliant.

    There are a lot of folks inexperienced in the art of political lobbying offering their condemnation of the NRA. Such a shame.

    Successful lobbying is a three-dimensional chess game. Not a game of checkers.

    • “The art of political lobbying” is EXACTLY the problem…along with crooked thinking assholes like you! What a fuckin stupid thing to say! Typical politician-think. You should go get a labotomy…do the world a favor.

      • That makes as much sense as unilaterally giving up our nation’s nuclear deterrent.

        I used to be naive about politics many, many years ago too.

  33. The NRA press release asks that the ATF reviews the ruling on the slidefire stock INSTEAD of having the congress or Senate create a new law or laws!!

    It was legal then, it will be legal now most likely since the laws they based their opinions on haven’t changed and by the time they are done reviewing the regulations we’ll be a year out from this with possibly a more favorable SCOTUS and less drive to legislate.

    By keeping it in the realm of regulation rather than legislation no new laws are made. Regulation is not law, regulations are written based on existing law.
    If they magically find new regulations outside of the law that is referred to as an underground regulation and is unconstitutional on its face.

    If Feinstein is allowed to pass a law regarding ‘increasing the firing rate’ we could lose more than the bumpfire stock.
    Muzzle brakes, forward grips, drop in triggers such as the binary trigger and even basic enhanced triggers like CMC and Geissele and more.

    As stated regulations are not laws, regulations are based on EXISTING law.
    Even if we lose bumpfire stocks under existing law, unlikely given that they have already undergone two ATF reviews and been found legal, nothing else is lost nor do we have a new law and a new set of regulations to fight.

    Did they request new legislation? No.
    Did they request a new ban on anything? No.

    What they did was try to mitigate the damage we all know is coming. Two days ago everyone was discussing the upcoming BAN on bumpfire stocks. Yesterday everyone was angry because of possible regulation of bumpfire stocks. In a day the discussion went from complete ban to possible regulation.

    Feinstein and the Dems are still going to try to ban every part and accessory they can but they are going to find it a very difficult and uphill battle with the NRA being ‘reasonable’ and ‘open to reviewing the item used in the massacre’.

    With two previous reviews failing to find the bumpfire stock meets the criteria of a ‘machine gun’ unless ATF makes something up that will fail in court a third will change nothing.

    • “Regulation is not law, and can be found unconstitutional”
      Really? Like the ban on 7N6 ammo? Which under the current law falls outside of any BATFE regulations for armor piercing but has been banned from import because it was deemed by regulations to be so. What court has found that was as illegal action exactly?
      Bumpfire stocks in no way meet the definition of machine gun but the NRA wants to “fuzz” the line and say they may so the ATF should look at it again.
      How about this, let’s take a hard look at the illegal activities on the passing of the Hughes Amendment. It should have never been allowed out for Regan to sign. It never passed. Watch the video
      https://youtu.be/a6Mx2UcSEvQ
      This is what compromise has led to.

  34. The middle ground (probably a year down the road) is congress passes legislation directing BATFE to regulate any firearm accessory that will make a semi-auto FUNCTION similarly to an automatic. After a protracted comment and development period BAFTE puts them in the Class 3 column. All present owners will be grandfathered but must submit a no-cost Class 3 application. If they pass, they keep it. If disapproved it must be divested.

  35. No, it was a dumbass move. Its gonna cost them a lot of members, a lot of people who might have become members, and some members of Congress may just decide to bail.

  36. Bump fire stocks DO NOT let any semi-auto function like a full-auto. GET A CLUE! So tired of you people spreading false information!

  37. ATF regulates.
    Congress makes laws.
    Which is easier to for a friendly executive branch to “creatively” enforce? (Thank’s Obama!)
    Which is easier to legally challenge?

  38. Without the NRA giving them cover, I don’t believe congress can pass a ban. If we told the Senate they had to pick two kinds of pizza, and make an order I don’t think they could get 2/3rds to agree on that, much less pass any type of gun control.

  39. genius is the word you used?

    i dont think that word means what you think it means

    how about in the future you refrain from using big words you dont understand

    the nra didnt stand down either

    what they did was roll over

    and all your bloviating isnt going to change that

    standing down would have been saying “the investigation just got underway and out of respect for the victims and their families were going to withhold comment at this time except to say that the obama administration said they were ok on at least two occasions so this matter is likely settled until such time as there can be a strong legal case made otherwise”

    how hard is that

    and your little quip about “bump fire stocks dont add anything to a citizens ability to use a rifle in defense of herself or our nation”

    that has to be the most retarded and intellectually repugnant statement ive read yet on this subject for so many reasons im not even going to go into it because theyre so self evident

    not one inch of movement on the 2nd amendment is the real smart move here

    and so is no more commentary or opinion pieces on this topic from one johannes paulsen

    he has failed to both demonstrate a command of the subject matter and differentiate himself from those who would take all our guns away

    he should instead get a job writing puff pr pieces for the nra im sure theyd love to have him on board after what he did here

    its tantamount to 2nd amendment editorial malpractice

    • It is been my experience in the past that when someone says that the reasoning behind a position they’re taking in an argument is “obvious,” but does not actually state it, it’s because they don’t know why, and are basing their position on fuzzy emotion.

  40. Get a clue he bought time once things cool off no change is going to happen. People have the attention span of gnats.

  41. The problem I see is one of phycology, 3D chess, and long-term plans. If ‘we’ falsely confess that guns themselves can be bad, or accessories can be bad and that there are good guns and bad guns out there than we are really opening the door to all sorts of problems. We really need to stick to people are good or bad, guns are objects.

    This can also hurt us later when we finally have a shot at amending the machine gun laws. Having previously stated that bump fire is bad, and thus machine guns, and possibly even higher ‘performance’ firearms are bad, we are really making more trouble for ourselves in the future.

    • EXACTLY

      on top of that we dont even know why this guy did what hes accused of yet

      for all we know he used them for the express purpose of getting them banned in the first place

      along with the ultra high capacity mags

      and the dozens of guns

      and the thousands of rounds of ammo

      and the tannerite

      you have to admit if somebody was going to do a false flag operation for the sole reason to get gun control laws passed it wouldnt look significantly different than this

      he was a lefty or a nut job or both

      remember theyre not mutually exclusive

      in fact the opposite is more often true

      i wouldnt put it past a member of todays left whos ok with 2700+ babies being killed every day to do something like this

      its not like todays left has anything resembling a moral compass

  42. Only a fool fights in a burning house. The NRA are no fools.

    However, I don’t see their position on bump fire stocks as genius. I see it as a forced move. There really was no option.

    • Nonsense, there were plenty of options besides preemptive surrender of their fellow citizens and 2A. For starters man up and say no as we did to all the hysterical sissy ‘geniuses’ who said we had no choice but to surrender after Newtown

  43. Legislative masturbation should always be avoided. Even if the thing being legislated is totally unimportant. Every second the focus is on guns and gun accessories is a second that progress cannot be made on actually preventing or lessening mass murders.

    Also grabbers are not interested in compromise or negotiation, only in an endless incremental walk. I don’t think we can ultimately reach victory over the grabbers by giving them anything, ever.

    The only way to win, is the spread the word that civilian gun ownership, even AR and AKs, are a net benefit for society in that more lives are saved with them than taken with them. Couple that with the fact that homicies in the UK and Australia both increased exactly as their strict gun control came into effect, that the lower murder rates in those countries cannot be attributed to their laws since the lower rates predates the laws, etc.

    My $.02 anyway.

    • The French Foreign Legion also asked themselves “What have done?” after trying to defend the ‘rice bowl’ terrain at Dien Bien Phu while the VietMinh had all the high ground.

      I’m not interested in emulating France on this one.

      • More like you’re so afraid of losing, and so far from having a principled position, that you panic, rush to surrender something that was defensible, and call it ‘genius’. Better than calling it what it is, cowardice and betrayal. What you’re doing is more like the ‘genius’ of feeding Germany the Sudetenland

  44. The only thing I have to say is that I believe this is a perfect time to open up the machine gun registry to anyone who wants to register machine guns that fell under the radar, up to and including bump-fire socks – even though bump fire can be achieved with a shoestring attached to a key ring. This would relieve the built-up pressure in the NFA registry created by the limited availability of new/modern machine guns that have been prohibited since May 1986, and would identify and register previously unknown full-auto weapons, giving the government more control over something that is heretofore a big unknown. I believe the government would prefer to know about these weapons rather than to find out in a future embarrassing example of their inability to control the public’s access to NFA weapons. Then we’d have to wonder whether the government would classify all of the new machine gun owners as people who illegally produced machine guns when they were prohibited. – which was the idea behind reopening the registry in the first place.

  45. there’s too many people asking too many questions abt this whole incident for it to be used as a pre-text for any sort of “gun control”

  46. Has ANYONE taking a position opposite the NRA even read the approval letter?

    The BATF didn’t approve a “bump fire” stock…they approved a device to help shooters with compromised physical abilities continue to enjoy shooting sports.

    Of course, everyone with half-a-brain realized what was going to happen…including the BATF…but they approved it anyway within the narrow scope of the question laid before them.

    Question: Does ANYONE know of a time such a “device” has been used for the approved purpose? I spend a LOT of time on rifle ranges, seeing hundreds of shooter per month. I’ve not seen a single time such devices have been used for the purpose they were approved…e.g., as an assist to physically impaired shooters.

    You can bleat and mewl all you want…but the BATF did not approved a “bump-fire stock”.

    Do not be at all surprised when the BATF circles-back and declares them illegal modifications – which is all they can do – then redefines “single function of a trigger” to mean only triggers that fire a single shot each time the trigger is pulled AND released.

    We all snickered when they issued the original ruling on slide-fire style stocks. They did the firearms community a favor when they did that. Do not be surprised when that bear whips around and bites us now.

  47. I’m sorry to tell you guys this, but a bump stock meets the definition of a semi-automatic because it is actually your finger that is pressing the trigger.

    If they are going to ban bump stocks, they might as well do a full ban on automatics. We all know that multimillionaire Stephen paddock could have purchased one legally. STFU and turn them in America. Automatics today, semi-automatics tomorrow. The emotional shaming performed by the leftists have worked. Even gun owners put their heads down and capitulated on bump stocks. If you capitulate on bump stocks you should capitulate on automatics. It’s only logical. The only thing I’m ashamed of – is my fellow gun owners.

    • Hear, Hear! 2.5 Million thumbs up, or equal to the amount of carding carrying membership that will be leaving the NRA….We need to stay focused…We the PEOPLE need to demand a “open and transparent independent investigation into what happened in Vegas! ” Because were certainly NOT getting answers!

  48. If Congress doesn’t pass a law regulating or outlawing bump fire stocks, the ATF, in several months time, will just reaffirm their previous stance on them. Remember, it’s Trump’s ATF now.

    The NRA seems truly concerned about anything that turns a semi-auto into something else (select-fire or full-auto)

  49. The assholes SUPPORTED GUN CONTROL. Why are you ignoring this?

    They supported the NFA and 1986 ban. Period. They didn’t say “Hey bump stocks are no big deal”, they SPECIFICALLY stated they support gun control.

  50. The NRA saying that bump stocks should be regulated and/or that the ATF should examine them is just legitimizing the gun grabbers’ idea that full auto weapons are dangerous and need to be regulated. It’s basically admitting that yeah, full auto weapons or fast firing weapons (over 100 rounds per minute?) should be banned, when they absolutely SHOULD NOT. The NRA basically just gave the left/anti 2a ammo to use against semi-auto weapons for years to come. Now the left can just say “SEE, even the evil gun toting NRA thinks full auto/fast firing guns are dangerous and should be regulated! You don’t need those guns!”.

    The NFA is unconstitutional. Full auto weapons being banned is unconstitutional. Rolling over and capitulating to the perpetually poutraging left before we even have half the facts or even motive of the shooting is absolutely idiotic, especially when we control the house, senate, president, and majority of state legislatures. It’s like we’re up by 40+ with home field advantage in the first quarter and the liberals got one field goal so we’re giving away the rest of the game.

    It’s possible the shooter didn’t even use the bump fire stocks. I heard reports that several of his firearms jammed. It’s possible that if he *did* use bump fire stocks, they actually caused the malfunctions and slowed him down. For all we know, him using bump fire stocks actually impeded his attack and saved lives.

    We need to be standing up to the poutraging left and repeal the NFA and full auto bans, not roll over and legitimize their attacks on our rights to keep and bear arms.

  51. http://www.keepandbeararms.com/information/XcIBViewItem.asp?ID=3247
    The NRA supported The National Firearms Act of 1934
    The NRA supported The Federal Firearms Act of 1938
    The NRA supported The Gun Control Act of 1968

    And the NRA let the Hughes Amendment of 1986 to the GCA slide without a fight.

    The NRA is not to be trusted. The leadership of the NRA still has ties to the Council on Foreign Relations, which is a globalist organization seeking totalitarian world government.

    The NRA only pays lip service to liberty, they do not stand in support of it.

    I think the NRA’s statement shows a level of dishonesty on par with any progressive or socialist. Unelected bureaucrats have no authority to make or modify any law or “regulation.” As per the Constitution, “All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.” No part of the Constitution gives Congress the authority to delegate any of its Powers. Nor does the Constitution give Congress the authority to ban or regulate what goods or services the People decide to make, sell, or buy.

    The NRA’s statement is a pathetic attempt to divert the issue from Congress, in order to provide cover for the Establishment Republicans. The midterm elections are only a year away. Does anyone think that any Republican, who votes for a ban, won’t be in danger of losing their primary?

    We either stay true to our principles, that everyone has the right to life, liberty, and property, or we die as slaves.

  52. “…For the price of giving up something that couldn’t be defended anyway, ”

    Since when do I have to defend freedom?

    The very heart of your statement is completely and totally wrong. You don’t reduce liberties because one person abused those freedoms. You don’t reduce the freedoms of citizens because of the actions of a criminal.

    Saying that it’s ok, good even, Is wrong. I don’t have to justify being free, the government has to make the case for limiting that freedom. That is how it is supposed to work.

  53. The executive branch of government has the power to interpret and regulate. Thats relly not debatable. The BATFE however must regulate within the framework of the laws within whic it has domain. The law says a machine gun is any firearm which fires more than once for each pull of the trigger. Nowhere does the law say what has to pull the trigger. The BATFE could not redefine a bump stock if it wated to.

    By taking a closed position referring the “problem” (of bump stocks) to the BATFE, the NRA has traded a little discussion, for a lot of space. We are used to seeing the NRA behave in a very slow and methodical way. This is what it looks like when they get off the “X” and countepunch effectively.

    Unfortunately, I’m affraid we are going to have to wait until we have drained more swamp water (replacing RINOS and Communists {formerly know as Democrats} with conservative constituionalists) before reciprocity and tax free suppressors see the light of day.

    • Good luck with that. I would love to see a resurgence of constitutionalism but I honestly don’t see it happening. It will get worse and more state controlled before people even start to wake up in large enough numbers to make a drastic impact. Not the truth I want, but the one I acknowledge exists.

  54. Bump-Fire stocks, flash hiders, high capacity magazines, muzzle brakes…To Switchblades vs assisted pocket knives…All of it a bunch of nonsense, designed for the US citizenry to surrender more Liberty to Big Government, Career Criminal Politicians, and the advancement of Globalism…We all know THIS is just Bull$#!T !..A Mysterious, and Strange shooting spree by supposedly a well to do Millionaire!? (The Catalyst.) Then the quick to the draw political agendas to take immediate action against the American publics 2nd Amendment rights. (Implied authority.) People, political/support-sellouts, and some organizations willing to help Americans surrender, or help curtail Civil Liberties….No! Again, this event reeks of the “Deep State”, and Paternalism…No Surrender, That’s coming from a non-Firearms owner! Who wholeheartedly supports everything pertain to the US citizenry!

  55. Sorry, but this analysis is completely wrong.

    The only way the NRA can walk back from this fiasco is to go all in and threaten every Congress member’s likelihood of re-election in 2016 and 2020. They should have made a principled argument along the lines that bump fire devices have never before been used in crime and banning them would do nothing to address the problem of gun violence.

    By caving in to the argument that “no one needs” bump stocks – which is what the NRA is doing – they are granting validity to that argument against semi-auto pistols and semi-auto rifles just as it has already been applied to high-capacity magazines. There is no denying that is a slippery slope which the NRA has just slipped on.

    People who think the NRA can wrangle a “deal” to “trade” bump fire devices for reciprocity or suppressors are delusional. Suppressors are already off the table. Reciprocity is even less likely to stand a chance now.

    There IS NO DEAL to be made. Bump stocks will be banned. And once banned, the movement for further gun bans will not be restrained one iota.

    The NRA has made a serious mistake and they need to walk it back vigorously immediately.

    • I disagree with this application of the slippery slope. There is a distinct difference between restricting a specific accessory to a firearm which alters it’s function, and an entire class of firearms. The largest class of firearms no less. The fight for semi autos is what we are trying to avoid.

      • There is a huge difference and stubbornly trying to equate the two is going to do more harm in the long term. Accessories should be regulated separately from firearms period. To combine the two groups is to risk them becoming one group in the eyes of the ATF, the anti gunners, and the fence sitters that we rely on to support us by NOT taking a side.

  56. Plan For Total and Complete Disarmament —- U.S. State Dept. Publication # 7277.

    N.R.A. ignores such things , you may want to read it.

  57. “The NRA believes that devices designed to allow semi-automatic rifles to function like fully-automatic rifles should be subject to additional regulations.”

    “WAYNE LAPIERRE: We have supported the existing law on fully automatic firearms.”

    The NRA has only supported privileges and not actual rights since the beginning. Hopefully more will wake up to that fact. There were 13 sentences in the NRA’s post Sandy Hook statement that were very dangerous to Liberty. This is nothing new for the NRA.

    Individuals have finite lifespans but governments are immortal by relative comparison. The free individual will always lose in a long political game of tyranny. Denied your Liberty for your lifetime is denied your Liberty forever.

    Apologists for statism, appeasement, and tyranny, such as Paulsen, are the reason I stopped reading and commenting here at TTAG. Trusting people like this author and the NRA will enslave you.

    –An unapologetic Liberty absolutist… Out.

  58. So we give up on bump fire stocks, like we gave up on sbrs and suppressors and background checks and the right to carry, etc and so on…
    When do we reach the magic point where the opposition is permanently appeased or thwarted from moving forward to its ultimate goal?
    Because it’s a matter of time before big pharma and the media encourage yet another terror incident, and the politicians will single out yet another legal thing that was the cause for a behavioral problem, and someone will say that thing is indefensible and we are forced to lose again.

    I’ve got no love for bumpfire stocks but this relationship is all give and no take. Unless somethings been put back on the table we shouldn’t simply give up ground.

    • You’re purely focusing on the political fight and ignoring public opinion. The public doesn’t see any rational defense of these stocks. That’s where we are at. That is what the political opposition is leveraging against us. So unless you have some proposed “take” that the public will endorse, you will ultimately lose out… AND, in the process, likely be made to look like the supposed extremists the political opposition wants to paint us as! Get it??

  59. “The NRA’s Position on Bump Fire Stocks was Genius”

    Yeah, Blue-Falcon genius. Not even the jaded NRA haters saw that buddy-Fv<K comin.

  60. Sounds about right. The NRA has it’s share of issues, but even they can smell the steaming pile of fail that bump fire stocks are. Gun rights have been making steady progress for decades. There’s no reason to undermine that making a stand on peripheral issue.

  61. I agree that this is probably as good as it’s gets for the NRA in this situation, but I would not call it genius. They have, in fact, accepted a premise put forth by the antis that some guns/features are bad. That will come back at them.

  62. Bumpfire stock?…Bumpfire STOCK?…We don’t need no steenking bumpfire stock!….

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QkWuYr0cD4M

    The principle on which these bumpfire devices work is so simple it can be duplicated many ways. This guy’s method calls attention to whether “regulating” these things is even a discussion worth having.

    Obviously, semi-auto firearms are inherently capable of very rapid fire and have been since their creation. They cannot exactly mimic their designed-as-full-auto counterparts in actual rate of fire, but once you get past several rounds per second it makes little substantive difference if you are on the “receiving end” of a hail of bullets (as proved in Las Vegas).

    The ATF approval of the “bumpfire” stocks during the Obama Administration (twice) is starting to smell like rotten red herring in Denmark. This kerfuffle seems fraught with unintended/unanticipated consequences.

  63. yet another chain of comments devoid of any acceptance of political reality. “not one inch!”, “no compromise!” way to back a losing strategy. you may hate politics and the court of public opinion, but that’s the way the game is played. every time a mass shooting occurs, the NRA is on the defensive and gets flamed for it. for once they’ve put the other side on the defensive.

    If we don’t at least give the appearance of compromise, then every time a mass shooting occurs and nothing changes the other side gets more support. you can stand in the open and get shot, or you can seek cover and find a better position to fight from.

  64. It hurts my soul that some gun owners still have the mindset of, “Oh well, if we give The Left this ONE thing- they’ll leave us alone and they won’t take anything else…”
    Really, where have you people been over the years? Have you not learned by now? They want EVERYTHING gone! But that’s okay, you can keep yalls head in the dirt until we’re reduced to revolvers and double barreled shotguns in a few short years.

    • Troy, I don’t think you got the point of this article. He’s not saying we give the enemy this one thing and they’ll leave us alone. The point is as much about public opinion as it is political opposition. We cannot ignore this side of things. If we do, the bastard will use it to win. It’s how the wicked game is played.

  65. Since it seems everybody is concerned with the rate of fire if they get rid of bumps stocks can we at least get all the machine guns that have a low rate of fire deregulated like the Chauchat, Madsen,and the grease gun

  66. I am very pro gun but the BUMP STOCKS need to be reviewed by the BATF and need to be regulated.as they modify the weapon to fire in an “automatic” mode. If you want an automatic weapon get the Class III license other automatic weapon owners have to get.. Quit being CHEAP!!! Personally I think the BATF should create another class for these weapons but have the same BACKGROUND check requirements current Class III owners have to go through and maybe charge less for the license. These BUMP STOCKS as shown in the wrong hands can be used and abused!.

    • A bumpfire stock is not a weapon, does not require a 4473 to purchase. It also does not alter the function of the actual weapon in any way, any more than pulling the trigger really fast does. Don’t be cheap? You do realize a select fire AR or M16 sells for over $20,000 when you can find one for sale, right? Your post reads as though you are screaming emotion without first engaging your brain or doing some basic research.

  67. The Good, Bad and the Ugly. Be thankful Hillary didn’t get elected. The liberal demoRats were in checkmate position. The hard working American people actually did show up in this last election. Imagine where you would be if there was no NRA to fight for us when we are busy at work to make a living. You would have already lost everything long time ago. Imagine if the NRA had 10 Million or 50 Million members instead of 5 ONLY Million. That’s right, there are only 5 Million members pulling the wagon for all of the rest. This is a heavy wagon. A LOT of people own LEGAL firearms. But they count on others to Protect THEIR Right to have them. I’m sure a LOT of critics fall into that category. Imagine what we could accomplish if more people would actually show up on election day to vote people like Pelosi, Schumer and Feinstein out of office. Imagine if more people got involved to make that happen. We all agree, what happened last week was a tragedy. The liberal demoRats didn’t even let the families put their loved ones to rest and others to heal before exploiting a tragedy to push their agenda. The NRA pointed out the last administration’s ignorance toward firearms. Now the demoRats claim we need to work together. When the left has attempted to obstruct everything our new President wants to improve since he was elected. The bumps stocks are more of a gimmick than anything. You will NEVER see our Military or Law-Enforcement agencies using them. It would be risky for many reasons. If the last administration had any clue what they were talking about bump stocks would have been rated as a class ll device (like a suppressor). I say we offer them (I didn’t say give) bump stocks for the Wall and National Reciprocity. We already have strict laws against making a semi-auto into a class lll firearm. I’m as Pro-2A as you can get. People always ask why would a person need a full auto. My reply is; why would anyone need a 300 + mph top fuel funny car or dragster, race boat or private jet? Because our Founders believed America was based on Liberty. To be the best we can be. Firearm ownership was intended to Protect US from a tyrannical government that would take them away. Class lll firearms are like 300 + mph top fuel race cars. They are owned by highly responsible people. And highly regulated. But you do have the right to own one (or more) legally in a safe environment if your a law-abiding citizen. And you can afford them. Remember the liberal demoRats (demolition rats) want to divide and conquer. (d) = DENY The liberal demoRats want to Deny YOUR Right to Protect Yourself and Others. They would like to divide US anyway possible. This is their strategy. But this might backfire on them. People now see through their agenda. People now see how the liberal demoRats and the media are using hate to divide people. People noticed how good people came together in last weeks tragedy. People see a President who appreciates our Military and Law-Enforcement Officers that put their life on the line to save others. We now have a President who wants to Protect OUR country. People see a President who appreciates people who work hard to make a living. People see a President that likes to see good people helping others. The world watched good people helping others in last week’s tragedy. And during the natural disasters that happened in the weeks before. People noticed Goodness is more powerful than hate any day of the week. We now have a President and an NRA that believes good people have a God-Given Inalienable Right to Protect themselves, their families, neighbors, community and country. Sometimes we have to take one step backwards to go three steps forward. So, think about this really hard. The NRA is a form of unity. Our strongest form of UNITY. We now have a President and an NRA fight on OUR side. This is NOT about guns. This is about Liberty. United We Stand! Vote Your Country. God Bless America

  68. NRA was crafty with this Idea, get the pig to eat itself, there by letting the Government democrats piss off the people of the gun even more, this massacre was perpetrated and facilitated by the black ops of the Democrat party in cahoots with the Muslim Radicals! why do you think the Democrats support illegal immigration from the Muslin countries they want to see chaos in this country so they can be in control from cradle too grave! cannot accomplish any sane, rational or positive help for the people it’s all abut control no freedoms except what they want too give you!
    If you think Automatic fire is the way too go then do so if you can afford it! at the same time tolerate those that do not! Personally could care less, as our family fires between 500-1000 rounds a weekend, with out trigger assists , ever skip cans or make them dance hard to do with a bump fire.

  69. NRA, WAYNE LA PIERE, CHARGED WITH DERELICTION OF DUTY, RETREAT UNDER FIRE, TREASON.
    THIS WILL USHER IN A NEW REPLACEMENT FOR THE NRA.
    THEY NOW ARE ON THEIR WAY TO IRRELEVANCE.

  70. What is crafty is how the media has made a maniacal madman’s idea of taking out a large group of people is now the sole fault of a piece of plastic. That’s like saying it’s my silverware’s fault for my obesity.
    Let’s put a little thought into this. Let’s take our mass murderer and make him a Truck collector, spending his fortune on big, heavy, high horsepower pickup trucks. He drives through the fence, maims hundreds, kills one hundred, and dies in the fiery crash into the sound board. How many people would be blaming Ford, Chevy, or Dodge, and seeking recompense for it? Would they sue Summit racing for the sale of a 1000 hp V8? How about blame the DOT for not making it harder to get off of a road with a vehicle? Would there be legislation on the table about fuel limitations?
    Now, collectively, how many people die annually from vehicular ACCIDENTS? They have already banned cellphone usage behind the wheel in many states, but you can still have one while in a car. I don’t have a percentage, but I’m pretty sure a higher percentage of people die each year due to improper vehicle usage than firearm accessories.
    Does any of this make it the trucks fault? A truck does not decide how it will be used, responsibly or irresponsibly. My 18 year old son just financed a Ram 1500, didn’t need to do a background check, an MVR, or even my permission.
    I think we need someone on the front line who is not afraid to say that an inanimate object has no motive. Objects, by nature, cannot be good or evil. Only the intention of the one using it. I have a hammer that could smash a persons skull to pieces, but that doesn’t make it a killer.

  71. POLITICS 101
    The art of public relations is political maneuvering so your opponents fail to rally the public despite an apparently strong position.

  72. Let us remember that the 2nd Amendment is not an immutable law of the universe. Less than 100 years ago, a bunch of moralizing dogooders passed a constitutional amendment that prohibited alcohol — you can bet the drinking public then was a much greater proportion of the public than the gun owning population now, and still they managed to get it passed.

    Secondly, when you are arguing with an anti, the purpose is NOT to change that anti’s position. Not going to happen. The purpose is to change the opinion of the vast majority of non-gun-owning bystanders who are somewhere in the middle. The NRA’s position bought a lot of credibility with those people in the middle and we need to remember that our rights to firearms are mediated by that middle because it is just larger than us. Tick off enough of them by looking totally unreasonable and irrational, and you could very well see the 2nd Amendment written out of existence.

    • Perfect! I hope EVERYONE reads this – I wish I had thought of this analogy! READ PBW’S POST PEOPLE! I am going to steal your post for others to read!

  73. I would not let the Government have what it wants. It is not their RIGHT to take. The NRA has and its members have let them relinquish every time to appease these people. I am now looking at Gun Owners of America. They seem to know what the Constitution and the Second Amendment were and are written for “The People”.

    • The part you are missing is that Constitution is amendable. Antis are talking about doing just that (see the M. Moore story). To prevail against the push for a Constitutional Amendment, you have appeal to the reasonable non-gun-owning public to defeat it because statistically, they are larger than us. Being rational will go a long way toward that goal. Being a hard___ “line in the sand” type, just means that the middle will look at us as total nuts and freaks who definitely shouldn’t have firearms.

  74. Perfect response by the NRA!!! As an NRA member I support this stance 100%. Personally, I was shocked when ATF allowed bumpfire stocks but whatever – they’re useless anyway. There is a price to be paid for Las Vegas – I will gladly give the anti’s their “win” and let ATF rule again on bumpfire stocks, which will at a MINIMUM, become regulated if not banned. If any of you think this isn’t a fair trade – you are fools. If you think you can go through life without compromise – you are fools (clearly you’ve never been married). If you let the legislators handle this everything we have could be lost – the LAST thing we want is for congress to begin crafting new gun laws, I guarantee we will pay a VERY dear price if that happens. Maybe a new assault weapons ban. I lived through one and I don’t want another. As a responsible gun owner, I am not willing to fall on my sword over bumpfire stocks and I hope no one else is either. When that day comes it will be to save my guns – not some silly novelty.

  75. I’m a firm believer in fire and maneuver…. Digging in takes away the ability to maneuver. Give ground in the valley if you can take the overseeing hill.

    Fire and maneuver isn’t retreating. It’s repositioning to gain the enemy’s flank. Once on their flank, the enemy must withdraw and reposition or risk the whole line collapsing.

    Anti-gun politicians expected the NRA to dig in. Instead, they yielded ground while out-maneuvering the anti-gun mob. If they can stall until the short attention span public moves on (and they will do so quickly), then the anti-gun crowd has lost all momentum. Meanwhile, politicians find their email inboxes flooded with messages from 2A advocates (who are far more inclined to raise hell than the liberal segment of society). Except for the usual anti-gun zealots, most politicians will have tempered their zeal with the reality of American gun politics.

    Consider what 2A advocates are fighting for. A bump stock is not a firearm. It’s not an essential component, such as a magazine or sight. It is, at best, an accessory. A range toy for most who own or want one. How much of their limited political capital should the NRA expend on defending an accessory that very few gun owners want and none actually require? Consider that there are bigger fights that can be won with that capital.

    Dig in or fire and maneuver. You can’t do both, but you must do one or the other… What do YOU do?

    • Well put Corey. Except your comment about magazines. I would leave them out of the analogy as they could be another debate in themselves. (Magazines *are* essential for semi-autos to function. The capacity limit is unconstitutional, etc etc…) Your point about bumpfire stocks being a non-essential accessory is entirely valid! I would simply not have likened it to mags. That’s all.

    • “A bump stock is not a firearm. It’s not an essential component, such as a magazine or sight.”

      A large detachable magazine is not a firearm either. And according to the gun grabbers it’s not an essential component. The reasoning you use to surrender bump stocks has been and will be used again against large detachable magazines. You can’t have it both ways.

      The only thing you get by pushing gun control is more gun control, and you make it easier to pass or decree by making the enemy’s arguments such as, “who needs a bump stock?” Well, “who needs a large detachable magazine?” “Who needs to buy more than one gun a month or a year for that matter?” “Who needs to own more than three guns?” “Who needs more than 1000 rounds of ammunition?” Etc. It’s a slippery slope and your genius appeasement is helping the enemy dump us onto that slope.

      The NRA geniuses are going to end up surrendering bump stocks and getting nothing in return. Worse, they will have advanced the enemy’s logic. Blame everyone for the act of one guy. Throw a technology under the bus. And in the process, they will have neglected to make our case, for example, how many people could’ve been saved if that security guard had been armed? Instead of making our case they’re making the enemy’s case and calling themselves clever. Oh how very clever.

  76. Damn dude, I have been struggling to figure out why the NRA took this position. Johannes, this is a brilliant and well thought out. If everyone would stop thinking with their b@lls and start thinking with their brains, this is perfect. Just look at the comments on this article, to figure out that the NRA just took the right approach.

    • Right? That was basically my reaction to this article. Really makes you think. Those guys in DC might be a little more sly than some give them credit for. May be

      • I know, right?
        Wrong. The same arguments all the genius appeasers are using to surrender bump stocks have been and will be used against large capacity magazines. You geniuses are too clever by half

      • Oh I know they were sly, I just didn’t realize how sly they were. They knew DiFi was going to introduce something, this was their way of sidestepping and let they show their cards. We know it isn’t going to come up for a vote, not with Scalise basically saying nope, ain’t going to happen. Apparently Wayne did read “The Art of War”. The NRA actually let them show their hand and then they overplayed it.

        • Right. Pepe LaPew read the Art of War. That’s why he still gives Queen Lindsey of Carolina an “A+” grade after she betrayed us to do her cheerleader pom-pom routine to confirm her anti-gun comrades like Sotomayor & Kagan, leaving us with a Supreme Court that is precarious at best, when LaPew could’ve kept those seats vacant until the cows came home or loyal honest Americans were nominated.

    • Alternately if all the sissy appeasers would man up and stop thinking with their v@gin@s, stop the hysterical panicking, stop trying to preemptively surrender, the rest of us could stay off the slippery gun control slope. You’re so smart you can’t see this is a dangerous precedent. You think they’ll be happy with the Sudetenland, and you will get nothing in return for throwing it under the bus.

  77. Seems pretty logical to me. The court of public opinion matters, folks. That’s is the point of this article. A point that many comments seem to side-step entirely. If we ignore this FACT, it will be to our own peril.

    Let’s be real – we (responsible gun owners) are grossly outnumbered in the general public. Bump-fire/slide-fire proponents and Hughes haters (myself included) are even more so in the minority. The outlier minority of the minority, you could say.

    My libertarian principles tell me to fight for every inch… BUT my rational realistic side, which follows the political climate, knows better.

    ***I would honestly love the comments against this article to explain HOW to support the libertarian principled stance (pro bump-fire & select fire) AND WIN in this exact situation.*** No abstract hypotheticals and theory. Real world. Here and now.

    I honestly want to hear it.

    • That’s the kind of preemptive surrender/appeasement that was pushed after Newtown on the same flimsy hysterical reasoning. Gottlieb wanted to surrender de facto national gun registration. NRA was testing the waters for a surrender “deal”. Loyal grassroots groups joined with GOA, manned up, said no, and guess what: Nothing passed.

    • Crickets chirping, prags slurping…. You wanted real examples of what you prag(ressive) geniuses want to do vs what should and can be done, and you got one. Here’s another. The Sudetenland.

      Neville Chamberlain: “Who needs the Sudetenland? Just let them have it and they’ll go away. Aren’t I just the Vulcan Chessmaster?”

      That’s what you geniuses are doing. Instead of manning up, saying NO, and making OUR case, you make the enemy’s case, using arguments that just as well can and do support bans on high capacity magazines and numerical and time limits on purchase & ownership of magazines, firearms and ammo. Out of hysteria, hubris or worse, you betray principles you probably never had – for wishful thinking, a ‘deal’, a ‘compromise’, something in return you’ll never get.

      P.S. Open-immigration Left “Libertarians” are the biggest destructive factor for gun rights in the USA. See California. “Libertarian” judgment should never be trusted.

  78. What a load of sissy spin. Gun cucks, appeasers and collaborators never get anything significant back for these alleged “genius deals”. After Newtown, Alan Gottlieb of SAF/CCRKBA and others were in full panic mode, tried to “compromise” by preemptively surrendering de facto national gun registration even though it wouldn’t have stopped the massacre since the shooter STOLE the guns. Gottlieb and the other beltway genius sophisticates screamed that we HAD to “compromise” or the gun grabbers would simply *take* everything and write their own ticket without our ‘input’. Loyal independent grassroots and state groups banded together with GOA, stood up like men and said NO. At that point the NRA – which had been testing the water for a betrayal – backed off and left Gottlib hanging. And guess what: NOTHING PASSED, despite the hand wringing hysteria of the sophisticated genius GRPC legal priesthood set.

    The NRA is coyly pushing gun control. Just because it’s being done by regulation under existing unconstitutional law doesn’t mean it’s not gun control. The only thing you achieve by pushing gun control is more gun control. It sabotages our own moral position, our own principles.

  79. “The NRA dodged an incoming blow from the enemy aimed at poisoning the image of their organization in the minds of the people.”

    Oh, the hell it did.

    Giving into liberal demands does not get you ONE IOTA of credit with liberals. They will lie about your cooperation and continue to vilify you anyway.

    In his history of ‘60s “Gun Control,” Bob Kukla describes quite well how the NRA learned to their dismay that their cooperation was soon disavowed and mischaracterized by the very vermin with whom they had cooperated.

    (page image at https://cl.ly/3H081H3C0W0B)

    Vin Suprynowicz pointed out the operative mechanism when discussing a different subject matter: “As for the [videogame] ’violence rating system’ — an area where the Constitutional mandate for federal involvement remains obscure at best — note that the president [Clinton] thanked the industry for adopting such a system voluntarily, as had been requested by him and the first lady. Their reward for complying voluntarily? The government will now impose on them a better, federal system. See how it pays to cooperate?”

    Not one damn inch more.

  80. One does not advance or even secure Liberty by giving up Liberty. The very notion is ridiculous.

    As for the Quisling NRA, this is their history, their legacy and their deliberate intent.

    The NRA: America’s ‘Govt Approved Gun Privileges Organization’, working hand in hand with govt since their inception to ‘slow-sell’ govt infringements to the American people of that which is constitutionally prohibited from govt infringement.

    I find the NRA sycophants/apologists/sucklers to be pathetic and a clear and present danger to the Liberty of the rest of us.

    Pfft.

    • While making the enemy’s argument on bump stocks, the NRA, their “prag” fans, and Bloomberg-Soros shills suppress, evade and divert attention from the basic case against “gun free” zones, a case that is very relevant here.

      Mandalay Bay is a “gun free” zone. Civilian carry might not have helped on the ground level outside, but it very well might have helped in the hotel. For starters, security guard Jesus Campos was the first person shot, in the leg, through the door. Assuming Campos wasn’t an accomplice, how many people might still be alive had he been allowed to carry and return fire, possibly hitting the shooter(s) and at least disrupting/suppressing? How many Nevada CCWs were in the hotel, in the vicinity, who couldn’t legally carry and were therefore helpless to try to help, provide suppressive fire, even kill the shooter(s). How many out of state CCWs were in the hotel nearby, including off-duty cops? etc. Why did it take 17-18 minutes for the police to even get to the 32nd floor let alone another hour to get into the room?

      All this highlights one of our key principles, that police carry is no substitute for civilian carry. The only person who can always be there with you armed to defend you is you. When seconds count, the police are minutes and even hours away from providing assistance. Dial 911 and die. In this case, all the police did was count the bodies. They had no beneficial effect whatsoever on the body count. This is no slur on the police either. Many loyal American police officers acknowledge this truth.

      But the alleged Vulcan Chessmasters, hysterical sissies, cucks, “prags”, appeasers and collaborators of the gun community would rather preemptively surrender than make our case.

        • Really? Logic much?
          What an idiotic argument that is.
          I knew within minutes it was a hoax, yet I never bothered to correct it. Now why do you think that is dumbo? Because it’s irrelevant to the fundamental arguments. But you seize it as some kind of perverted justification in your mind for your betrayal of the second amendment and your fellow Americans. That not only makes your argument look bad, it makes *you* look llike a weasel

        • Yet you are unable to dispute any of my arguments, but are forced to lurk waiting for a diversionary hit & run cheap shot. Cheap shot, cheap mind. Crickets chirping forever before you address a substantial issue.

  81. This BS that the NRA is actually crazy like a fox is BS. What they should have done it put out a statement that they can not comment on a situation that is still being investigated and they do not know the facts. That we do not know if the shooter used illegal modified guns and of what type. As we do not know we can not make an intelligent comment. If they had to say something then it should have at least said that they feel banning something that has been eagle sold for several years is near impossible and that it would make more sense to put them under NFA regulation than to ban them. To do what they did was to fold like a cheap hookers dress on a motel room floor.

    • exactly. delay. there was no need for the nra to jump in and open the door. but we all still must support the nra as it is the best organization to protect the 2nd amendment there is.

  82. I’m willing to accept limits on the types of firearms protected by the Second Amendment. I draw the line at crew-served weapons; if it takes more than one person to operate it, perhaps it shouldn’t be a personal firearm.

    That said, I sort-of agree with the NRA; let the BATFE fiddle with stuff for a while. We can blame the existing BATFE ruling that ALLOWED “bump stocks”, from Obama’s BATFE. That twists the argument a bit.

  83. I agree with this article, and would simply add that no rulemaking proceeding is needed — just an internal decision to reverse a prior interpretation of the existing regulations regarding conversion kits and other gizmos, specifically by treating a bump stock the same way the regs treat semi-to-full conversion kits. The Eleventh Circuit has already confirmed that the ATF has this power when it affirmed the ATF’s reversal of its original internal decision on the original Akins Accelerator in Akins v. United States (2009). They’ll need to reverse the existing rulings on the Slidefire product (sales of which the manufacturer has already suspended) and a few other such rulings, but this can skip the whole public comment period, and most important, this can keep CONGRESS’ GRUBBY PAWS off the subject.

    Contrary to what absolutists demand, this massacre does not add to the NRA’s or any Second Amendment supporter’s political capital. It does the OPPOSITE of that. But if we take this bump stock issue off Congress’ plate, then maybe next year we can actually get some action on reciprocal concealed carry, suppressors, or other goals. If Congress changes the law to deal with bump stocks, you can damn well bet that will include other gimmes demanded by the Dems and insufficiently fought for by squishy Republicans, certainly including large-capacity mags.

    If you want to understand the current law and regulations on this, and in particular the not-very-consistent treatment of these sorts of gizmos by ATF going back to 2006, I recommend that you read the briefs in the case currently pending in federal court in Indiana in which Freedom Ordinance’s ERAD product (a battery operated trigger-return gizmo) is at stake on cross-motions for summary judgment:

    * FOMI’s brief in support of its motion for summary judgment

    * ATF’s brief in support of its cross-motion for summary judgment

    * FOMI’s response/reply brief

    * ATF’s response/reply brief:

    I’m not interested in arguing with anyone about their belt loops or rubber bands or other MacGyver’d techniques for bump-firing a semi-automatic weapon. That’s not the legal question before the ATF. Rather the question before the ATF is: Do we treat bump stocks the same as, or differently from, conversion kits under existing laws and regs? I think the answer to that legal question is that they’re the same, and I also think that’s the politically smart answer.

    • If one supports the unalienable natural right to keep and bear arms which is merely contextualized for the times and enumerated via Amendment II, along with a crystal-clear prohibition on govt from doing exactly as they have, continue to do and that you support…..then opposing anything which govt does that infringes upon that right is not being an “absolutist”, it is being a clear-thinking, principled free-man.

      A breed of men in ‘new armerica’ that is near as scarce as hen’s teeth it seems and a breed of men to which you do not belong to, let alone even comprehend.

      As I said in an earlier post, One does not advance or even secure Liberty by giving up Liberty. The very notion is ridiculous.

      It really is as simple as that.

    • Translation from legal priest toady speak:

      “I’m for existing unconstitutional gun controls, and for new ones as long as they’re decreed by bureaucrats.”

      What a courageous principled POV. The gun grabbers will never see if coming. Look at them, they’re all fooled! They’ll totally back off once you give them Sudetenland!

      See, the difference is, you don’t care about the Sudetenland. They respect what you care about and will never go after those things using your arguments!

      Keep dreaming. The way to keep congress’ hands off gun control is to say NO to them and to hysterical preemptive surrender chimps like NRA and Gottlieb, as we did after Newtown when Gottlieb SAF & Compamy were screaming like sissies that we HAD to preemptively surrender on de facto national registration or congress would pass “something” anyway. Guess what. Soon as enough loyal Americanss, grassroots groups and GOA, manned up said no, the NRA imitated them, and nothing passed.

      From the POV of whether you “really need” a bump stock, 50 high capacity magazines, 50 guns, more than x guns a year, more than y amount of ammo etc, the gun grabbers, the media, the uncommitted public and others you’re trying to appease will see no fundamental difference between banning bump stocks and banning large capacity magazines, “arsenals” etc like those used in the shooting. They will say thanks for agreeing with them on bump stocks and use the same argument to go after magazines, “arsenals”, too many guns, too much ammo etc, IF you don’t say NO, iIF you focus on making the enemy’s case instead of ours, (eg “gun free” zones) which the appeasers have completely ignored, spending all their time pushing gun control.

      Man up, stop making the enemy’s case and start making ours

  84. I used to think that bumpstocks were a useless gimmick and I still do, but if if the government is going to tell me I can’t have one, well . . . get me grandfathered in.

  85. not so sure this was a good move. bills are being crafted as we speak to change the laws again regarding increased rate of fire. the door has been opened and nothing good for a 2nd amendment proponent will come from it.

  86. “They [bump stocks] appear to be fashion accessories for entertainment purposes only. ”

    Then why does the Feinstein bill have a carve-out to allow police to purchase and retain them? What possible purpose is in that?

  87. Welp, there’s another website on the list of “Will not visit because bad on gun rights”.

    Let me spell it out for you:

    No more. At all.

    The anti-gunners don’t just lie all the time, they lie in bad faith. They have they’re eye on the long game while twits like you are thinking whackamole.

    The NRA will ALWAYS be the boogey man under the bed, the troll under the bridge, the big bad.

    All that will happen is that the anti-gunners will take whatever olive branch the NRA offers and shove it so far up Wayne’s a$$ that he’ll think he’s drinking martinis.

    Here’s the best response the NRA could have given:

    Wow, the bloods not even cooled yet and you’re making it political. What is it with you vampires, can’t you give people time to grieve? Look, we know you’re out of power, and we both know you’ve got zero chance of getting any anti-gun bills through, so why all the screeching and moaning? Oh, yeah, because it gets people to open their wallets and give you money.

    It’s always about the money, isn’t it.

    Look, the 2nd amendment says ‘Shall not be infringed’. We like it that way. You don’t. So the thing is there’s a process IN the constitution that can get rid of that thing standing in your way. We suggest you put pen to paper and write a new amendment that changes the wording, and let’s have a National Discussion about *that*. Stop trying to violate the constitution, stop trying to violate the rights of the people.

    Until then the answer is *no*.

  88. Sorry, not buying it. The gun control crowd lives their entire lives in a state of “irrational fear”, and loves it! Conceding ground to them on that basis is giving up everything, because they’ll never lose their fear and certainly will never achieve rationality.

    “When the gun control lobby says that regulations touching on guns have to be crafted transparently via the legislation, not crafted by unelected bureaucrats in an opaque process”

    Because they won’t continue to try to do both? This stinks of the “noble” losing that the GOPe is so in love with: standing aside, pointing and shrieking “Look, they’re all hypocrites and liars!” while said hypocrites and liars win the dirty battles and further erode our rights.

  89. The recent Vegas shooting has not surprisingly started more talks about gun control. I have always believed that laws that restrict access to firearms, and their accessories from people who are neither inclined nor determined to use them unlawfully, accomplishes absolutely nothing.

    The Slide-fire Stock, which is noting more than a plastic stock that allows a semi-auto rifle to reciprocate back & forth, harnessing the firearms rearward recoil that is counter acted by the operator putting constant forward pressure with his/her support hand. This non traditional way of firing a gun creates a static affect allowing the rifle to mimic the rate of fire of a machine gun. Bump fire devices have been around as early as 1992 with the invention of the Hell Fire Trigger.

    Bump fire is a symptom of a semi-automatic firearm. Any stock semi-auto rifle or pistol can be bump fired without the use of any device. Bump fire devices came about after the passage of the Firearms Owners Protection Act of 1986, which also was amended at the last minute, with the Hughes Amendment which banned newly manufactured machine guns for civilians. Because of this ban the price of legal machine guns sky rocketed. These bump fire devices were a legal alternative to owning expensive machine guns.

    What make bump fire legal? In 2006 I wrote the ATF firearms technology branch to clarify what bump fire is. They stated that it was not define in the NFA of 1934, and they defined it as meaning ” Rapid manual trigger manipulation to simulate automatic fire!” Being that bump fire is more of a technical symptom of the semi automatic operation, than a mechanical device, any legislation that bans specific devices, parts, or combination of parts that increase the rate of fire of a semi automatic firearm needs to be squashed. You can not ban bump fire without banning every semi automatic on the market. In 1994 we allowed the gun grabbers in Washington to tell gun owner that standard capacity magazines were to be restricted to 10rds. Now in 2017 we are about to let the gun grabbers tell us how fast we are allow to pull the trigger? HELL NO!

  90. If there is a real push to further regulate bumpstocks, that in and of itself doesn’t bother me too much.

    But let’s not have another “compromise” that is effectively giving up gun rights with nothing in return. The deal should be a true compromise: regulate or even ban bumpstocks, in exchange for Constitutional Carry (or at least National CCW Reciprocity).

    If we continue to gradually give up gun rights with nothing gained, the will eventually be whittled down to nothing.

  91. The argument that we do not need them to defend the nation. Well here’s the thing, anyone who’s actually been in the Infantry, or actual combat for that matter, understands this crazy little thing called suppressive fire. Suppressive fire allows you the freedom of maneuver, and denies the enemy that same luxury. It also aids greatly in establishing fire superiority. It takes that point target weapon and changes it into an area fired weapon, which when used effectively, gives you that exact advantage.

    Just saying.

Leave a Reply

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