ATF Bump Fire Stock Regulation Aims to Set Legally Acceptable Rate of Fire

Former ATF Technical Branch Chief Rick Vasquez (courtesy youtube.com)

In the video below, former ATF Firearms Tech Branch Chief Rick Vasquez sounds the alarm on the Bureau’s soon-to-be-released bump fire stock ban. As the Military Arms Channel’s Tim Harmsen discovered, the new regs are set to outlaw “any device that enhances the rate of fire.” Say goodbye to competition triggers. It gets worse . . .

As Mr. Vasquez points out, to make this work, the ATF has to create a legally acceptable firing rate. The rate would set a common baseline across all rifles and platforms, above which enhancements could not go.

The Second Amendment is appalled. Not to mention that the ATF “rules” represent an end-run around the legislative process. And then there’s the Miculek problem . . .

If a shooter exceeds this standard rate of fire with some non-enhanced methodology — such as being Jerry Miculek — it’s possible he could be arrested. On federal charges. For shooting a machine gun.

It sounds crazy, but remember that the ATF ruled that the SB Tactical Brace was illegal (without an ATF-approved SBR tax stamp) when fired from the shoulder. While they reversed that ruling, the “logic” is the same.

The danger is clear: the ATF’s bump fire stock regs could have serious consequences for firearms freedom.

So where is the NRA in all this?

The ATF bump fire stock regs were their idea, designed to take the wind out of the sails of a post-Vegas mass shooting federal bump fire stock ban. Which they did. Only to put gun rights in the teeth of a howling gale.

[Click here to watch the full, unedited interview.]

comments

  1. avatar Wedge259 says:

    I’d like to think that they’ll realize theres no practical way to enforce rules on a “rate increasing” device, be that a spring, binary trigger, etc. Particularly when you can bump fire off your belt loop easily. If they try something along the lines of “1 round a second” like some have hypothesized, I know for a fact that I can shoot a bone stock glock or m&p 2-3 times a second. So then you would be forced to implement some kind of mechanical limiting device that I can hardly imagine would be feasible (maybe that’s the point). I believe (and hope) that this will go nowhere because they’re trying to make the decision too broad over too many different parts. IF anything like this is rammed through I imagine there will be mass non compliance.

    1. avatar DaveL says:

      I’d like to think that they’ll realize theres no practical way to enforce rules on a “rate increasing” device, be that a spring, binary trigger, etc. Particularly when you can bump fire off your belt loop easily.

      No fair, practical way, no. But there would be lots of opportunity for arbitrary and capricious enforcement, and isn’t that what it’s all about, after all? Just think, entire crowds of protestors could then be arrested for possession of a belt loop without an NFA stamp. It’s enough to warm the cockles of a statist’s heart. Those cold, shriveled cockles.

    2. avatar Garrison Hall says:

      We should never mistake a ruling like this as being in any way “practical”. It is, instead, entirely symbolic. It’s one of those rules that is specifically designed to reflect the contentious values of a specific demographic i.e., gun controllers which are in obvious conflict with gun owners. The feds will be quite happy to mandate 15 pound triggers or even worse “safety” designs to achieve their desired result. Gun control ideologues will almost certainly use regulating trigger design as a way of making firearms unusable.

      1. avatar Garrison Hall says:

        Addendum: The proposed ATF ruling is something we’ve seen before. Redesigning triggers is based on the same exact logic that promotes “speed governors” on cars. From time to time car safety advocates have tried to enact laws that would arbitrarily limit the speed of cars and trucks—all in the name of “safety”, of course. It’s instructive to note that, historically, these efforts have failed as being entirely impractical. Nonetheless, activists are attracted to measures like governors or restrictive trigger design because they physically force their targets to behave in ways the activists desire. Instead of speed governors, governments have invested their policy efforts in posting and maintaining speed limits, leaving the driving decisions to individual drivers. I think a similar approach is preferred with a potential AFT ruling. Instead of installing triggers that force gun owners to “behave” the AFT ought to simply establish rapid fire “speed limits” and stay away from imposing it’s rules on firearm design.

        1. avatar TX_Lawyer says:

          That is beyond the authority of the ATF.

        2. avatar Arch says:

          Mandating a rate limiting device to a trigger assembly or firearm would be in strict violation of the 2nd Amendment for such weapons would no longer be suitable for Militia use (Miller vs United States, SCOTUS 1939) despite the “Sporting Purposes” clause in the GCA of 1968. And then, would ALL firearms have to be retro-fitted with such a device, including currently legally owned machine guns? or does this just concern semi-auto firearms?

    3. avatar binder says:

      The biggest problem is that the bump fire stocks are machine guns. The single triggering action is you pushing forward on the gun. NOT you pulling the trigger. But no one wants to acknowledge that so now we have all the rate increasing crap.

      1. avatar Chip Bennett says:

        The biggest problem is that the bump fire stocks are machine guns.

        No, they’re not.

        The single triggering action is you pushing forward on the gun. NOT you pulling the trigger.

        No, it isn’t. The trigger is still cycled one time per each round discharged.

        1. avatar California Richard says:

          His argument is “If you hold your finger still and push the rifle in to your finger, then you are manufacturing a machinegun.” Hence, the belt loop conundrum….. The binary trigger uses the same legal conundrum, about “one round discharged per action of the trigger” and “multiple rounds per pull of the trigger”….. you’re still “pulling” the trigger, by pushing the rifle in to your trigger finger. You don’t need a bumpstock for that.

      2. avatar TrueBornSonofLiberty says:

        You do realize that during the Obama administration the ATF was asked to reconsider reclassifying the bump stock, ON 2 SEPARATE OCCASIONS, and came back both times and said no, it was NOT a machine gun, right? You are aware of that. So now, for the third and final time, under more political pressure, they are going to finally go through with it. So how can they be wrong THREE TIMES (once on the initial approval), and justify what they are doing now?

        1. avatar Binder says:

          Yes im fully aware of it. But never unestimate the incopidence of anti second amendment types. Look, I’m in full agreement that the NFA is bs. Most of the gun regulations we have are. However people who have no real idea how guns work see on fire multiple time with what is effectively a single action are going the think automatic firearm. And trying to explain that a bumpstock is somehow a single shot per pull of the trigger is not going to pass anyone’s stink test

        2. avatar TX_Lawyer says:

          Binder, I believe it will pass any honest judge’s “stink” test because that is exactly what the law says. The trouble in some jurisdictions is finding an honest judge.

        3. avatar Binder says:

          The original configuration of the bump stock was classified as a machine gun. All they did was remove a spring. Ask Tim at military arms channel about adding or removing springs to remove automatic firing. I know he loves his open bolt guns.

          All they did was replace that spring with pressure from the shooter. It should never have passed in the first place. Your finger pressing the trigger after every discharge did not save the original bump stock.

          Anyone can return the Slide Fire to that original configuration with a good zip tie and a spring.

      3. avatar Aaron J Franklin says:

        The NfA defines a a semi-auto as a gun that fires with every “function” of the trigger. Not every time the trigger is pulled or every time the trigger has an action. You’re suggesting they should just follow the spirit of the law. Because I don’t trust the government to be honest in their interpretations the spirit of it I want them to follow the letter of the law.

        1. avatar binder says:

          Trigger is not a defined a single mechanical device. I could call the sights the trigger, but no one would believe me. If I attach a string to the trigger, is the spring now the trigger or the original trigger on the gun? If I put on a GAT crank on the rifle, now what is the trigger?

      4. avatar Vorkon says:

        You WOULD be right, IF a machine gun were defined as a device that fires multiple rounds with each “pull” of the trigger. They are not. The definition in the NFA clearly states that a machine gun fires multiple rounds with each “action” of the trigger. The difference is huge; one describes an action the user is taking ON the device, and the other describes an action the device undergoes, regardless of how the user accomplishes it.

        I would be happy with a bump stock “ban,” if Congress had simply amended the definition in the NFA to read “pull,” or even “unassisted pull” rather than “action,” and I said so both in my letters to my Congressmen back when this first came up, and in my comment to the ATF more recently. However, unless that definition is changed, something which only Congress can do, the ATF will be legislating all on its own. We can’t just redefine words whenever it suits us. If we could, what do you think they’d change the definition of “infringed,” keep and bear,” or “arms” to?

        1. I believe I know which reddit thread you read to come to that conclusion, and you are incorrect. A binary trigger is not a machine gun. A manual crank is not a machine gun (but a powered one is). Bumpfiring is not a machine gun. If, once you engage the trigger, or any other firing device, the weapon fires more than one round before you perform another action (such as releasing the trigger, moving the stock, turning a crank), then and only then is it a machine gun.

          The definition does in fact state “Trigger” and “single function.” Releasing a trigger is a separate function.

          From the ATF:
          https://www.atf.gov/file/83561/download
          (automatic refers to a weapon that “once its trigger is depressed,
          the weapon will automatically continue to fire until its trigger is released or the
          ammunition is exhausted”); GEORGE C. NONTE, JR., FIREARMS ENCYCLOPEDIA 13
          (Harper & Rowe 1973) (the term “automatic” is defined to include “any firearm in
          which a single pull and continuous pressure upon the trigger (or other firing
          device) will produce rapid discharge of successive shots so long as ammunition
          remains in the magazine or feed device – in other words, a machinegun”}:
          WEBSTER’S II NEW RIVERSIDE-UNIVERSITY DICTIONARY (1988) (defining
          automatically as “acting or operating in a manner essentially independent of
          external influence or control”}; JOHN QUICK, PH. D., DICTIONARY OF WEAPONS AND
          MILITARY TERMS 40 (McGraw-Hill 1973) (defining automatic fire as “continuous fire
          from an automatic gun, lasting until pressure on the trigger is released”).

          From the NFA:

          The National Firearms Act defines “machinegun” 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.” 26 U.S.C. 5845(b).

      5. That’s an amusing hypothesis…since the ATF invented the bumpfire stock. And if you’re not aware of how that came about, you should do some research.

    4. avatar Hank says:

      I’d like to take this time to personally thank the NRA and all the FUDDs who thought the idea of an ATF decree, suddenly declaring bump stocks illegal, was the way to go. Bravo retards. You’ve really shit in everyone’s cereal now. I used to be a big fan of the NRA till this. If this actually happens the NRA must be destroyed as an organization for its treason to the right to keep and bear arms. Now, I will also say this, just because some former ATF agent is running around screaming this is going to happen so everyone start panic buying to “stock up again”, doesn’t make it true. Don’t give into the fear mongering.

      1. avatar Hank says:

        Where is the NRA on all this? Busy drafting a hysterically worded letter begging for more donations (oh and don’t forget to call or write your congressman…after you sign your generous check payable to the NRA).

    5. avatar barnbwt says:

      They do it by mandating heavy triggers, same as England.

      1. avatar Hank says:

        Next up, pistols with short reset travel.

    6. avatar Cuteandfuzzybunnies says:

      Regardless of practicality , I’m fairly sure they will lose a court challenge. The law is clear as to what a machine gun is.

  2. avatar LiberalWithAGun says:

    You can easily 3D print a bumpfire device that goes over the pistol grip or just buy the Hellfire Gen 2, Hypergat, or similar devices. Time to stock up on those and binary triggers, it seems.

    1. avatar strych9 says:

      “Stock up”?

      No, in all seriousness, why? If they become regulated NFA items selling them would be the Devil’s own chore and keeping them would likely require serialization and registration. That’s a serious PITA.

      If they’re not regulated then there’s no real point in having a bunch.

      1. avatar st381183 says:

        “Stock up”

        Because America, that’s why! The more there are the more impossible it is to enforce.

        1. avatar TrueBornSonofLiberty says:

          Unfortunately, there’s no grandfather provision in the proposed regulation. They will be completely banned, and there will be a grace period to turn them in to police with NO other remedies. They will NOT even be allowed to be serialized and registered under the new reclassification because they were manufactured after 1986. As you know, ALL “machine guns” manufactured after 1986 are non transferable.

        2. avatar strych9 says:

          “Stock up”… bump fire stock…. play on words… joke…

    2. avatar Roymond says:

      I’d be willing to bet someone creative could make a trigger crank out of LEGOs, or (with some modification) from Tinkertoys.

      I’m pretty sure about the Tinkertoys, because when I was a kid we made a Tinkertoy “machine gun” that ran with a crank and a rubber band (and a playing card whacking the “barrel” to provide the sound).

  3. avatar TruthTellers says:

    It’s like every decision the NRA makes ends up being terrible for gun owners, but another reason for them to beg for more money.

    1. avatar LiberalWithAGun says:

      We need a group that actually stands up for gun owners and gun rights, not this greedy organization that wants to keep the value on its registered machine guns and do nothing but ask for more money.

      1. avatar Ross says:

        There is such a group gun owners of America $20 to join.

      2. avatar Tim says:

        You can join the GOA for $15 using this link. I get no kickbacks from GOA for the use of this link. Please join. We must defund the NRA, who constantly screws over American gun owners, and fund a true no compromise organization that has been no compromise for 40 some years. LINK: http://gunowners.me/2gAxNyv

        1. avatar st381183 says:

          I joined GOA as a life member after the NRAs BS bump fire statement. I have since renounced my NRA membership in writing and will give them not one penny more.

        2. avatar Howdy1 says:

          Thank you for the link.

          I joined and donated.

        3. avatar Swarf says:

          A second thanks for the link. I joined as well.

        4. avatar MiserableBastard says:

          Joined today after watching your video. Tomorrow I will become a Patreon for MAC. Thanks for getting this out there.

        5. avatar Tom in Oregon says:

          I joined GOA once. Just once.
          I would get power begging letters twice a month asking for more money.
          They easily spent more than the 20 bucks it cost me to join.
          Pass.

        6. avatar Roymond says:

          Tom, I joined GOA and had the same experience — except I called them, just once, and asked for only one mailing a year. They complied.

        7. avatar Blue_Falcon5811 says:

          OR we could change the NRA’s make up via voting-in real advocates of the 2nd Amendment. I understand the rhetoric implications of simply defunding and everyone moving to another advocacy group BUT the NRA already has the numbers, already has the funding, and already is well established with lobbying. I’m not denying the back handedness that is has participated in in the past and recently but overall changing the NRA’s leadership and board members would be better than swapping to GOA or another advocacy group. I’m not knocking them, as I am a member of both. I just am arguing that changing the NRA would be better than switching all together.

        8. avatar TX_Lawyer says:

          And we’re not going to defund the NRA. It’s just not happening. I am a member of an NRA gun club. You have to be a member of the NRA to be in the gun club. 90% of the people I’ve talked to have no idea what’s going on with the NRA. I believe, but have no evidence, that this is typical of most NRA members. We, “extremist” supporters of the 2A, need the 4.8 (just a guess) million members who aren’t paying any attention. Only “130,560 valid ballots [were] cast in the board election” with Tom Selleck and R Lee Ermy taking took the 1st and 3rd place.

          It wouldn’t be hard for a dedicated group to take over the NRA. I’m getting involved in my local organization. If I can get people to there to respect me or my opinion, then I can probably get them to vote.

    2. avatar Garrison Hall says:

      Wrong. The NRA’s handling of the bump-fire issue was aimed at derailing emotional-panic driven demands that congress “do something”. It’s lots easier to change ATF administrative rulings than it is to change federal laws. The NRA knows what its doing.

      1. avatar Tim says:

        Well, the NRA’s chess game is about to get your AR15 banned. Congrats on being another mindless lemming that gobbles up NRA propaganda. Here’s the truth. A proposed law we can beat, easily. We even did it under an Obama administration (2012 AWB). We shut it down, cold.

        You would have to be mentally deficient to believe that 1) having the ATF make a law is a good thing or, 2) that the goons in congress wouldn’t try to ban bump stocks anyway. Not a week after the tragedy Carbelo tried to introduce a ban and we stopped it cold. It never made it to the floor for a vote. That’s how it’s supposed to work. What you’re advocating for is a dictatorship where faceless entities make laws and not the Congress.

        The NRA gave the antigunners a way to get their ban without an act of Congress leaving us with no recourse except to blow up the ATF’s web server with comments. If you think that’s a good idea, you’re an idiot and part of the problem.

        For God’s sake, you have the former FTB Chief telling you in this video undoing a regulation is nearly impossible. Yet there you are making a stupid comment that undoing a regulation is easier than stopping a proposed bill in Congress… a Congress that’s controlled by Republicans and with a Republican sitting in the White House.

        1. avatar TruthTellers says:

          God knows what would have been attached to that bill Congress would have passed though. At least if we flood the ATF with enough comments calling for them not to make a ruling that redefines a machine gun, it may never become law.

          Not that the ATF can make or redefine law.

        2. avatar Garrison Hall says:

          “Here’s the truth. A proposed law we can beat, easily.”

          Sadly, you could not be more wrong. Perhaps you weren’t around at the time or old enough drive, but the 55mph speed limit was exactly the kind of moral-panic driven legislation that dismembered highway travel and turned everyday highway users into criminals. It took almost 2 decades to get rid of that stupid law. The NRA’s geezers are well aware of our political vulnerabilities—-starting with National Prohibition and going forward— regarding this kind of legislation. If you know something about the history of such political/legislative efforts, you can easily understand the logic behind the NRA’s lobbying efforts. To do that, however, pretty much requires that you have been there and done that. The NRA’s been there and done that.

      2. avatar Db says:

        What was the last ATF regulation that turned over? And you’re right the NRA does know what they’re doing and that’s screwing over gun owners. Just like they did in 1934,1968, 1986, and NICS.

        1. avatar jt says:

          You forgot “trying to derail Heller”.

    3. avatar doesky2 says:

      I have 3 NRA memberships that get monthly (or so) letters wasting my dues on junk mail.

      All those letters have “no postage necessary” return envelopes.

      Returning those envelopes stuffed with postage increasing junk (return all the crap they just sent you) with a comment about their bumpfire stance on the outside might get their attention.

      I received 3 just yesterday and I probably have another dozen in the junk mail basket. The worse that could happen is that I get taken off the junk mail list.

      Maybe I can send them my dead AA batteries.

      1. Actually, no, because a contractor deals with the donations, and they’ll just toss those. The NRA will never know, they’ll just be billed for them.

  4. avatar TyrannyOfEvilMen says:

    Doesn’t the trigger itself effectively increase a firearm’s rate of fire from zero to something greater than zero?

    Uh-oh! It looks like it’s time to break out our Revolutionary War era accoutrements…

    1. avatar little horn says:

      thats why i dont see triggers falling into this snare but i fully accept i can be wrong.

      1. avatar Tim says:

        Did you hear what the former Director of the Firearms Technology Branch said? He said this is most definitely a possibility.

      2. avatar Sian says:

        Not by intent, but the ATF is known to capriciously re-interpret unclear rules on the fly so it’s definitely an extreme worry.

  5. avatar little horn says:

    i dont see triggers falling into this category. hopefully im right. the trigger doesn’t pull itself no matter the trigger job done. on the other hand a bumpfire, depending on the model, may not make you pull the trigger at all if it does it for you. seems like that is what they are going for.

    1. avatar LiberalWithAGun says:

      You still pull the trigger with a bumpfire stock, it just helps you pull it faster. Doesn’t do anything except help. If it pulled the trigger for you, it’d be considered a machine gun.

      1. avatar binder says:

        No, it uses the recoil energy to reset the trigger for you, you then are using your support hand to pull the firearm forward to reactivate the trigger. It is using the recoil energy to bypass the trigger disconnector. The ATF kind of has a thing for disconnectors and bypassing them. Part of the reason why we have no open bolt guns.

        1. avatar anarchyst says:

          Not true…the “disconnector” STILL “disconnects” between each shot. The OPERATION of the firearm does not change.

        2. avatar Roymond says:

          So, binder, you’re arguing that the only difference between a full auto weapon and a bump-stock is that one has the mechanism internally included and the other has the mechanism external?

          Interesting.

        3. avatar Cam says:

          Actualy as long as it was manufactured before 1982, they have no problem with open bolt guns. There are quite a few out there.

    2. avatar TrueBornSonofLiberty says:

      You are wrong. This isn’t about bump fire stocks. It’s about anything that can “increase the rate of fire”. Heck, it will include springs, amongst many other things.

      1. avatar Tim says:

        Exactly, that’s why I’ve been saying for months now, “IT’S NOT ABOUT THE STOCKS, STUPID!” This is an end run around Congress to pass an open ended regulation that carries the weight of law that will give us Canadian type gun laws the moment the next antigun administration takes office. If what you see in this video leaves any doubt in your mind that this is EXTREMELY dangerous… all I can say is “wow”.

        1. avatar TrueBornSonofLiberty says:

          Thanks for standing up Tim. I’ve posted your video link on EVERY YouTube gun channel video (yeah, that’s me, lol) that’s been posted in the last 24 hours. Not a single comment reply, although Sootch did post his own video.

        2. avatar Sc says:

          Reading the ATF document, if they used the definitions and descriptions they suggest in that document, I don’t think they would apply to bump stocks at all. Bump stocks don’t increase the cyclic rate of fire at all. The cyclic rate of a firearm is static unless the original inner working parts of the firearm are adjusted or replaced. Bump stocks are external to the system. A bump stock really only helps you pull the trigger quicker. So it can’t increase the cyclic rate of fire.

        3. avatar binder says:

          The bump fire stock moves the triggering function from you pulling the trigger to pressing forward on the firearm. That forward pressure is ONE FUNCTION. The stock even prevents the actuation of the actual trigger when the firearm is in the reward position on the stock. Things like springs and lighter triggers make the actuation of the trigger easier, they do not move the actuation of the trigger to a single function of the other hand.

          The problem is no one steps back and really looks at what the stock is doing, all they see is it shoots fast the world is ending.

          A machine gun that shoots a 60 rounds a minute is still a machine gun. Rates of fire have NOTHING to do with an actual legal definition of the firearm.

        4. avatar Steve Day says:

          Binder – a bump-fire stock does not have any connection to the trigger or sear. You are completely mistaken when you say that a bump-fire stock changes the way a gun operates.

          A bump-fire stock merely let’s the rifle receiver recoil backwards towards the user’s hand, then it moves forwards away from the stock via either a recoil spring or the user’s support hand pulling the rifle away from their body.

          You keep on saying, incorrectly, that a bump-fire stock equipped rifle is “fired by pushing forwards on the rifle”… THAT IS UTTER NONSENSE/BULLSHIT. You’ve said it at least 3 times in the comments of this pos!! A rifle with or without a bump-fire stock is fired by the user pulling/squeezing the trigger with their finger. One bullet per trigger pull, same as every other non-machine-gun.

          I can’t figure put if you are a lobbyist who is deliberately putting out misinformation to get this ATF rule passed, or if you really are “that” clueless about how they work.

        5. avatar Binder says:

          “single function of the trigger”. A trigger is not any single part. You don’t pull a trigger on a M2, even though is is the very definition of a machine gun. trigger is the final action you take to fire the gun. M2, push the paddle, SlideFire “push forward”. If you continue to do that action the gun will continue to fire. Doesn’t matter how the weapon continues to fire, just that all you need to do is continue to add that single force.
          An electrically operated rotary gun has almost none of the same internal components of a traditional firearm, but good luck arguing that with the ATF.
          Now I know there are arguments for and against crank fired weapons, but at least you can argue it is not a constant force in one direction.

        6. Binder: Let’s try this one more time: I put a bumpfire stock equipped rifle on a rest. I pull the trigger. It fires…one shot. And stops. Because there is no “mechanism” to move the weapon. If and only if apply a separate action with my other hand, does the trigger reset. And for purposes of this argument, we can even call the protrusion on the stock the trigger (it isn’t, for this definition, but that seems to be what you’re stuck on), and it must be operated a second time to fire the weapon again. This is why ATF has ruled on this before, after they de facto created the device from another device they rejected…one that DID have a spring in it. Which, if it were mounted the same way, would continue to fire, thus making the stock the “Trigger” of a machine gun.

          A crank is legal if it is hand cranked, because ongoing action is needed to fire each shot. If it is powered, it is a machine gun, because a single activation of the power supply causes it to keep firing.

          Now, back to the first paragraph. If I take one of my machine guns, of which I have several, and lay it over a sandbag, and pull the trigger, it will fire, and fire, and fire again, and keep firing, until I release the trigger or run out of ammo.

          If a bumpfire stock were a machine gun, ATF would not have approved it, and I wouldn’t be spending 5 figures on each machine gun I buy when a $300 stock would do the same thing, would I?

  6. avatar Peter Wolf says:

    We are here because Congress doesn’t want to do its job and they don’t like the result of a correct interpretation of the law. Congress defines, bureaucrats enforce. Bumpfire stocks are not machine guns. And never invite bureaucrats to change the clear meaning of the law simply because you don’t like the result. Want to outlaw bumpfire stocks? Go back to Congress and change the law.

    1. avatar Wedge259 says:

      As someone who was affected by the ATF’s new “opinion” on suppressor wipes I think thats the bigger issue at hand. It kills me that an entity like the ATF has the full force of law behind their “opinions” which seem to change on a whim.

      1. avatar Binder says:

        The whole supresser law is BS, but how is a wipe not a part of a silencer? The law regulates silencer and silencer parts. Nothing about wear and non-wear parts.

  7. avatar Rick the Bear says:

    I was disappointed to hear Rick say that ATF field agents only ask for 4473s when there is an investigation and/or trace. I have read several stories where agents have come to gun shops and requested all of their forms.

    I appreciated that Rick (and Tim) noted that there are pro-rights people in the ATF. Perhaps some discretion comes from that. However (and a big “however”), minor events (e.g., Ruby Ridge, Waco, Fast & Furious, the shoestring “machine gun”) suggest that the upper management lean significantly towards anti-rights. Scary.

    1. avatar Tim says:

      I tried to tell him that’s not how I, as a FFL, see it. But let’s not get bogged down in that fight right now. The fight at hand is stopping the NRA’s proposed ban on rate increasing devices and threatens to imprison anyone who shoots a gun too quickly.

      1. avatar Rick the Bear says:

        Tim,

        Fair enough, sir,

    2. avatar robby says:

      Only ask for 4473’s related to an investigation, or trace??? Back in the 1980’s I had a couple of
      “Field agents”, come in to the store. They put on they were customers. When it was just the three of us,
      in the store, they flashed badges. They wanted to randomly go through our A&D books, just to see if there was anything or anybody they might find interesting. This was not a compliance visit, they were not compliance agents, they had no warrants, trace request, no investigation open or closed. Hell they didn’t even bring fishing poles!!!!

  8. avatar CalGunsMD says:

    Jerry Miculek will be outlawed.

    1. avatar Diksum says:

      Fingers will be outlawed.

      1. avatar t says:

        Correct diagnosis Doctor,now lets cure the symptoms of the non existence disease.

  9. avatar TrueBornSonofLiberty says:

    This will eventually cover such nebulous and ancillary items like trigger springs, 3rd Party aftermarket triggers, modified bolt carriers and perhaps “large capacity” magazines. This will be abused in the future to ban our guns without the legitimacy of even congressional process (and still would defy the 2A). PLEASE write to the ATF. I made my comment on Sunday, but it took 4 days to post on the site, so don’t be discouraged.

  10. avatar Robert Heinlein's Ghost says:

    So their “ruling” is based on what law on the books again? As far as I know, the only law regarding a “machine gun” is the literal written form of the 1934 National Firearms Act which defines a machine gun as a firearm which: “fires more than one round per function of the trigger.”

    So based on that, how does rate-of-fire factor into any existing law at all? As far as I can tell, there are no national laws that even mention rate of fire.

    I’m no lawyer, but this to me is the ATF just screaming to be dismantled due to gross overreach of chartered authority. Not to mention dismantled on grounds of being abjectly unconstitutional, but that’s not stopped 99% of the federal government from treading all over it on a daily basis.

    1. avatar Jackal says:

      This is the most logical comment here. If the ATF actually follows through, they will most assuredly be taken to court and lose.

      This isn’t the 80’s. Franklin Armory, Fostech, Slidefire won’t just sit this out.

    2. avatar strych9 says:

      Basically what I’ve said from the beginning.

      My bet is that this goes to comments, gets slammed andbthenbgoes away like the proposed M855 ban. ATF doesnt want this shitstorm nor does it want the increased workload. This is probably a “Well, we tried” CYA and nothing more.

      1. avatar Tim says:

        Sure hope you are right!

      2. avatar J.T. says:

        That’s what I think as well. There was some stuff added that wasn’t in that draft that was accidentally released early that basically seems like they think it is a waste of time but people are screaming at them for it so they have to at least go through the motions.

  11. avatar Baldwin says:

    Congress defines, bureaucrats enforce, regulators make shit up, and courts legislate. FIFY. Ban the ATF and fire the self-empowered judges. Congress?…Can’t be fixed as long as protecting-you-from-yourself-liberals are allowed to vote.

  12. avatar binder says:

    The regulation they are all looking for is so simple. Any device that designed to use the energy produced by firing to activate trigger or reset the disconnector are illegal.

    1. avatar Tim says:

      …and that would be my finger. I do exactly that when I bump fire my rifles. Some people use a belt loop, are they going to write an exemption for bump firing without a device or exempting belt loops? Of course not. Don’t downplay the severity of this regulation. Remember, the ATF is the same group that made a bootlace a machine gun.

      1. avatar binder says:

        It comes down to what is firing the gun. You pulling on the trigger or pushing forward on the firearm. With a bunpfire stock the gun is fired by you pushing on the gun in one direction. Is is ONE motion on your part. With the standard machine gun that is the trigger.

        The definition machine gun is “A]ny weapon which shoots, is designed to shoot, or can be readily restored to shoot, automatically more than one shot, without manually reloading, by a single function of the trigger”
        A bumpfire equipped gun is triggered by the function of you pushing forward on the firearm. Hell there is even a stop to prevent the firing of the gun when it is in the rearward position.

        And belt loop, really. I’ve seen you playing with “braces” on your pistols. You can not resigned a belt loop into a machine gun by misusing it.

        1. avatar Protestant Rambler says:

          Hmm. By your logic, the “trigger” could just as easily be my mind.

        2. avatar ACP_arms says:

          binder, I can hold my bone-stock AR-556 and do what you describe without a bump stock. Even if I push the rifle forward in a bump stock it won’t fire unless the trigger is pulled. Which, with the rifle in a bump stock, is by holding your trigger finger on the finger rest of the stock. So instead of moving your finger to pull the trigger, you push the rifle forward with your arm, pulling the trigger against your trigger finger and then the recoil of the rifle firing causes you to release pressure on the trigger, thus resetting the trigger allowing you to fire again. It does not change how the trigger works. It’s still a semiautomatic trigger/rifle!

        3. avatar binder says:

          To quote slidefire

          Slide Fire: POSITION TRIGGER FINGER
          For ambidextrous models, ensure that the Finger Rest is on the opposite side of the rifle from your shooting hand. Place your trigger finger across the trigger, and seat the tip firmly on the rest.

          Me: Not on the trigger,

          Slide Fire: APPLY FORWARD PRESSURE
          Use your support hand to apply a light forward pressure to the rifle. This will force the trigger into your finger causing a round to be fired.

          Me: Push forward to fire NOT pull the trigger.

          Slide Fire: Recoil from the discharged round will cycle the action and return the firearm back to the rear position. Maintaining a light and consistent forward pressure will continue the firing sequence.

          Nothing about pulling or actuating the trigger, just forward pressure.

          You fire it by using forward pressure. That is the action that fires the gun. One action, not push, release, push release.

        4. avatar ACP_arms says:

          Again, I can do the same thing with my bone stock AR-556 without a bump stock.

          A machine gun is a machine gun because it can fire continuously if the trigger is held to the rear by the shooter. A bump stock doesn’t do that, the trigger is still being moved from one position (forward to rear) and released (rear to forward) to fire. You can do the same thing without a bump stock by holding the rifle off you shoulder and letting it freely recoil back while pushing forward with your support hand.

        5. avatar Binder says:

          It doesn’t matter how it works or what you call the parts. The final action to fire a gun is the trigger. With a slam fire shotgun are you using the trigger to fire the gun or the slide? What about if you use the trigger as a bolt release, is it no longer a trigger? How about a zip gun you fire by hitting it with a hammer, is that a trigger? So how exactly do you define a trigger?
          What about if I set up a gas tube to reset the trigger by pushing it against your finger? Or even better yet, set it up so only the recoil is enough to reset the trigger so constant pressure on the “trigger” is all that is required to fire the gun.

          As for your argument that you can bump fire a gun without the stock, well was the gun in anyway manufactured to accomplish that? No it was not. That’s why the whole sig brace crap came up. The bump fire stock was designed to allow you to fire multiple shots with a single action. Even SlideFire skirts around the phrase “pull the trigger” becouse they know that the “trigger” is not what you are using to fire the gun.

        6. avatar ACP_arms says:

          “It doesn’t matter how it works or what you call the parts. The final action to fire a gun is the trigger.”
          Yes, it does matter how it works and what the parts are. The action to fire a gun is for the trigger to be moved out of neutral to fire (aft) and then let back to neutral for the reset (fore). how the reset happens is irrelevant.

          “With a slam fire shotgun are you using the trigger to fire the gun or the slide?”
          Both.

          “What about if you use the trigger as a bolt release, is it no longer a trigger?”
          Like the M3 “grease gun” submachine gun? That is out of place in this discussion. but, yes it is still a trigger.

          ” How about a zip gun you fire by hitting it with a hammer, is that a trigger?”
          Ask the ATF. I say no.

          “What about if I set up a gas tube to reset the trigger by pushing it against your finger? Or even better yet, set it up so only the recoil is enough to reset the trigger so constant pressure on the “trigger” is all that is required to fire the gun.”
          The thing is a semiautomatic trigger mechanism only resets the hammer after firing, if the trigger automatically reset after firing with my finger on it that would be automatic fire. But we are (or should be) talking about semiautomatic firing mechanisms, not automatic ones.

          “The bump fire stock was designed to allow you to fire multiple shots with a single action. Even SlideFire skirts around the phrase “pull the trigger” because they know that the “trigger” is not what you are using to fire the gun.”
          Then how is it that a trigger that only works by being move out of its neutral point to fire (aft) and then back to its neutral point to reset (fore) to be able to fire again is a single action? That’s two actions in my book.

    2. avatar uncommon_sense says:

      And why would you help gun-grabbers?

      Please keep quiet and do NOT provide answers to gun-grabbers.

      1. avatar binder says:

        Oh please, someone found a technical way to work around the definition of a machine gun, and now the gun grabbers are going to try use it as a way to ban semi automatic firearms.
        What I would like to see is if we can use the whole BS fight as a way to re-open the machine gun registry. Not that that is going to happen as everyone who owns them will probably fight that tooth and nail.

        1. avatar Chip Bennett says:

          …someone found a technical way to work around the definition of a machine gun…

          No, not at all. The definition is the definition, and cannot be “worked around.” One trigger pull still results in one and only one round being discharged. And I’m pretty sure that Jerry Miculek can discharge a revolver at a rate of 9-10 rounds per second, so this alleged “work around” still doesn’t exceed unassisted human capability.

        2. avatar Binder says:

          Chip a bump fire rifle is fired by pushing forward on the rifle. Slide fire even had demonstration models that used a bar in place of your trigger finger to fire the rifle. Your trigger finger is not even moving. is is resting against the bump stock, not the trigger. If anything it is doing the functional equivalent of holding down a grip safety.

        3. avatar Chip Bennett says:

          Your trigger finger is not even moving. is is resting against the bump stock, not the trigger.

          Which is irrelevant, because the statutory definition of a “machine gun” – which ATF has no statutory authority to change or to act outside of – involves the action of the trigger.

        4. avatar binder says:

          Chip, what is the final action that you take to fire a bump stocked equipped rifle and what action do you take to keep it firing?

          Manual of arms for a bump fire stock. Put you finger on the INTERFACE BLOCK (no the trigger), grab for-grip and push forward until you want to fire stop firing, run out of ammo or the firearm malfunctions. The sear is no more controlled by your trigger finger as a grip safety on a 1911. The firing is controlled by you pushing or releasing the for-grip.

          Look at it this way. A slam fire shotgun is not a machine gun. You hold down the “trigger” and it will fire multiple times. But the firing is actually accomplished buy you racking the slide. But that takes a distinctive back and forth operation (like a semi auto gun) where as the bump fire stock requires a single constant pressure. (Fully automatic)

          Now an argument can be made that it requires constant pressure from both of your hands, but adding a second trigger on a traditional machine gun is not going to fly with the ATF.

          Now you could argue that it is the trigger finger that is firing the gun, the reset is being accomplished by the impulse energy or the gun firing, not you releasing the trigger. But you better be very careful about that because if you went that way, I could design a gun with NO function deference with a traditional automatic gun other than a vibrating trigger.

        5. avatar Chip Bennett says:

          Chip, what is the final action that you take to fire a bump stocked equipped rifle and what action do you take to keep it firing?

          Please cite where the statutory definition of “machine gun” depends upon the action of the person manipulating the firearm.

          Here, I’ll help you:

          26 U.S. Code § 5845

          “The term “machinegun” means 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.”

          https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/5845

        6. avatar binder says:

          ATF has no statutory authority to change or to act outside of – involves the action of the trigger

          OK, bolt on a electric electric motor to a GAT Trigger and see how far that gets you. The actual action of the firearm is not effected.

        7. avatar ACP_arms says:

          The bump stock is exactly like a slam fire shotgun. You know why? because you have to pump the for-end to slam fire. The same reason a bump stock on a rifle doesn’t make the rifle machine gun because the trigger it self is being “pumped”, moved aft and fore, (two functions) not held in place aft. (one function)

        8. avatar Binder says:

          Slide fire is not being pumped. You are only applying forward pressure. That’s the whole point. With a slam fire shotgun your actions directly control the rate of fire. With a bump stock all you have are on and off. The only way to stop it firing is to release pressure. The same pressure used to fire the gun.
          The only way to stop a MG is to release the same pressure to applied to fire the gun. Like I said, the trigger is the final action to fire the gun, not what you call a part.

        9. avatar ACP_arms says:

          You can control rate of fire with a bump stock. A bump stock doesn’t a set rate of fire.
          The thing is on a machine gun that constant pressure is only on the trigger, not the fore-end of the rifle.

          And the trigger is not the final action to fire, the final action to fire is the trigger being moved from its neutral/reset point.

        10. avatar binder says:

          “constant pressure is only on the trigger”, see even you are saying it. Not pulling the trigger.

        11. avatar binder says:

          OK lets say that it is your finger pulling on the trigger that is the final action. How hard would it be to replace you finger with a tab mounted to the stock. I can already tell you it is very easy. Slide Fire has already done it. “or can be readily restored to shoot” Same reason you can’t get any new open bolt guns anymore.

        12. avatar ACP_arms says:

          But what happens when you use too much pressure pushing on the fore-end with a bump stocked rifle? It doesn’t bump fire. use too little forward pressure it doesn’t bump fire Also that forward pressure on fore-end is being use to move the trigger to fire, if forward pressure was the only thing needed to fire the ATF never would have approved bump stocks for manufacturing and sale in first place.

          Now there was a bump stock that used a spring in the stock to push the rifle forward. In that case I would say yes, that is a machine gun. It automatically moves the rifle forward in after recoiling. In fact the ATF said after approving it that the spring loaded stock would make a gun with it a machine gun.

          But the stock we are talking about doesn’t have a spring in the stock, the stock it self does not move the rifle that is in it forward to fire again. That is why a bump stock isn’t a machine gun. Because that forward pressure on the fore-end is still being use to move the trigger to the rear.

          What if I draw a semiautomatic handgun from a holster and my shirt get caught on the trigger and as I push the gun forward it fires? What if I hold the trigger guard of a semiautomatic handgun and hold a finger on the trigger and fire by pushing it forward, do I now have a machine gun?

        13. avatar binder says:

          So now your argument is that stops firing if you use too much pressure it stops firing. Making a crappy machine gun is still making a machine gun. Some machine guns have a two stage trigger. Pull lightly and it fires single shot, pull father back and you have automatic fire. Reverse the function of the trigger and you still have a machine gun.

          Again, the action of the gun is not important, just what is required by the operator. The very definition of machine gun is one action on the trigger. Pushing forward with 10-25 lbs of force is ONE action.

          “What if I draw a semiautomatic handgun from a holster and my shirt get caught on the trigger and as I push the gun forward it fires? What if I hold the trigger guard of a semiautomatic handgun and hold a finger on the trigger and fire by pushing it forward, do I now have a machine gun?”
          NO it will only fire once. But you do have a ND,

          The only reason the bump stock got past the AFT if that the operation of the stock is very subtle and convoluted.

          But I guess you would argue this is not a machine gun ether.
          http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2014/01/23/slide-fires-concept-bump-sled/

          Kind of when you have “braces” where you can adjust the length of pull. At some point people call BS
          http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2017/01/01/tailhook-pistol-brace-adjustable-lop-folding/

        14. avatar Chip Bennett says:

          Again, the action of the gun is not important, just what is required by the operator.

          I already quoted the statutory definition. It says nothing about the operator, only the trigger.

        15. avatar ACP_arms says:

          “NO it will only fire once. But you do have a ND,”
          You didn’t answer the other half of the question.

          How is it that bump firing with out a bump stock a gun is still a semiautomatic, but when you put the same gun a bump stock it’s now a machine gun?

          Because to me with or without a bump stock you’re doing the exact same thing.

        16. avatar binder says:

          “How is it that bump firing with out a bump stock a gun is still a semiautomatic, but when you put the same gun a bump stock it’s now a machine gun?”

          The same reason that everyone with a pistol brace is not being arrested for having a SBR. you are using the rifle in a way it was not intended be used. Now put a reverse brake on the end, and you might have a problem. (I know people so that on bump fire stock guns to get them to run better). Put a riffle buffer on a pistol (still has not stock) and you will end up in trouble. Make a new open bolt gun and you will have even more problems.

        17. avatar ACP_arms says:

          Answer this question directly.

          If I have bone stock rifle and I bump fire it, I push the gun forward to fire it, it recoils back and I push forward to fire again.
          Now that same rifle is in a slide fire stock, I push forward to fire it, it recoils back and I push forward to fire again.

          Is there any difference in the actions use to fire the gun?

        18. avatar Binder says:

          Regular bump firing is not illegal for the same reason a Sig brace is not. Inappropriate use of a firearm will not reclassify it. But keep arguing that they are the same and you may end up getting that classified as illegal too. (Kind of what happened with the brace)

          I push forward to fire it, it recoils back and I push forward to fire again.

          NO you just keep pushing. Same force you used to get it started. If it require you to stop pushing it, or better yet push back,that would be semi auto and at that point, just use the trigger.

          Arguing that if I push too hard is also invalid as the example of a two stage trigger on a open bolt gun demonstrates

          And the final argument that you finger is what is touching the trigger is also invalid as it can easily be replaced with a zip tie, then we are back to the easy to convert problem.

        19. avatar ACP_arms says:

          “Regular bump firing is not illegal for the same reason a Sig brace is not. Inappropriate use of a firearm will not reclassify it. But keep arguing that they are the same and you may end up getting that classified as illegal too. (Kind of what happened with the brace)
          Bump firing is bump firing if you don’t change how the gun works, a slide fire stock doesn’t change how the rifle in it works. What happened with the SB brace was the ATF saying that shouldering a pistol with a SB brace would at that moment make the pistol in to a SBR, but then it was ruled later shouldering pistol with a SB brace did not make the pistol in to a SBR.

          What you have been saying about bump stocks making a semiauto rifle full auto is just like the ATF saying shouldering a SB braced pistol made the pistol a SBR. It is completely absurd.

          “NO you just keep pushing. Same force you used to get it started. If it require you to stop pushing it, or better yet push back,that would be semi auto and at that point, just use the trigger.

          If I kept pushing it would never recoil back, I have to let it recoil and push forward to fire again.

          “Arguing that if I push too hard is also invalid as the example of a two stage trigger on a open bolt gun demonstrates.”

          Says the one who is talking about a machine gun with a machine gun trigger mechanism. I’m talking about a gun that has a semiautomatic trigger mechanism. Ruling; Invalid counter point.

          “And the final argument that you finger is what is touching the trigger is also invalid as it can easily be replaced with a zip tie, then we are back to the easy to convert problem.”

          Just like the SB brace, any modification to it is not legal. Ruling; Invalid counter point.

      2. avatar binder says:

        Chip, the triggering action is PUSHING forward NOT pulling the trigger. Even if you were to argue that pulling the trigger is the final action, it is too easy to just put a screw in there and now your finger is not even involved and NO case can be made that you are pulling the trigger. So you fall under easily restorable to a machine gun.
        Why don’t you become the court case so we can get back open bolt guns.

        1. avatar Chip Bennett says:

          Once again, please cite the statutory language that relies upon the action of the operator, rather tham the trigger. I linked and quoted it for you.

          I can’t be the court case, because I don’t own a bump stock, and I don’t live in a freedom-hating state.

        2. avatar binder says:

          The original version was classified as a machine gun. All they did was take out a spring. That made it even more effective and got it past the ATF. I can return it to that original state with a zip tie and spring.

          The fact that the trigger was bouncing off your finger did not get past the ATF the first time.So that was never a factor. But someone at the ATF thinks and still thinks that if you take a spring out of a machine gun (one that is fairly easy to replace at that) then it is no longer a machine gun. Well that kind of works unless you provide a way for the shooter a way to compensate for that spring, It can be device like a squeeze cocker on a HK P7, or in the case of the slide fire, forward pressure on the for grip.

        3. avatar ACP_arms says:

          “The original version was classified as a machine gun. All they did was take out a spring.”

          Do to automatically returning forward by the spring. The models for sale now are the manual version, you have to push them forward.

        4. avatar binder says:

          And all you have to do is cover up the hole in the back and put back in a spring. Easily returnable.
          And did you just agree that the original was a machine gun?

          But in the original version you did not push on the stock to fire it, you pulled the trigger. On the new version you push, not pull. Even slide fire agrees to that.
          And how do your resolve the issue that you can use a zip tie instead of you finger in the trigger.

        5. avatar ACP_arms says:

          “And all you have to do is cover up the hole in the back and put back in a spring. Easily returnable.”
          “And how do your resolve the issue that you can use a zip tie instead of you finger in the trigger.”

          Both of those is a modification to the device which mean it should go to the ATF for review. The device is only approved in its “stock” configuration.

          “But in the original version you did not push on the stock to fire it, you pulled the trigger.”
          “And did you just agree that the original was a machine gun?”

          Due to it moving forward automatically after recoiling. Key words- moving forward automatically.
          Yes, but don’t get too excited by that. like I said the models for sale now are manuals, not autos.

          “On the new version you push, not pull. Even slide fire agrees to that.”

          You push to pull the trigger, because if you don’t have your finger in the way of the trigger, the rifle in the slide fire stock won’t fire unless the trigger is pulled. And I can do the same thing with out a slide fire stock.

          As long as a human is the one doing the actions to fire it is still a semiautomatic i.e. GAT crank. Bump stocks (minus the spring) have been reviewed twice before by the ATF and each review came to the same conclusion, it does not make a semiautomatic firearm in to an automatic firearm.

        6. avatar ACP_arms says:

          A bump stock doesn’t change how a semiautomatic rifle works, the trigger is pulled (it’s the same thing if your using a belt loop or bump stock) rifle recoils and the trigger resets to fire the next round. If a bump stock really made a semiautomatic into a machine gun the trigger would never need to be reset. And it never would have been approved in the first place.

  13. avatar MLee says:

    Technically speaking, smoothing an action isn’t to increase the rate of fire, it’s to smooth the action. With the mentality being shown, a padded butt stock could increase the rate of fire because it aids the shooter in comfort, thus enhancing the ability to fire a weapon more rapidly and in an increased rate of succession. However, I just don’t see enforcement on trigger packages, action and trigger jobs. That’s a bunch of “the sky is falling” malarkey. The intent is to curtail possession and use of items that increase the rate fire beyond what (most) humans can perform, Jerry Miculek being the exception. That being bump stocks, slide fire, trigger cranks and such.
    Granted, all it takes is some snot nosed brat with a badge to make someones life miserable because the letter of the law says………etc. Nobody wants to be dragged into a court having to pay a lawyer, have guns seized and generally be a very unhappy person because the rules or laws used inadequate, poorly crafted, careless language.

  14. avatar RV6 Driver says:

    They’re (the fed) is gonna do whatever they want regardless of people sending nasty messages to useless politicians.

    If these laws go into effect, who enforces them? The ATF? Local local LEO? Some new federal agency? Where’s the budget for all the man power?

    Correct me if I’m wrong but the basic gist of these new proposed laws is to ultimately ban semi-auto guns right?

    The general anti gun strategy is “death by a thousand paper cuts.” That being said,I think a super aggressive “gun grab” and de facto semi-auto ban would accelerate the inevitable “showdown” everyone has been talking about for years….

    It’s always funny to hear people with a safe full of fighting rifles and thousands of rounds to be so terrified….

  15. avatar Jackal says:

    Tim, back up your claims. Your FB/instagram posts have been posting here claims that on the 25th, federal rates of fire will be established, all match triggers and bump stocks will be defined as machine guns. The notice in the federal register says NOTHING of the kind. Where are you getting the information for these claims?

    1. avatar TrueBornSonofLiberty says:

      WATCh the video

  16. avatar former water walker says:

    Thanks NRA…all you to do after Las Vegas was NOTHING.

  17. avatar Chip Bennett says:

    ATF has no statutory authority to issue such a rule. FULLSTOP.

  18. avatar strych9 says:

    I still think this will die in the comment period with the ATF basically using this as a “Well, we tried but Congress needs to act” CYA way of passing the buck because the ATF doesn’t want to open this can of worms.

    I mean, this is the organization telling Congress that they want silencers off the NFA because they aren’t often used in crimes and the ATF doesn’t really want to continue doing the amount of work that keeping silencers regulated this way entails. Now I’m supposed to believe that they’re going to, of their own volition, add to that pile of work by not just adding bump stocks (used ONCE in a crime so far as I know) and a ton of other shit to boot and then coming up with arbitrary numbers for rate of fire? On top of that they’ve got to know this is going to spawn a ton of lawsuits.

    So again, the ATF, an agency begging for it’s NFA workload to be reduced is not voluntarily going to take action to insure that it’s NFA workload to be increased by many, many times what it is today… over an item that, so far as any reporting (that I know of) has found, has been used for exactly one crime?

    I’d call those claims dubious.

    This set of assertions reminds one of Winston from Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels when he says “You went out six hours ago to buy a money counter and you come back with a semi-conscious Gloria and a bag of fertilizer. Alarm bells are ringing, Willie.” because the proclaimed forthcoming actions on the part of the ATF make about as much sense.

    1. avatar TX_Lawyer says:

      How would this increase they’re NFA workload? It just makes the things “illegal.” It doesn’t say they have to go through the stamp process. (It would increase the workload of the tech branch).

      Also, I figured out that thing I was talking about. I can’t find a reason it can’t be done. I just can’t figure out why it hasn’t been done. I’m smart, but I don’t think I’m so smart as to have come up with a pretty obvious idea no one has ever had before. I don’t know if you’ll remember what I’m talking about.

  19. avatar FedUp says:

    Thanks for thinking this one up, Wayne and Chris.
    And thanks to Marion for promoting it.

    Negotiating Rights Away, Since 1934…

  20. avatar James Earl Hopper says:

    If we could get some links put up on where to go to make a comment to the ATF. I know the goa has a form letter and I suggest people use it but make it into their own words use the form letter to structure your comment that way they’re individualized. And remember to call your congressman and senators and get them knowing about this and how you plan on not voting for them again if they let this crap go through along with the reciprocity Bill unless they take the fix NICS out of the reciprocity bill. The only way to fix that crap this background check bull crap is to get rid of it. Thanks a lot guys from the truth about guns for putting this up it was very important and I know you guys have a bunch of readers so let’s get out there and make those comments to the ATF and call our congressman and our Senators and let them know this will not fly.

  21. avatar Green Mtn. Boy says:

    So where is the NRA in all this? you ask.

    Wayne LaChamberlin,Ms Hammer and their fellow NRAe directors are Standing and Capitulating !

    Now a question just how is it a UnConstitutional agency attempts to regulate the speed of ones finger,thinking of Jerry Miculek’s finger in particular and even if it was done Constitutionally by Congress how do they regulate the speed of ones finger?

  22. avatar Jimmy says:

    Had fot the Hills

  23. So, Jerry Miculek’s fingers will have to be registered with the BATFE as a machine gun.
    Fortunately, he was born (“manufactured”) before 1986, because if his fingers were “manufactured” after 1986 they would be illegal, as only machine guns made before 1986 can be registered or transfered.
    After he registers his fingers as a machine gun, can he transfer them to me? I’d willingly pay the tax stamp!

    Will existing competition triggers, binary triggers, or Miculek’s fingers be “grandfathered” by the new ruling, or will they suddenly be illegal? What if you have a trigger that isn’t a binary trigger or LaRue competition trigger, but simply a Stag two-stage trigger, is that okay, or will we all have to downgrade to the shittiest possible trigger? Ironically, if we have to downgrade to the shittiest trigger on our AR-15s, we’ll actually be downgrading to a Mil-Spec trigger, in other words a trigger that’s “Military grade” (as the antis love to call anything scary-looking)! So basically, the antis want us to have “Military grade” (shitty) triggers, but they don’t want us to have “Military grade” guns. Makes sense…. not!

    1. avatar Geoff says:

      I was born in 1951. Would I have to register MY trigger finger? Get a tat serial number?
      I can shoot 3 or 4 rounds a seconds. Not as fast as Jerry, but hey, who is?

    2. avatar binder says:

      High rate of fire does not equal machine gun. I know it does with the anti gun crowd, but I don’t thing that is the type you see here

  24. avatar LKB says:

    If ATF actually decrees that bump fire stocks, binary triggers, etc., are in fact “machine guns,” it’s not like we’d be able to just suck it up and “get legal” by just getting a tax stamp for them. Due to the Hughes Amendment, the registry on “machine guns” is closed. Ergo, it’s the Atkins Accellerator problem on steroids — millions of units that for years have been legal and blessed by the ATF suddenly become 100% illegal with no way to fix it.

    Now, such a result will look fundamentally unfair to a lot of people, and I suspect that ATF will come under a lot of pressure to try and mitigate it. One way they could do so would be to just reopen the MG registry (which I believe the President can do by an executive order granting an amnesty period to all who want to register “illegal” MG’s) so that everyone who has what the ATF now considers a “machine gun” can get legal.

    Of course, if they do that, I have a funny feeling that there are going to be a lot of people quietly machining thousands of DAIS’s and Lightning Links to take advantage of the amnesty . . . which would really hoist ATF on its own petard.

    1. avatar Geoff says:

      Bump stocks do not have a serial number. What are they gonna do?
      Crap. I know how to convert an AR15 to full auto and where to buy the full auto FCG. What are they gonna do?
      Alternately, I can actually afford to buy a machine gun, even though they cost $15,000 or more, but why should I?
      Slide Fire for under $200 to SIMULATE full auto.

    2. avatar TX_Lawyer says:

      Everything you said is correct. The Atkins Accellerator decision was mentioned in their letter. That leads me to believe they are going to base their reasoning on that letter and just say “it’s one function of the trigger because we are the ATF.” That argument won in court last time.

  25. avatar Geoff says:

    Revolution in 3…2…1…

    1. avatar robby says:

      It’s time for the kind “That will Not be televised!”
      I’ll bring the tar, if someone brings feathers, and I have all the rails we need.
      Sadly, I fear the sheepole don’t have it in them.

  26. If the ATF only wants to ban bump stocks, there are ways to do that without massive overreach. Furthermore, setting a rate of fire would not survive a legal challenge. Also remember that Trump gan void any of ATF’s administrative actions.

    All ATF needs to do is issue an opinion that bump stocks constitute a modification to the “trigger system” that results in a full auto firearm. Would this survive a legal challenge? Who knows? What is clear is that it is more likely to survive than a rate of fire regulation without any foundation in law.

    As for echo or duplex triggers, ATF could issue a revised opinion that a pull of the trigger includes “press and release”. Again, the ruling would be limited to the devices in question. Again, the courts will decide

    Who knows what they will do – but I believe they will be restrained in their actions because they work for Pres. Trump and do not want to be overruled.

    1. avatar Binder says:

      “echo” triggers should be banned not for rate of fire but becouse they are a beyond stupid safety flaw. Anyone who thinks that putting the equivalent of a dead’s man switch on their gun needs their head examined. We have enough ND with people putting their fingers on the trigger, now they have invent a way to have one when take your finger off it. Yikes.

      Better way to do it is have a “milti stage stage” trigger when it will brake one time, fire, lock the trigger untill a new round is cambered and then allow you to continue the trigger pull to a second or third break.

      But that is even closer to the definition of a machine gun then the binary.
      I hate rules that that result in things being more, not less dangerous (yes I’m still bitter about idpa wanting people with CZ without firing pin blocks to start with the hammer fully down)

  27. avatar Ralph says:

    Let’s get all bent out of shape by something that hasn’t happened and might not happen at all. Then we can all take SSRIs for the anxiety that we are causing ourselves. Win win!

    1. avatar RV6 Driver says:

      Spot on… These guys get swept away in the anxiety wave everytime without thinking anything through. The antigunners and firearm industry have a symbiotic relationship.

      Hang that “Come and take it” flag high while having an anxiety attack everytime some new nonsense laws hit the forums…. I thought that safe full of fighting rifles and stockpiled ammo was for the big “showdown”……

      1. avatar TrueBornSonofLiberty says:

        There’s 2 kinda of people, those that are proactive and try to get stuff done, and those that react. Those are the losers. Because by that time, it’s too late. And finally- this isn’t a “law”, as traditionally and legitimately passed through Congress. This is through bureaucratic fiat, with no redress. Those that aren’t alarmed or taking action, that claim to support the 2A, are as bad as the filthy, subhuman Liberal Terrorists™️ that work for Bloomberg.

        1. avatar RV6 Driver says:

          Pretty bold talk…. What do you mean by “take action?” You just said yourself, none of this will go through Congress and will be enacted by fiat….

          So if that’s the case and all this stuff gets enacted who enforces these laws? The bump stock/ rate of fire storm troopers? None of this stuff has serial numbers so do they just randomly raid the gun ranges looking for violations?

          Judging from your response your the type of guy that anonymously calls people a “filthy subhuman” in the comment section…. Bold talk is usually at its boldest when it’s anonymous….

    2. avatar Bob in Calif says:

      Gotta agree Ralph. Blah, blah, blah, NRA this, blah, blah, blah, ATF that. It’s all a bunch of hot air for now. All this whining and bitching is just a waste of time. If the people in these comments put as much time into calling, mailing, or emailing their congress-critters we might stand a better chance of none of this crap happening. In the mean time, relax and see what happens. And if it goes south, well, I guess non-compliance won’t just be a “thing” any more.

  28. avatar Weird Sal says:

    I think this is all to set up the mandate for “smart guns”. A computer chip controlled gun can have firing limits coded into it, along with a govenment shutdown mode that will be implemented against pesky citizens. Tinfoil hat, anyone?

  29. avatar Scorp says:

    This isn’t possible, so I call BS on yet another conspiracy theory from MAC. Machine guns have the inherent ability to shoot multiple rounds per one trigger pull, whereas semi automatics are inherently unable to do so. The ability for someone talented, such as Jerry or Miculek, to fire very fast comes down to personal prowess of the shooter. Jerry can shoot stock triggers ridiculously fast, so you can’t even bring the match trigger argument seriously after seeing him shoot because nothing slows the man down. And not to mention, there are people like Jerry and Lena who make a living shooting in competitions, so I can’t imagine this would go very far when people’s livelihoods are at stake.

    Beyond that, every gun ships with different trigger pull weights and resets. My Scorpion has a roughly 8lb stock trigger, mushy as all hell, but the Ruger PC Carbine which TTAG just reviewed has a 3.5lb trigger with short reset. You can’t even begin to enforce stock triggers when there is such contrast in how they are all manufactured.

    Please stop with these conspiracy theories. There is already enough to deal with in he firearm universe without this garbage being put out there. Some people are just more talented than others and someone will always be able to fire guns faster than someone else. The next thing they’ll do is arrest those people who are able to shoot lever action guns ridiculously fast because they were never intended to fire that fast, manual action or not.

  30. avatar Joe R. says:

    When are they ever going to BE FORCED TO ADMIT THAT THEY ARE

    N O T

    P R O T E C T I N G

    A N Y O N E

    ATF Rules ARE FING

    H O N O R

    S Y S T E M

    O N L Y

    GUESS WTF, ATF&E,

    N O

    O N E

    (AND I MEAN NOT AN FING THING)

    I S

    P R O T E C T I N G

    Y O U (and yours)

    F R O M

    U S

    IF WE CHOOSE TO STOP PLAYING YOUR STUPID Fv<k Fv<K GAMES.

  31. avatar Kenneth G Maiden says:

    Where’s the NRA? The same old place it always is. Give us more MONEY, more money, more money! Hey maybe we’ll give ya some cheap bag or a hat. But shell out more money!
    NO MORE nra! You sell us out and do us in the backside? GOA folks!

    1. avatar Joe R. says:

      “Give us more MONEY” and we’ll work on a problem that we already had fixed before we purposefully broke it again.

      F’ING GIVE US NATIONAL RECIPROCITY AND HUSH NOW !

  32. avatar Tt78 says:

    So they plan on banning Jerry?

  33. avatar Chris T from KY says:

    The second amendment is just for rich people???
    I have heard people on gun podcasts say “I have a machine gun as an investment.”

    I say the second amendment is for everyone!!!!!

    If technology makes rapid fire guns economically affordable for the poor why is the “gun community” against it???

    This debate is about the definition of what the Second Amendment means. Does it mean any firearm?
    Or does it mean only “civilian firearms”. As defined by the government.

    TTAG has many cowards supporting the gun grabber position. It has been quite an eye opener reading comments before Las Vegas and now after. Certain people really did “come out of the closet” as gun controllers.

    I assume you people support state government confiscation of private property, without just compensation. Massachusetts has just ordered bump stock owners to turn in their property for destruction. The state is NOT giving them the $300 to $400, cost, to compensate the owners for the DEMAND BY THE GOVERNMENT they give up their legally purchased property.

    I guess it was all just “talk” about liberty. No action here from the Libertarians. They supported former governor William Weld, who signed the state level AWB, back in the early 1990s.
    And his law is being used to enact even more gun control.

    1. avatar TX_Lawyer says:

      “The second amendment is just for rich people???” – Pretty much. That’s the true effect of all gun control.

    2. avatar binder says:

      “If technology makes rapid fire guns economically affordable for the poor why is the “gun community” against it???”

      Because “rapid fire guns” got SBRs SBSs and suppressors banned and almost got handguns banned. People back then were using them to gun down other gangsters and cops, not the common person

      Given how much crap the NV shooter had I think the only reason he did not have a actual machine gun was the time to get a stamp transferred.

  34. avatar Jim says:

    Eh. GOP had the chance to handle this legislatively, but instead punted to the ATF. Maybe this will convince the “slippery slope” jackasses amongst us to use their heads a little in the future. Just kidding, it won’t.

  35. avatar sound awake says:

    thanks nra

    all they had to do was withhold comment for a few weeks until it all blew over and everybody forgot about it just like it always does

    but no

    now theyve opened the biggest 2nd amendment can of worms weve seen in decades

    we still have no idea who did the shooting and why

    this investigation is being run by the same fbi that we now know for a FACT conspired with our intelligence agencies to take down the president because they disagreed with him ideologically

    oh yeah and anybody remember fast and furious

    THEY *CANNOT* BE TRUSTED

    its still at least as likely as not at this point the whole vegas thing was concocted and perpetrated by leftist new world order types to get gun restrictions like this implemented in the first place

    this whole thing could end up being fast and furious ll

    and now we appear to have the preeminent gun rights advocacy group in america going right along with it like a bunch of MORONS

    the lesson to be learned from this:

    never ever let a perfectly good opportunity TO JUST SHUT UP pass you by

    1. avatar Green Mtn. Boy says:

      This repeated for truth.

      thanks nra

      all they had to do was withhold comment for a few weeks until it all blew over and everybody forgot about it just like it always does

      but no

      now theyve opened the biggest 2nd amendment can of worms weve seen in decades

      we still have no idea who did the shooting and why

      this investigation is being run by the same fbi that we now know for a FACT conspired with our intelligence agencies to take down the president because they disagreed with him ideologically

      oh yeah and anybody remember fast and furious

      THEY *CANNOT* BE TRUSTED

      its still at least as likely as not at this point the whole vegas thing was concocted and perpetrated by leftist new world order types to get gun restrictions like this implemented in the first place

      this whole thing could end up being fast and furious ll

      and now we appear to have the preeminent gun rights advocacy group in america going right along with it like a bunch of MORONS

      the lesson to be learned from this:

      never ever let a perfectly good opportunity TO JUST SHUT UP pass you by

  36. avatar Chip in Florida says:

    I thought the NRA was playing some kind of 4D chess with this issue and it would work out for firearm owners…. is that still the case and I am just too 2D to see the bigger plan?

    1. avatar Green Mtn. Boy says:

      No I think we are all starting to see the picture clearly through the Bravo Sierra the Negotiating Rights Away since 1934 are trying to sell.

    2. avatar TX_Lawyer says:

      I think maybe they were playing 4D chess, but on a regular chess board, so all the pieces just fell on the floor when they let go. Then the ATF said “king me!”

  37. avatar Binder says:

    “single function of the trigger”. A trigger is not any single part. You don’t pull a trigger on a M2, even though is is the very definition of a machine gun. trigger is the final action you take to fire the gun. M2, push the paddle, SlideFire “push forward”. If you continue to do that action the gun will continue to fire. Doesn’t matter how the weapon continues to fire, just that all you need to do is continue to add that single force.
    Now I know there are arguments for and against crank fired weapons, but at least you can argue it is not a constant force in one direction.

    1. avatar uncommon_sense says:

      Binder,

      What your analysis claims is the final action to fire a rifle with a bump stock is not actually the final action to fire said rifle. The final action is your TRIGGER FINGER EXERTING A REARWARD FORCE ON THE TRIGGER SHOE TO FIRE THE RIFLE.

      Look at it this way: take your finger out of the trigger guard, push forward on the front grip with your off hand, and tell me how many times your rifle fires. Answer: ZERO times.

      The obvious definition of a trigger is the group of parts that you actuate with a body part which enables a firearm’s striker or hammer to strike a cartridge. And that group of parts is the minimum amount of all NECESSARY parts to release the striker/hammer.

      Remove the trigger shoe (thus all remaining trigger parts are inside a firearm receiver) and no body part can do anything that causes the striker/hammer to strike a cartridge. Or remove the sear from the trigger assembly and no body part can do anything that causes the striker/hammer to strike a cartridge. Now, remove a bump stock and a body part can still easily cause the striker/hammer to strike a cartridge.

      That is why bumpstocks do not change our common understanding of a trigger and why bumpstocks are NOT part of the trigger system.

    2. avatar binder says:

      “take your finger out of the trigger guard,” and put in a screw. Now is it a machine gun? Because slide fire had guns like that. If that is all lit takes, you fall under easily restorable, same reason we do not have open bolt guns anymore.

      1. avatar uncommon_sense says:

        binder,

        If you install a screw into a bumpfire stock such that the screw depresses the trigger shoe rather than your finger, then your off hand which pulls forward on the fore grip is the triggering mechanism. Does that make your rifle a machine gun? I am inclined to say no because your off hand has to move the rifle forward every time you want the rifle to shoot. If you do not move the rifle forward after a shot, it will not go bang.

        Which direction you have to move something, which hand you use to move it, and what piece/part you move is irrelevant. The point is that you have to move your hand/finger every time to fire the rifle. As long as rifle “resets” after every shot and you have to again move your hand/finger to move the part which fires the rifle, I do not consider your rifle a machine gun.

  38. avatar #2aAFALLDAY says:

    *Spread THE WORD ONLY 5 DAYS LEFT! Lets blow up their inbox so they will never AGAIN… think about doing this EVER AGAIN!!!!!!!!!!! I mean it ….lets overwhelm them!! What part of #SHALLNOTBEINFRINGED do they not understand???????

    Please comment TO THE ATF politely using your own words not a boiler plate response for it will be trashed.

    You can use just a short Sentence or 2 saying you oppose this rule Change!

    THE SITE LIST SPAM AND MULTIPLE COMMENTS FROM The SAME SOURCES AND COMMENTS THAT ARE THE SAME OR NEAR THE SAME WILL NOT BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE RULES AND CONSIDERED SPAMMING!

    REMEMBER THE COMMUNIST ARE MAKING COMMENTS TOO…. PAID FOR BY SOROS,BLOOMBERG,HOLLYWOOD,CLINTON FOUNDATION,FACEBOOK,EBAY,GOOGLE,YOOBTUBE ETC….

    HERE IS THE LINK WITHOUT THE GOA SURVEY BS…SHAME GOA….

    https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=ATF_FRDOC_0001-0035

    Don’t complain if all semi-autos get banned and sat on ur butt to lazy to comment!

    We cannot allow the ATF to the have the power to write and change laws and make Plastic a NFA item!*

    1. avatar DoomGuy says:

      I already have at least 8 or 9 comments.

  39. avatar Blade says:

    Does this mean that the ATF will outlaw rubber bands? I can use a rubber band to bumpfire and have more control than if I used a bumpstock.

  40. avatar DoomGuy says:

    And everyone called me stupid and paranoid for saying that this was just a blanket semi auto ban. I guess I’ll just get called all kinds of names and profanities like the last idiot who saw fit to insult me.

    I hate to say I told you so but I told you so.

    Good luck negotiating with the SS… I mean the atf.

    Goodbye America.

  41. avatar DoomGuy says:

    I tried to sound the alarm by saying the very thing Tim is saying long before the comment period even started, and for my trouble I get people calling me profanities.

    1. avatar Raoul Duke says:

      Nothing but heads up their asses.

  42. avatar TX_Lawyer says:

    I have a few thoughts on this.

    1: I think Strych9 is probably right that this isn’t getting past the comments stage because the ATF knows it’s b.s. If it does get past the comments stage, then I think a nationwide injunction will be issued against the ATF’s new reg. That injunction will probably come from either the Northern District of Texas or the Western. I can’t remember which one is the “go to” District for conservatives seeking a nationwide injunction.

    2: Nationwide injunctions are terrible and will lead to an actual constitutional crisis eventually if they are not done away with.

    3: Welcome to turn of the century (18th to 19th) America and the administrative state where Congress doesn’t make laws, but nameless, faceless, unelected, unaccountable bureaucrats do. The progressives’ first gift to America from Germany.

    If I ever get a time machine, I’m not going back in time to kill Hitler. I’m going back to Germany in the 1800’s to kill all the political philosophers I can find. (I think it was Max Weber who gave us the philosophies behind the administrative state, Karl Marx who gave us socialism, and Friedriche Nietzsche who got us the Nazis).

    1. avatar binder says:

      It would not be that hard to get it classified as a machine gun if someone had two brain cells. The original version did not make it threw. Honestly, the NFA is crap, but getting a machine gun, if you want the particulars I can give them, reclassified as a semi-auto, is not the best way to keep law from being written banning semi autos. Look at the AWB and that was just cosmetics, not function (other than the magazine part). And we are still living with the crap in a number of places. This time it is the actual function of the firearm, so expect the shit to rain

      Remember the TEC9 stuff. They helped push the whole AWB crap because the open bolt versions were being converted to full auto.

      At least slide fire stopped pushing the sleds. I think they knew that was just to far.

      1. avatar TX_Lawyer says:

        I haven’t been reading the Everybody vs. Binder debate, but your argument of the bump stock being part of the “trigger” is probably the ATF’s best chance of outlawing these. It’s still bull because trigger has a common and accepted definition, especially in the context of firearms. “Undefined terms will be given their plain, ordinary, and popular meaning.” Washington Insurance Law, Thomas Vincent Harris, Sec. 6.04 Undefined Terms. (I’m using that because it was the first result that came up when I was looking for the legal wording that always turns up in statutory and contract interpretation). A trigger is the thing in the trigger guard. The springs and hammer and trigger are the trigger group. The trigger isn’t the “firing mechanism.”

        If the NFA hadn’t defined machine gun, or only defined it as a gun that is designed to fire full-auto, bumpfire stocks would probably make the gun a machine gun. But, the NFA has a specific definition for machine gun.

  43. avatar Binder says:

    Regular bump firing is not illegal for the same reason a Sig brace is not. Inappropriate use of a firearm will not reclassify it. But keep arguing that they are the same and you may end up getting that classified as illegal too. (Kind of what happened with the brace)

    I push forward to fire it, it recoils back and I push forward to fire again.

    NO you just keep pushing. Same force you used to get it started. If it require you to stop pushing it would be semi auto. Arguing that is I push too hard is also invalid as the example of a two stage trigger on a open bolt gun demonstrates

  44. avatar Arch says:

    So, will I be arrested, prosecuted and sent to prison for Fanning my Single Action revolver?

  45. avatar MRosalyn says:

    Hello, is anybody here interested in online job?

    It is simple survey filling. Even 10 bucks per survey (10 minutes duration).
    If you are interested, send me email to hans.orloski[@]gmail.com

  46. avatar Steven Simonton says:

    Why even have this debate. Full auos should be as legal as any other firearm.

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