Bump Fire Stock Ban: DOA?

(courtesy thetrace.org)

Congress’ deadly dereliction of duty: Republicans are blocking action on bump stocks, which let semiautomatics fire continuously. That’s the headline at nydailynews.com. The anti-gun rights daily reader reckons . . .

As the nation absorbed the insanity that civilians not only can buy weapons of war, but can equip them with bump stocks that allow them to squeeze off nine rounds a second, even Republicans in Congress knew better than to defend the indefensible.

What the Republican pols said is one thing. What they haven’t done is another.

Over in the Senate, not one Republican is signed onto Dianne Feinstein’s bump-stock ban. The Judiciary Committee is “considering a hearing.” So nice of them.

Second Amendment absolutism has gone to lethal extremes before, but what on God’s green Earth could justify stonewalling a simple attempt to do what eight in 10 Americans say must be done, and ban equipment that turns semiautomatics into automatics? Not even the NRA has the gall to say machine guns, severely regulated since 1934 and banned for new production and sale since 1986, ought to return.

Pay no attention to the Second Amendment behind that curtain! Listen to the rabble!

I too was galled when NRA Veep Wayne LaPierre said bump fire stock should join machine guns in permanent regulatory quarantine; a call from a gun rights group to make a simple piece of plastic firearms accessory– implicated in one crime — as unavailable to the average American as a politician genuinely committed to draining the proverbial Washington swamp.

The NRA’s decision to accept that machine guns are “beyond the pale” is a refutation of previous policy and a slap in the face of gun rights advocates who believe the 2A says what it says about ANY government infringement on American’s firearms freedom. Speaking of faces . . .

To the extent they’re not just hiding like cowards, legislators like House Speaker Paul Ryan claim, with a straight face, that a ban is properly the job of regulators in the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives — not of Congress.

Yup: Republicans who have made a professional sport out of howling about regulatory overreach now pretend to defer to federal bureaucrats.

As much as I hate to say it, nailed it.

You may be interested to learn that we have it on good authority that the NRA checked with the ATF before they called for the agency [formerly known as jack-booted thugs] to regulate bump fire stocks to death, making sure the Bureau would do no such thing.

Cunning plan, eh? Head fake towards the ATF to give cover to Republicans strangling the bump fire bill at birth. Cunning yes, but as I’ve pointed out before, a bilious brand betrayal. But hey, real politik is a bitch baby.

And as the whole bump fire misegos fades into the media mist, it looks like this pretend throw-the-bump-fire-ban-bill-under-the-ATF’s-MRAP strategy is working. For now . . .

comments

  1. avatar HP says:

    “You may be interested to learn that we have it on good authority that the NRA checked with the ATF before they called for the agency [formerly known as jack-booted thugs] to regulate bump fire stocks to death, making sure the Bureau would do no such thing.”

    Gee, you don’t say? Wasn’t particularly hard to imagine the NRA had more going on with their statement than meets the eye. Didn’t stop impulsive, angry people from piling on here, though.

    Cue the all caps, NRA are anti-gun crowd now…..

    1. avatar Ryan says:

      Wayne LaPierre didn’t ask the ATF to do anything but review their previous statements about the bump-stock products that had recently come onto the marketplace. That is all he said. The NRA is NOT anti-gun now, nor will it ever be. And to come to such a stupid conclusion is just, well, stupid.

      1. avatar HP says:

        Agree completely. I saw some pretty ridiculous things written by people on this blog after the NRA’s statement, and none was more ridiculous than the claim that the NRA was anti-gun.

      2. avatar John in Ohio says:

        Oh, really?

        “WAYNE LAPIERRE: We have supported the existing law on fully automatic firearms. And what we don’t want is we don’t want the line to be fuzzed.”

  2. avatar Hank says:

    “What the Republican pols said is one thing. What they haven’t done is another.”

    Hurray for that working in our favor for once. I kinda figured it would go this way once the hysteria died down. But, the real problem now comes in getting them to act on things like HPA or reciprocity.

  3. avatar dwb says:

    NRA never really said ban either, they said “regulate.” “Regulating” bump stocks is fraught with problems. Are we opening up the registry to new machine guns aka existing bump stocks? I think we would have to. Now why not open up the whole thing to all machine guns made before, say, … when was the last bump fire stock sold? I do not think that we would have much choice here either. The ATF is never going to take on the responsibility of determining what to do with those newly determined machine guns in the hands of “civilians” between 2010 and present, they will toss it back to Congress. I do not think that the BATFE made the wrong determination, but even if they did, they will ever admit that they made the wrong determination under Obama.

    No matter how many times people complain about the NRA, they play defense like no other. They slowed the process down to molasses until cooler heads could prevail. It never pays in poker to make a move until your opponents reveal themselves.

    1. avatar BecauseWeSaySo says:

      I am not at all sure that the NRA’s 2A and my 2A are the same thing. They seem to think the 1934 NFA and the 1968 GCA are reasonable regulations. I think recent SCOTUS rulings make it clear that the “militia” should have access to anything that a soldier would have access to. SBRs, full auto, belt fed machine guns, suppressors and body armor.

      Also in the latest issue of American Rifleman, they review a new version of the Saint from the company that shall not be named. Way to keep it classy NRA. I paid for a few years back in the dark days, but I am out when that expires.

  4. avatar former water walker says:

    Well it’s sorta’ working out- so far. Even in Illinois(!). Are we done with bans? Of course not. But even the opinionated Stevie Wonder can see it’s political suicide for republitards and some dumbocrats to suppprt any gun control…

  5. avatar chris says:

    This happens after every incident. The news runs the story non-stop, there’s a few mentions of banning this or that by some politician up for re-election, and everybody’s crying on tv. Two weeks later it’s like it never happened, the lawsuits get thrown out, and we don’t hear anything until the next one. That’s just how the news is, they’re always looking for the next story.

  6. avatar Geoff PR says:

    ” But hey, real politik is a bitch baby.”

    There are the way things oughtta be, and the way things actually *are*.

    The slimy Leftist scum plays the ‘Real Politik’ card deftly.

    We must learn to do the same or better than them in that department…

  7. avatar El Bearsidente says:

    Weapons of war. I live in Europe. I own three of those. A mate in Switzerland owns 9. The stuff’s increasingly popular, especially with all the fun stuff you can put on it.

  8. avatar Anon in Ct says:

    Gotta stall and run out the news cycle. Plus you can always count on the Dems to over-reach and craft a bill so broad that Republicans can’t possible sign on to it.

  9. avatar Noishkel says:

    Well what I get from this is that people stopped carrying about that Vegas shooting after all of 10 days after the fact.

    Not surprising. Let’s not forget about Sandy Hook. After about a week people stopped really getting upset about it. Which is why New York had to violate the law by forcing an emergency vote on the S.A.F.E. treason. Which it is, given that the state of NY’s constitution requires at least 3 days to vote on a law, so the government just wrote an emergency order to hammer the vote in in less than a day.

  10. avatar DaveR says:

    “And as the whole bump fire misegos fades into the media mist, it looks like this pretend throw-the-bump-fire-ban-bill-under-the-ATF’s-MRAP strategy is working. For now . . .”

    Exactly. The strategy apeased all the post-outrage clamoring by throwing the matter into the beaurocratic darkness.

  11. avatar Johnjohn says:

    Same thing in the “Peoples Republic of Illinois” (Madiganistan)….HB 4117 a bill to ban bump stocks and trigger modification devices and the more ominous HB 4107 bill to outlaw all semi-auto long guns were quickly brought to the forefront for a vote……thanks to republicans and downstate dems HB4117 failed to pass it’s first major hurdle despite a major push from Chicago area “lib’tards…..realizing their defeat they did not bring HB4107 to a vote at this time….many thanks to the NRA, The Illinois State Rifle Assoc. and Guns Save Life….we were able to contact our congress people as these bills were rapidly being pushed through…….once again given time cooler heads will prevail.

  12. avatar Ralph says:

    The NRA outfoxed everybody. By seeking regulation of bump stocks, the NRA took the wind out of the anti-NRA sails, threw the ATF under the bus and assured that the odds against a legislative ban would be high.

    Did the move alienate the more radical among us? Sure, but who cares. They always hated the NRA anyway.

    Do not misapprehend the thrust of my comment. I like gun rights radicals. I support them. I commend them. They have passion and I believe they’re in the right. But when they become the face of gun rights, we will all be totally forked right up the culo.

    If the left can demonize the moderate NRA, they will have a field day with the radicals.

    1. avatar Joe R. says:

      “If the left can demonize the moderate NRA, they will have a field day with the radicals.”

      The left demonizes the moderate NRA all day and twice on Sundays. If the ‘radical’s are (more) pissed at the NRA, then know that the radicals have lumped the NRA apologists in with the NRA as “the problem”. Push comes to (bayonet) shove, we figured you were in the way anyway.

  13. avatar Joe R. says:

    Bump Fire Stock Ban-ers: DOA?

    No? Then never assume the former.

  14. avatar Jay says:

    And the NRA stall move to deflect to the ATF bought enough time for the knee jerk legislation to go nowhere. You all should thank the NRA for what it did.

    1. avatar Strategy of Distraction? says:

      I think we should thank the countless phone-calls to our congress-critters threatening recalls if they voted for any gun-control bill.

      All NRA did was a sloppy sleight-of-hand with the usual compromising double-speak assurances that most-likely, effectually did nothing to assuage Congress’s posture on the matter. The (house/senate) remember how politically toxic voting for gun-control measures can be. The overwhelmingly silent-majority of the voting population won’t stand for it. The NRA only really accomplished in alienating its base and making a big deal out of a tactic that really didn’t hurt or help anything, but looked like a big, bold move.

      People need to stop giving NRA so much credit (and funding). There are other, far-better gun-rights organizations that do not compromise and actually put their money where their mouth is. i.e. don’t require you to pay a monthly insurance policy with them to help defend your rights in court, if it’s a slam dunk case, other gun-rights orgs have jumped to the aid of the defense even if they’re not a member; out of principle.

      1. avatar Jay says:

        That’s so cute, you think your call to a congressional office makes a difference. You know they cross reference you against a donor list when you call. If you’re not cutting checks to campaigns then they don’t care what you think. Also, non of these bills even got scheduled for a committee hearing. So what was your congressmen going to do about a bill that was submitted to a committee that he or she doesn’t even sit on? Keep wasting your time with calls, letters, and emails.

      2. avatar HP says:

        None of those other groups has the clout or power of the NRA. None. Not even close.

    2. avatar John in Ohio says:

      “You all should thank the NRA for what it did.”

      Anyone who understands their inalienable right to keep and bear arms wouldn’t waste their breath on that Uncle Tom, privilege-pushing, scam of an organization.

  15. avatar Elijah Decker says:

    I don’t see how this would have turned out any differently had the NRA stayed silent on the matter. They rubbed their base the wrong way and played a very dangerous game with the notoriously wishy washy ATF. The left biased media still demonized the NRA, but also misrepresented their position on bump stocks “Even the NRA doesn’t think bump stocks should be legal.” Now that this has all blown over, defenders of this decision claim it worked. I argue that it didn’t help and may still have made things worse in the long run. I’m still a member of the NRA, but only because it is so much more than a gun rights lobby. If I could only afford one, I would put my support behind Gun Owners of America.

    1. avatar FedUp says:

      This.
      They didn’t maintain silence, they didn’t speak up in support of rights, they didn’t even say ‘let the ATF determine if regulation is needed under existing laws before hurriedly passing new laws’.

      They said that the Obama era ATF gave Paddock his bumpfire stocks, and and strongly implied that if the ATF had done its job he never would have had them. Was it dishonest? Yep. Did it work? Yep. Does it piss off people with morals who think the lying should be left to the other side? Yep.

  16. avatar B says:

    This continues the NRA’s long streak of being unable to accomplish any of it’s stated legislative goals. Considering those include the secret no fly list gun ban support and trying to kill Texas OC, lucky us, huh?

  17. avatar stateisevil says:

    Feds won’t touch gun rights, except to slowly erode them if we let them get away with it, which we have until now. Which is why it was very foolish of TTAG and writer John Bosch to say SHARE/HPA was a done deal. It was a very long shot to begin with and now it’s essentially zero because even if it can be broached again (as with reciprocity), by the time that happens it will be time for another lunatic and/or false flag mass shooting, burying the legislation again. Rinse and repeat.

    1. avatar Raoul Duke says:

      This.

  18. avatar MiamiC70 says:

    Hope the profiteers who were driving prices up on those pieces of crap choke on them.

  19. avatar Jim Bullock says:

    Another case of incompetence in regulation, which kinda justifies “stonewalling the simple attempt.”

    If they were serious about modifications to regulations to “auto fire”, they’d be talking about auto fire. They’re talking about “speed”, in the article “9 shots a second”, and in the proposed legislation modifications that can increase the rate of fire.

    This isn’t about fixing anything. As usual, they’re all about how big a barn door can they open for regulatory overreach under the umbrella of “doing something” while people are all wee-wee’d up. Under “speed” they can go after lever, pump, and of course self-loading actions; “light” triggers; muzzle-brakes; I’ll even go with “quick acquisition” scopes, lighted illuminated & sights, and … lower-recoil calibres? Sealed metallic cases?

    If you’re gonna open that door by tossing a hand grenade, yeah, maybe we should stonewall that.

    Not that they’re listening, but, if you want “common sense” gun control, first you have to realized that the people on “the other side” of this issue absolutely don’t trust you. Second they don’t trust you only because you’ve earned, and can’t seem to stop earning it.

    Their new problem is we’re on to them. Their new, new problem is that people with no particular preference on the gun issue are also becoming on to them.

    The short form: try to be less lying sacks, and maybe people will start listening to you.

  20. avatar Danny338 says:

    The NRA’s position on bump stocks and their reaffirmation of support for the National Firearms Act 1934, Gun Control Act 1968, and the Hughes amendment 1986 more than shows them to be liars when they claim to be defenders of the 2nd Amendment. But what is even worse is their providing cover for politicians who would be voted out for supporting more gun control legislation.

    1. avatar John in Ohio says:

      Yup.

  21. avatar Garrison Hall says:

    The bottom line is this: The NRA strategy worked. Feinstein’s move to put government in control of trigger-design was obviously a staff-developed idea that was already in place and just waiting for another crisis and its predicable moral panic to be presented as a “reasonable” gun-control measure.

    The NRA is the dowager empress of gun-rights and about cool as a 4-door Buick land-barge. But, when the chips were down the old fat White guys at the NRA once again showed that they were several steps ahead and handily made Feinstein’s carefully crafted proposal run down the ATF rabbit -hole.

    The NRA may not be be stylish, but in America’s political world—which itself is venal, seamy, and filled with dishonest scum-bags—it has the kind of street-cred that can’t be bought. America’s politicians know full well that the NRA is not an organization you want to cross. Frankly, I’m damn glad they’re on our side.

  22. avatar Bob says:

    If in fact, as the article states, that 8 in 10 Americans want the ban, then let them VOTE to attempt to change the Constitution, per the proscribed process. We are not ruled by the mob, we have a Republic, based on LAW !!

Write a Comment

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

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email