BREAKING: President Trump Directs Justice Department to Ban Bump Fire Stocks

“President Donald Trump said on Tuesday he has directed his attorney general to propose changes that would ban so-called bump stocks, which make it easier to fire rounds more quickly,” kdvr.com reports . . .

“Just a few moments ago I signed a memo directing the attorney general to propose regulations that ban all devices that turn legal weapons into machine guns,'” Trump said at a Medal of Valor event at the White House, addressing Attorney General Jeff Sessions. “I expect these regulations to be finalized, Jeff, very soon,” Trump said.

Clearly, the CIC was referring to bump fire stocks. Because . . .

converting a rifle to full auto elsewise is already illegal. And over at Stately Wayne Manor. . .

Moments earlier, White House press secretary Sarah Sanders said Trump ordered the Justice Department and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives to review bump fire stocks, which she said had been completed. She said movement on that front would take place shortly.

“The President, when it comes to that, is committed to ensuring that those devices are — again I’m not going to get ahead of the announcement, but I can tell you that the President doesn’t support use of those accessories,” Sanders said.

A bump fire stock does not turn a rifle into a machine gun. With a bump fire stock attached to a rifle, there’s still one trigger press per fired shot. (As opposed to a machine gun’s multiple shots per trigger press.) And that means that the Justice Department is heading into some dark, dangerous waters, gun-rights-wise.

To ban bump fire stocks, the Trump administration will have to set some kind of standard for “acceptable” rate-of-fire. There is just no other way to do it. And once you do that, well, you’ve opened the door to banning all sorts of otherwise benign devices, like competition triggers.

And once you do that, you’ve opened the door to an anti-gun rights administration’s ability to ban other functions and features — as they do in New York to ban “assault rifles.”

The Second Amendment’s protection of Americans’ right to keep and bear arms says nothing — not a word — about what type of arms are protected. The forthcoming bump fire stock ban is a clear infringement on Americans’ gun rights. And a bad precedent.

comments

  1. avatar OmnivorousBeorn says:

    That sound you just heard was the brains of Trump fanboys breaking and then recovering to delete all memory of this.

    Trump has done some good, but I still would’ve liked Cruz to be POTUS (not that he could’ve beaten Hillary).

    1. avatar Danny L Griffin says:

      Agree on Cruz.

    2. avatar Bloving says:

      Nope. Ted couldn’t have beaten Hillary – and I still say Trump couldn’t have beaten Sanders if he hadn’t gotten thrown under the wheels by the DNC.
      This sucks but going forward we may be thankful several months from now if this is the worst new regulation we have to deal with.
      🤠

      1. avatar OmnivorousBeorn says:

        Agreed. Also, I don’t think anyone we had or they had could’ve beaten Biden. He was leading polls in the primaries when he wasn’t even running.

        If this is Trump’s worst regulation, I won’t complain. I expect far worse if he somehow manages to win the next election. Just my gut feeling.

        1. avatar Jonathan - Houston says:

          Biden has failed, repeatedly, across decades, to secure the presidential nomination of his own party. He knew he couldn’t even beat Hillary in 2016, so he bowed out. You think he’s a juggernaut? Good grief. He’s just a jughead.

      2. avatar anonymoose says:

        I’m torching my MAGA hat tonight.

        1. avatar OmnivorousBeorn says:

          Finally, a Trumper who is willing to change his mind . . .

        2. avatar anonymoose says:

          Unless this is a poison-pilled ploy like the walled DACA renewal thing was. Then I’ll have to buy a new MAGA hat. It’s just a bootleg one I bought from a black Muslim girl around the corner from the RNC, anyway. If this goes through, though, I’m going to vote Constitution Party or someone else in 2020.

        3. avatar Joel Thompson says:

          How is this a poison pill for anything? He’s directing the Justice Department and by extension the ATF to just write a rule that outright bans it… no congressional legislation requires… He’s using Obama’s pen and phone to get things done… For the children.

        4. avatar mk10108 says:

          No need to torch the cover yet.

          A bump stock is a mechanical device that converts expended gases of the bullet into mechanical energy moving the rifle in a way that increases the rate of fire.

          A trigger selector (safe semi auto) on a military rifle is a mechanical device lifting a sear thus removing the limitation of mechanical movement used to control a rifle bolt. It is used to increase the rate of fire.

          Bump stocks are not a cosmetic attachment but a device that increases the rate of fire.

          We of the gun community must reconcile the above facts and lend support to classify bump stocks as a device used to increase the rate of fire similiar to a machine gun.

          It’s up to ATF to determine if they should remain legal or be registered.

        5. avatar Joelt says:

          Congressional law determines what is a machine gun and what isn’t. For the ATF to ban it, the law would have to change.

          The Bump stock was allowed by the ATF specifically because it did not meet the legal definition of a machine gun. It was reviewed by the ATF three times already, and three times already, they determined it was legal.

          If he wants to put a bill before Congress, then that is his right, but he is directing the Justice Department to wave a magic wand and ban it.

          This is squarely on Trump.

        6. avatar Sian says:

          mk10108

          A bumpstock does not increase the mechanical rate of fire. It simply facilitates making it easier to manipulate the trigger more quickly.

          Nothing a bumpfire stock does is impossible to do with just your finger and practice.

        7. avatar Jonathan - Houston says:

          Joelt? Seriously? After more than a century of the government pissing on the Second Amendment, plus another eight years under Obama of him pissing on the rest of the Constitution, haven’t you learned that the only magic wand waving today’s presidents need is to whip out their johnson and just piss on something?

          Good lord, man, Trump has the same pen and the same phone Obama did. And if you think I’m wrong, then just answer me this: Who’s going to stop him? The Democrats? The Courts? The Deep State? The GOP? They’re all in favor of this, too!

          Worst of all, this isn’t even about bump stocks. That’s just the outrage de jour. There’s so much more involved here.

        8. avatar arc says:

          mk10108

          You are wrong. It is not up to the ATF to decide which weapons are or aren’t legal, the COTUS has already re-affirmed that the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. THAT MEANS ALL ARMS ARE LEGAL, including their attachments, ammunition, and cosmetic features!

        9. avatar TX_Lawyer says:

          Not that I disagree, but good luck with that argument in court or with a cop.

      3. avatar Ansel Hazen says:

        Maybe so but now there has to be tit for tat. If they get bumpfire stocks I want something and it needs to “make a difference” too.

        National Reciprocity. Removal of all Gun Free Zones.

        Nothing for free. Otherwise start grooming who will primary Trump in 2020 cause this ain’t what I voted for.

      4. avatar Shane says:

        Anyone would have beaten Hillary if Trump was able to.

      5. avatar PeachesSabrina says:

        Now hold on a second folks, this might actually work in our favor. Did anyone read the memo, or just shooting off at the hip. What makes the memo so important is that he used the words that this was approved under the Obama administration. Guess what else was approved under Obama (DACA), so if someone sues the administration they can use the DACA defense on it.

        1. avatar That One Guy says:

          the problem is that his words don’t match his memo.

          his words imply that he’s making an effort to ban bumpstocks.
          his memo implies that he wants sessions to review the ObamaATF’s determination on bumpstocks.

          those are two similar, but very different, things. God knows which on is what is actually happening.

    3. avatar Joe Brown says:

      A bag full of used diapers could have beaten Hillary, why do you think the 2nd worst candidate in history is president?…

      1. avatar Esoteric Inanity says:

        A very cogent point conveyed in a succinct and humorous way.

      2. avatar achmed says:

        Yes. A lot of people underestimate how truly crappy the Hildog was

    4. avatar Sam I Am says:

      People voted Trump, knowing there would be an unwelcomed tab to pay for defeating Clinton.

      This is going to be fun.

      BTW, the alternatives to Trump were/are not known to be unabashedly pro-gun.

      (Odd note: People sometimes read that collectively, more people voted against Trump in the primaries, than voted for. That is true, no matter which candidate you thought better than Trump. In every case, more people voted against “your” candidate, than for.)

      1. avatar OmnivorousBeorn says:

        You don’t think Cruz is unabashedly pro-gun? If he’s not, who is?

        1. avatar Slick says:

          Rand Paul

        2. avatar hillbillyjew says:

          + 7 billion

        3. avatar OmnivorousBeorn says:

          @Slick, Are you saying that Rand Paul is pro-gun, too, or that Rand Paul is and Cruz isn’t?

        4. avatar Cory C. says:

          So some of you guys are arguing that Cruz —who has written amicus briefs in favor of the Second Amendment and made oral arguments in the Heller case— are somehow less pro-gun than Trump? Really?

        5. avatar Sam I Am says:

          Cruz is not an “absolutists”, which is the only pro-gun position that matters.

        6. avatar OmnivorousBeorn says:

          @Cory C. I know, it’s like these guys either don’t know about Cruz or are beyond perfectionists — something you can’t do with politicians, because you usually settle for the least worst option.

        7. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “You don’t think Cruz was unabashedly pro-gun? If he’s not, who is?”

          Might maybe spot you that one; we shall see. But perhaps past is prolog?
          Cruz was a contributor to one of the 70 amicus briefs filed on Heller, but Cruz’s brief also included a set of caveats. The states that signed onto the brief, he wrote, “..have a strong interest in maintaining the many state gun laws” and “reasonable regulations” already in place, which the brief helpfully listed in a lengthy appendix. Scalia’s majority opinion seemed to take the hint when it declared, “nothing in our opinion should be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms.”

        8. avatar BlazinTheAmazin says:

          Cruz was the only true pro gun candidate in the primaries. Certainly not another Bush or Kasich who has already demanded ARs be banned again or how about that statist McCain. That being said, even Cruz likes to claim “states rights” for things that should clearly be left “to the people” (the big one coming to mind would be the drug war or I’m sure prostitution – both of which get these uptight politicians panties in a wad).

      2. avatar Ed says:

        Wheres the NRA in all this
        Complacent mother fuckers. Whats the use in voting anymore? Let me know when we’re gonna storm D.C. Outside of that, FUCK THIS FUCKIN ASSHOLE!

        1. avatar John in Ohio says:

          “Whats the use in voting anymore?”

          You’re waking up. Good morning! 🙂

    5. avatar henry bowman says:

      He can not do this, by default the AG has no such power. This is just a distraction.

      1. avatar Dale says:

        Bwahahahaha… Apparently you don’t know how government works. Not how it’s supposed to work, but how it works in reality. I can’t wait for all of the sycophants to begin excusing away this action by the god, Donald J Trump.

        1. avatar TStew says:

          Da, komrade. Sow that discord. Maskirovka FTW!

        2. avatar Stiktomygunz says:

          Well spotted methinks. Nice try Tovarich “Dale”.

    6. avatar Phil Wilson says:

      One of my biggest reservations on Trump (along with the worry that he might be another deficit spender) was that he might be as lawless as Obama was. So far, I think he’s adhered to the Constitution much better than Obama did. This EO, however, is the kind of thing that worried me. He does not have the authority to do this. And about the big spending…

      For all that, he’s still worlds better than Hillary would have been.

      1. avatar Prudiikal says:

        I agree with everything you said. I didn’t really want to vote for Trump, but did so understanding he was the lesser of 2 evils. up till now, i liked what he’s been doing.

        1. avatar Phil Wilson says:

          Agree, he’s far better in most regards than I feared he might be. And I’d feel better than I did before about voting for him in 2020 if he runs against…anyone who has a chance of winning the Dem nomination. Even with if his admin goes through with the proposed bump fire ban. I still don’t think he’s the leader we need, but I’m starting to accept that he may be as good as we can expect at this point in history. At the very least, I think he has the best interests of the USA at heart, which puts him ahead of 99% of Democrats.

      2. avatar Tom says:

        Oh, but he absolutely does have the authority.

        1. avatar Phil Wilson says:

          Fair enough, perhaps I should have said he doesn’t have the LEGAL authority to do this, which is not to say that he doesn’t have the power. Just like Obama lacked legal authority to unilaterally create immigration policy, but that didn’t stop him from doing it anyway.

    7. avatar Chris Mallory says:

      A Cuban-Canadian should not be allowed to be president, much less president. Deport Cruz and Make America Great.

      1. avatar Prudiikal says:

        A kenyan shouldn’t have been president, but he still was (also Cruz is a citizen since his mother was an American)

        1. avatar Nicky says:

          Obama was born in Hawaii to an American mother and Kenyan father. Therefore, he was American. As simple as it gets, dude.

      2. avatar Joel Thompson says:

        Whether or not you think that Cruz was eligible to be president since he was born outside of the US, he was still born to a US citizen, making him a US citizen…. Yes, let’s start deporting US citizens. I vote to deport US citizens that are internet trolls like yourself.

    8. avatar Jake Rogers says:

      I wish Grandpa Munster had won as well. He would have been much more hard core on matters concerning the Constitution

    9. avatar Nanashi says:

      Go and read Grassley-Cruz, the bill Cruz was falsely touting as pro-second amendment on his campaign page. It would have deprivatized medical records and given millions of dollars of your money to the ATF under a token promise they don’t commit more illegal acts. Cruz is no friend to the Constitution.

    10. avatar Hank says:

      This could be bad, depending on how things roll. Unfortunately, I think we’re looking at the beginning of the GOP turning anti gun in full. This isn’t happening right away, of course. But incrementally, like everything else. Frankly let’s all be honest. Who gives a shit about the bump sticks themselves? No one. The real problem here is democrat like mantra being taken up by Trump and many in the GOP, to not only accept gun control, but also to rule by executive fiat. The real problem, here, is appeasement. Yes. This is appeasement. Tell yourself whatever you want, wether you love the GOP and or Trump to death, you need to accept the fact that this move; is flat out appeasement.

      And because we are now seeing Trump and the GOP go into the appeasement mode, acting as chamberlin, I feel I must quote the following, this is lengthy, but I feel it needs to be said:

      “Give up your dreams of freedom because to save our own skins, we’re willing to make a deal with your slave masters.” Alexander Hamilton said, “A nation which can prefer disgrace to danger is prepared for a master, and deserves one.”

      Now let’s set the record straight. There’s no argument over the choice between peace and war, but there’s only one guaranteed way you can have peace — and you can have it in the next second — surrender.

      Admittedly, there’s a risk in any course we follow other than this, but every lesson of history tells us that the greater risk lies in appeasement, and this is the specter our well-meaning liberal friends refuse to face — that their policy of accommodation is appeasement, and it gives no choice between peace and war, only between fight or surrender. If we continue to accommodate, continue to back and retreat, eventually we have to face the final demand — the ultimatum. And what then — when Nikita Khrushchev has told his people he knows what our answer will be? He has told them that we’re retreating under the pressure of the Cold War, and someday when the time comes to deliver the final ultimatum, our surrender will be voluntary, because by that time we will have been weakened from within spiritually, morally, and economically. He believes this because from our side he’s heard voices pleading for “peace at any price” or “better Red than dead,” or as one commentator put it, he’d rather “live on his knees than die on his feet.” And therein lies the road to war, because those voices don’t speak for the rest of us.

      You and I know and do not believe that life is so dear and peace so sweet as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery. If nothing in life is worth dying for, when did this begin — just in the face of this enemy? Or should Moses have told the children of Israel to live in slavery under the pharaohs? Should Christ have refused the cross? Should the patriots at Concord Bridge have thrown down their guns and refused to fire the shot heard ’round the world? The martyrs of history were not fools, and our honored dead who gave their lives to stop the advance of the Nazis didn’t die in vain. Where, then, is the road to peace? Well it’s a simple answer after all.

      You and I have the courage to say to our enemies, “There is a price we will not pay.” “There is a point beyond which they must not advance.” And this — this is the meaning in the phrase of Barry Goldwater’s “peace through strength.” Winston Churchill said, “The destiny of man is not measured by material computations. When great forces are on the move in the world, we learn we’re spirits — not animals.” And he said, “There’s something going on in time and space, and beyond time and space, which, whether we like it or not, spells duty.”.. You and I have a rendezvous with destiny…. We’ll preserve for our children this, the last best hope of man on earth, or we’ll sentence them to take the last step into a thousand years of darkness.”

      Now, I understand Reagan was not the greatest friend to gun rights, as Trump is proving the same. However these words hold true on this regard of appeasement. When the liberals get what they want, when they get an inch, they take a light year. Giving in here will only lead down one path, the road to war.

      1. avatar SlicedVeggie says:

        I may be in the minority, in reading that piece, but no truer words have been said.

        tl;dr people would rather live on their knees than die on their feet. We live in never ending compromise.

      2. avatar John in Ohio says:

        Excellent post, Hank.

      3. avatar Eddie Bryan says:

        That should be the front page headline article in every paper, and on every newscast for the next week. I hope more people take the time to read that post in full and think about it. Very wise words.

      4. avatar cisco kid says:

        Road to war. Ha, Ha, what a joke. You know zero about populations and the age factor that affects how they think and act. Nor do you know anything about how American Government was set up to work. In the first case an aging population is a docile one and you can take about any right away from them and they are not going to do a damn thing about it and America has an aging population. Walk the streets some time and look at the average age of the people you meet. In the second case the U.S. was not set up as a democracy it was set up as a thoroughly corrupt Representative Government because the original swamp rats were the Founding Fathers who feared democracy and the people. They set up a corrupt government for the rich and by the rich and it remains so to this very day. The Constitution has always been a laughable joke and you may as well use it to wipe your ass with it as the corrupt Supreme Court is what gives you your rights and they vote according to current public opinion and they always have done so to stay in power. The current Presidential Degree to ban bump stocks is a prime example how the corrupt people in power do just about anything they want to do if its current with public opinion as the proletariat would not know any more about the Constitution than they do about rocket science.

        1. avatar ProfessorManque says:

          You really are pants on head retarded, aren’t you. The largest, most active block of voters in this country are the over 50 set.

          The 30 and under set aren’t even a blip on the radar when it comes to voting.

          Admit it. You’re in a group home.

    11. avatar Southern Cross says:

      Did anyone think this was going to end differently?

  2. avatar Stereodude says:

    By what authority will those new regulations be imposed?

    Or is this just a delay tactic to come up with proposed regulations that will be discarded at a later date when things have simmered down?

    1. avatar Esoteric Inanity says:

      Of course, it’s all some clever obfuscatory tactic devised to run out the clock, followed by inaction. Hell it could be, but then again, sometimes a spade is just a spade.

      1. avatar Stereodude says:

        Well, they’ll have to follow executive order 13771 too. 😀

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_Order_13771

        1. avatar Kapeltam says:

          Could this be a ploy to eliminate itself as well as another regulation? If so, big D is craftier than I gave him credit for.

        2. avatar Esoteric Inanity says:

          More likely to be a bureaucratic dictum/reinterpretation/hocuspocus muddy water hubbub maneuver than a legitimate executive order. Who knows? It’s all one grand shit show.

          The truly sad thing is that such a ban will hurt legitimate business owners. Bump Stocks, as gimmicky as they may be, have a niche in the market and can be quite fun. They don’t add to the lethality of a weapon directly (shot placement with any firearm is directly proportional to lethality). Besides, anyone with a modicum of intellect can do the necessary research and acquire the proper tools to do a legitimate select fire conversion.

        3. avatar Mad Max says:

          This is a very good point…. suppressors, maybe?

          It takes about 3 months for the actual reasoning and plans behind any of Trump’s moves to become obvious.

          I think he may be way, way, smarter than everyone gives him credit for. He’s usually 10 steps ahead on most things. He just acts like an obnoxious school bully as a distraction.

        4. avatar Kapeltam says:

          He is definitely smart. Otherwise he couldn’t have gotten as far as he has in life. Definitely keeping an eye on how this one turns out.

    2. avatar ToddR says:

      My initial thought is: likely to be what you wrote. Or, bump stocks are a sacrificial lamb and banning them won’t upset too many people-of-the-gun while scoring points with the left and middle left. My $.02

      1. avatar paul says:

        There is no such thing as “scoring points” with the left; it is a zero sum game with them. But, they will view this capitulation as blood in the water.

        1. avatar Nigel the expat says:

          Exactly. It is incrementalism.

          Anything that is given will be taken.

          Then more will be demanded. Nothing is ever #enough.

          Cake principle.

        2. avatar Phil Wilson says:

          ^This. And it sets an absolutely terrifying precedent. In theory, if they can ban one piece of equipment that is legal under current Federal law, why not any other? The only limitation here seems to be what the POTUS thinks he can get away with politically. The article absolutely nailed it on that point.

    3. avatar George from Alaska says:

      Stereomandude… that’s what I was wondering also.. and whether or not Trump already knows that Sessions may not be able to do this as it goes against at least 12 ATF permission letters to at least three different bump stock makers. Its also possible that the Trump son has already briefed his dad as to the complexity of the issue, which as far as I know is still under review by the ATF/NFA. I wrote my letter of support before the comments period closed within the last month or so and isn’t ATF/NFA still doing the review process??
      And what does “a ban” mean?? Future production? Take all the the ones ever made back or “make” people turn their already legally bought devices??
      And bump fires of course do not constitute on their own or convert anything into a “machine gun” as defined by either the NFA act or the ’68 GCA.
      So Trump looks good penning a memo directing Seasions to look into doing it… Please note that Trump could have Executive Ordered them out of existence but chose not to. I think he is looking for a little positive kudos from the antis but may already know how hard this is going to be to implement. And more importantly he has not addressed banning semi-autos… maybe good psych-ops.

      1. avatar Indiana Tom says:

        I think you may be right in that this ATF Bump Stock review could turn into a bureaucratic can of worms and everyone may wind up just spinning their wheels. The NRA was right to let the ATF review the bump stocks and have them go around in circles. This bump stock ban will probably get messy.’
        The bump stocks are a gimmick and I can see why the NRA will just let the items be a scapegoat to throw a stalking horse to the wolves.
        Of course we all know that the bump stock ban is pure BS and has nothing to do with making the USA any safer, but it might take some of the steam out of some of the sheep.

  3. avatar Esoteric Inanity says:

    The NRA’s ingenious strategy on full display.

    1. avatar HP says:

      Trump, Sessions, and the DOJ work for the NRA?

      1. avatar Esoteric Inanity says:

        According to the dems and mushy moderates. Hasn’t HP been paying attention since 2012? Every pro 2A politician is on the NRA’s payroll.

        In all seriousness, when the NRA foisted the blame for the Vegas Concert Shooting upon bump stocks, rather than upon the culprit(shooter), they capitulated and effectively gave their blessing for potential regulation. This has created a looming controversy that will only continue to fester and foster distrust and resentment.

        Even if this “concession” is merely some feigned surrender that was executed brilliantly to masterful effect, it will just as plainly appear to be some bungled submission foiled by the grace of god. Can one really trust an organization that behaves in such a duplicitous manner?

  4. avatar JohnnyL says:

    It seem like every time someone shits their pants we all now have to wear diapers!!!

    1. avatar Esoteric Inanity says:

      Indeed, the many are punished for the transgressions of the very few. It’s oh so American.

    2. avatar Stereodude says:

      It’s more like stopping drunk driving by regulating what kinds of cars people can buy and how big the gas tank can be.

      1. avatar OmnivorousBeorn says:

        I bet we could cut auto deaths from about 35K to 5K easy if we just made it illegal to have a car capable of accelerating past 15 MPH.

    3. avatar Hank says:

      Diapers and politicians must be changed often and for the same reason.

  5. avatar Brian says:

    “propose regulations that ban all devices that turn legal weapons into machine guns” – A bump stock doesn’t turn a gun into a machine gun. Does this mean we’re getting a new definition of machine gun?

    1. avatar HP says:

      For what will likely be a fleeting few days or maybe weeks, I’ll be an optimist here and say that nothing has changed or will change, as what you said about bump stocks not making guns into machine guns is true. So maybe this is all just fluff? The illusion of “doing something” to shut up the Democrats? I’m probably wrong.

  6. avatar Kurt says:

    Trade for national concealed carry reciprocity and hearing protection act?

    1. avatar Esoteric Inanity says:

      Only if “Assault Weapons” ban 2.0 and Universal Background Checks a.k.a Registration are on the table. Thanks to current “gun rights” proponents inaction/complacency of late the antis have somehow gained the upper hand.

    2. avatar Mike in KC says:

      There is nothing to trade. This isnt new legislation, its a regulation/intreprtation change of existing law. Obama only wished to do something like this but never got it done. Im pissed but not that pissed cause i figured this is what trump was. That and some of the worst gun legislation was passed by/with republicans

      1. avatar pwrserge says:

        The hilarious part is that they will have a hell of a time justifying such a ban under existing law. The term machine-gun is clearly defined. This “announcement” is a nothingburger.

        1. avatar binder says:

          No issue at all. The slide fire stock itself pushes your finger off the trigger. Hell you can replace your finger with a looped zip tie. Try to do that on any other firearm. All they have to do is define exactly what is meant be a single operation of the trigger. You better hope like hell that is the way they do it.

        2. avatar pwrserge says:

          Yeah… Watch as I sit and laugh at all the commie concern trolls who think this order will change jack shit.

        3. avatar Rammerjammer says:

          Pay no attention pwrserge. He doesn’t know jack about firearms as you can see in his prior posts.

          Trump is a traitor and his appeasement is clear evidence that his 2nd Amendment position was only a means to gain the vote of rubes.

        4. avatar hillbillyjew says:

          “Pay no attention pwrserge. He doesn’t know jack about firearms as you can see in his prior posts.

          Trump is a traitor and his appeasement is clear evidence that his 2nd Amendment position was only a means to gain the vote of rubes.”

          Agreed. I can almost forgive pwrserge’s love for anime. But calling everybody “kiddo”, “commie” etc. makes me wonder which intellectual disability this poor fella suffers from. And who says nothingburger? What a tool.

        5. avatar pwrserge says:

          See obvious left wing concern troll above.

        6. avatar pwrserge says:

          Cool video bro. Doesn’t change the plain text of the statute.

        7. avatar binder says:

          His finger is not on the trigger on this version. Same operating principle.

        8. avatar binder says:

          The problem is that you are hung up on a peace of hardware called a trigger. Not the definition of a trigger. A trigger is the final act that a person does to fire the weapon. That act on a bump-stock equipped firearm is to push forward. And as long as you push forward it will continue to fire. You don’t even need you finger on the “interface block” Anything that will stay in the trigger guard will work. Doesn’t quite work that way on a typical semi auto.

        9. avatar pwrserge says:

          But you have to push it forward with each cycle. That constitutes a new operation of a trigger as constant pressure forward will cause the gun to fire once and stop.

        10. avatar Esoteric Inanity says:

          “A trigger is the final act that a person does to fire the weapon.”

          By that logic, a Winchester model 1897 could be considered a machine gun.

        11. avatar binder says:

          WHY? Is the recoil going to cycle the gun? Or do you have no idea how a 1897 actual works. If anything the recoil is going to keep the breach closed.

        12. avatar binder says:

          “as constant pressure forward will cause the gun to fire once and stop.”???? WTF have you actual ever fired a slidefire???? I go admit that putting too much froward pressure can be an issue, but a bad machine gun doesn’t make it not one. On a side note. if you want to shoot 22 out of one you need a very light trigger and a “reverse” mussel brake. With 556, they have it pretty well dialed in.

        13. avatar pwrserge says:

          Yes, yes I have. If you put enough pressure on it so that the rifle doesn’t recoil back enough for your trigger to reset, you’re just going to get one bang. Hence, every recoil is a separate operation of the trigger, in this case, with your arm.

        14. avatar Binder says:

          So as long as you put between 5-20 lbs of pressure it is a machine gun, but 25 and you are good. Let’s stick with that 😉

        15. avatar pwrserge says:

          Which makes it, legally, NOT a machine gun.

        16. avatar CZJay says:

          Human rights? What human rights? The ones written into law? Who cares about following the law?

        17. avatar Esoteric Inanity says:

          “WHY? Is the recoil going to cycle the gun? Or do you have no idea how a 1897 actual works. If anything the recoil is going to keep the breach closed.”

          According to binder: “A trigger is the final act that a person does to fire the weapon”, ergo pump=trigger. Never removing hand from pump=depressed trigger correct?

          True one has to work the pump just as one has to apply forward pressure to a firearm equipped with a bumb stock and keep their trigger finger stationary. All conscious acts that an anesthetized man cannot do, or at the very least cannot do well.

          Can a one armed man, without the use of a prosthetic operate a machine gun in full auto fire? How about: Can a one armed man, without the use of a prosthetic operate a bump stock equipped firearm to simulate full auto fire using conventional means?

          Theoretically, if a button on the side of a firearm reciever actuated a full auto sear when continually depressed, would such a device constitute a machine gun?

      2. avatar SoFingDisappointed says:

        Turth. Like the 86 ban. Can’t believe an all Republican Congress with a Republican President is where we start getting new bans. I’m not a Republican (independent), but I thought at least gun rights would be safe under them.

      3. avatar binder says:

        “as constant pressure forward will cause the gun to fire once and stop.”???? WTF have you actual ever fired a slidefire???? I go admit that putting too much froward pressure can be an issue, but a bad machine gun doesn’t make it not one. On a side note. if you want to shoot 22 out of one you need a very light trigger and a “reverse” mussel brake. With 556, they have it pretty well dialed in.

  7. avatar Bob says:

    Eh, this could be just a “feel good” move.

    He didn’t say “ban bump fire stocks” that was added.

    Anything that makes a semi auto into a machine gun is already illegal, so he basically said he wants to see laws that are already in place. But maybe it will appease the lynch mob and keep the peace with the gun side as well.
    Remember the ATF has already stated that a bump fire stock does not actually make the weapon into a machine gun.

    Certainly an area to tread lightly, but I would say too early to tell…

    1. avatar binder says:

      Ya, and a “brace” is not a stock. That problem is people are not taking MCR uppers on a sig braced rifle and managing to put 1000 rounds downrange accurately well under 2 minutes

    2. avatar warfab says:

      Bingo.

      Read the actual memo instead of reading what the media is saying about the memo. The media and anti-gunners don’t understand gun laws at all. Trump even added a completely unnecessary paragraph at the end that was basically a ‘wink and a nod’ to gun owners. This memo is nothing more than Trump playing the media like a fiddle.

  8. avatar Alex Waits says:

    /facepalm

  9. avatar tsbhoa.p.jr says:

    sometimes lethal toys get banned: 3wheeled atvs, lawndarts, potato cannons, bucky balls.

    1. avatar Esoteric Inanity says:

      Guns?

  10. avatar jason says:

    The left still wont embrace him if he does this. A lot of the right will abandon him if he does this. Some crazy set of regulations gets voted down by congress and he can say that he at least tried. Could be a smart move.

    1. avatar barnbwt says:

      I didn’t feel like voting for Obama (before or) after he “tried,” either. That’s an even more retarded strategy than the NRA’s

  11. avatar Joe Brown says:

    Thanks NRA for this broken promise of a president… Also, here come the Trumpets to defend him for playing 3 dimensional beer pong…

    1. avatar Green Mtn. Boy says:

      @ Joe Brown

      Exactly,we are still living with the result of the last former Democrat who became a republican,remember back to 1986.

      1. avatar Vic Nighthorse says:

        I keep hearing about how great the Firearm Owners’ Protection Act was when ever I mention Reagan. “The Hughes amendment was a small price to pay” I am told.

        1. avatar Green Mtn. Boy says:

          @ Vic Nighthorse

          This is just a further price Infringement.

  12. avatar Uh-huh says:

    The gun banners are screeching bump stock ban is not enough on all of the prog-rag news sites. The want All Semi-auto rifles banned. Everything except lever action an bolt action rifles.

    1. avatar DoomGuy says:

      This is a semi-auto ban.

      1. avatar barnbwt says:

        This is a repeater ban; you can bump fire revolvers

  13. avatar Kelly says:

    He’s turning into a true politician. He is doing something meaningless when many voices are calling for action. Rather than standing proud on his beliefs, he can now say he did something.

    1. avatar warfab says:

      Exactly. The media is swallowing this hook, line, and sinker.

  14. avatar Green Mtn. Boy says:

    “A bump fire stock does not turn a rifle into a machine gun. With a bump fire stock attached to a rifle, there’s still one trigger press per fired shot. (As opposed to a machine gun’s multiple shots per trigger press.) And that means that the Justice Department is heading into some dark, dangerous waters, gun-rights-wise.”

    Perhaps the Constitution,ya think.

    1. avatar Indiana Tom says:

      Oh heck, as far as I am concerned, an M4 Sherman tank with a high velocity 76mm gun is constitutional.

  15. avatar uncommon_sense says:

    “Just a few moments ago I signed a memo directing the attorney general to propose regulations that ban all devices that turn legal weapons into machine guns,” Trump said at a Medal of Valor event at the White House

    Oh, the irony: the President of the United States telling the United States Attorney General to ban firearms protected under the Second Amendment — at a Medal of Valor event which honors United States Armed Forces servicemen/women who went to great lengths protecting the Second Amendment!

    1. avatar Sal Chichon says:

      I think I am ready for my own country now. This one is a few too many feet over the ledge for my taste.

    2. avatar tmm says:

      I noticed too that the reported occasion was a Medal of Valor event…

  16. avatar Tim says:

    I don’t see how a ban on bump fire stocks would have to revolve around a baseline rate of fire. Why not make it targeted to the mechanism type instead? Seems relatively easy to me.

    1. avatar Mike in KC says:

      Its cause the bump stock doesnt change the rifle from semi auto to full auto. Read the leagl speak and you will see thats what they have to do to allow for a regulation

      1. avatar binder says:

        The recoil energy takes your finger off the trigger. There are versions that use a metal bar to activate the trigger, not your finger. You can take a regular bump stock and replace your finger with a zip tie. In operation your “trigger finger” is more of a safety that and anything else.

        1. avatar barnbwt says:

          I am afraid you are ignorant. The recoil bounces the gun off your shoulder (human component number one) and against your trigger finger (human component number two). Forget your zip ties, the gun must still be held against the shoulder just right, and *controlled* by the shooter to keep it functioning. That is why it is not possible to classify it as an automatic conversion. Yes, the trigger actuator could be locked in place, yes, a spring could be substituted for the shooter to make the gun run on its own; but that isn’t what a bump-stock is, just like how an M16 lower is not an AR15 lower.

          More importantly, there is no way to logically differentiate bump fire from repeating firearm fire, let alone semi-automatic auto-loading fire. A revolver can be bump-fired.

        2. avatar binder says:

          The interface block keeps your trigger finger from coming back with the firearm. When you bum-fire without a stock you need to keep your trigger trigger from coming back. It is the interface block that makes it different.

        3. avatar binder says:

          The interface block keeps your trigger finger from coming back with the firearm. When you bum-fire without a stock you need to keep your trigger finger from coming back. It is the interface block that makes it different.

        4. avatar ACP_arms says:

          When you bump-fire without a stock you need to keep your trigger trigger from coming back. It is the interface block that makes it different.

          No, it doesn’t.

        5. avatar binder says:

          No, it doesn’t what? Make it different than normal bump firing or keeps your finger from coming back with the rifle?

        6. avatar binder says:

          M16 lower is not an AR15 lower because of the auto sear. the auto sear keeps the hammer from dropping until the bolt is in battery. The bump fire stock keeps your finger off the trigger while the bolt is out of battery and then presses the trigger into your finger (NOT YOU PULLING THE TRIGGER) once it is in battery. Sound a a lot more like the function of a machine gun fire control group that anything else.

        7. avatar ACP_arms says:

          No, it doesn’t make it different than normal bump firing

          26 U.S. Code § 5845(b)

          (b) Machinegun. The term ‘machine gun’ 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 (1) function (2) of the trigger (3). The term shall also include the frame or receiver of any such weapon, any part designed and intended solely and exclusively, or combination of parts designed and intended, for use in converting a weapon into a machinegun, and any combination of parts from which a machinegun can be assembled if such parts are in the possession or under the control of a person. [emphasis’s added]

          1)Single – adj.
          1. Not accompanied by another or others; solitary.
          2.
          a. Consisting of one part, aspect, or section: a single thickness; a single serving.

          2) Function – noun.
          3 : any of a group of related actions contributing to a larger action.

          3)Trigger – noun.
          1 a : a piece (such as a lever) connected with a catch or detent as a means of releasing it.

          A bump stock does not change how the mechanism of a semi-automatic trigger group works.

          Why? because when pressure is put on the trigger to fire it disengages the sear releasing the hammer, (a function) the movement of the BCG after firing to the rear pushes the hammer down and it catches on the disconnector. Now in order to fire again pressure has to be removed from the trigger for the hammer to be released from the disconnector to then re-engage on the sear allowing the gun to fire again. (a function) That’s two functions for my AR to fire, not one (single) function to fire. It doesn’t matter if I’m bump firing with my belt loops or a bump stock.

          Quit trying to shape the discussion (the trigger, being pushed in to your finger, not being pulled) to support and hold on to your theory of bump stocks making an AR-15 a machine gun. U.S. Code § 5845(b) doesn’t say anything about the trigger being pulled or pushed. All it says is a gun is a machine gun if it takes a single function of the trigger to fire, there for, if it takes two functions of the trigger to fire it is a semi-auto.

        8. avatar binder says:

          The law says NOTHING about how the mechanism work. Can we all agree that the trigger is the final act to fire a gun? For a slide fire stock that is to apply forward pressure on the rifle. Not too much mind you, but forward pressure. And the gun will continue to fire. Here is the best part. Your finger is only transferring the forward pressure to the part called the trigger. You can use anything else to do the same thing. Hell Slide-Fire has made versions that use a metal bar. But it gets better, add a butt pad and a spring and now you have converted it back to the original configuration that did NOT get past the AFT, so now you are up against the “readily restored” part. So pulling a spring out of a machine gun but replacing that function with pressure applied by the shooter (a spring that can be replaced easily) will not unmake a machine gun.
          On a side note, Slide-Fire has even commented that the stock uses the recoil energy to reset the trigger. And if you read their posted manual of arms they avoid phrasing that it is you trigger finger that is firing the weapon, I wounder what that is?

        9. avatar TX_Lawyer says:

          “Can we all agree that the trigger is the final act to fire a gun?” No. A trigger is a mechanical thing, not an act.

        10. avatar ACP_arms says:

          Well guess what, the technical branch of the ATF determined a bump stock doesn’t fire multiple rounds with single function of the trigger. The reason that they are for sale. Modifying bump stock from its approved design is akin to me putting an auto sear in my AR.

          What part of shoots automatically more than one shot, without manual reloading, by a single (one) function of the trigger do you not understand? My AR can’t do that.

          Just like my dad, you wont admit to being wrong when you are. Your twisting how the gun fires to fit a idea that isn’t fact.

          If pushing a gun made the gun a machine gun bump firing with belt loops would be illegal.

          By your argument we could ban semi-autos because they can fire like a machine gun even though they aren’t machine guns. Because that’s the last place that idea of yours goes.

    2. avatar hillbillyjew says:

      Don’t give them any intelligent ideas. Let’s just hope we have some loopholes left once the smoke clears…

      1. avatar barnbwt says:

        Ironic sentiment given the user name

      2. avatar Chris says:

        This latest whirlwind has been bad, I’m basically living in a hole until it blows over. Some of those gun grabbers are just vipers, I can’t be on facebook or anything for a while.

  17. avatar Jeremy in AL says:

    Sure, just open the machine gun registry and we’ll register them.

  18. avatar bfitz76239 says:

    This is going to be interesting to see how’s it pans out.

    There are thousands if not hundreds of thousands in circulation. They can’t just call them contraband and make you turn them in. Will they open up the registry for these? Will they go the route of open bolt guns and grandfather them in without registration?

    1. avatar Esoteric Inanity says:

      More likely to just ban manufacture and keep private possession/sales legal ala “Assault Weapons” and “High Capacity” magizines 1994-2004. Much less messy and fewer grounds for legal challenge.

      1. avatar TX_Lawyer says:

        You can’t grandfather something this way. Re-interpreting bump fire stocks to fit the definition of machine guns would mean they have always been machine guns. They’ll have been illegal the whole time.

        1. avatar Esoteric Inanity says:

          Interesting point that Esoteric Inanity hadn’t considered.

          What if bump stocks were treated akin to full auto sears and trigger groups? Whereby possession wouldn’t warrant a criminal act but installion on a corresponding semi auto would create a machine gun.

          In TX_Lawyer’s opinion: Could the BATFE upon retroactively reclassifying bump stocks as machine guns also create a sub class specifically entailing bump stock equipped semi autos? Thereby allowing an amnesty registration period without letting any new traditional machine guns be registered?

        2. avatar TX_Lawyer says:

          The “Secretary” can declare an amnesty for no more than 90 days. I’m not sure exactly how amnesties work since there haven’t been any since the first one. I’m pretty sure the “Secretary” was the Secretary of the Treasury. It’s probably the Attorney General who has the authority now that the ATF is in the DOJ.

          I don’t know if they can do a limited amnesty. I’m probably going to look it up later.

        3. avatar TX_Lawyer says:

          Esoteric Inanity, the 1968 Gun Control Act contains the following language:

          “The Secretary of the Treasury, after publication in the Federal Register of his intention to do so, is authorized to establish such periods of amnesty, not to exceed ninety days in the case of any single period, and immunity from liability during any such period, as the Secretary determines will contribute to the purposes of this title.”

          You won’t find this language in the U.S.C. because it isn’t codified, so it was harder to find than I’d have liked. As the law says “this title” I assume it means the Title 26 of the U.S.C. based on context. Title 26 contains the NFA. This should be in Title 26. I don’t know why it isn’t unless it was repealed at some point.

          For your question, the pertinent language is the “Secretary of the Treasury, … is authorized to establish … periods of amnesty, … as the Secretary determines will contribute to the purposes of this title.” A purpose of the NFA could be said to have covered devices registered. The question is whether or not a “period of amnesty” can be limited to only certain types of NFA items. I’ve never even seen a case interpreting this kind of law, so your guess is as good as mine on that point. A lot of people on the internet think a limited amnesty can be done.

          The machinegun definition includes “any part designed and intended solely and exclusively, or combination of parts designed and intended, for use in converting a weapon into a machinegun.” Therefore the bump fire stock would be a machinegun under the NFA.

          So if the Secretary (whether that’s the Secretary or Attorney General) can declare a limited amnesty, then he (Mnuchin or Sessions) could do as you suggest. Or they could just declare a general amnesty, and then Trump would be the best 2A president ever. (I’d spend all my spare money on lowers and register them as SBR machineguns).

          Dean Weingarten’s TTAG article on the subject: http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2016/09/dean-weingarten/amnesty-administration-can-implement/

        4. avatar Esoteric Inanity says:

          TX_Lawyer thank you for the edification and clarification on the subject, as Esoteric Inanity is only vaguely familiar regarding the nuances of this subject. By the sound of things the GCA has all types of interesting caveats to complicate matters. It might also stand to reason that certain provisions could provide for some rather disconcerting future actions.

          “You won’t find this language in the U.S.C. because it isn’t codified, so it was harder to find than I’d have liked. As the law says “this title” I assume it means the Title 26 of the U.S.C. based on context. Title 26 contains the NFA. This should be in Title 26. I don’t know why it isn’t unless it was repealed at some point.”

          U.S.C. is the US Supreme Court?

          Admittedly, the significance of such a thing is lost upon this one as he fails to understand its meaning. Are there dire implications regarding the absence of said provision in codification?

          “The machinegun definition includes “any part designed and intended solely and exclusively, or combination of parts designed and intended, for use in converting a weapon into a machinegun.” Therefore the bump fire stock would be a machinegun under the NFA.”

          Mere possession of an m16 full auto sear by itself isn’t illegal though correct? Or does constructive(or is it general?) intent potentially muddy the waters on this?

          “So if the Secretary (whether that’s the Secretary or Attorney General) can declare a limited amnesty, then he (Mnuchin or Sessions) could do as you suggest. Or they could just declare a general amnesty, and then Trump would be the best 2A president ever. (I’d spend all my spare money on lowers and register them as SBR machineguns).”

          Amen brother.

          “Dean Weingarten’s TTAG article on the subject: http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2016/09/dean-weingarten/amnesty-administration-can-implement/”

          Ah yes, thank you for the link, Esoteric Inanity vaguely recollects reading it sometime back. It had some very elucidating information.

        5. avatar binder says:

          “Mere possession of an m16 full auto sear by itself isn’t illegal though correct?” As far as I know this is correct. Some AK parts groups came with the auto fire control group. But because the receiver was destroyed you were OK. I would not want to have the sear and a lower with the extra hole in it. Take this with a grain of salt. I have no idea how the auto sear on a AK works.

        6. avatar ACP_arms says:

          “The machinegun definition includes “any part designed and intended solely and exclusively, or combination of parts designed and intended, for use in converting a weapon into a machinegun.” Therefore the bump fire stock would be a machinegun under the NFA.”

          Hold on there, TX_Lawyer. Keep in mind that that the definition also includes – “The term ‘machine gun’ 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.”

          “single function of the trigger” Would have to be changed or removed. And a bump stock does not make the gun that is in it a machine gun according to the technical branch at the ATF. If you call a bump stock a machine gun you would be making every semi-auto gun a machine gun because the bump stock does not change how the semi-auto works.

          Would that not be correct?

        7. avatar TX_Lawyer says:

          Sorry if I wasn’t clear enough. If the ATF held a bump fire stock equipped semi-auto AR to be a machinegun, they would hold a bump fire stock to be a machinegun.

        8. avatar ACP_arms says:

          I’m with you now.

          And the ATF did have a bump stock that was ruled to make the gun a machine gun due to the design using a spring to move gun forward after the recoil moved the gun back in the stock. The bump stock people buy and use now aren’t designed for use with spring and move fore and aft freely. So if the ATF wanted to call bump stocks a machine gun now that would mean they would have to rewrite every thing they use to determine what is a machine gun and what is not a machine gun. I don’t see that happening due to the fact the ATF can’t do that.

        9. avatar TX_Lawyer says:

          “I don’t see that happening due to the fact the ATF can’t do that.” Can’t and don’t have the lawful authority are two different things. For example, the government doesn’t have the lawful authority to infringe on the people’s right to keep and bear arms, but the government does.

        10. avatar ACP_arms says:

          True. Keep in mind that the ATF proposed to ban M855 and look at what happened. The ATF stepped out of bounds proposing to ban M855 and took heat for it, I don’t see the proposed bump stock reclassification being any different.

        11. avatar TX_Lawyer says:

          One big difference between the M855 ban and this one is that there is political pressure from outside the system and from on high to ban bump stocks.

  19. avatar C.S. says:

    Pretty easy: change “with each pull of the trigger” to “with each conscious pull of the trigger”… bump fire stocks banned, everything else is saved.

    1. avatar pwrserge says:

      Except that they can’t change it. That’s the hilarious part that the trolls are missing. This announcement doesn’t mean jack. Show me the reg and the resulting lawsuits.

      1. avatar Anonymous says:

        I like machine guns. So I don’t want it changed. There needs to be fewer regulations on machine guns – not more.

        Just a few moments ago I signed a memo directing the attorney general to propose regulations that ban all devices that turn legal weapons into machine guns

        What’s a machine gun? I thought all devices that turned legal weapons into machine guns were already banned??? A bump stock is not a machine gun. A bump stock does not a machine gun make.

        1. avatar pwrserge says:

          Agreed, but this announcement won’t change jack. A bump stock still requires multiple operations of the trigger. Hell, everything currently on the market does. This is yet another example of Trump giving the left enough rope to hang themselves.

        2. avatar binder says:

          It has already been classified as one. The only thing that they did to get it past was replace a spring with the operator putting forward pressure on the firearm. And guess what, it actually works better that way. By the way, replacing that spring is not to hard, but why would you when it works better the way it is now.

        3. avatar pwrserge says:

          But here’s the beauty. You pulling the rifle forward constitutes an “operation of the trigger”.

        4. avatar binder says:

          Yes, and it is ONE operation. As long as you keep applying pressure it will continue to fire.
          Kind on like a typical machine gun. As long as you keep applying pressure it will continue to fire.

          One with the forearm and one with the trigger.

        5. avatar binder says:

          I will give it to you that is requires two actions on the part of the shooter. But that is two actions for constant fire. Not one action for each firing on the gun. I could put two triggers that you need to hold down for a regular machine gun, but I have a feeling the ATF will not buy it.

        6. avatar pwrserge says:

          Incorrect. Every shot requires a separate push. Constant pressure will cause it to fire once.

        7. avatar binder says:

          Constant pressure will cause it to fire once. UM, no….. It is a issue with .22 LR, .223 not so much

        8. avatar pwrserge says:

          Only if you have noodle arms. Not allowing the gun to recoil will cause it to fire once and stop. You pushing it forwards with each shot after relaxing and allowing it to recoil is no different than letting pressure off the trigger and allowing it to reset.

        9. avatar binder says:

          Not a constant force? Than I guess all the original stocks with the springs that got band by the AFT never worked? OK……

        10. avatar pwrserge says:

          Binder… you do realize that a spring doesn’t apply constant force, by definition.

        11. avatar B-Rad says:

          OK, pwr might have a point in that it wouldn’t change anything. But, big BUTT. Trump has no freakin clue, HE thinks that it would. That’s the problem with him, he doesn’t know anything, and takes not knowing things as a point of pride, so sure, he’ll “enact” a bunch of rules and have no clue of even the 1st order repercussions, much less the 3rd or 4th.

          We don’t want the kids from the school making rules, I don’t think Trump knows any more, and is a few more years removed from civics or math class.

        12. avatar pwrserge says:

          Holly crap Binder. Read the god damn memo. What it actually says, not what you think it says. Until I see concrete evidence otherwise, I’m going to treat it as what it probably is, a brilliant ploy to make the DNC run on a gun control platform.

        13. avatar binder says:

          Binder… you do realize that a spring doesn’t apply constant force, by definition.

          WOW, just wow. Yes it is technically a ideal spring has a linear increase in force that is proportion to the length of compression.

          But the original version with a spring was classified as a machine gun, so replacing that spring, with forward pressure applied by the shooter will not unmake a machine gun. A spring that can be easily replaced once you add a butt pad.

          The original Akins Accelerator first got past the ATF because is was a Rube Goldberg version of a machine gun. Then they started taking out peaces to try and get it past the ATF after the ATF no longer fell for it. Kind of reminds you of a Sig-Brace.

          When a typical shooter can do (and did) 3 100 round mag bumps into a crowd in under minute people start to wonder where the AFT dropped the ball. And the AFT and NRA are not that stupid. They know with the right upper you can get that up to 500 + RPM sustained. Keep claiming it is just a typical semi auto rifle and they will just ban all of them.

        14. avatar pwrserge says:

          Holly shit Binder, replacing the spring with an action of the shooter is like replacing an auto-sear with a manual disconnector. You need to perform an action to make the gun fire again. Legally, not a machine gun.

  20. avatar ACP_arms says:

    “Just a few moments ago I signed a memo directing the attorney general to propose (emphasis added) regulations that ban all devices that turn legal weapons into machine guns”

    Doesn’t sound any different then what the ATF did. And like the ATF, the DOJ will find that “devices that turn legal weapons into machine guns” are already banned.

    1. avatar pwrserge says:

      Thank you. Somebody can read. All the “proposed” regulations in the world won’t turn bump stocks into something they legally are not. The plain text in the NFA is clear. It’s amazing how many commie sympathizer concern trolls are lurking today.

      1. avatar ACP_arms says:

        With me, if something gets me fired up when I read the headline, I’ll read it very intently to see what it says.

        1. avatar warfab says:

          This memo is brilliant. He’s playing the media like a fiddle. He’s basically winking at gun owners towards the end of the memo, but anti-gunners and the media dolts that don’t understand jack about the gun laws don’t get it.

          On the down side, it appears as though Feinstein understands. But, the majority of the media noise is saying Trump wants to ban bump fire stocks.

    2. avatar Uh-huh says:

      Like lightning links and auto sear’s ……..

      1. avatar ACP_arms says:

        “banned from use in unregistered machine guns.” Happy now?

    3. avatar Anonymous says:

      Why bother? Lets just ban murder. If we ban murder problem solved. If they aren’t going to respect the law regarding murder, they definitely aren’t going to respect the laws regarding guns, and if passed, those laws regarding guns great impact the gun owners with no intent to harm others. Better just to leave it at banning murder. Let’s go with that.

      1. avatar binder says:

        Murder did not get us the NFA, Tommy Guns did. And if we want to be super honest in most conditions a semi auto AR15 is a hell of a lot better of a weapon that most any submachine gun.

        1. avatar Anonymous says:

          Murder did not get us the NFA, Tommy Guns did.

          Hold on a sec. You’re telling me that the gangsters in their ford model 18’s driving around tommy gunning in the air in the city square and machine gunning people down straight up on the street wasn’t the problem, and their possession of the Tommy gun was? It was the possession and not the murder? That is seriously what you are saying?

          I would in an effort to be honest in my opinion, say that it was people murdering people… with Tommy guns, and the shooting of Theodore Roosevelt (a relative of FDR) that got us the NFA. Also I would say at that time, we had this rise of helpless, uneducated, naive people who helped elevate a government with a smidgen of socialist/communist elements and their terrible ideology. It was an ideology of “social engineering.” As if the people were lab rats for the government to observe. So it was time to implement the new deal, then it was time to threaten the judicial branch to admitting it was constitutional (they initially said it was not), then under threat of adding another judge nominated by FDR, one capitulated. Then more deals, and more social liberalism and socialism with a small dash of communism. During this time, minimum wage was established and enormous host of other social programs. FDR was a populist and elected 3 terms by legions of immigrants, and held control over all branches of government to some degree. And part of this new ideology was about social engineering and controlling the people. And that means the people’s freedom and access to guns.

          Now that said, it really doesn’t matter right now. That was almost a hundred years ago, when my father’s father’s father and the rest of his generation took a huge colossal s**t on the entirety of their forth-going progeny in everlasting shame, by suggesting that we should social engineer the population on the basis of what they “might” do. Rights were thrown out the window, and collective statistics replaced them. Tommy gun equipped criminals were no longer a criminal issue. They were a gun issue. And they needed to gather statistics on gun crime, so they could control the populace, enact legislation, and socially engineer them. Individuals with rights? F that. They were numbers on a paper. A metric. A statistic. That’s what they became. So no…

          I don’t agree it is so simple to suggest that Tommy guns is why we have the NFA. There was a convergence of many events, ideas, and ideologies that allowed the NFA to come into being. And none of them were sound logical ones. The NFA remains today, legislation that says: “We fear what you are capable of, so we are going to make an attempt to control / discourage what you can possess.”

        2. avatar strych9 says:

          Actually a cheapo revolver and an attempt at assassinating the POTUS, an attempt that killed the Mayor of Chicago, got us the NFA which was originally written to go after handguns.

        3. avatar Indiana Tom says:

          It was the possession and not the murder?
          Well, yes, because the Tommy Guns were scary and the Winchester Model 12s were not.
          Given that the FBI has stated that people with shotguns are more effective than people with submachine guns, and you can see the reason behind the Tommy Gun ban was pure political BS. Oh, and the gangsters were killing off people with shotguns as effectively as with Tommy Guns.

        4. avatar Indiana Tom says:

          the NFA which was originally written to go after handguns.
          Yes, there was a big push to ban handguns at the time.

    4. avatar barnbwt says:

      The memo states Trump is who directed the ATF to look at this issue (again), likely right after he had the NRA broach the subject to take some of the heat off himself.

  21. avatar Trollolol says:

    I just want to say to pwrserge “I told you so.”

    1. avatar pwrserge says:

      I just want to say to commie vermin. Show me the reg. This is a nothingburger. The rate at which the fake news media is crowing about it shows that they fell for it.

      1. avatar Trollolol says:

        There is always room for National Socialists on the helicopter Sergey

        1. avatar pwrserge says:

          Good luck with that kiddo. You going to sack up and stack up?

        2. avatar Trollolol says:

          I already have, I joined the infantry and didn’t do four years as a POG

        3. avatar pwrserge says:

          Oh… so you’re grumpy and out of crayons… Can’t help you there kiddo.

        4. avatar Trollolol says:

          Whats it like knowing that you talk tough, but it comes to stack bodies you chose to be a fobbit?

        5. avatar pwrserge says:

          Yeah… Because clearly we combat engineers never did anything other than sit on our asses…

        6. avatar Anonymous says:

          My uncle was a lieutenant colonel. He was also a fobbit and big time POG. Must suck being a fobbit and POG.

        7. avatar Indiana Tom says:

          Dad did everything he could do to remain a REMF, his luck ran out in May 1945 and was sent to Bagio to fight Yamashita. Dad hated combat infantry.

  22. avatar jwtaylor says:

    Pathetic.

    1. avatar Klaus Von Schmitto says:

      Which part JW? There is a lot of fail going on here.

  23. avatar MDH says:

    Trump can direct all he wants, but neither he or Sessions have the power to make law, and ATF has already twice ruled that it does not have the authority to regulate the firearms accessory in question.

    If bump-stocks go away, the most likely reason will be liability lawsuits, and not additional federal regulations.

    1. avatar barnbwt says:

      Ban via “chilling effect” is no less outrageous than an open ban (in fact, it is actually more insidious)

  24. avatar Roy says:

    This is happening. Easy way or the hard way guys. You can either be part of the conversation and help make sure the ban is limited to bump stocks, and doesn’t wind up worded so aftermarket triggers get banned too, or you can stamp your little feet and pout and whine “not one inch” and we’re all screwed. Time to make up your minds.

    1. avatar pwrserge says:

      Or we can sit and laugh as Trump directs the DOJ to ban things that are already banned and the leftists spend the next 18 months thinking they’ve “won”.

      1. avatar Anonymous says:

        I hope it goes that way.

        1. avatar pwrserge says:

          Remember, this is the same Trump that tricked the DNC into turning amnesty into a midterm election issue. I’m going to keep laughing as there is no way in hell they can legally pull this off without cracking open the NFA and doing some edits. (and creating an opportunity for us to do some creative editing of our own.)

        2. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “… there is no way in hell they can legally pull this off without cracking open the NFA and doing some edits. ”

          If “they” are merely DOJ and ATF, “they” cannot “crack open” the NFA. Congress will have to amend or replace NFA.

        3. avatar TX_Lawyer says:

          I don’t trust “our” guys to do anything but get the short end of the stick when “creative editing” is going on.

      2. avatar HP says:

        At least someone else here gets it.

        1. avatar warfab says:

          Anyone else follow Scott Adams? This memo is right up his alley. At first I read the headlines and got worried. Then I read the memo and thought about it. Now I’m in awe of what we just saw Trump do. He and the staff members that helped write this are probably laughing themselves to sleep tonight.

    2. avatar jwtaylor says:

      Just let it happen, Roy? Spoken like a true victim. How do you pathetic cowards live with yourselves?

      1. avatar Trollolol says:

        Their God Emperor is more important than their rights.

      2. avatar Roy says:

        I’m saying participate in the conversation, you jackass. It’s happening. This is reality. Hello, this is reality speaking. Your stupid bump stocks are going byebye. Get it now? The thing nobody really gives a shit about is going away so the GOP can point to this and say they’ve done something on gun control, meanwhile we lose ZERO guns. Or, we can sit, and pout, and namecall and get a poorly written regulation that will actually hurt us. Your call, dude.

        1. avatar barnbwt says:

          The conversation we have with the robbers, to decide how much they get to take away from us? That is not how robbers should be dealt with.

        2. avatar Anonymous says:

          I’m saying participate in the conversation, you jackass. It’s happening. This is reality. Hello, this is reality speaking.

          No it’s not. Nothing is happening at all yet. This is Roy speaking, and he sounds pathetic.

          LOL

          It’s like: Roy: “It’s capitulation time fellas! Lets bend over or kneel down! Hey buddy. Which one are you going to do? bend over or kneel down?”

          LOL

          BTW – This is me… “being part of the conversation.”

    3. avatar Anonymous says:

      This is happening. Easy way or the hard way guys. You can either be part of the conversation and help make sure the ban is limited to bump stocks, and doesn’t wind up worded so aftermarket triggers get banned too, or you can stamp your little feet and pout and whine “not one inch” and we’re all screwed. Time to make up your minds.

      How about we say “not one inch” then stab Roy in the gut laughing while he keels over, then continue on to victory?

      LOL

      1. avatar Roy says:

        You know something? You’ve changed my mind. If that’s seriously how you “not one inch” folks view things, then by all means go sulk and let the grownups talk without you. The last thing gun owners need is people like “stab him in the gut” here flinging shit about and making us all look like people who shouldn’t be trusted with anything more dangerous than a spoon. You want a crackdown on guns? Keep talking like that guy. I really, really hope you people grow up soon.

        1. avatar John in Ohio says:

          We are “grown up” enough to know that having a mythical “conversation” with thieves is pointless and potentially dangerous.

          Thief: Hey buddy, let’s talk about how much of your stuff I’m going to take and how I may let you use some of it for my set fee, on my schedule, and under my conditions.
          Slave: Erm… Uh… Gee, I guess I better talk to this guy so I can at least use some of my stuff… maybe. C’mon guys!
          Free person: ROTFL. Molon labe, baby!

    4. avatar barnbwt says:

      You sound like a rapist.

      1. avatar John in Ohio says:

        Funny, I didn’t think he sounded anything like government. 😀

    5. avatar Sam I Am says:

      Incrementalism (being part of the conversation) has helped, how?

      The Republican, conservative, pro-gun cohort has been in every “conversation”, and look at the useless gun control laws we received in return.

  25. avatar Clarence Worley says:

    You all keep harping on his use of the term “machine gun.” He has no clue what a machine gun is. Ten bucks says he would also say clip instead of magazine, and you’d all still ride his dick. He is a billionaire who isn’t like any of us, doesn’t care about people like us, never had and never will. When will you all get that?

    1. avatar Sam I Am says:

      “He is a billionaire who isn’t like any of us, doesn’t care about people like us, never had and never will. When will you all get that?”

      So, following your logic, we should put our support behind only multi-multi millionaires (like Clinton?), because multi-multi millionaires care so much more than billionaires?

      Hey, we “got it”, and voted Trump anyway. What part of no more of the crap we’ve been fed over the last fifty years, churn the swamp, do YOU not get?

  26. avatar Mad Max says:

    What happens to all of the existing bump stocks, considering “no ex-post-facto law shall be passed”?

    1. avatar pwrserge says:

      Nothing. I’m rather enjoying the obvious Soros plants in this thread trying to stir up shit over a literal nothingburger.

      1. avatar CZJay says:

        Alexander “The Trump Sellout” Jones has taught you well.

        1. avatar pwrserge says:

          Oh, you’re adorable…

      2. avatar CZJay says:

        Defense, Alex. Defense. You know the deal you got with your boy.

    2. avatar Sam I Am says:

      Ex post facto means making an act prior to the implementation of a law illegal in and of itself. That is, if you owned a bump stock prior to a law banning possession of a bump stock, then you are guilty of the crime of owning a bump stock at some point in the past. If a law makes possessing a bump stock illegal on the date of a law prohibiting possession, or any date established as the effective date of the law, then you are not guilty of the crime of possession before the law existed.

      However….

      There have been successful laws passed that make certain actions retroactively prohibited. (which should probably be declared “ex post facto”). Not sure how those survive.

    3. avatar TX_Lawyer says:

      The law was passed in 1934. It was amended in 1986 to prohibit registration of new machine guns. I’m not sure when bump stocks were invented, but I believe it was recently. Ex post facto isn’t an issue.

      Just look at what happened with the Akins Accelerator.

  27. avatar Joe R. says:

    Stupid wet sh_t MF FORGOT HE WROTE A BOOK CALLED CRIPLED AMERICA.

    The world is full of FV<K bag MFs and too many live and work in D.C.

    I'm praying for a fing meteor.

    1. avatar Joe R. says:

      On the aid & comfort to the enemy alone.

      Totally bad optics.

    2. avatar Anonymous says:

      Looks like Joe just had a brain aneurysm.

  28. avatar DoomGuy says:

    Well trump is now a one term president

    fuck him….

    1. avatar Anonymous says:

      Politics is partly a game. Let’s see what game he is playing before we judge too much.

      Devices that make legal firearms machine guns are already illegal. And a bump stock is not a machine gun. Loosely holding a rifle to bump fire does not a machine gun make. A shoe string is not a machine gun. A rubber band is not a machine gun.

      1. avatar DoomGuy says:

        Except that this will be used to ban all semi autos

        1. avatar pwrserge says:

          Yeah… and Trump’s amnesty offer was going to legalize 30 million illegals… how did that work out? Oh, yeah, now the DNC has to run on a pro-amnesty platform.

        2. avatar strych9 says:

          “Except that this will be used to ban all semi autos”

          If you actually bother to go read the memo you will find the quoted text to be a bit… overblown.

  29. avatar strych9 says:

    I’d like to see the actual document before passing judgement.

    If the language Trump used in talking about it is the same as what’s in the document then, as others here have pointed out, it’s a big show that does nothing which wouldn’t exactly be new in DC. It would also be a decent headfake considering how many morons think a bump stock makes a rifle into an MG.

    OTOH, if the document says something substantially different this could be the beginning of a pretty big shit show.

    1. avatar pwrserge says:

      The text of the memo was released. It says exactly what we thing it does. Full of sound and fury, Signifying nothing

      1. avatar strych9 says:

        *Removes S-Pen from phone and goes hunting the document*

      2. avatar strych9 says:

        LOL it basically just directs the DOJ to completely review the comments the BATFE received on their proposed bump-stock ban from months back since those comments and the whole rule making process are still “under review”.

        It further requests that the review be done ASAP and that the POTUS be kept appraised of any and all progress.

        Yup. One ginormous nothingburger with a side of nothingness. Ah well, this comment section will be good for entertainment. I’ll go make some popcorn.

        1. avatar pwrserge says:

          That’s why I’m laughing. The fake news industrial complex is all over this. 9D chess indeed.

        2. avatar strych9 says:

          Yeah… lol the amount of pants-wetting in this thread should be good though.

          Over/under on number of freak-out comments by, say…. 7pm Central?

          I mean, I’m just gonna sit here, catch up on cleaning some rifles that I’m behind on and watch them roll in. (While trying to keep Hoppe’s out of my popcorn of course).

        3. avatar pwrserge says:

          I’d say this thread easily hits 300 comments by then. The trolls and idiots seem to be on a roll today.

        4. avatar strych9 says:

          300. Damn. That’s a lot of unnecessary butthurt.

        5. avatar pwrserge says:

          I think the ass cream industry is going to have a blockbuster week.

        6. avatar barnbwt says:

          It says to run through the comments as quickly as possible, and to then move to ban ‘devices’ that shoot ‘too fast’

        7. avatar Geoff PR says:

          The Leftists have convinced themselves Trump is stupid.

          Let ’em keep on thinking that way.

          During the primary, *every* time something got dredged up that could potentially hurt him, he threw a *massive* head-fake (usually via Twitter) that had *everybody* lunging in that direction as to how outrageous it was. And it *was*. Outrageous, nothing else.

          He’s *good* at that shit… 😉

          *snicker*

        8. avatar strych9 says:

          No barn, no it doesn’t.

          It orders them to complete the current work and then, and I quote, “…to propose for notice and comment a rule banning all devices that turn legal weapons into machineguns”.

          So he’s asking them to read all the comments from the previous notice and comment period and then propose another rule for yet another notice and comment period. This one covering devices that, other than a lightning link which is already regulated under the NFA, don’t exist.

          This memo doesn’t do anything other than direct the DOJ to finish the work already underway and then do it again.

        9. avatar Defens says:

          Yep – the initial directive that ATF issued was a “Notice of future rulemaking” – a comment-collecting exercise. Now that they have the comments, Trump has directed them to evaluate those, and then propose rules that may or may not ban bump stocks, or other devices (like DIAS or lighning links, which are already regulated) and put those out for comment.

          A masterful stroke of doing something without doing anything. However, I don’t think the anti’s will fall for the head fake this time. The Moms are all pissed off, and the high school kids are all galvanised and energized to skip school for a day.

        10. avatar rudukai13 says:

          I must admit, I was concerned by the headlines at first. But now that I’ve read the actual text of the memo a couple times…The only way it could be interpreted to recommend bumpstocks or any other legal accessory be further regulated would be an intentional mis-interpretation/mis-application of statute…

          I’m not one to use the phrase “nothingburger”, but if ever a nothingburger there were, this memo is it

        11. avatar TX_Lawyer says:

          This isn’t some brilliant move by Trump. All this memo is saying is “do your job quickly” and “I think bump fire stocks should be banned.”

          The ATF issued an Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPRM)*. The second comment period is required by law. Trumps memo doesn’t add a comment period. There was always going to be a second comment period. That’s why I didn’t make a comment on a regulation I didn’t know anything about. That’s why I thought all the wailing and gnashing of teeth about immediately making a comment was stupid. I never saw a single person say anything that indicated they actually understood the process or what was actually happened.

          *Some terms need to be understood. Quotes from https://www.regulationwriters.com/regulatory_glossary/

          “Also, an agency cannot use the ANPRM’s notice-and-comment period as the only basis for issuing a final rule. If an agency chooses to use an ANPRM, it still must issue an NPRM before issuing a final rule on that subject.”

          “The notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM, NPR, NOPR) informs the public that a Federal agency is proposing a new rule or regulatory change, and provides a period for the public to comment on the proposal. The NPRM provides the proposed regulatory text, and generally includes an explanation of the basis and purpose of the proposed rule and the issues involved in the rulemaking.”

          “The term “notice-and-comment rulemaking” is used synonymously with “informal rulemaking.” It refers to the process that agencies must use to issue rules under section 553 of the APA. It basically has four steps-notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM), a comment period, promulgation of the final rule, and a 30-day delay in the effective date. Other statutes and executive orders have added additional requirements to this APA process.”

          Link to memo: https://publicpool.kinja.com/subject-presidential-memorandum-on-the-application-of-1823170075

        12. avatar Klaus Von Schmitto says:

          “I think the ass cream industry is going to have a blockbuster week.”

          Just letting you know Serge – I’m stealing that.

          Awesome.

  30. avatar stateisevil says:

    What Obama could not do, Trump and the GOP will accomplish. What filth, what scum. And “conservatives” will cheer it because their man did it. Sick, sick, sick! Treasonous bastards. Off with their heads!

    1. avatar DoomGuy says:

      Never thought gun rights would’ve been safer under obama…

      1. avatar Klaus Von Schmitto says:

        You have got to be bullshitting us right?

  31. avatar Kenneth G Maiden says:

    It’s over. Wayne, I hope you and Chris choke on your seven figure incomes. NRA: A joke. It’s members: fools.

    1. avatar CZJay says:

      At least the majority of pro gun people are not part of the NRA.

  32. avatar pwrserge says:

    So many “new” posters today… It’s almost like the trolls are coming out of the woodwork trying to start shit over literally less than nothing.

    1. avatar barnbwt says:

      The name’s Bob, Baghdad Bob

      1. avatar Geoff PR says:

        I’m *literally* popping popcorn, with some new butter-oil I grabbed at the store.

        Got a big bowl for the next week or so. 🙂

        1. avatar Klaus Von Schmitto says:

          My money is on the revolution starting in Polk County if they actually try to disarm people.

  33. avatar Nanashi says:

    Remember to thank Wayne LaPierre (Laval) for suborning this oathbreaking.

  34. avatar Mad Max says:

    So, on a lighter note, the President has directed the Department of Justice to propose regulations that ban Jerry Miculek.

  35. Bahhh… Bahhh… Can you hear that?
    It’s you guys talking sh*t.
    Wake up!

  36. avatar Jay in one town over from Parkland says:

    Doesn’t really matter what anyone does. No one will turn in anything. Make us all unknown felons. So what else is new. My trigger thingy/crank that I don’t own. Will just sit on its appropriate rifle till needed.

  37. avatar pwrserge says:

    Can someone just post a link to the actual memo to get this retardation over with? I would, but I’m on my phone at the moment.

    1. avatar Geoff PR says:

      Is this it?

      “THE WHITE HOUSE

      Office of the Press Secretary

      FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

      February 20, 2018

      February 20, 2018

      MEMORANDUM FOR THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

      SUBJECT: Application of the Definition of Machinegun to “Bump Fire” Stocks and Other Similar Devices

      After the deadly mass murder in Las Vegas, Nevada, on October 1, 2017, I asked my Administration to fully review how the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives regulates bump fire stocks and similar devices.

      Although the Obama Administration repeatedly concluded that particular bump stock type devices were lawful to purchase and possess, I sought further clarification of the law restricting fully automatic machineguns.

      Accordingly, following established legal protocols, the Department of Justice started the process of promulgating a Federal regulation interpreting the definition of “machinegun” under Federal law to clarify whether certain bump stock type devices should be illegal. The Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking was published in the “Federal Register” on December 26, 2017. Public comment concluded on January 25, 2018, with the Department of Justice receiving over 100,000 comments.

      Today, I am directing the Department of Justice to dedicate all available resources to complete the review of the comments received, and, as expeditiously as possible, to propose for notice and comment a rule banning all devices that turn legal weapons into machineguns.

      Although I desire swift and decisive action, I remain committed to the rule of law and to the procedures the law prescribes. Doing this the right way will ensure that the resulting regulation is workable and effective and leaves no loopholes for criminals to exploit. I would ask that you keep me regularly apprised of your progress.

      You are authorized and directed to publish this memorandum in the “Federal Register”.

      DONALD J. TRUMP

      ###”

      https://publicpool.kinja.com/subject-presidential-memorandum-on-the-application-of-1823170075

      1. avatar pwrserge says:

        Yup… that’s the one. It basically turns this into an election issue. A brilliant piece of electoral strategy. He’s forcing the DNC to run on both amnesty AND gun control.

      2. avatar jwtaylor says:

        “I desire swift and decisive action…”
        I will take the ptesident at his word, and mark him down is yet another president who seeks to destroy the Second Amendment and take away firearms from lawful owners.

        1. avatar hillbillyjew says:

          Agreed.

        2. avatar Esoteric Inanity says:

          Taking a man at his word this day and age? This is madness!!!

        3. avatar pwrserge says:

          Oh come now, JW, you should know that partial quotes are little better than lying.

          Full text:
          “Although I desire swift and decisive action, I remain committed to the rule of law and to the procedures the law prescribes”

        4. avatar jwtaylor says:

          Serge, that part is even worse. It’s “I wish I could just screw you all over and be done with it, but I’m willing to go through the hoops to make sure you’re fucked good, and it sticks”.

        5. avatar Eric in Oregon says:

          JW, you started in this thread with a partial quote lie and this latest comment is a “my fantasy is…” lie. What else you got?

      3. avatar Sam I Am says:

        Thanks for doing that !!

  38. avatar former water walker says:

    My take? Trumps trolling. Sound and fury signifying nothing…then again I’m not invested in the AR platform. Oh and when Jay Pritzger gets elected governor good luck running that AR serge…

    1. avatar pwrserge says:

      We’ll see… He’s not doing too hot right now with his Blogo tapes out. Given how pissed Trump voters are right now, I don’t like his chances. The GOP primary will be important this year. We need to keep RINOs off the ballot.

      1. avatar former water walker says:

        So who’s a RINO?!? Rauner won’t lose to that gal. In Illinois republicans are usually just democratlite…my experience in mafia controlled Kankakee. Felon George Ryan’s home town(had my pic taken at his drugstore as a baby).His brother Tom was mayor. I hope I’m wrong but fatboy may win😩

        1. avatar pwrserge says:

          Rauner will get his teeth kicked in. Have you seen the latest numbers?

  39. avatar Eric Lawrence says:

    I understand the mechanics of the bump stock.
    I understand the law as written.

    I still believe that the bump stock is a workaround of the law to produce a firearm that acts like a machine gun. Not the mechanics mind you, but the result. I felt this (and maybe the brace) were going to be banned eventually. I’m just angry we didn’t get anything in compromise (suppressors off the NFA) for the ban. A few months ago the Dems might have traded a bump stock ban for the SHARE Act. Now they don’t have to.

    1. avatar Mad Max says:

      Two old regs for every new reg. Executive order.

  40. avatar TroutsBane says:

    The lesson here: If it pertains to firearms and it’s not illegal yet, then just wait.

  41. avatar Patrick says:

    It’s time to end the NFA already… still.

  42. avatar Chadwick says:

    Big mistake Don… And yeah Ted Cruz is god and he is so perfect. Didn’t he support and vote Yes on the FBI being able to see all your internet history without a warrant? Oh no let’s not bring that up because emotions rule this day.

    1. avatar Setnakhte says:

      Rather than comparing people to a god, I would say that a more relevant question would be “Why are there so few pols on either side of the aisle that actively defend all ten Amendments?”.

      1. avatar TX_Lawyer says:

        I’ve never heard of a politician who defends the 3A. It really just doesn’t come up much.

        1. avatar Sam I Am says:

          Nice, that.

        2. avatar Esoteric Inanity says:

          When the BATFEaRBF and National Guard are sent into Chicago’s ghettos enmasse, in order to quell the violence, they will need a place to stay…………….

  43. avatar barnbwt says:

    I hope you all realize that if you hang a rifle by its trigger, it will likely fire until empty; that is what bump fire is, but horizontal and controlled by conscious human action.

    Trump just made noises about banning all semi autos with this memo.

    We need about a million videos of unassisted bumpfire sent to that man’s Twitter account, yesterday.

    1. avatar tsbhoa.p.jr says:

      only the rifles they want to ban.

  44. avatar mk10108 says:

    A bump stock is a mechanical device that converts expended gases of the bullet into mechanical energy moving the rifle in a way that increases the rate of fire.

    A trigger selector (safe semi auto) on a military rifle is a mechanical device lifting a sear thus removing the limitation of mechanical movement used to control a rifle bolt. It is used to increase the rate of fire.

    Bump stocks are not a cosmetic attachment but a device that increases the rate of fire.

    We of the gun community must reconcile the above facts and lend support to classify bump stocks as a device used to increase the rate of fire similiar to a machine gun.

    It’s up to ATF to determine if they should remain legal or be registered.

    1. avatar pwrserge says:

      No. Next question.

      1. avatar Gutshot says:

        FKNA! I second the “no”

    2. avatar TX_Lawyer says:

      If the NFA didn’t define the word “machinegun,” I would agree that a bump fire stock turns a rifle into a machinegun, but the NFA did define the word, and it doesn’t include bump fire stocks. 26 U.S. Code § 5845(b)

  45. avatar pewpewpew says:

    Wouldn’t a “device that turns a legal weapon into a machine gun” be called a mill/lathe combo? Cant help but think that it wouldn’t be good for American jobs to ban metalworking machines like that.

    1. avatar Defens says:

      Good thing I have separate machines! Go ahead and ban them, I’m good to go! (First they came for the Harbor Freight combos, but I didn’t have one. Then they came for the Smithy’s….)

    2. avatar Mad Max says:

      Overly, overly, broad; even under the “Chevron Deference”.

  46. avatar Mad Max says:

    What effect would the regulation of bump stocks have on Gatling guns?

    I think Gatling guns are currently legal (?) but usually expensive and not very popular.

    1. avatar TX_Lawyer says:

      It depends on the regulation. The regulation isn’t publicly available, so no one (in the general public) knows the answer to your question. We can only guess, but it would probably ban them too.

      1. avatar Mad Max says:

        If they want to ban “bump fire” stocks, they should use specific language to describe them and not some overly-broad definition that would affect Gatling guns and triggers for long-distance/competition shooting.

        Maybe refer to the patents for the stocks.

        1. avatar TX_Lawyer says:

          The definition is fixed in the statute. They can’t really change the definition. They can issue an “interpretation” of the definition that includes things that don’t fit the actual statutory definition. They could issue some sort of ruling (there are different kinds) that says that a bump stock fits the definition for “reasons.” An “interpretation” would have to be broad enough to encompass other things that are also not machineguns. A ruling’s “reasons” would also have to be overly broad, but inconsistent reasoning in various agencies rulings isn’t unheard of.

  47. avatar James69 says:

    ok take the bump-fire stock, and give me a quiet can.

    1. avatar Mad Max says:

      That may just happen.

  48. avatar Jared says:

    My thoughts:

    First. Nothing was said about “bump-stocks” specifically meaning it could be platitudes.

    Second: And the important one. Slide-fire is built in TX. Which is the fifth circuit court of appeals. Regulation goes through, slide-fire sues saying 1934 act defines “machine-gun”. Government settles. “Sue and settle” strategy. Or government loses and does not appeal. Trump say court blocked measure which also blocks future administrations from recreating same regulation.

    1. avatar pwrserge says:

      Better yet, company sues against entire 1934 act. Government settles. NFA goes up in a puff of smoke.

      1. avatar TX_Lawyer says:

        Doubt it, but that would be awesome. (Though I do generally agree with Jared’s analysis of what would happen. Machinegun is very explicitly defined. Bump stocks ain’t that).

  49. avatar Joe Nieters says:

    Well, automatic weapons should not be restricted either.

  50. avatar Sam I Am says:

    There is a huge positive for POTG in all this. We were just reading the doom of the firearms industry because the threat of more restrictions had been eliminated with the Trump election. The gun industry was going to crater because fear could no longer drive sales.

    Well….

    Now fear is back. Expecting the gun industry to “recover” quite nicely. We should be thankful for gun-grabbers ensuring we have plenty of inventory available, and more on the way.

  51. avatar Gutshot says:

    Ban Jerry Miculek! He turns a semi auto into a “machine gun” on a regular basis! THE CHILDREN! OH THE CHILDREN!

    1. avatar Patrick says:

      lol I was going to use those exact words: “Ban Jerry Miculek”. You beat me to it.
      Realistically, as Jerry is just one of many fantastic shooters, the ban would need to include anyone who shoots excellently, such as many popular USPSA competitors. Essentially, ban all skilled and disciplined shooters. It’s for the children.

  52. avatar Dale Gribble says:

    Hopefully you guys are right and he has a bigger plan in place, we shall see.

    1. avatar pwrserge says:

      When doesn’t he? He’s turned the entire DACA debate into a major albatross for the DNC going into the midterms.

  53. avatar Jonathan - Houston says:

    TOLD YA SO, TRUMPKINS!

    Say “But Hillary’s worse!”, one time, I dare you. Then explain why you jackwagons voted for Donald J. “The ‘J’ stands for ‘Jenius'” Trump in the primaries in the first place.

    1. avatar Gun Free School Zones are a crime against humanity says:

      We voted for the Donald because, unlike you, we believe in the 2a.

      Did you read the memo? Or did you just remember your love of hillary and speak out?

  54. avatar TomP says:

    It won’t make much difference to anyone determined because there are easy alternatives, but if it appeases the liberals, fine.

    1. avatar jimbo says:

      gun control is a dead letter;
      virtually any-one can make a Phil Luty-type subbie’ or a good qual. 3D gun now…..
      its too late, youse gun-grabbing bastards

      1. avatar Patrick says:

        Thanks for the Luty link.

  55. avatar Aussie pub brawler says:

    pffft!
    BAN wht-ever you like, youse statist fools…
    Trump ain’t got any real power, any-way…..
    neither has the cops or the judiciary….
    sooner rather than later…they’re all goin’ the way of the dinosaur…..
    any-one can make an SMG in their back-yards using Phil Luty’s (RIP) plans….
    also: people are now making quality 3D-printed guns except for a few metal parts that can’t be banned….
    (check out the l8st YouTube from Cody Wilson… Defense Distributed)

    the age of the gun-grabber is over!
    say good-night, bitches!

  56. avatar Disgusted says:

    Why doesn’t he direct the Justice Department to ban covering-up for politicians instead of playing the appeasement card to the anti-gun agenda Commy crowd made up by the politicians and others his Justice Department are covering-up for? On the surface it sounds and looks to be unconstitutional, but with such a corrupt court system, Congress & Justice Department the law of the land of the free has been vacated & replaced with law of the jungle………………………….We-re done here in America…..!!!

  57. avatar Esoteric Inanity says:

    TX_Lawyer thank you for the edification and clarification on the subject, as Esoteric Inanity is only vaguely familiar regarding the nuances of this subject. By the sound of things the GCA has all types of interesting caveats to complicate matters. It might also stand to reason that certain provisions could provide for some rather disconcerting future actions.

    “You won’t find this language in the U.S.C. because it isn’t codified, so it was harder to find than I’d have liked. As the law says “this title” I assume it means the Title 26 of the U.S.C. based on context. Title 26 contains the NFA. This should be in Title 26. I don’t know why it isn’t unless it was repealed at some point.”

    U.S.C. is the US Supreme Court?

    Admittedly, the significance of such a thing is lost upon this one as he fails to understand its meaning. Are there dire implications regarding the absence of said provision in codification?

    “The machinegun definition includes “any part designed and intended solely and exclusively, or combination of parts designed and intended, for use in converting a weapon into a machinegun.” Therefore the bump fire stock would be a machinegun under the NFA.”

    Mere possession of an m16 full auto sear by itself isn’t illegal though correct? Or does constructive intent potentially muddy the waters on this?

    “So if the Secretary (whether that’s the Secretary or Attorney General) can declare a limited amnesty, then he (Mnuchin or Sessions) could do as you suggest. Or they could just declare a general amnesty, and then Trump would be the best 2A president ever. (I’d spend all my spare money on lowers and register them as SBR machineguns).”

    Amen brother.

    “Dean Weingarten’s TTAG article on the subject: http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2016/09/dean-weingarten/amnesty-administration-can-implement/

    Ah yes, thank you for the link, Esoteric Inanity vaguely recollects reading it sometime back. It had some very elucidating information.

    1. avatar Geoff PR says:

      “Mere possession of an m16 full auto sear by itself isn’t illegal though correct?”

      Incorrect, an auto-sear is illegal to own by itself, unless it was registered prior to ’86. (?)

      “Or does constructive intent potentially muddy the waters on this?”

      ‘Constructive intent’ can get you 10 years prison…

    2. avatar TX_Lawyer says:

      U.S.C. stands for United States Code. As in 18 U.S.C. 922(o) is where the Hughes Amendment was codified. That means Title 18 of the United States Code, Section 922, subsection o.

      “Mere possession of an m16 full auto sear by itself isn’t illegal though correct?” They are NFA items, so mere possession is illegal. Possession with a tax stamp, or whatever, is legal.

  58. avatar jimbo says:

    WTF’s “up” with Fargo or wtf-ever the kike cunt’s name is censoring comments here, eh?
    FUCK you, jew-boy!

  59. avatar Shane says:

    So if this happens, will it be an outright ban as in not-legal-to-own? Or will it be a ban in new sales?

    I think it will be a ban in new sales. The government will not want to make a bunch of law-abiding citizens into criminals just because they already own a bump stock. They’ll just ban future sales of new bump stocks. So I guess maybe I should buy one. They’re still out there, even new ones:

    http://www.armslist.com/posts/8003461/dallas-texas-gun-parts-for-sale–slide-fire-ssar-15-sbs-bump-stock

    1. avatar How_Terrible says:

      Until the ATF actually releases a copy of their proposed rule no one really knows what it will look like aside from the fact that it will suck.

    2. avatar Mad Max says:

      No ex-post-facto law shall be passed.

    3. avatar TX_Lawyer says:

      As the ATF is interpreting existing statutory law and not making a new regulation under delegated authority, all bump fire stocks will be machine guns and illegal under the Hughes Amendment.

      1. avatar pwrserge says:

        Except that there is no way that they can do that without butchering the English language beyond all recognition. Pushing the gun forward after firing with your arm constitutes an “action of the trigger” each “action” produces one shot. Not legally a machine gun. With a bump stock, you’re effectively actuating the trigger with your arm instead of your finger. All it does is turn a fine motor skill into a gross motor skill.

        1. avatar TX_Lawyer says:

          I agree Serge; now let’s see if the ATF and then (if the ATF disagrees) the courts agree with us.

          It wouldn’t be the first time they butchered the English language to get what they want.

  60. avatar DerryM says:

    “Just a few moments ago I signed a memo directing the attorney general to propose regulations that ban all devices that turn legal weapons into machine guns,‘”

    Since such devices are already illegal and Bump Fire stocks do not turn legal weapons into machine guns, I think Trump is pulling Lefty Legs (y’know the ones Chris Matthews got a ‘tingle’ in when he heard Obama speeches).

    Nonetheless, a serious attempt by Trump and his DOJ to outlaw Bump Fire stocks or any other “device” that augments the rate of fire of semi-automatic firearms would be illegal.

    https://www.firearmspolicy.org/fpc_calls_president_trump_s_bump_stock_ban_lawless?utm_content=bufferdda0a&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=buffer

    Every law whether Federal State or Local that infringes American’s “right to keep and bear Arms” is illegal. If Trump wants to play at “legislation by fiat” he ought to declare null and void all firearms infringements at the Federal, State and local levels. That would be a bold move worthy of risking the ensuing political and legal firestorm, but this directive to propose regulations that ban all devices that turn legal weapons into machine guns, is really bad political charades and may cost him much more than it would ever be worth. Trump has other, better choices and sometimes I have to wonder if those questioning his judgement and mental clarity are actually onto something.

  61. avatar james says:

    Read what Trump posted “ban all devices that turn legal weapons into machine guns”,
    OK, now read it two more times.

    Remember that semi autos lack the required internal parts to make it full auto machine gun.

    We know you can’t do that with a bump stock or a $2 curtain rod from the dollar store.

    You can’t fire the rifle any faster with or without a bump stock.

    jerry miculek can fire his AR very fast w/o bump stock.

  62. avatar SlicedVeggie says:

    I think we are all getting worked up for no reason – the atf can ban just one item. They have done it before and will do it again – that since act wont necessarily reach into every other aspect of firearms rights.

    Plus, bump stocks really are terrible.

  63. avatar Oxygenthief says:

    I know I am going to be flamed for my point of view, but I am not seeing similar thoughts in the responses to Trump’s move here in the comments section.

    I am a Trump voter (would prefer Cruz, but hey Hillary lost so I am happy). I believe in the right to keep and bear arms, completely and totally. To hell with anyone who tries to disarm me. That being said I think the views of many on select fire / fully automatic firearms are skewed on both sides of the argument. The intent behind the second amendment was to ensure the people have the means to prevent tyrannical government overreach. On the right, there are many that believe that this should include fully automatic firearms and a few that go further down that path insisting that whatever the government can use against us as citizens we should be able to use against it/them. The left, of course, can’t even wrap their heads around this concept.

    Part of me agrees with the logical argument that should the worst happen, the average citizen needs to be armed or have the same capability as those that would strip us of our rights. THOSE THAT WOULD STRIP US OF OUR RIGHTS. That isn’t the military, it never will be. Being prior service, like many of you, I cannot imagine any unit/individual going along with a mission to disarm the American people or worse, kill those who refuse to disarm. Most would consider such an order to be in direct conflict of their oath to defend the constitution from enemies both foreign and DOMESTIC.

    So from whom would we need to defend ourselves? Local law enforcement? Homeland Security? FBI?

    They don’t have tanks, grenade launchers or Apaches. These are military force multipliers. The average citizen will never have to worry about being massively outgunned by such technology, it simply will never happen.

    That brings me to automatic/select fire firearms. Yes your local police station may have a few, as will the FBI and Homeland Security. So should the average citizen have access to them? Again, one part of me says yes, why not? But understanding that automatic firearms are also force multipliers used by our military I balk at the notion.

    Automatic fire is typically reserved for military engagements when friendly forces need to suppress or halt the advance of an enemy force, usually one that is much larger in size or capability. Only on no-fail missions are fully auto fire sanctioned/recommended when engaging enemies. Homeland security, the FBI, your local police force will have no such mandate let alone the training to use automatic fire effectively.

    A semi-auto AR-15 is no less deadly than a fully automatic M4. More bullets can only equal greater lethality when aimed at a mass of people like what happened in Las Vegas. In no scenario where the average citizen is defending itself against government tyranny would a fully automatic firearm be any more effective than a semi-auto firearm.

    Long story short, I don’t believe anyone should have access to force multiplying weapons technology, to include fully automatic firearms. Anyone includes any/all non-miliary personnel to include your local police department, FBI, and Homeland Security. You want to take the sting away from an infringement on our Second Amendment rights, take that same capability away from America’s police force. I have no doubt many of us here can appreciate the necessity of de-militarizing our police forces, this could be a compromise for both sides…

    Lower the potential body count during shootings and the de-miliarization of our police forces while still adhering to the intent of the Second Amendment.

    1. avatar John in Ohio says:

      I’m not going to flame you. Your post, IMHO, was well thought out and not overly based on emotion. However, I disagree and will make the following comments:

      “I believe in the right to keep and bear arms, completely and totally.” -vs- “I don’t believe anyone should have access to force multiplying weapons technology, to include fully automatic firearms.”

      “I have no doubt many of us here can appreciate the necessity of de-militarizing our police forces, this could be a compromise for both sides…”

      Unfortunately, the game is well beyond compromises. Those compromises were hashed out at the writing of the Constitution. Infringement on the individual RKBA is a direct violation. Militarization of police is a violation of the very spirit of the Constitution. Therefore, the logic being proposed is; because government violates individual rights, we should compromise by agreeing to more violation. Any compromises made today will hang individual liberty tomorrow. No deal. The only way for something like that to work is to amend the Constitution. Still, you will have many, such as myself, who will fight rather than capitulate; amended Constitution or not.

      1. avatar Oxygenthief says:

        You are right, of course. There have been violations and will continue to be more and even greater violations in the future. Standing our ground only works as long as right leaning politicians will stand with us. The second any stance on firearms jeopardizes the re-election potential for candidates it dies. Thankfully both sides realize this after the 1994 AWB when Dems got routed afterwards. With our system of government COMPROMISE is all we (us 2A supporters) have. There is a give and take to lasting legislation.

        Bump fire stocks are going to be outlawed, there is nothing any of us can do to change that… the writing is on the wall. Instead of protesting that point why not advocate for a compromise. Ultimately we will lose the same, but wouldn’t it be better if the anti-gunners lost as well?

        1. avatar John in Ohio says:

          “There have been violations and will continue to be more and even greater violations in the future.”
          That’s reason to bend over and give up? Rape me once so you can rape me again and that makes it okay? Wow.

          “Standing our ground only works as long as right leaning politicians will stand with us.”
          Fortunately, those who founded this country didn’t think that way. IMHO, you have it backwards. It’s not politicians who protect rights. It’s the people. That’s the point of the Second Amendment. It won’t work if you just grab your ankles. By your method, the number and quality of pro-rights politicians decreases over time. Additionally, the children are brought up to accept infringement. It is a real stinker of a position to propose to others.

          “The second any stance on firearms jeopardizes the re-election potential for candidates it dies.”
          Again, that is because your methodology is the status quo, thereby producing less and less quality candidates. One generation could turn it around, but not with the way you are proposing. That leads to tyranny.

          “Thankfully both sides realize this after the 1994 AWB when Dems got routed afterwards.”
          No, government plays the long game. The long game is impossible for the individual to win. They didn’t get “routed.” It was passed and caused much concern among those who still knew what individual liberty is. Once government exceeds its limits, it will continue to do so generation after generation.

          “With our system of government COMPROMISE is all we (us 2A supporters) have.”
          That is patently false unless you consider yourself a slave. Read the 2A again and tell me that particular bit of text hinted of ANY compromise.

          “There is a give and take to lasting legislation.”
          Ah, the old “making sausage” bullshit.

          “Bump fire stocks are going to be outlawed, there is nothing any of us can do to change that… the writing is on the wall.”
          Nonsense. It’s only on the wall because you wrote it.

          “Instead of protesting that point why not advocate for a compromise.”
          Because I know what is mine and I don’t intend to compromise with thieves.

          “Ultimately we will lose the same, but wouldn’t it be better if the anti-gunners lost as well?”
          All individuals lose with your strategy. What is at stake is more than just bump stocks. If you fail to appreciate that, no wonder you aren’t willing to fight.

          I’ll leave you with these… (http://www.oaknorton.com/foundingfatherquotes.cfm)

          “Is life so dear or peace so sweet as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take, but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!” Patrick Henry

          “If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.” Samuel Adams

        2. avatar Oxygenthief says:

          Dear God! I think you may have picked apart my entire reply! Why? Because I am a pragmatist/realist? I can wish and hope that everyone on the left sees the light, that politicians will think of their constutuents before their careers, and that Trump will somehow rid us of of the ATF. But what is the likelyhood of any of that happening?

          Try not to get so bent out of shape when a fellow 2A supporter offers a different way of looking at the problem set. Jesus!

        3. avatar Anonymous says:

          Oxygen thief. This is about principles. And you don’t “compromise” principles. And If you guys think they will stop at bump stocks, you are gravely mistaken. They will continue to their satisfaction – not ours. They have opinions and they want them implemented. And they will push and push until resistance makes it not worth it. This is what tyrants do.

          Regarding your sentiments about the military never using force multipliers and their oath and all. First you make this assertion, then you express concern about police becoming militarized. Which is it? Do you have a concern or not? I will say that the people of pol pot, mao, or Stalin probably assumed the same thing. And in this I would suggest you watch the lectures of Jordan Peterson, or read Gulag Archipelago. You will be surprised how quickly their oath will fade when they are confronted and intimidated by all those around them, even their loved ones, and those they once respected. In no time at all, the US military will be machine gunning toddlers, babies, and unarmed plebs, just like they already did in the My Lai Massacre:

          https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/My_Lai_Massacre

          and this would be exasperated by polarized ideologies, such as we currently live in.

          But regardless, it is extremely distasteful, personally to me, to prosecute and imprison people for victimless crimes (gulag archipelago style) because they were perceived as a threat and the people feared what they “might” do (such as the feelings the left has towards AR15/gun owners).

          And the loss of gun rights in such a polarized atmosphere we currently live within, is a terrible idea. The best decision is no compromise. No compromise at all. If anything, we need to be progressing towards more gun rights and freedoms. The strength of your opponent is a deterrent to violence. And – “Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun. – Mao”

        4. avatar TX_Lawyer says:

          No compromises of principle, of course, but I’m not opposed to compromises in principle. I just don’t trust the Republicans to make a good compromise in our favor. They never have before.

        5. avatar John in Ohio says:

          “Try not to get so bent out of shape when a fellow 2A supporter offers a different way of looking at the problem set. Jesus!”

          You seem to be projecting, friend. I stated that I wouldn’t flame you and I haven’t. I also actually haven’t gotten “bent out of shape” answering your comments.

          Perhaps if you re-read my comments with more thought and less emotion, you might understand my POV.

        6. avatar John in Ohio says:

          I will qualify my previous statement with:

          I know my comments might have appeared to be directed at YOU with exasperation. I assure you, that exasperation is not directed at you personally. I am exasperated by a lifetime of people claiming to understand and believe in unalienable individual rights when, in reality, they neither understand or support the genuine article. I, as many others, have expended decades of energy on opening eyes and living the philosophy. As such, I no longer posses the extra energy to suffer slaves, cowards, and idiots. Servitude, cowardice, and idiocy are dangerous to liberty.

    2. avatar TX_Lawyer says:

      “They don’t have tanks, grenade launchers or Apaches.” They do have APCs, grenade launchers (that’s how they fire tear gas canisters), and other helicopters. That’s close enough.

      I basically disagree with almost all of the factual underpinnings of your argument. The military of tomorrow isn’t the military of today. Things change.

  64. avatar Edward Nygma says:

    Honestly this seems like a very Trump thing to do basically it’s the opposite of when he negotiates for something he wants and essentially says you are going to give us the moon and pay for it too then is willing to settle for more than he actually wanted in the first place. He is saying ok you guys can have the bump stocks they aren’t a huge pet project for him and honestly most gun people I know think of them as toys anyway. The other thing I wonder is what about that mechanical glove that basically does the same thing I don’t hear of that being banned plus like many other people have posted a bumpstock is not very difficult to jerry rig out of at most $20 worth of parts. At this point aren’t most of us primarily concerned that legal access to semi auto rifles and handguns as well as standard cap mags remains (for me that’s all I care about)?

    1. avatar John in Ohio says:

      “(for me that’s all I care about)”

      Hunting wabbits?

      1. avatar Edward Nygma says:

        Lol yes that why I have plans an parts to be able to manufacture full auto Mac 10s on my phone back from when I thought Hillary might get elected. My thought is bump stocks are really silly to get up in arms about but then again I don’t really care regardless of legislation myself and family will be extremely well armed. One can achieve the same rates of fire or higher without need of a bumpstock one just needs to have a bit of engineering knowledge. Also I should have clacked standard cap is defined as 120 rds or less maybe that’s why you jumped on my comment I sure as hell didn’t mean 10.

        1. avatar John in Ohio says:

          ” less maybe that’s why you jumped on my comment I sure as hell didn’t mean 10.”

          Nope. Why I commented is plainly copied and pasted in quotes. That’s clearly E. Fudd material. Perhaps you didn’t mean it that way?

          “I don’t really care regardless of legislation myself and family will be extremely well armed.”

          Oh wait… Clearly, you did mean it that way! That wascally wabbit!

        2. avatar Edward Nygna says:

          Buy a CNC machine and 3D printer you dolt and won’t need to worry about what gets banned.

        3. avatar John in Ohio says:

          “you dolt”

          The comedy just keeps rolling off of your keyboard, doesn’t it? I guess you are going to continue deflection without addressing the point.

        4. avatar hillbillyjew says:

          Haha. I had to Google “dolt”. So maybe I am one? Looks like the use of the word peaked around 1900, then plummeted around 1980. It’s starting to make a comeback, but at what cost? Hahaha. Who talks like that?

    2. avatar TX_Lawyer says:

      I think most of care about incrementalism. If Jesus came down and told us that a ban on bumpstocks would be the last anti-gun law to ever be made, and we could still fight what was on the books, then I think most of us would take that deal. But Jesus didn’t say that. The proponents of the law didn’t say that. Nancy Pelosi said she hopes it is a slippery slope. They are coming for everything, the Republicans always cave on something, and Republicans never get anything in return unless they go ahead and give up an additional disproportionate amount.

  65. avatar harold says:

    well he just lost my vote period….

    1. avatar TX_Lawyer says:

      Nope. Not even the NRA. “An NRA spokesman says the group won’t consider moving elsewhere and that it already is in Dallas in the form of numerous members in the region.”

      I guess I gotta bring a gun and holster for everyone (in my family) flying in? Maybe I care a little, as the city’s support for lawless “demonstrators” will inconvenience me.

  66. avatar m1ckDELTA says:

    A bump stock (or anything similar) is anathema to marksmanship. Even this guy sees no practical purpose for rapid fire gadgetry:

    https://youtu.be/OrE1-wSWQKc

    End of discussion. Full stop.

    1. avatar emclean says:

      so we should all be rocking 20 inch plus barrels to improve accuracy?

      you for get that it is a bill of rights, not a bill of needs, or of accuracy.

  67. avatar Adam says:

    Conservatives, still happy that you elected Trump instead of a principled small government representative like Cruz or Paul?

    A ham sandwich could have beaten Hillary and in the easiest election ever, the Republicans selected an unprincipled buffoon. I’m not even gonna be sad when Republicans lose both the House and Senate in 2018, they deserve it.

    1. avatar Gun Free School Zones are a crime against humanity says:

      If cruz and paul could not best Trump for the nomination how were they to beat hillary?

      1. avatar Sam I Am says:

        “If cruz and paul could not best Trump for the nomination how were they to beat hillary?”

        Being subtle is not considered a virtue here.

        But I commend you for only using two words with more than one syllable. It’s a sign of recognizing your audience.

  68. avatar Chris T in KY says:

    I still support President Trump. But if he does “a Reagan”, then I’ll know for sure. I know there is a great deal pressure now on everyone. And where is the NRA???

  69. avatar Libertarian says:

    Hypocrite repeal hughes adment any federal gun law not more goverment regulation !!

  70. avatar Dale Gribble says:

    Anyone see Trump’s comments on gun free zones?

    1. avatar Anonymous says:

      Yep. He basically implied they were “victim-ready zones.”

      1. avatar TX_Lawyer says:

        “A gun-free zone to a maniac — because they’re all cowards — a gun-free zone is ‘let’s go in and let’s attack because bullets aren’t coming back at us’,” were his exact words.

  71. avatar 80 says:

    “Just a few moments ago I signed a memo directing the attorney general to propose regulations that ban all devices that turn legal weapons into machine guns,’”
    Which means bump-fire stocks will not be targeted since they do not turn a legal weapon into a machine gun.

  72. Some Americans may have felt uneasy 35 years ago when DUI laws, DWI checkpoints, seatbelt laws, and car liability insurance laws were started, but most people felt that the experts must be right.

    Pro-police state shows like “COPS” and “America’s Most Wanted” were then aired, neighborhood watch groups were formed, “get tough on crime” candidates were elected, and laws allowing mandatory minimums, IMBRA, 3 strikes laws, curfews, police militarization, teen boot camps, school metal detectors, private prisons, and chain gangs were enacted.

    Nanny state smoking laws then started appearing.

    When 9/11 happened, the Patriot Act was passed, NSA wiretapping, no knock raids, take down notices, no fly lists, terror watch lists, Constitution free zones, stop and frisk, kill switches, National Security Letters, DNA databases, kill lists, FBAR, FATCA, Operation Chokepoint, TSA groping, civil forfeiture, CIA torture, NDAA indefinite detention, secret FISA courts, FEMA camps, laws requiring passports for domestic travel, IRS laws denying passports for tax debts, gun and ammo stockpiles, laws outlawing protesting, Jade Helm, sneak and peek warrants, policing for profit, no refusal blood checkpoints, license plate readers, redlight cameras, speed cameras, FBI facial and voice recognition, tattoo databases, gun bans, the end to the right to silence, free speech bans, searches without warrants, CISPA, SOPA, private prison quotas, supermax prisons, sex offender registration laws, and sex offender restriction laws were allowed.

    Now that the USA is a total police state, Americans are finding out that changing anything is impossible and that freedom is lost forever.

  73. avatar Hyper Loose says:

    So where did and when did the president get authority to write and or make law about anything concerning non Federal employees?…….He didn’t! For if the POTUS had such power don’t people think Obama would have already banned everything down to toothbrushes and rubber bands? I can’t wait to see how this shakes out with legal challenges especially when the reason for the law/banned device was based on an emotional response to a fake fake fake fake all of them fake shootings which Trump had to be aware of, seeing how both were in the backyard’s of his casinos and the secret service was at the high school in Florida a week before the drill (fictional shooting) happened on Valentines day (the secret service always visits sites the President is going to visit in the future for security details)……So the lesson we all should learn here is, we’ve been screwed again by electing another one of the controlled Jew boy bitches…….

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