A Police Officer’s View On Bump Fire Stocks and the NRA

President Bill Clinton signs the 1994 assault weapons ban bill. courtesy abcnews.go.com

As some of our readers may know, I’m a member of the law enforcement community and I only write (badly, might I say) part time. Prior to that I was simply a fellow member of the People of the Gun and an avid reader of TTAG.

I’ve been a firearms owner for as long as I can remember, a NRA member for 23 years, and I believe that the NRA’s statement on bump fire stocks is wrong. Compromise is never a good thing. Ever.

I joined the NRA in 1994. If you’re younger, that may seem like just a random year. But for our older readers, 1994 was pivotal. On September 13, 1994, Congress passed a federal assault weapon and President Clinton signed it into law within hours.

I joined the NRA in August of 1994 as a wee pup and my membership was bought and paid for by my father. He’d been a member since 1980 and was and still is a devoted defender of the Second Amendment. He listened to the NRA that year when they were begging for donations and more members to help fund their fight against the forces of civilian disarmament like Bill and Hillary Clinton.

The Clinton assault weapon ban was built primarily on compromise…and it compromised away some of our rights. The gun grabbers soothingly claimed that we could keep our guns. The really icky ones were grandfathered in. Once the AWB went into effect, you could still own guns that didn’t have the bad features.

Those now outlawed features included things like threaded barrels, flash hiders, collapsible/folding stocks, bayonet lugs, magazines over 10 rounds, pistols that weighed 50 ounces or more or that had magazine wells outside the pistol grip, and certain guns specifically listed by name. But it was definitely a compromise. You could still walk into a Walmart or Sports Authority and buy a neutered Ruger Mini-14 with a five-round magazine or a Marlin Model 60. And that had to be good enough.

The law, however, wasn’t passed by anti-gun Democrats alone. Republicans supported the bill too. Current Ohio Governor John Kasich was then a member of Congress and voted to pass the AWB. So appreciative was the President that he sent Kasich this letter.

Back then the NRA stood up and fought againts the ban tooth and nail. It was in that spirit that then-NRA President Charlton Heston famously said…


The NRA subsequently adopted a new slogan:

But with their latest stance on the regulation of bump fire stocks, much of the capital the NRA has built within the gun-owning community was dashed upon the rocks of political expediency.

The very words in that statement gave the green light to every gun-grabbing wanna-be despot in American politics that the NRA will fold and compromise.

A bump fire stock is a simple piece of plastic. It’s no different than a flash hider for an AR-15 or a 17-round magazine for a GLOCK 17. But it isn’t the item that’s the issue here. It’s the fact that the NRA signaled its willingness to compromise. The NRA knows — or should — that for every inch the gun grabbers are given, they’ll take a mile.

The reason for my being a member of the NRA and running for the organization’s Board of Directors prior to personal family issues complicating that is because of their no-compromise attitude that the NRA built since the Clinton presidency. I have spent my adult life trying to expand Second Amendment rights for all Americans because I believe in a simple core value. Freedom is for everyone and no aspect of it should thrown under the bus for political correctness.

I took an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States and the rights that it holds dear. The Second Amendment is one of those and shall not be infringed.

The NRA’s statement regarding bump fire stock regulation gives the green like to Republicans like the John Kasichs of the world. It added fuel to the fire of dedicated anti-gun Democrats like Chuck Schumer and Dianne Feinstein and will embolden the civilian disarmament movement. The camel’s nose is now very much under the tent.

Watch and wait, folks. This is just the start. Bump fire stocks are just the tip of the iceberg.

I am saddened by the actions the NRA took. I feel betrayed and hurt. I have defended the NRA for my entire life and have wanted to do nothing but make it better. But now? Now all I see is another class of political elitists trying to secure their iron rice bowls and keep the swamp that is DC happy and well stocked.

As a member of the law enforcement community I have already seen enough what compromise brings us. I know the truths of the world. I see it every day as a police officer. Outlawing items — drugs, guns, whatever — doesn’t stop criminals. Outlawing bump fire stocks won’t stop nutjobs and radicals from potentially using them either.

If you somehow manage to outlaw guns, they’ll simply use a knife, a car, a can of gasoline or a hammer. Bad people will do bad things no matter what. You cannot legislate morality or virtuousness. You cannot legislate safety. Sadly, you can legislate oppression and the infringement of rights and liberty.

The NRA has made a very big mistake. As a result, we the people of the gun will be feeling its after effects for a very long time.


  1. avatar strych9 says:

    I’m still waiting for someone to explain how suggesting that the ATF regulate an object which the plain language of the law prevents them from regulating, and making that the centerpiece of this conversation, is such a bad thing.

    I won’t say it’s a stroke of genius, because it’s not, but it’s a pretty deft move that’s already got the antis chasing their tails because they have abso-fucking-lutely no idea what they’re talking about. No one in the “national conversation” seems to have figured out that this is nothing but a bullshit suggestion to get them running down a rabbit hole. Instead they’re running down said rabbit hold laughing about how they’ve got the NRA by the balls when anyone who reads the plain language of the NFA knows that that if anyone has anyone by the balls it’s the NRA locking a good portion of the anti’s balls in a vice.

    1. avatar former water walker says:

      Yep…I live in the real world. And I’ve only been at this gun thing perhaps 7years. WE’D all be screwed without the NRA. After Newtown our rights WERE in jeopardy. A Hildebeast presidency would have been the nail in out coffin. My take? Lots of gunowners don’t understand political reality. I DO support getting rid of old Wayne…

      1. avatar strych9 says:

        I’ve never been a fan of Mr. LaPierre and I would support his departure.

        That doesn’t change the fact that, in this particular case, the NRA played the cards they were dealt and did so really rather shrewdly.

      2. avatar Hank says:

        The NRA successfully prevented the civil war of 2013. That, they are owed. However, they are helping water the seeds for the civil war of the 2020s, by legitimizing bureaucratic authority.

      3. avatar Joleolsen says:

        I would be happy to see Wayne retire very soon.

        1. avatar M1Lou says:

          How come it seems that the NRA board member or leadership portraits always have them pose with an over and under shotgun? I think Crazy Ted is the only one that had a gun different than an O/U shotgun in the portraits I’ve seen of him at the NRA show. I’m a Endowment member member and I don’t own a single O/U shotgun.

    2. avatar FedUp says:

      1. The ATF has been more than willing to step outside the law in the past.
      2. The ATF did not step outside the law in its prior evaluation of bump fire stocks.
      3. The NRA is publicly calling out the ATF for failing to step outside the law, assuming that the ATF will refuse to step outside the law in response to the NRA’s demands for illegal action, and hoping to gain brownie points by making idiotic and illegal demands of an often idiotic and illegal agency.
      4. Those with principles think playing political games such as #3 above is too dishonest and stupid for words.
      5. If the NRA gets its alleged wish, and the ATF goes back to arbitrarily ruling lawful guns and accessories to be unlawful, how does that help us in any way?

      1. avatar strych9 says:

        I would grant to each and every one of those points if HRC was POTUS. She’s not and the SCOTUS has had Scalia replaced.

        The NFA says that a machine gun is, and I quote: “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.”

        The ATF can do whatever the hell it wants but it’s going to get slapped down HARD by the SCOTUS if they try to classify bump stock as a machine gun or try to otherwise regulate it under the NFA because they very, very clearly have no authority to do that without Congress rewriting the NFA to change statutory definitions which the ATF must operate within.

        The ATF is about gathering power and authority. They’re not anpit doing stupid things that leave the agency open to having a ton of it’s authority stripped away by a court in a case that the ATF quite obviously cannot win. They don’t have the authority to regulate this, they’ve said said as much in the past, and there is literally zero reason for them to reverse that decision considering the absolute deluge of other add-on parts they’d be asked to regulate by the antis, something the ATF doesn’t want to do and doesn’t have the manpower or money to do.

        Congress isn’t going to do jack. That’s a dog-and-pony show virtue signaling clusterfuck and nothing more. The ATF isn’t going to do anything either. As such, nothing will happen and 95% of people will 1) not understand why and 2) blame Congress and the ATF rather than the NRA.

        I understand that the optics don’t look good to people who know what’s being discussed but you have to keep in mind that the vast, vast majority of people have never even heard of a bump stock until this past week and have no clue what’s being discussed here. As such, they’re easy to flummox.

        1. avatar Ing says:

          I hope you’re right.

          Myself, I think we’re going to see some sort of legislation banning bump-fire stocks specifically, and it probably will be passed, with or without the NRA. Hopefully it’s limited to that and isn’t an invitation to agency overreach.

          To me, this looks like a PR gamble designed to gain the NRA some mainstream [sic] credibility and avoid the perception of an ignominious defeat when a bump-fire ban inevitably passes.

          I hope I’m wrong.

      2. avatar Garrison Hall says:

        The ATF is a regulatory agency, subject to the control of both congress and the president. It **interprets** law but does not make law. ATF rules are obviously more subject to modification or elimination than are laws passed by congress which is currently actively being urged to start regulating trigger design. Controlling how triggers are made will provide gun-controllers to effectively legislate guns out of existence by the simple expedient of making them impossible to use.

      3. avatar Ardent says:

        Forget ‘how does it do us any good’. That ship has sailed. Now ask: How the hell we get them [ATF] to STOP!

    3. avatar Jack Gordon says:

      I could not agree more with you. What you write says it all pretty well, so I won’t repeat. I’ll only add that what the NRA proposed impressed me enough to make me change my membership status from simple member to life member. If we didn’t have the NRA, we’d sure as hell have no guns. Period.

    4. avatar GaPharmD. says:

      Okay 9 let me explain it to you.

      By “suggesting” the ATF regulate the object and by also publicly stating that they “want them subject to additional regulation”, they have begun the process that will either

      1. Congress will now be embolden to ban these items and the pro gun politicians will have the support they need to support it.

      2. They (the government) will indeed find a way or introduce a power so the ATF can regulate these stocks.

      Not really that hard to understand. But then again you also were clearly on board and okay with what RRA and Springfield were doing politically as well.

  2. avatar Jeremy S. says:

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

    That is WAY more than suggesting to the antis that they take it up with the ATF first instead of trying to create a new law.

    1. avatar strych9 says:

      Which, unless those regs are passed by congress and signed by the POTUS, can’t happen under a plain reading of the law.

      1. avatar pwrserge says:

        Which is the point. Either the liberals accept the limitations of administrative decisions and more or less kill any future plans for changing gun control through creative interpretation of existing law, or they go to the ATF, where they will be told that there is no legal basis for regulating these things and will have to live with that.

        It’s a lose lose situation for them. If they push for a law, they will fail as they have nowhere near the votes to override a veto and in doing so, create precedent for why a future ATF has no authority to arbitrarily ban things.

        In retrospect, it’s a clever move, but I would have taken a different approach and used this as a crowbar to repeal Hughes.

        1. avatar CZJay says:

          This day in age words comeback to bite you. You don’t get to erase them or define them. The public will only hear that the NRA wants “additional regulations” on the 2nd amendment, thus time for “common sense gun control laws.”

        2. avatar strych9 says:

          As I’ve said elsewhere: I think the ATF was dealt a poor hand but played it deftly on this one. A stroke of genius? No, but well played nonetheless.

          The delicious part is watching the Left trip over themselves to walk into what amounts to a trap while crowing about how they’re winning.

  3. avatar Jstover says:

    What we need is for the Law Enforcement community to not enforce unconstitutional laws. This is coming from a retired LEO by the way.

    1. avatar pwrserge says:

      We can start with refusing to acknowledge qualified immunity… It’s almost like we have some sort of equal protection clause in the CotUS or something…

    2. avatar The Punisher says:

      Like taxes. And speed limits.

      Make Taxation Theft Again

      1. avatar Excedrine says:

        I could understand a city having speed limits, especially in residential areas and sk00l zones and the like.

        Outside of that, Autobahn across the U.S. Not very fuel efficient, but fun as fuck.

        1. avatar jwm says:

          Gotta pay taxes for those roads. Otherwise it’s donkey cart time.

        2. avatar Excedrine says:

          Or just skid-plate undercarriage SUV time. 😉

          Nothing stopping individuals from adopting streets and highways and crowdfunding their maintenance, either. If it weren’t done through taxes, I’d give up that money voluntarily, anyway — and gladly withhold that money if there be much of any fuckery afoot.

        3. avatar kenneth says:

          The taxes on gasoline and diesel fuel are SUPPOSED to be what pays for the roads!
          In practice ,OFC, that’s NOT what happens. That unlawful way of using funds permeates everything, and is one more problem yet to be addressed.
          The ONE real problem is: The federal Government is a criminal enterprise. All else flows from that.

        4. avatar Excedrine says:


  4. avatar rc says:

    This article exactly (and eloquently) expresses my feelings on the subject. Well done Luis!

  5. avatar Ed says:

    Bravo Sir. I KNOW we have strongly dissagreed here in the past, but WELL SAID! An actual voice of reason from TTAG? Amazing. +1

  6. avatar Mutdad says:

    Could be we live in another chapter of the Wild West where men wore a pistol strapped to their legs and ladies carried discreetly. I have no problem being around armed fellow Americans. This is the only way you’re going to have immediate response to a threat. I’d like to read of an over weight old guy taking out a nut case threatening a school than how many innocent children died. Time to load ’em and rack ’em..

  7. avatar stateisevil says:

    Lots of Kasich’s in Congress. Do you know why SHARE and reciprocity hasn’t and now won’t pass the House. The Kasich’s and pretty much EVERY Democrat want European style control. Shame.

    It’s amazing how little people understand. Just a couple weeks ago a writer here, John Bosch, wrote that both SHARE/HPA and reciprocity were done deals. Asinine. The Republicans HATE you. They want to get in your pants (your votes) and that’s it. There’s a reason we’ve been on defense since 1934. We declare victory prematurely and compromise when we shouldn’t. All that said, we need to correct the NRA and if we get out of this without a ban, we should forgive them. The stupid bump fires really do present a unique situation. Bumps can be defended and NRA should know that after tensions have died down. There’s no evidence bump made this shooting worse really. Plus, this guy had the time, money, and background check to buy REAL machine guns. He chose not to. What would NRA be proposing if he had gone down that route? Confiscation? Come on.

    1. avatar Joe R. says:

      Bump stocks ONLY EXIST BECAUSE OF THE HUGHES AMENDMENT. The ATF&E have ALREADY BANNED FULL AUTOS BY PUTTING A BALL BAND AROUND THE POST 1986 MARKET which would lead to the abolition of the ATF&E by force.
      The bump / slide fire stock was a band aid / pressure relief position taken by the ATF IN ORDER TO APPEASE and to appear that their hands are tied but that they are mostly ‘on our side’. F all that. The truth is the bump / slide stocks / binary triggers and the like, FOLLOW THE LETTER OF THE LAW WHICH IS MORE THAN THE ATF / the evil POS (D) / the DEA / the Clintons / Susan Rice / the FBI / the EPA / the IRS / the FCC. . . (but I tire at the exposition).


    2. avatar fiun dagner says:

      its time to stop being on the defense and start playing offense. gun owners have given up silencers, machine guns, and even “assault weapons” at one time or another. lets take the offense and start demanding our rights back. we gave them the AWB for 10 years, lets force them to give us Machine guns for 10 years. Force a silencer bill through, force a NFA repeal through. I am so tired of being told what i can and cannot have by the government. force an import bill through allowing all the stuff the previous president banned.

      1. avatar TrueBornSonofLiberty says:

        2 seminal moments were the AWB and firearm confiscation during Katrina. The ship has sailed on those ever happening again in the US, without organized and sustained kinetic violence in response. Gun owners are a completely different breed with a different mindset since 1994. I’m 51 y/o and admit that my preferred response to any new infringements is immediate violence, when before that was never even a consideration. Obama, ANTIFA, and the BLM are mostly responsible for my new perspectives.

  8. avatar Sean in CO says:

    Looks like we need to ban woodworking, too. Full auto 2×4 is gonna need permits

  9. avatar Heartland Patriot says:

    Well, it would seem that strych9 and pwrserge get it. Glad someone does.

  10. avatar Joe R. says:

    The NRA saying we’re open to anything on the left is an F bag move. Hinting that we’re open “to review” on anything, much less ATF&E ALREADY DECIDED UPON BUMP STOCKS is pure ignorance, OR ELSE IT’S FIFTH COLUMN SH_T and its a whole separate swamp we need to drain by MOAB (and my money’s on the latter).

    WORSE, to suggest that we may have to give up something because a POS (D) / ISIS plant used something improperly is total unconscionable sh_t. Absolutely unconscionable.

    It is Wholly akin to Paul Ryan hiring an Obsama Dreamer to KILL EVERY FING PERSON registered in Feinstein’s, Pelosi’s, and Schumer’s constituent voting districts, then telling those, F’d up three, that they don’t have a job as a Rep. anymore because they don’t have anyone to represent any more.
    How’d that go over?

    Ya, so the nra, the congress, the senate, and the President (if he’s not paying attention to [cough] “Crippled America”) can all STFU and go to the house, their lack of services are no longer required.

  11. avatar Fred Butler says:

    What a fn joke! a rubber band is the real bumpfire tool. This is it

    1. avatar IdahoBoy says:

      Elastic assist devices have already been ruled illegal by the ATF. The Slide Fire is legal because it uses the rifleman’s own muscles for the assist, and not an elastic device. Therefore I doubt this rubber band trick would pass muster with the ATF.

      All that said, I wonder if an AR-15 and a box of rubber bands is sufficient to prove “constructive intent”? I kinda doubt it.

      1. avatar IdahoBoy says:

        I thought about this some more. Perhaps this might be legal because it’s just functioning as an exceptionally strong return spring. I think the elastic devices that have been deemed illegal by the ATF worked differently.

        Regardless, I am stocking up on rubber bands for the Zombie Apocalypse.

        1. avatar Matt(Tx) says:

          Didn’t the BATF&E and really big fires and sometimes kidnapping rule that a shoelace used to do the same thing was a machine gun, and illegal?

  12. avatar Aaron M. Walker says:

    Luis [email protected] , Well, thank you for being a Law Enforcement officer that protects, and upholds a US citizens constitutional rights. Unfortunately, I don’t see that as often in my draconian, Eastern Bloc communist State. (I have relatives and family-friend’s that are, or were involved in the LE community.-and even they have said things are far out of wack!) As police officer, can you say without a shadow of a doubt that this Las Vegas incident has a serious tone of high strangeness… That it begs an open, and transparent independent investigation…For this incident is the catalyst for these very strong political agendas….

  13. avatar TrueBornSonofLiberty says:

    The time to actually use our guns, for the reasons the Second Amendment was enshrined, is fast approaching. NOT. ONE. MORE. INCH.

  14. avatar joetast says:

    I can make my semi auto shoot as fast as an mg by, belt loop, shoe string, rubber band, vibrators, cranks two by fours, screwdrivers, and a real fast finger. …nperhaps we ought not keep bragging about that

  15. avatar D.O. from CO says:

    I am not an NRA member. I’ve dropped a buck or two at the LGS in their “NRA Donations” fishbowl when they make me change for my purchases over the years. I’ve listened to tons of people in conversation or watched videos online about how they used to be a member or how they never will be for this reason or that. Do they listen to members at all or do you just pay your dues and let them call the shots that they feel need called? It seems like they upset the membership on the regular but the only thing people can do is quit the organization. Sounds like the insurance racket to me. You give them money, maybe they help you, maybe they don’t and it’s all at their discretion. What really sucks is that it doesn’t really matter if someone is a member or not, the NRA has the American gun owners seat at the table and if membership numbers I have read (5million???) are true, then that’s an organization that is the paid voice of 5 million of us but speaks for 100 million of us? It’s a shame.

    1. avatar scott says:

      So, join already!

  16. avatar Crowbar says:

    Excellent article sir. Thank you.

  17. avatar Tom in PA says:

    Our forefathers would be done shooting by now – Author unknown

    1. avatar Missouri_Mule says:

      Lets not forget it was the Redcoats that shot at us!
      Reread the Declaration of Independence and you will know when it is time to start shooting.

      1. avatar Tom in PA says:

        “Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury.”. So, where are we in this process?

      2. avatar TrueBornSonofLiberty says:

        The time to start shooting is now, IMO. Unfortunately, most uninformed people interpret that to mean fighting the “government”. Nothing could be further from the truth. Our system of govt is the most beautiful thing this world has ever seen. It’s been specific individuals who have been toxic. Sometimes lots of them. Still, it’s the Liberal Terrorists™ who pose an existential threat to our Constitutional Republic. It’s the red diaper babies and radicalized, modern “progressive” vermin who need to be defeated as enemies of America. Once patriotic Americans realize that those people aren’t neighbors, colleagues, friends or even relatives, but rather, quantifiable enemies, we’ll be well on our way to forcing a restoration of our country.

        1. avatar int19h says:

          Can you put this into clearer words? Are you saying that it’s time to shoot citizens who vote for Democrats?

  18. avatar Missouri_Mule says:

    The NRA has been very good at saying “NO.” They should stick to it.
    That said they need to make National Reciprocity goal number 1.
    It actually helps 15 million “good guys with guns” and promotes the the protection of freedom & liberty.
    By comparison, suppressors and bump stocks are just accessories.

  19. avatar adverse4 says:

    What is a bump fire stock used for? Hunting, precision shooting, tin cans? Just for jollies? Maybe the tactical factor? Cool stuff. Can’t wait not to buy one.

    1. avatar TrueBornSonofLiberty says:

      Thank God the exercising of a Constitutional right has never been dependent on demonstrating “need”. Feel free to not buy one. But don’t dictate to others what they need or not. And lastly, we are discussing the Second Amendment here, which has nothing to do with hunting or sporting purposes. The 2A is strictly about having the ability to kill people. Period.

  20. avatar W says:

    A. Kasich is absolutely not a decent example of a Republican. In fact, he famously stated that he ought to be a Democrat.(1)

    B. Was Dunkirk a bad compromise with Hitler? Was it just the West giving away territory and planning for the inevitable slippery slope? Did people run around with their pants on fire yelling, first Dunkirk, then everything else?

    1. http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/268511-kasich-i-ought-to-be-running-in-a-democratic-primary

    1. avatar kenneth says:

      Dunkirk was a rout, not a compromise. I think you meant to say The Munich Agreement of 1938,yes?

  21. avatar Bob999 says:

    So, if the laws currently on the books do not allow the ATF to ban bump stocks, doesn’t that mean Congress needs to pass a law to outlaw them? In a true Constitutional Republic, yes it does. (In our case, it would require an amendment, but that is another discussion.) Frankly, I do not see Congress getting any bill out of committee and up for a vote.

  22. avatar Johannes Paulsen says:

    Who’s the guy in the picture w/glasses & Jerry Garcia necktie?

  23. avatar TC says:

    Overall pretty well put…compromising our rights never turns out well. I do take exception to the authors use of the term “2nd Amendment Rights.” The 2nd Amendment granted no rights, in fact no rights are “granted” in the Constitution at all. Remember these words “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights…That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men…” The Constitution formed a limited Federal Government which was to protect our rights.

    Gun control is not an enumerated power delegated to the federal government. Our federal Constitution doesn’t delegate to the federal government any power over the Country at Large 2 to restrict our arms. Accordingly, all pretended federal laws, regulations, orders, opinions, or treaties which purport to do so are unconstitutional as outside the scope of powers delegated. They are also unconstitutional as in violation of the Second Amendment.

    As far as the NRA, they have a long history of supporting Gun Control and compromising the very rights they claim to champion. http://jpfo.org/articles-assd02/nra-supported-nfa34.htm


    1. avatar Johannes Paulsen says:

      Aside: Congress has the delegated power from article 1 sec. 8. to “provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress….”

  24. avatar Detroiter says:

    Here’s a thought:

    What if the NRA is thinking they could trade bump fire sticks for either the HPA, and/or national reciprocity?

    I’m not saying they would have a chance at actually pulling it off. But if they could, Would you take the trade?

    1. avatar TrueBornSonofLiberty says:

      Without hesitation. Do not pass go…..

  25. avatar The Man Who Stares at Goats says:

    Great article Luis! Well-put and expertly argued. I couldn’t agree more.

  26. avatar JD says:

    Don’t think they have no authority to regulate these out of existence because the law states what a machine gun is. The law also states what is armor piercing ammo is as well. Specifically it states larger than 22 caliber. The steel core 5.45×39 is less than 22 caliber and not armor piercing anymore than green tips is. However was it law or ATF regs that banned it from import?

  27. avatar John says:

    Come on man this is classic divide and conquer.

  28. avatar Doug Burton says:

    First, I’m getting really tired of articles written by someone in Law Enforcement being treated like they are channeling the words of God himself. Being an LEO means you at least understand guns so you get a seat at the table. Beyond that, you’re just another person with an informed opinion.

    Second, anyone who thinks that any form of compromise on guns is unforgivable should consider packing up and leaving for their SHTF cabin today because you’re ill-equipped to coexist with the rest of the human race. We all have to share the planet and be respectful of other people’s point of view. Negotiation and compromise is a daily part of our lives. To suggest otherwise is to suggest that it’s perfectly ok to get into a crowded elevator and fart simply because you don’t mind your own smell.

    Third, as gun owners we all know that bump stocks are toys with no practical application in serious shooting. Sure, it’s fun to empty a mag really quickly and feel like we’re firing an automatic. But if we go to the mat on protecting such a trivial device, we lose any sense of credibility on the larger issues. Pick your battles.

    1. avatar Raoul Duke says:

      And you don’t seem to understand the opposition at all.

      THEY WILL NOT COMPROMISE. They are not moral, rational people operating in good faith.

      Why can’t the lot of you Fudd’s get it the anti’s want all of your guns. We have been giving up rights since ’34. If you think giving them these stocks with nothing in return is a winning strategy then you are by definition insane. Us keeping a little bit of what we have left IS NOT COMPROMISE!! That is what the opposition means when they want compromise. We give them what they want while we get nothing.

      People like you only embolden them to demand more which is what they get when you try to rationalize giving away more of our rights the next time the clarion call is sounded to ban the next type of gun on the road to disarmament.

      To put it simply, stop bending over and being a coward before we even fight!!

      1. avatar Doug Burton says:

        “Keeping a little bit of what we have left..” I’m at a loss to understand what exactly you think is so important about a toy that lets you pretend you have a fully automatic firearm? Don’t you see how childish that makes you look? Fight the battles that matter man! How do you expect anyone to take you – or your arguments – seriously when you want to go all-in on something that doesn’t even matter? There’s a time and a place to hold the line and get in people’s face. This is not it.

      2. avatar Ad Astra says:

        You seem to confuse someone wanting to start a discussion about something with a final offer and not grasp that there is a phase in between those. Once you’re down from your keyboard warrior mode and wiped the spittle off your monitor come back and try to have a rational discussion.

        1. avatar TrueBornSonofLiberty says:

          THeres nothing to discuss. My rights are not negotiable. You don’t negotiate with domestic terrorists. You kill them if they pass tyrannical legislation.

  29. avatar Boba Fett says:

    I have an idea: All the ATF has to do is publish an open letter stating that shouldering a bump fire stock redesigns it into a machine gun, and thus, subject to NFA controls. Boom. Problem solved.

    Obviously I’m kidding, but also, kinda sorta not really. On one hand, it would be a “strong” message to bump fire users that the ATF could then pretend to enforce, but on the other hand, it would be yet another redesign of the word “redesign,” which is some bullshit we don’t need any more of.

  30. avatar Hugo says:

    Hopefully, Bannon can help replace some of the neutered Republicans in Congress.

  31. avatar Accur81 says:

    Nice to meet another LEO who is a 2nd Amendment absolutist. Or nearasdamnit.

  32. avatar T says:

    Not sure why so many do not remember the NRA compromising in the instant back ground check in the Brady Bill? The NRA lost my support in 1994 for this atrocity that is costing million of Law Abiding Citizens their Rights today, including thousands of veterans who lost due process based on the Feds opinion on PTSD.

    Remember staunch pro-gunners like Rep. Jack Fields of Texas appearing on the television program “48 Hours” because they were lobbying their colleagues for the so-called “instant check?” These pro-gunners were pushing a gun control bill that the NRA was strongly supporting. The instant check was touted as an alternative to a waiting period in Virginia in 1989. https://www.gunowners.org/nws9402.htm

  33. avatar Richard Cutie says:

    I give money to the NRA for one purpose and that’s to protect my 2ndAmendment rights PERIOD. any compromise on thier part is unacceptable PERIOD. more people were killed with a truck in nice when a madman goes crazy. 4 times as many people were killed in Oklahoma by a madman with a truck. How many people can spend a 100,00$ to carry out such sickness and evil. Bump stocks are not the problem and guns are not the problem. And this is nothing new. A man in the 60s in the tower at Texas university. A (black) man on top of the Howard Johnson hotel in the early 70s in New Orleans both shot and killed many people for what nothing but to be noticed and famous. This is a test for the NRA if they fail they will not get another cent from this member

    1. avatar 1stfreedom says:

      Perhaps we should be grateful that Paddock, an accomplished pilot, didn’t fly a private plane to Las Vegas and just pancake it into the concert audience! Would “they” then ban aircraft? Of course they would – – they’re the yellowstream political and media elites.

  34. avatar oldshooter says:

    Join the GOA (Gun Owners of America) they NEVER compromise!

    I’ve been a life member of the NRA since 1959 and I can assure you, they have often done this sort of compromise thing in the past. They seem to feel that, if it looks like something is going to be supported by a bipartisan congressional vote, or seems to have popular support among the public, then they should go along with it too, in order to appear willing to compromise, and show themselves to be a “reasonable” group. This misses the whole point, and the left will continue to excoriate the NRA as they always have, no matter what position the NRA takes on any sort of gun rights issue. Have we NRA members been “sold down the river” again – yep, you bet we have! And further, I’m willing to bet it wont’ be the last time, either.

  35. avatar retrocon says:

    Look folks, i can pretty much guarantee that bump stocks are going to be illegal soon. Even if Trump were to oppose, the fact that full-autos have been regulated for so long, and this makes an AR “like” a full-auto, means enough republicans will vote to over ride his veto.

    I don’t like it. I don’t even think that the NFA has been properly tested in SCOTUS (Miller was the closest, but that was a default judgement, and the ruling suggested that if a SBS has been shown to be a “conducive to a well regulated militia” which means, “military-like,” Miller would have won. But, Miller didn’t show up.

    Full-auto fit the criteria for “not be infringed” in the Second Amendment

    Now, that said, this ban will happen, it cannot be by the ATF, since the NFA is about “one round fired per pull of the trigger.” So congress will step in.

    Since it will happen, i would like to see the “bump-fire bill” have the HPA or National Reciprocity bolted on.

    This way, if it loses, next election cycle, conservatives can point at liberals running for office and say “He/she voted AGAINST banning bump-filre stocks after Vegas.”

    If it passes, Republicans can say “we voted for Reciprocity and HPA.”


    Besides, i can do with a rubber-band what you are paying 300 bucks to do with a slidefire stock.

    1. avatar Jim Macklin says:

      SCOTUS has never issued a decision on the MILLER case. MILLER was remanded for trial because there was no trial transcript or evidence for the Court to study. The trial didn’t happen because Miller died. Who and why he died is anybody’s guess. [ conspiracy theorists might ask if the government killed him to avoid te trial]
      SCOTUS remanded but failed to issue a restraining order and ATF and DOJ have just beemn pretending that teh 1934 NFA is constitutional for nearly 80 years.
      The only thing te 1939 MILLER Court was sure of was that military rifles were protected by the Second Amendment.
      They said,https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/307/174/case.html
      “The signification attributed to the term Militia appears from the debates in the Convention, the history and legislation of Colonies and States, and the writings of approved commentators. These show plainly enough that the Militia comprised all males physically capable of acting in concert for the common defense. “A body of citizens enrolled for military discipline.” And further, that ordinarily, when called for service these men were expected to appear bearing arms supplied by themselves and of the kind in common use at the time.”
      That describes the AR exactly and that is why schumer, pelosi and finestien et al are so adamant that they want to legislate them out of private possession.

    2. avatar oldshooter says:

      Now THAT’s an interesting idea for a bill!

  36. avatar Jim Macklin says:

    I remember the first interview Charlton Heston made after he was elected NRA President. He was dismissive of “black rifles” and spoke well of $20,000 custom guns and OU sporting guns. He was soon educated and became a staunch supporter of the unfettered Second Amendment.
    I would have been happier had he held up an AR rather than a nice modern flintlock.
    Still, they say politics is like watching sausage being made. It can look and smell bad.
    ATF :looks” at everything so suggesting ATF look at SlideFire stocks is a PR diversion. Congress doesn’t wait for ATF to act.
    Congressional Democrats always have their pet anti-gun legislative package in waiting for the next atrocity.[ Some people might even suggest that some faction actually kills people to create the opportunity.]
    It is even possible that the anti-NRA outrage of people claiming that they will drop their membership might even be a bloomberg operation.
    Divide and conquer and never let a crisis go to waste are the left’s M.O. and blaming what you do on someone else is easy. It helps when the MSM is on your side.
    So don’t condemn the NRA. Join and let them know you’re worried. Also be sure to call and write your Congress people and the MSM so they know you’re not happy.

    1. avatar oldshooter says:

      You may remember that the reason Charlton Heston held up a flintlock, was simply that it was what had just been presented to him – he probably said his now famous line out of sheer speechlessness, when he was caught off guard and very emotional.

  37. avatar JoshinTX says:

    My wife and I had a long conversation on this topic; I thought her suggestion was brilliant. Allow that bump stocks are a technical workaround for a stupid law (1986 closing of the mg registry, or more broadly the NFA). Here is the proposed compromise, reopen the mg registry and require bump stocks to be installed on form 1 making a machine gun, remove suppressors, SBR and SBS from NFA requirements to ease the burden on the atf agents processing the huge influx of bump fire stock registrations. Should help ease things up a bit. Dems get their scary machine gun registration, POTG get sensible access to suppressors and smaller rifles and shotguns, and an open registry to enter new machine guns. Compromise means both sides give a little and both sides get a little, not compromise with me by giving me everything that I want in return for nothing.

  38. avatar Mark Kelly's Diapered Drooling Ventriloquist's Dummy says:

    The Rat’s Rat Ohio Gov. John Cucky Cat$hit, thank GOD we dodged THAT bullet last year just think of where we would be right now if he was president..

  39. avatar GaAbstractor says:

    I understand the reasoning of not going to the mat to protect bump-fire stocks and picking our battles carefully. However, I have liberal friends who have made their viewpoints quite clear that they will not compromise and that their goal is ultimately a total gun ban. Just reference Killery’s remarks concerning “silencers” after the Vegas shooting to understand how the gun grabbers whip their followers into a frenzy by using dis-information concerning guns. The low-information liberals/progressives in this country have been taught to hate the NRA and blame them for everything from ANY gun related death to global warming. Thinking Congress won’t pass some stupid legislation that further infringes on gun owner’s rights and thinking Trump won’t sign it into law is risky at best and dangerous at worst since any success on the gun grabbers part will further embolden them and motivate their followers into thinking they are “winning”. They are already using Vegas as a ploy to sign up more liberal voters (probably even dead ones). They also understand the real battle will be won at the ballet box and are pouring their funding in that direction. Gun owners need to do everything they can to elect pro-gun legislators. The liberal/progressives took over our education systems years ago and are now using it to brainwash our children to be anti-gun with their zero-tolerance of anything that appears to even resemble a gun (including Poptarts and nerf guns). All that being said, we cannot afford to give an inch. They certainly won’t.

  40. avatar Russ H. says:

    A lot of you don’t seem to get it. There WILL BE a sacrificial lamb over Las Vegas, the only question is what? So far, the NRA has guided the diatribe to the bumpfire stock and has suggested the ATF do something (again). If we can survive the coming anti-gun feeding frenzy with just getting bumpfire stocks reclassified as a controlled item we will be lucky. If congress gets involved with creating new legislation or altering the NFA we are going to face a very frightening reality of losing MANY items and weapons (“assault rifles”, high capacity magazines, purchasing ammo in bulk, etc). Congressional members will of course exempt themselves from any changes, as usual. I suspect the NRA isn’t pointing the finger at the ATF (who allowed bumpfire stocks) to try and preserve the “friendlier” relationship that has been created when Trump was elected. Don’t kid yourselves: Bumpfire stocks will go away along with owning one. Be grateful if that is all we lose.

  41. avatar Chris T in KY says:

    I’m up set with TTAG commenters who were ready to throw bump stocks under the bus even before the NRA said anything.

    1. avatar Doug says:

      I ask again: WTF do you care about a bump stock? Do you even own one? If you did, what practical use would you put it to? Why do you insist on trivializing the gun movement by fighting over something so meaningless?

  42. avatar Clifford Allen Mechels says:

    It sounds like a lot of commenters here advocating “compromise” with nothing guaranteed in return, are perhaps liberal wolves wanting an easy victory to fire up their troops for further progress toward disarming enough people to enable their dictatorship.

    Pelosi has already stated they are hoping for the ban to start the “slippery slope”. They have no intention of any real compromise and you are fools to think its possible.

  43. avatar Naturalist says:

    The NRA lost my trust during their compromise on the Cop Killer Bullet Ban aka Armor Piercing Bullet Ban. I let my membership expire and never looked back. I did join GOA, SAG and CCRKBA as a Life Member. Unortunately it looks like Gottlieb may be cowering as well.

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