List of States and Cities That Ban/Want to Ban Bump Fire Stocks. Is Your State on This List?

Bump fire stock (courtesy

“States and municipalities nationwide are attempting to ban bump stocks — devices used to make rifles fire more rapidly,” reports, “after Congress failed to act on bipartisan resolve to restrict them following their use in a Las Vegas massacre last year.” Failed, I tell you! Failed! An outcome aided and abetted by the NRA, who deferred to . . .

the ATF’s ” jack-booted government thugs” (Wayne LaPierre’s words), asking the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosive (and Really Big Fires) to add the plastic bits to the National Firearms Act, making them highly restricted items, opening the door to other bans (more on that later today).

At least 15 states [ED: 16] are considering laws that would ban bump stocks, as is Denver. Columbia, S.C., barred them last year. The devices already are illegal in California, and some other states with bump stock restrictions are trying to tighten them.

They include New Jersey, where, in one of his last acts in office, former Gov. Chris Christie (R) on Monday completely barred bump stocks from the state. Though the use of bump stocks already had been illegal in New Jersey, the new law prohibits possessing or selling them. Owners have 90 days to voluntarily surrender their bump stocks to law enforcement, and retailers must turn them in within 30 days.

Bump fire stock bans in place or about to take effect:

New Jersey
Columbia, S.C.

States with a proposed bill banning bump fire stocks:

New Mexico
New York
Rhode Island
South Carolina

Cities moving to ban bump fire stocks:

Denver, Colorado


  1. avatar Jonathan-Houston says:

    Vermont, New Mexico, Maine, and Missouri are the only surprises/disappointments on the list. Although, these states are so far just considering a ban. It might not go anywhere.

    1. avatar FedUp says:

      The Demoncrats in Missouri wanted to be the last state in the country without ‘civilian’ concealed carry.
      They almost succeeded.
      It’s not surprising that a Kansas City Demoncrat (Richard Brown) wants to ban a sliding piece of plastic.

    2. avatar No one of consequence says:

      NM isn’t as much of a surprise as you’d think. Santa Fe (state capital) is kinda like Santa Cruz (CA) in the desert.

      This sort of thing happens pretty much every legislative session, but as this is a budget session the governor has to invite the bill to be heard. I’m going to write to her requesting she not. Writing my rep will be useless, as she’s a bought-and-paid-for Bloomberger D.

    3. avatar GunDoc says:

      Something tells me with Obamagate ready to burst wide open, the Leftists won’t really be in a position to do much of anything.

      Kind of hard to pass legislation…from jail.


  2. avatar Roger J says:

    Where is Illinois?

    1. avatar Rick Hess says:

      Last time I looked, right next to MO. 8^)

    2. avatar Scoutino says:

      Right? Illinois gun grabbers never seen a gun control bill they didn’t like. I’m surprised to see Illinois missing.

  3. avatar Alex Waits says:

    Pants on head retardation. Do these “politicians” believe that they are a law unto themselves?That God himself has decreed that they shall go fourth and rule man by “getting things done” and “acting where others have not”, and showing bravery by “standing up to the NRA”! To dominate their fellow man by fiat and referendum, shaping society to fit their personal view of liberal values and socialist pursuits?

    1. avatar BLoving says:

      “A law unto themselves”?
      Have no doubt, some do. The rest are simply being politicians. The first lesson a civics teacher of mine beat into our heads in school: “the one overriding goal of every politician is to get reeelected.”
      That isn’t cynicism, it just an acknowledgement of reality. These politicians who are pushing this at a state and municipal level probably are doing so knowing full well that their laws are unconstitutional and will be overturned.
      It doesn’t matter.
      There are no penalties to suffer when a politician knowingly votes for or implements an unconstitutional law. They get to pass it, claim credit for it, reap the benefits of their actions with the weak-minded sheep who demanded the law, get reelected by those same sheep, and have the law thrown out by the courts with no consequences to the politicians whatsoever.
      So why not ban a piece of plastic? From the politicians perspective (rule #1 Get Reelected), what could it hurt?

  4. avatar Docduracoat says:

    You will note that my state of Florida is not on the list
    We are very gun friendly here.
    I love shooting with both my bumpfire stock and Snapfire trigger bumpfire device!
    Everyone should comment on the proposed rules ATF is considering about regulating bumpfire stocks
    Go to
    The docket number for the bumpfire regulations is 2017R-22
    Please read the “rules for making effective comments” that you will find there
    They do ask you to give your name and address on the comment form
    If you are paranoid, just say you don’t own any bumpfire stocks, but have shot them at the range
    They want consumers to comment on where do you see them for sale, what is the price, and what purposes are they used
    Then say something like thousands of law abiding citizens enjoy shooting these for recreation and only once were they used in a crime
    You can also find links at and to make comments against the proposed regulations

    1. avatar FedUp says:

      Very gun friendly, until your Florida weight clothing lets your handgun become visible?

      1. avatar JD says:

        Also very gun friendly if you consider asking permission and paying a tax to bear arms is friendly or constitutional. Sounds a lot like a poll tax to me. Seeing as unconstitutional laws are void from conception though I suspect many people ignore the ccw permission slip and carry anyway.

  5. avatar somethingclever says:

    The Columbia, SC ban is on the use within city limits, not on possession. It is already illegal to discharge any firearm within city limits, so it’s really irrelevant grandstanding.

    1. avatar ThePontificator says:

      Columbia’s ban on the use of bump fire stocks and triggers cranks was immediately challenged by local attorney Mark Schnee. Waiting for courts to follow through.

      Schnee won a case last year against the city of Columbia for enacting a ban on all firearms within an extended distance of the statehouse.

  6. avatar Joe R. says:

    F em all, in the goat a_ _.

  7. avatar Warlocc says:

    What I want to know is how these laws are legal without offering refunds to owners and businesses that have already paid for them.

    1. avatar Lcsw says:

      They don’t care. In NJ it’s either throw it away or face penalties so severe you would’ve thought you beat and robbed an old lady. No “just” compensation.

    2. avatar Jeff in CO says:

      What I find even more interesting is that all of this has occurred from ONE KNOWN CRIME involving a “bump stock.” I’ve been searching for the last month trying to find documentation of another crime involving the use of a “bump stock,” and I have yet to come across anything.

      I’ve asked people if they knew what a “bump stock” was six months ago before the Vegas shooting, and everyone I’ve talked to that was not a “gun guy” said, “No.” Think if we had done this with the automobile industry. The first time a crime is committed with a vehicle over 50-horsepower and an “automatic” transmission, we must “ban it!” Lump in all non-criminal automobile accidents, and . . .

      The just goes to show that it is not about making people “safe,” “stopping crime,” or “saving just one child.” It is just about trampling on the constitutional rights of Americans.

  8. avatar TrueBornSonofLiberty says:

    I’d suggest watching and sharing this video if you want to learn how dangerous the proposed ATF ban really is to the 2nd Amendment. This if NOT fear mongering.
    Follow the link to comment to the ATF in opposition. Clock runs out on January 25th

  9. avatar ButtHurtz says:

    Don’t think it will be much longer until a group of Patriots start taking the tyrants out (Trump keeps winning will delay this)

    I’m ready and willing to do my part, are you?

  10. avatar PA Gun Owner says:

    Pretty confident nothing attacking bump stocks will pass in PA, but pretty disappointed that time is being wasted on such nonsense.

  11. avatar Khen710 says:

    I am thankful to live in Florida. This is a very gun friendly state, we have the best of both worlds down here because we are part of “the south” and have everything that comes with that (mostly GOP reps, governor, etc) but we also kill it in the tourism industry and generate a lot of money from that. The good thing is that tourism is really only prevalent on the coasts, specifically south Florida. Then you have everyone else in the middle of state and near, but not on, the coasts like me and its actually a ton of farmland and nature preserves all over the state. It’s like night and day driving from let’s say, Palm Beach, out to Orlando and through the middle of the state. Most people don’t realize how much agriculture and wide open country we have in FL. Now if they would only open up “public lands” to us to go shooting like they do out west and we would be set. There are a ton of great outdoor ranges though.

    1. avatar Robert Farago says:


  12. avatar strych9 says:

    As I sit here outside Santa Fe prepairing to wire in a few light ballasts, I give the chances that NM bans bump stocks a “snowball’s chance in hell”.

    NM’s non-professional legislature has trouble passing budgets and other necessary bills. I doubt they’ll even have the time to consider this proposal.

  13. avatar anonymoose says:

    California, Hawaii, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, and New York have already effectively outlawed bumpstocks by having salt waffle bans that ban pistol grips, they’re just too stupid too figure out that making something “double-illegal” doesn’t actually make it more illegal-er.

    1. avatar anonymoose says:

      Meanwhile, I can’t write in proper English.

      1. avatar Mark N. says:

        Salt waffles might be interesting, are they like salt water taffey? Personally I prefer butter and real maple syrup….

        1. avatar anonymoose says:

          “Salt waffle” is a term I use to describe “assault weapons” regulated by laws, since any weapon (including body parts) used in an assault is an actual “assault weapon.” When ((they)) use a contrived BS term I like to use a more whimsical, nonsensical term in its place. I dislike the term “MSR” because abbreviations such as that can have several meanings, just like the old arfcommer use of “EBR” (Evil Black Rifle) to refer to AR- and AK-style guns.

    2. avatar Thomas S. says:

      Exactly, California has no need to propose a bill to ban bump fire stocks, they are illegal already. In California they are considered a “multi-burst trigger activator”

    3. avatar Raoul Duke says:

      Um Maryland has no law banning pistol grips so stop spewing BS about it.

      Also only certain “salt weapons” are banned in MD. You can still buy AR’s and AK’s.

      The only AR’s that are affected are 5.56 pencil/goverment barrels. HBAR’s in 5.56 are fine, any other caliber is fine. With all the evil features as well.

      The only AK’s banned in MD are 7.62×39 rifles. 5.45 and 5.56 still legal cash and carry with all the folding stocks and bayonet lugs you want. Imported, sporter 7.62×39 AK’s still legal. AK pistols in any caliber still legal.

      1. avatar anonymoose says:

        That still sounds pretty bad to me, and if you can’t have gubmint-profile ARs that’s basically a ban on 98% of the AR15 market. Also, how in the hell can they just outright ban 7.62×39 rifles? Can you buy an AR15 in 7.62×39?

  14. avatar Diksum says:

    Virginia is considering such a bill.

  15. avatar MDH says:

    The increasingly blue and increasingly poor state in which I currently reside is on the list — but it’s not *my* state, and never has been.

    Will be heading for Texas very soon, with barely a rearward glance.

  16. avatar TX_Lawyer says:

    The Congress currently has at least two bills taking silencers of the NFA, two for national concealed carry, one overturning every “assault weapons” ban on rifles, and a bill for a budget. None of those things are happening. The budget thing will be done eventually. The others, I ain’t holden’ my breath.

  17. avatar William West says:

    Well state of Missouri you can get a tax stamp to own suppressors and silencers. I think for bump stocks they should put serial numbers on them just like a gun get a special tax stamp. And have to do a nics background. To have a bump stock

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