CORRECTION: New Bump Fire Stock Regulation Not Published Yet in Federal Register or Final

bump fire stocks machine guns machineguns

We received the link to the proposed new rule that would regulate bump fire stocks from someone with intimate knowledge of the process earlier today. You can read that rule here. However, we have since been informed that the ATF has not yet published that rule in the federal register. As such it has not yet officially become law.

While there is every likelihood that this will, in fact, be their final determination, we were premature in announcing that the ATF and DoJ have changed their determination. We apologize for that error.

* * * * * * * *

“The Department of Justice is issuing a rulemaking that would interpret the statutory definition of machine gun in the National Firearms Act of 1934 and Gun Control Act of 1968 to clarify whether certain devices, commonly known as bump-fire stocks, fall within that definition.”

That’s the intro (or “abstract”) to the DoJ’s newly issued public rule following their re-examination of the classification of bump fire stocks. This, of course, was done after last year’s Las Vegas Mandalay Bay shooting in which 58 people were killed and hundreds more were injured. That was the only crime in which a bump fire stock had ever been used.

The ATF had issued an approval letter to SlideFire for their bump fire stock back in 2010 that read, in part:

“The stock has no automatically functioning mechanical parts or springs and performs no automatic mechanical function when installed. … Accordingly, we find that the ‘bump-stock’ is a firearm part and is not regulated as a firearm under Gun Control Act or the National Firearms Act.”

That was, of course, the correct ruling under the law as written.

In February, however, President Trump directed Justice to take another look at them, a move that was supported at the time by the NRA. He apparently wanted the ATF to look deeply into the emanations and penumbras of the law to see if, just maybe, there was a way to look at bump fire stocks in a whole new way.

Well, take another look they have, and — to the surprise of no one — now that we’re past the midterms, the DoJ has now classified bump fire stocks as NFA-regulated items, the legal equivalent of a machine gun.

This rule is intended to clarify that the statutory definition of machinegun includes certain devices (i.e., bump-stock-type devices) that, when affixed to a firearm, allow that firearm to fire automatically with a single function of the trigger, such that they are subject to regulation under the National Firearms Act (NFA) and the Gun Control Act (GCA). The rule will amend 27 CFR 447.11, 478.11, and 479.11 to clarify that bump-stock-type devices are machineguns as defined by the NFA and GCA because such devices allow a shooter of a semiautomatic firearm to initiate a continuous firing cycle with a single pull of the trigger. Specifically, these devices convert an otherwise semiautomatic firearm into a machinegun by functioning as a self-acting or self-regulating mechanism that harnesses the recoil energy of the semiautomatic firearm in a manner that allows the trigger to reset and continue firing without additional physical manipulation of the trigger by the shooter.

You can read the full rule here.

There’s only one problem. As stated above,

…such devices allow a shooter of a semiautomatic firearm to initiate a continuous firing cycle with a single pull of the trigger.

That’s demonstrably false. As anyone who’s used one can tell you, a bump fire stock slides back and forth, allowing the shooter to pull the trigger faster. But the rifle still fires only one round per trigger pull. It may simulate rapid fire approximating what a fully automatic weapon does, but it’s still semi-automatic.

That, of course, was the basis for the ATF’s original approval eight years ago. But the law and the facts apparently aren’t in play when there are larger, political considerations.

From the rule’s costs and benefits section:

This rule provides significant non-quantifiable benefits to public safety.  Among other things, it clarifies that a bump-stock-type device is a machinegun and limits access to them; prevents usage of bump-stock-type devices for criminal purposes; reduces casualties in mass shootings, such as the Las Vegas shooting; and helps protect first responders by preventing shooters from using a device that allows them to shoot a semiautomatic firearm automatically.

Just how the DoJ plans to handle the millions of unregistered bump fire stocks that are already owned by the public isn’t clear.

So far, there’s no word from the administration as to when they intend to begin the notice and comment process on the proposed reclassification of rubber bands as machine guns, but we’ll keep you informed.

comments

  1. So what do they call my Levis belt loop?

    1. avatar MouseGun says:

      Class III assault garments

    2. avatar John Deere says:

      “millions of unregistered bump fire stocks”

      Where did this number come from Dan? Or is it just a wild guess.

    3. avatar L says:

      Levis? Tsk.

      1. Outgrew my Sergio Valentes

    4. avatar million says:

      unless you have the tax stamp you better take them off just to be on the right side of the law.

      1. How about I keep my pants on since I didn’t even have to use the belt loop.
        https://youtu.be/iWFOWl8wKb4

      2. avatar Defens says:

        Probably a fine point of the law, but if they classify bump stocks as NFA items, will it be the stock itself that’s registered (like an M-16 auto sear) or the gun to which it’s attached, meaning the entire assembly.

        Which falls afoul of the Hughes Amendment, which closed the registry to newly manufactured machine guns, meaning they either have to reopen it to fairly allow people with bump stocks to register them during some grace period OR they just declare them unregisterable contraband, turning “millions” of such stock owners into instant felons if they keep them, or create an illegal government taking by forcing those owners to turn them in or destroy them without compensation.

        This will be a total can of worms, no matter how it moves forward. Sure glad I don’t own any bumpstocks. My milling machine and 80% AR lowers will remain safe from .gov meddling, at least.

        1. avatar Dwo777 says:

          The “rule” will make ALL bumpstocks post 1986 machineguns, so all are illegal. No appeal, no refund. Tough shit folks.

          Of course how a Federal appeals court covers their “interpretation” of the rule is a different thing. The BATF participated in the law change that specifically changed the definition as “More than one shot per pull of the trigger” to cover DIASes, Lighting Links, and other sear or conversion devices or kits.

          Of course idiots will file lawsuits, which will be judged under civil law standards, “Preponderance of the Evidence” and create precedence. This has to be appealed on a criminal charges, not some half baked “lawsuit”.

          Criminal charges are judged on much higher standard, especially in the civil rights or standards of proof or interpretation of a law.

        2. avatar Big E says:

          To DWO777- challenging an obvious Federal over-reach doesn’t make one an “idiot”.
          Do YOU want to be charged with a crime in order to be the test case plaintiff? No? Then maybe you should shut-up.

    5. avatar JDA says:

      when they outlaw belt loops, only the outlaws will have belt loops!!

  2. avatar fiundagner says:

    When does this rule take effect? Where Do We join the class action lawsuit? And I do believe that this reinterpretation of the rule may have just broken the NFA, the 1968 GCA and the Hughes Amendment.

    1. avatar Rincoln says:

      Add another to that lawsuit. Where do I sign up / contribute.

      Overstepping constitutional authority should be slapped back, every time. Congress makes laws. They pass because of the way they are written and agreed. There is no such (lawful) thing as “interpretation,” or “rulemaking.” The laws ARE the rules, and only congress gets to make them.

      1. avatar jeep1967 says:

        I have been saying this for a long time. Any federal laws or regulations created by any organization other than Congress, are null and void.
        Article I (Article 1 – Legislative)
        Section 1
        All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.

        Congress is the only body granted the powers of legislation, and I don’t believe they were granted the authority to delegate or grant the powers of legislation to anyone else.

        All three branches of the federal government have been exceeding the powers granted them by the Constitution. Most of the “departments” and “administrations” are illegal organizations that have been incorrectly granted the power to make laws and regulations. They also have usurped powers that should be the domain of the States.

        1. Agreed. The Executive Branch has zero Constitutuonal authority to make laws (even if they are disguised as rules.) Executive orders can be made that apply only to government agencies or employees, but that’s it.

    2. avatar Anymouse says:

      Rule takes effect 12/00/2018.

    3. avatar Marc Adams says:

      Looks like this was proposed originally December 26, 2017 (https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2017-12-26/pdf/2017-27898.pdf#page=1), then again on March 29, 2018 ( https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2018-03-29/pdf/2018-06292.pdf#page=1 ). Comment period ended June 27, 2018. When the Final Rule is published and if no changes are made. “current possessors of these devices would be required to surrender them, destroy them, or otherwise render them permanently inoperable”.

  3. avatar HP says:

    Seems they’ve contradicted themselves with this. A good lawsuit could defeat this, but we are living in a country where the rule of law is increasingly breaking down, so anything could happen.

    The comments on this one are going to get messy.

    1. avatar Anymouse says:

      This is a final rule, so no comments. The final action date is 12/00/2018, whatever that means.

      1. avatar Merp says:

        Geez, even that non-date could probably be challenged in court and get this dropped like the hot piece of poo that it is.

      2. avatar GunnyGene says:

        It means sometime before the end of Dec is all. Standard policy if there is no legally required deadline for publication, and in this case there isn’t.

    2. avatar arc says:

      Government doesn’t respect the COTUS or the rule of law, why should we lowly peasants respect it? Unjust and unconstitutional non-laws aren’t laws at all and Americans have the duty to disobey. With all the double standards, carve out clauses, and powers being above the law, do we have law or just the illusion of it?

      Once again, someone else in a far distant land is making up new “rules” without the consent or input of the people they are trying to apply their rules to. Its not a constitutional act of congress, therefore its not a “law” anyone has any moral duty to recognize. No victim, no crime. Law applies equally to all or it applies to none. I could go on and on.

      There is no rule of law anymore in the Untied States, only the rule of force. Opinions that bloom from the barrel of a gun. As long as the people remain armed, they get an opinion.

      1. avatar UsedToBePun says:

        You are, of course, correct.

        But as many on here have stated, most “people of the gun” are not going to be bothered by actually doing anything about it. What with having jobs and families and such. Easier to just watch the swat teams roll up on their neighbors’ house at zero dark thirty and no knock them into oblivion and be thankful it wasn’t them…this time anyway.

        One day they’ll wake up and their “job” will now be at the local prison or detention center and their family will be right there with them. So…win/win???

        We like to wear cool shirts and spout slogans but really, most Americans are not on board with that whole “give me liberty or give me death” thing. Secretly they’re much more comfortable wearing velvet chains.

        1. avatar HP says:

          While a good portion of the Molon Labe crowd is going to wind up looking more like “come and try to find where I’ve hidden it”, it would only take a small percentage of America to opt to not go quietly and the authorities would have a huge mess on their hands. I think you might find yourself surprised should a literal door to door action ever be taken by the government with how people react. There’s a reason they didn’t go in with overwhelming force when the Bundy’s were doing their thing out in Oregon, and it wasn’t because the government has become kinder and gentler since Waco and Ruby Ridge. Make people pissed and desperate enough and strange things start to happen.

    3. 1st someone’s going to have to find a “non-Kangaroo” .GOV court room. NOT operated by a “DemoCommie appointed, Marxist Activist, Judge…”

      And Secondly, I DON’T believe anything was ever remotely “made clear, or cleared up” regarding the Las Vegas Shooting incident! If anything is as shadowy as Area 51 in THEIR state. Then the Las Vegas Shooting incident is it…Of course, its rather convenient that such an event occurred to “allow for this type of gun control And .GOV intervention into the Bill of Rights…”

  4. avatar Warlocc says:

    Did they just make millions of people into felons?

    1. avatar fiundagner says:

      Yes they did just make millions of people felons. That’s a feature not a bug in the eyes of the government and the ATF specifically

      1. avatar DJ says:

        Just wait until anything semi-auto is class III.

        1. avatar Nigel the expat says:

          Coming soon to a former constitutional republic near you…

    2. avatar New Continental Army says:

      This is quite disturbing on so many levels. The ATF originally declares it legal (from what authority god only knows), then 10 years legal suddenly rules it illegal, turning millions into felons over night, WITHOUT any ruling from an elected legislature. This is true blue sheer tyranny. A single individual or small group has officially ruled by fiat, without any congressional authority. This is some seriously scary shit.

      1. avatar Defens says:

        It’s also an ex post factor rule and clearly illegal.

        1. avatar Isaac says:

          Ex post facto does not mean what you think it does. Declaring something previously legal illegal is not against ex post facto. It just means that you can’t punish somebody for doing something when it was legal after it becomes illegal.

          An example would be: I cannot be punished for owning a bump fire stock now after (if) it becomes illegal. I can still be punished for owning the same bump fire stock afterwards though.

    3. avatar barnbwt says:

      “They” being the guy who was elected president to end the assault on gun rights and the organization dedicated to the same. Yeah.

  5. avatar L says:

    I can bumpfire my rifle without any assistance just by holding it a certain way, so is every semi-auto rifle now a machinegun? Fucking ridiculous.

    1. avatar Rincoln says:

      That is, in effect, exactly what they’ve done.

      1. And that is a good thing.
        I want this shit to happen in my lifetime rather than two generations from now when the people have no means or desire to fight properly.
        Push fast forward so we can get to the chase.
        Everybody go out right now and bump fire your semi auto then send the video to CNN.
        Let’s fight on our terms in our lifetime.

      2. avatar CZ Rider says:

        Didn’t the ATF specifically point out that bump fire with an ordinary rifle isn’t affected? Not that it makes the ruling any less of an abomination against objective fact and the rule of law, but I think they didn’t go that far off the deep end at least.

        1. avatar arc says:

          We still have the rule of law? I figured it was just gangs and organizations all trying to force their made up opinions and rules on other people.

        2. avatar barnbwt says:

          They did not offer any argument for why it was exempted, only that it was exempted at this time. The exact ‘arguments’ they made to ban bump stocks (which basically boil down to “they shoot too fast”) apply equally to all disconnector-based semi-auto designs, and even manual repeating actions. Australian model gun control.

    2. avatar little horn says:

      no because you don’t own a “device” that does it for you. THAT is what they made an NFA item. so what? pay your $200 bucks and get it if you want it so bad.

      1. avatar Excedrine says:

        Except that this “device” actually doesn’t do it for you, and if you had used one yourself or at least seen someone use one, you’d know that. THAT is why it’s not an NFA item regardless of whoever says it is, period. THAT is the end of this whole discussion, too. Don’t bother, you’re wrong.

      2. avatar James says:

        Non-SOT manufacturers cannot make a machinegun. There will be no opening up the registry or paying $200 to stamp the bump stock. There is no grandfathering of these useless items. As of right now, they will not even pay you form them…get caught with it and it’s up to a 10yr sentence.

    3. avatar RA-15 says:

      Exactly L , it ain’t rocket science 🙂

      1. avatar LarryinTX says:

        Pretty sure, if you can fire full-auto with one hand, it’s a machine gun. Otherwise, no. Bumpfire takes two hands, one pulling and one pushing. Did I get that right?

        1. avatar Michael says:

          Only if you have your hands registered as class III.

        2. avatar Binder says:

          No, there was a version that was mounted on a tripod that only require one hand to fire. EXACT same firing mechanism, but even slide fire knew that they were just pushing the idea too far and may make the AFT rethink the whole thing.

          Its was deigned for “disabled” individuals who wanted to “bum fire”

        3. avatar barnbwt says:

          Let’s go back to basics and stop paying attention to all the crap the ATF has “bump fired” from the usual place over the past couple decades. The law says one shot per trigger action. It says nothing about rapid fire. Period, full stop.

          The reason even playing this game, 4D chess or no, is because the courts simply will not rule in our favor. Scalia was the most pro-gun justice we have had in probably a century at least, and I don’t know if he ever fired an AR15 in his life. He was a total Fudd, even if he wasn’t antagonistic about it. The courts are simply the wrong tool for this job; they will defer to the government’s expert witnesses –the ATF– every. single. time.

  6. avatar former water walker says:

    Oh well…will they ban videos of dudes with rubber bands?

    1. avatar million says:

      if modern jurisprudence has taught me anything, it’s that rampant illegality exists at the intersection of “shall not be infringed” and “shall make no law”.

    2. avatar Denver says:

      Without question

    3. avatar Binder says:

      Rubber ban was 9 mm, lets see how effective it is with 5.56 and a bi-pod. So just how hard does 9 mm hit at 500 yards anyway.

      But that video gives anyone who want’s to ban ALL semi autos a nice taking point, so thanks.

  7. avatar GS650G says:

    I wonder if a light trigger that can be bumped easily will now be considered a machine gun which turns a semi automatic into a fully automatic when installed.

    1. avatar Rincoln says:

      Fully-semi-automatic

    2. avatar HP says:

      Though the wording of this particular rule seems explicitly aimed at bump stocks, if they can reclassify those into a NFA item then presumably anything can be made a NFA item. Laws be damned.

      1. avatar Baldwin says:

        Rules, laws? Same thing. Elected lawmakers, un-elected lawmakers? Same thing. Agenda driven infringement, tyranny? SAME THING!

        1. avatar arc says:

          Law is legislation that follows the supreme constitutional law in this land, passed the house and senate, and was signed into law by the President of the United States… The ATF ‘rules’ are administrative fiat and nothing more than a gang banger trying to tell you that his rules apply to you when you never consented to them nor had any input in their creation.

          We have the rule of force now, not the rule of law.

      2. avatar barnbwt says:

        They explicitly *mention* bump stocks; the actual description of mechanical operation is extremely vague and applies more to binary triggers, as I read it. The description of bump fire isn’t even accurate for how a bump stock works, yet it will ban their use (so this is going to be rife with abuse if it isn’t struck down immediately)

    3. avatar Tom of Toms says:

      GS650… Shut. The. F*ck. Up.

      1. Shutting up is only a delay so you won’t have to fight the inevitable.
        Maybe your great grandchildren will fight?

        1. avatar CZ Rider says:

          No, they’ll be caught in the “it’s always been this way” trap. But who cares? He’ll be dead by then anyway and higher principles are for suckers!

        2. avatar Tom of Toms says:

          At the rate we’re going, my great grandchildren will either not know what guns are or guns will be as common as unexploded ordnance in the streets.

          Truly, I just hate giving antis ideas. It isn’t enlightening to them. “Yeah, ban that too” is all we’ll ever get back. A fight would be easier to palate than just watching them disappear shit they don’t understand.

          But I get you, man.

        3. avatar GluteusMaximus says:

          Something is coming and i think in our lifetimes

      2. avatar GS650G says:

        Like that idea isn’t in the pipeline………

  8. avatar TheUnspoken says:

    This is the final ruling from the earlier ATF rulemaking, or this is a separate one off from department of Justice?

    1. avatar CZ Rider says:

      Final ruling, conveniently issued after the midterms to not depress turnout. It’s cool now though, the rubes will all forget or decide that bump stocks are a silly fad that nobody will miss anyway and pull the lever in 2020. 4d chess is best chess

  9. avatar Dev says:

    First, can the DoJ even change ATF rules? Second, media people are going to completely skip over this part:

    Anticipated Costs and Benefits:

    The rule will be “economically significant,” that is, the rule will have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million, or adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the economy, the environment, public health or safety or State, local or tribal governments or communities. ATF estimates the total cost of this rule at $320.9 million over 10 years. The total 7% discount cost is estimated at $234.1 million, and the discounted costs would be $39.6 million and $39.2 million annualized at 3% and 7% respectively. The estimate includes costs to the public for loss of property ($102,470,977); costs of forgone future production and sales ($213,031,753); and costs for disposal ($5,448,330). Unquantified costs include lost employment, notification to bump-stock-type device owners of the need to destroy the bump-stock-type devices, and loss of future usage by the owners of bump-stock-type devices. ATF did not calculate any cost savings for this final rule. It is anticipated that the rule will cost $129,222,483 million in the first year (the year with the highest costs). This cost includes the first-year cost to destroy or modify all existing bump-stock-type devices, including unsellable inventory and opportunity cost of time.

  10. avatar Rick the Bear says:

    “…significant non-quantifiable…”

    If you can’t measure it, how do you know it’s significant???

    My Dad would have said, “You’ll go blind from that.”

    1. avatar Old Guy in Montana says:

      +1!

      My thoughts exactly when I read that phrase.

    2. avatar No one of consequence says:

      What OGM said.

      Talk about not passing the giggle test…

  11. avatar Stateisevil says:

    One step closer Serge! Let’s hear the excuses.

    PS. What other accessories will be machine guns?

    1. avatar pwrserge says:

      Like I said, I’ll wait for the numerous injunctions and court cases. No way this passes the legal hurdles.

      1. avatar Shawn says:

        Of course it will. It may go to court and when it does the court will uphold what the DOJ ruled. When appealed to the supreme court they won’t hear it. Just like literally every court case that involves guns going back all the way to McDonald. Just like when they make all semi automatic everything totally illegal to own punishable by execution without trial.

        1. avatar pwrserge says:

          Obvious troll is obvious.

        2. avatar TomC says:

          You are at least partially correct.

          It is essentially black letter law that the courts defer to regulatory agencies on technical matters. Thus because the “experts” at BATFE say that a bump stock meets the legal definition of a machine gun, that is a technical decision and the courts generally will not re-examine that decision. Challenges based on the fact that the technical decision is obviously not true will fail unless someone finds a very pro-2A activist judge.

          The courts are much more willing to hear procedural challenges consisting of claims that the regulatory agency failed to dot all their i’s and cross all their t’s properly. There are certainly grounds for such a challenge, including the agency’s complete disregard for the public comments and the facetious “cost benefits analysis” claiming imaginary social benefits.

          I don’t think it is completely impossible that the case might be heard at SCOTUS, but the only real chance of getting it heard is if we can get an en banc ruling in our favor from at least one of the Circuit courts. Even that will be tough — and expensive.

          But who is going to fight this long and expensive battle? Certainly not the NRA! Remember that it was the NRA that first recommended banning bump stocks immediately following the Las Vegas shooting.

      2. avatar Rusty Chains says:

        Sergey, it depends on the court, the 9th would find for the ATF so fast the ink would barely be dry on the government response to the suit. Here in Georgia, the 11th circuit would likely find against the government.

        1. avatar pwrserge says:

          Which is the point of the exercise. This time, WE get to go venue shopping. Somehow I don’t see the red circuits upholding this little decision.

  12. avatar DavidB says:

    Anticipated Costs and Benefits:
    The rule will be “economically significant,” … The estimate includes costs to the public for loss of property ($102,470,977); costs of forgone future production and sales ($213,031,753); and costs for disposal ($5,448,330). Unquantified costs include lost employment, notification to bump-stock-type device owners of the need to destroy the bump-stock-type devices, and loss of future usage by the owners of bump-stock-type devices. ATF did not calculate any cost savings for this final rule. It is anticipated that the rule will cost $129,222,483 million in the first year (the year with the highest costs). This cost includes the first-year cost to destroy or modify all existing bump-stock-type devices, including unsellable inventory and opportunity cost of time.”

    That’s a LOT of cost to gun owners and businesses. I wonder how this holds up to Constitutional Scrutiny?

    Fifth Amendment:
    No person shall … be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

    1. avatar L says:

      Yes… if only our government followed the constitution…

  13. avatar jwm says:

    Well, that tears it. Clinton 2020.

    1. avatar New Continental Army says:

      She’ll still lose. A box of hot pig shit would beat her. But if she doesn’t run, Trump is officially doomed now. The gun vote will never forgive him for this, and rightfully so. So now we all beat better stockpile and prepare for another panic and enivitable bansin the early 2020s. Then hopefully in 2024 we can turn that back with Cruz or another true conservative.

    2. avatar jwtaylor says:

      Trump is clueless on the 2A. He depends entirely on the NRA to guide him. And at this point, continued support of the NRA is nothing more than Battered Wife Syndrome.

      1. avatar barnbwt says:

        I’m not convinced it wasn’t a joint effort. “Wayne, I’m doing this regulation whether you like it or not; you can publicly support me and make it look like your idea and your NRA has influence, or you can look helpless before all your donors and piss off my Republican Party by resisting. If we both support it, my apologist sycophants plus your sycophants will outnumber the thinking people who raise an objection, so neither of us will be hurt.”

        Though Hanlon’s Razor suggests that it was more likely Trump or LaPierre or both just shot their mouths off without thinking about the implications very hard. Trump’s been on board with ‘scary weapon’ bans in the not so distant past, the NRA has never supported NFA item or machine gun use.

  14. avatar Wood says:

    So a legal thing becomes illegal; ie a “taking”. No opportunity to register? That’s a problem too, aside from the blatant lawlessness of it. NRA better get on it at least on the basis of lawlessness. If Congress were to legislate a ban that would be one thing (still an infringement) but this is rulemaking using an outright, bald faced lie.

    1. avatar Screaming_Reels_556 says:

      The NRA wanted this. Why would they fight it?

      https://home.nra.org/joint-statement

      1. avatar J.T. says:

        Yep. Between this and making Ollie North president, the NRA lost me as a member. My money goes to GOA now.

        1. avatar SundryGunner says:

          Exactly. I’m done with the NRA and their Fudd leadership. Enough is enough.

        2. avatar barnbwt says:

          I mean, if I wanted to donate to the GOP, I’d just…donate to the GOP

  15. avatar johnny go lightly says:

    … cost $129,222,483 million….

    Hot Damn ! The writer of the rule must be one of those millenial brainiacs that took common core math courses….what a maroon….129 TRILLION DOLLARS….Gotta love it

    1. avatar LarryinTX says:

      Damn. I’m almost ashamed I missed that. Good catch!

  16. avatar Binder says:

    As anyone who’s used one can tell you, a bump fire stock slides back and forth, allowing the shooter to pull the trigger faster.

    You finger is not moving one bit when the gun is firing. The trigger function is no longer your “ trigger finger” instead it is the application of forward pressure with your weak hand. The FACT that you can replace your trigger finger with a zip tie removes any argument that your finger is anything more than a kludgy grip safety.

    No matter what semantics you want to argue, the slidefire uses recoil energy in the operation of the trigger. Specifically the reset.

    Now you can argue all you want about if that is enough to qualify a slide fire as a machine gun, but don’t deluded yourself into thinking it is your finger that is actively pulling the trigger.

    1. avatar That One Guy says:

      More accurately, your weak hand pulling the gun/trigger back into your finger/ziptie is “pulling the trigger”. Still a function of the operator. Still not a function of the gun.

      1. It is the rate of fire they are after. Not devices.
        Don’t fall for the trap.
        Abolish the NFA!
        Machine guns are constitutional!

        1. avatar LarryinTX says:

          And bans of any firearms, ammo, accessories, are all unconstitutional.

        2. avatar barnbwt says:

          Yup, the DOJ is attempting to limit the number of shots that may be fired per second, just like some dickhead RO at a restrictive gun range. All autoloading guns shoot too fast, and all repeating guns shoot too fast. These idiots think a gun should be *mechanically* limited to a handful of shots per minute, ie flintlocks.

  17. avatar John says:

    Wait till they find out I can bump fire my AK with no devices at all, does that make it full auto as well? Ridiculous. Who is going to sue over this one?

    1. avatar Joatmon says:

      I’m waiting to see. NRA, GOA, SAF?
      If none do, then we’re screwed for the future.

      1. avatar J.T. says:

        The NRA won’t, they wanted this. It’s one of the reasons I am no longer a member.

        1. avatar Joatmon says:

          I let my membership lapse. Persistent calls and emails asking for more money. I got tired of it.
          All I was doing was paying salaries and nothing was getting done.
          Big business and government go hand in hand.

    2. avatar Old Guy in Montana says:

      Short answer: Yes.

      How? Bite-by-bite, State-by-State…Washington State just placed ALL semi-automatic rifles (Marlin 60, Ruger 10-22, AK’s, AR’s, etc) into a highly restricted, regulated category requiring additional time and expense on the part of a purchaser to obtain and retain one.

      Most of firearm opposition in the U.S. is driven by a handful of billionaires funding the voting Initiatives (all the while maintaining their private security forces…they’re impotent ya knows). I foresee that self-loading shotguns will be next in Washington with the pièce de résistance being semi-auto handguns in a few years. Other Anti-2A States will follow WA’s lead with varying results…the radicalization of younger Socialist Democrat’s will only exacerbate firearm regulation.

      Voter Initiatives are a scary proposition in that they bypass State Legislative bodies…and we have just seen how easily the sheeple can be swayed by false and intentionally misleading advertisements and rhetoric.

  18. avatar Chris says:

    Does this mean machine guns are now in “common use”?

    1. avatar L says:

      You earned the comment of the day.

    2. avatar ACP_armed says:

      “Someone get Kavanaugh on the phone — NOW!”

    3. avatar barnbwt says:

      No. They are not being added to NFRTR, they are being declared contraband, and will not count toward any common use argument (even though both ‘criminal use’ and ‘law enforcement use’ both logically count toward something being common vs. uncommon the same as lawful registered use)

  19. avatar MojoRonin says:

    Expect a, erm, bump… in binary trigger sales. It’s still one bullet per trigger finger action, ATF, so kiss my grits.

    1. avatar TheUnspoken says:

      Just like assault weapon and weapon of war are thrown around terms to make scary looking to some guns seem extra bad and require regulation and/or bans, bump stock, especially being equivalent to illegal machine, seems to be the new jargon.

      So even while this federal rule seems to go after actual bump stocks, states like Florida think pretty much anything is a bump stock. Maybe. They aren’t sure so likely banned them all. When in doubt, ban it, it’s a bump stock, even if it isn’t a bump stock and doesn’t work like a bump stock.

    2. avatar barnbwt says:

      The rule change rather explicitly defines binaries as machine gun conversions, since they fire twice per “pull” of the trigger. That “action” of the trigger you refer to –which is from the actual law– is being changed by executive fiat to a completely different word, “pull,” so Trump can write out the bump stocks.

  20. avatar Carl Wilhelm says:

    Nothing touches the trigger but shooters finger and rifle fires only one round each time the shooters finger makes sufficient contact to pull the trigger. The original ATF letter is correct.

    The slide fire stock is fun to shoot. But results in inaccurate fire. It’s a fun toy.

    But never mind the facts.

    1. avatar Binder says:

      It’s not a toy, don’t fool yourself. Funny how you will NEVER see anything on TAG about the effective use of a slide fire, why is that.

      1. avatar Sian says:

        It’s a range toy because a high end trigger and training with it can approach the same fire rate while retaining full control and accuracy that is inevitably lost when allowing a rifle to bounce loosely in your grip as is necessary for bumpfire. As an additional bonus a good trigger gets you improved precision at all other times as well.

        It only takes a little practice, just like effective, militarily-viable use of a bumpfire stock requires practice.

  21. avatar DoubleD says:

    Binary triggers, anyone? I suspect their days are numbered as well then.

    1. Let’s go for all auto loaders.
      Bring it!

  22. avatar Andrew Lias says:

    Don’t own a bump fire stock, but the question on my mind is of course when we see the NFA go to the SC again. With the court the way it is now (much less if RBG croaks) we could see some interesting dynamics around Miller start popping up. If not Miller its self Chevron Deference and the ability of agencies to make rulings like this that aren’t explicitly law.

    1. avatar TomC says:

      OMG! Sounds like someone actually read U.S. v Miller — Congratulations!

      Ever since 2008 everyone wants to rely exclusively on D.C. v Heller and the “in common use” aspect severing the 2nd Amendment from “the militia.” People have accepted the notion that the decision in Miller wasn’t pro-gun without looking closely at it.

      Yes, SCOTUS ruled against Miller but it is time we started looking at WHY the court ruled against Miller. The decision against Miller was basically that his short barrel shotgun wasn’t military enough to be protected as useful to the militia. By the logic of the court in Miller, then clearly all the assorted “Assault Weapon” bans based on the idea that ARs and AKs are too military or are too much like ‘weapons of war’ would be invalid. Could there be any weapon that is more directly related to the militia than an AR?

      1. avatar Cory C. says:

        Add to that the fact that the court in Miller didn’t technically say that a SBS was not suitable for warfare/militia service, rather that they simply weren’t provided any judicial notice that it was. The reason they had no evidence suggesting that shotguns were used in war (trench guns, anyone?) is because Miller was actually dead at the time his case went before SCOTUS and his lawyer, who was handpicked by (drum roll please) the prosecutor who got Miller convicted, said the case wasn’t worth traveling to DC for. Consequently, NO ONE was there to represent Miller. It was the government vs. an empty chair.

        The point is, I agree with you that Miller can be read more favorably to gun owners in certain circumstances.

        Also, a state or two has declared the AR-15 their state’s designated rifle for militia service. Now that’s 3D chess. Haha.

        1. avatar barnbwt says:

          How that lack of evidence was sufficient basis for justifying the level of restriction ordered by the NFA was also an interesting judicial decision. Maybe one day we’ll get to pull the cover back on all the illegal influence & coercion the Roosevelt administration was obviously bringing to bear on so many of the questionable Depression Era court cases whose precedent has haunted us for a full century.

  23. avatar Jack says:

    Trump has never been a believing 2A supporter. It’s just a political convenience for him in that he needs our votes and voices (in fact the only thing he really believes in is stroking his own ego).

    Was he better than Hillary, sure. Is he really your ally, no. He should be treated as he treats us, a convenience to be discarded when the cost benefit turns negative.

    1. avatar HP says:

      The ace in the hole with Trump was always Donald Jr. The hope was that he could be a voice in his father’s ear for the 2A community.

      1. avatar barnbwt says:

        How’s that working out?

    2. avatar FreakinPeanuts says:

      Thats exactly why i think bill 7115 could pass. It will pass the House and i dont doubt there are quite a few weak kneed Republicans that will back it in the senate. Then all they have to do is get Trump to buy in on “ghost guns” or “3d printed gun” aspect and he will sign it.

  24. avatar Mad Max says:

    Three options:

    1 – Court rules that ATF/DOJ can’t change the definition of machine gun in the NFA and the propoosed change requires an act of Congress. Issue dead.

    2 – Court rules that the ATF must allow them to be registered under the NFA (a money maker for the ATF and a big expense to us).

    3 – Court rules that it is a “taking” and the ATF must buy them back (a cost to the ATF and taxpayers – possibly requiring an act of Congress to fund).

    1. avatar 300BlackoutFan says:

      (2) GCA (or NFA, I forget which) allows amnesty periods. However, this ruling declared no amnesty period is required (and in fact, they claim it doesn’t apply) because only the manufacturer can register a MG. This would also require a waiver of the Hughes Amendment

      1. avatar LarryinTX says:

        Was the “declaration that no amnesty period is required” authorized by a law passed by both houses and signed by a President?

    2. avatar barnbwt says:

      4 – Court rules the DOJ does have this authority, and that the MGs are contraband and therefore are not subject to compensation requirements, same as they have the last handful of times these arguments have been used. Because the ATF’s opinion matters more than yours, mine, the judge’s, or the statute. Because they are the experts enforcing the rules they also write, not us.

  25. avatar DoomGuy says:

    And y’all believe the senate and trump will stop hr 7115…

    1. avatar pwrserge says:

      Yeah… the chances of that even getting out of committee is exactly zero.

      1. avatar barnbwt says:

        Though more because of the many, many structural problems with the bill, not so much Trump’s willingness or unwillingness to sign it, or the guys in congress. We will probably have a vocally anti-gun wing in the GOP going forward by 2020, they no longer have anything to fear on this issue.

  26. avatar Marcus says:

    Kinda ironic since slide fire is now out of business and I’m sure criminals wont 3D print that or something…

  27. avatar 300BlackoutFan says:

    “Just how the DoJ plans to handle the millions of unregistered bump fire stocks that are already owned by the public isn’t clear.”

    Yes they did:
    “The Department has determined that there would not be a registration period for any device that would be classified as ‘‘machinegun’’ as a result of this rulemaking. The NFA provides that only the manufacturer, importer, or maker of a firearm may register it. Accordingly, there is no means by which the possessor may register a firearm retroactively, including a firearm that has been reclassified. Further, 18 U.S.C. 922(o) prohibits the possession of machineguns that were not lawfully possessed before the effective date of the statute. Accordingly, if the final rule is consistent with this NPRM, current possessors of bump-stock-type devices will be obligated to dispose of those devices.

    However, IMNSHO, they ARE taking something that was NOT classified as a firearm and turning it into a firearm. Such a reclassification tramples the 5th Amendment (deprived of property without due process). This is not the same as a ‘contraband’ argument as that takes something “X” and makes “X” illegal. Reclassifying an accessory as a firearm is different than making the accessory illegal.

    For others that don’t want to read…
    * No, other forms of bump firing (ie, from the hip) are not included in the ruling (specifically EXCLUDED)
    * The Department ‘disagrees’ that they are not allowed to change the definition of ‘single function of a trigger’ because the AG has directed the ATF to implement ‘rules’ that abide by the definition.

    1. avatar Anymouse says:

      Their argument is ruined by their prior reclassification of Stryker and Street Sweeper shotguns as destructive devices. The owners had to register them, not the manufacturer, maker, or importer. Having an outcome and then trying to justify it makes it full of contradictions and nonsensical arguments.

    2. avatar Geoff "Mess with the bull, get the horns" PR says:

      ” Accordingly, there is no means by which the possessor may register a firearm retroactively, including a firearm that has been reclassified.”

      We can attack that on constitutional grounds.

      When the NFA was created in 1934, they had an amnesty period where the public could register machine guns and other NFA items by paying the tax stamp.

      They are denying us the same opportunity.

      File a federal lawsuit seeking relief by re-opening the registry. There is historical precedent (the 1934 NFA) to back that up…

  28. avatar Concerned Vegas Citizen says:

    “reduces casualties in mass shootings, such as the Las Vegas shooting”

    and yet, there is no evidence that has ever been produced that any weapon used to kill or maim in the Las Vegas incident was equipped with a bump stock. Actually, there has been no proof that any weapon found in the room was used in the incident.

    The cover up continues.

  29. avatar Anymouse says:

    The rule doesn’t say what a “bump-fire-style” stock is. It also saws that modification is an alternative to destruction, but it doesn’t specify what the allowable modification is. Also not addressed is what is it’s attached to an M16? Is it now 2 machine guns?

    1. avatar bob says:

      The aftermarket will just make a device that fits over a regular stock and performs the same functions.
      Then claim its not a firearm part because it doesn’t actually attach to the firearm.
      Which would be exactly the same thing as using a rubber band or your pants.

      Just get rid of the NFA crap already, Al Capone is dead and nobody is shooting up banks with Tommy guns anymore.

      1. avatar LarryinTX says:

        That was only the excuse for NFA, the actual reason was so the agents who were hired to bust up stills during Prohibition would not have to be fired now it was over. And there are a whole lot *more* agents employed today.

    2. avatar Other Tom in Oregon says:

      A M16 with a bumpstock and a DIAS is now officially three machineguns in one.

      1. avatar Geoff "Mess with the bull, get the horns" PR says:

        An M-16 doesn’t need a ‘Drop-In Auto Sear’ to fire select fire…

  30. avatar bob says:

    What’s the difference between pulling a semi auto trigger fast to dump rounds or holding it down?

    It doesn’t add extra shots, it doesn’t make the round more lethal, it doesn’t make it more accurate.

    The only reason full auto firearms made any sense to regulate was/would have been because of the obvious rate of fire advantage over bolt or pump action firearms.
    With the recent improved quality and quantity of semi auto firearms it makes full auto less appealing.

    Realistically given two scenarios of which is more deadly for the masses.

    You vs a building or room full of people.

    Scenario 1: You get a semi auto or full auto weapon and unlimited ammo. Everyone else is unarmed.

    Scenario 2: You get a semi auto or full auto weapon and unlimited ammo. Everyone else has the same choice.

    Which outcome is more likely to have more civilian deaths?

    Does the semi auto or full auto choice make much difference?

    You know, this could be played out easily using a Call Of Duty based game and live online players.

    I know I don’t have the resources to pull it off, but I bet TTAG does.

    1. avatar Binder says:

      “it doesn’t make it more accurate”

      OK, let me give you a little hint. Bi-pod. Most machine guns are used with bi-pods. And guess what works wonderfully with a bi-pod.

      1. avatar LarryinTX says:

        I’m pretty sure that would *not* be a bump stock.

      2. avatar LarryinTX says:

        Edit fail

        And if you are thinking “machine gun”, that’s not going to work surrounded by a room- or building-full of armed opponents, since it locks you into firing in one direction.

      3. avatar bob says:

        uh.. a Morter tube?

  31. avatar James69 says:

    Well they should jump to $600 on armslist. Good time to make some coin.

  32. avatar James69 says:

    God help us if they ever figure out 9 pellets come out of a shotgun with every pull of the trigger. 12 trigger pulls = 108 *almost* 9mm size projectiles. Who needs full auto? I have an auto death machine 12ga.

    1. Do the math with 15 pellets.

  33. avatar nomadic_meerkat says:

    As a Route 91 survivor, I’m tired of having my neck stepped on by people looking to use that tragedy as a springboard to advance their anti-firearm, anti-liberty political agenda. This is B.S. As human beings we have the right to life and property, therefore, the right to use our property to defend our lives. Any diktat that disarms us, confiscates or demands we destroy our property, or requires us to seek permission to keep legally acquired property is an affront to our natural rights and immoral. I find this personally insulting. I hope there is a class action to fight this in the courts.

    1. avatar S.Crock says:

      I figured many of those survivors were likely pro gun and thus got no media time. Sorry that our politicians are using probably the worst experience of your life to take rights away from you.

    1. avatar Geoff "Mess with the bull, get the horns" PR says:

      Mike, I just want to thank you.

      I am so relieved not to be the ugliest TTAG commentator…

      *Snicker* 😉

  34. avatar Walter says:

    Does this mean those that own bump stocks now and prior to the law’s effective date get those ones grandfathered in? Or are they going to treat these like a silencer and require a tax stamp?

    1. avatar 300BlackoutFan says:

      Neither. Owners are “obliged to dispose of those devices”, in clear violation of the 5th Amendment.

      1. avatar GS650G says:

        When they ban other firearms we’ll see the same requirement.

      2. avatar LarryinTX says:

        Is anyone going to notify me? Or am I to be robbed of the opportunity to say “fuck you!”

      3. avatar Walter says:

        When they banned M16 lowers, they didn’t do that. SMH.

  35. avatar Jay in Florida says:

    For myself none of this matters. Although I didn’t see any mention of any other actual trigger devices. Such as a crank or inertia type trigger. Now if I did own one. Thanks to gubener Scott they are already illegal here. I might just be another gibbermint made felon. As if I would turn it in anyway. Nah I think I’ll keep it if I had one.

    1. avatar Sian says:

      The law has been very effective!

      To date, two bumpstocks have been turned in to police for destruction.

  36. avatar S.Crock says:

    Things like this make me want to become NRA lifetime members and vote so that republicans control every branch of the government. Oh wait…🤔

    1. avatar CZ Rider says:

      Left wing, right wing, same bird, and it seems to enjoy crapping all over the people.

    2. avatar Mick says:

      You realize that the NRA was the group who started the call to ban bump-fire stocks, right?

      1. He realizes a lot more than you.

  37. avatar Chris T in KY says:

    Rich white people will always have rapid fire weapons. Just like the rich white man who used one to murder people in a concert in Las Vegas.

    No rapid fire weapons for the poor.

    1. avatar Nanashi says:

      Just look at Wayne LaPierre, I’m sure the collection of full autos he uses his fake gun rights organization (that is also, on the word of its president, a self proclaimed terrorist organization) to protect the artificial scarcity of is worth more than the million dollars he milks out of suckers who think he’ll do the exact opposite of what they do.

  38. avatar GS650G says:

    So a guy buys 23 guns and takes them in a hotel. Lives there 4 days and breaks a window. Next he uses a variety of guns to shoot 500 people. Some of his guns had slide stocks, some didn’t. We still don’t know why he did it.
    Result is bump stocks are now regulated or banned. I guess we are fortunate that’s all they did, but I suspect the LV case and others will be sited in the next ban they announce. And it’s going to be pretty broad.
    If an agency can sign away the right to own something like a bump stock there will be more nibbles like magazines, calibers, bullets, etc.
    And if we get another Democrat in the white house with a Democrat Congress it’s really going to be interesting.

    1. avatar LarryinTX says:

      I bet that eventually they are going to make shooting strangers at a concert illegal! Even with a cap and ball revolver!

      1. avatar Binder says:

        Just as a stupid question, but do you truly have any idea just how effective a slide fire can be? Because I can tell you the NRA does.

    2. avatar Binder says:

      The problem was the bump stocks were always right at the edge of the NFA. The original version (the Akins Accelerator) was classified as a machine gun. No one thought much of them until about 2 years ago when people figured out how to make them work effectively. Then about a year after that, you had Vegas.

      1. avatar barnbwt says:

        How dare that guy design a legal device and get federal approval for it like he’s supposed to.

        Guys like you also failed to respond to the Akins fiasco, which was *also* on highly shaky legal ground and raised a lot of concern among the not-so-clueless who took the time to think about the implications. Implications we are starting to realize now, right on schedule.

        We get it; you may like rapid fire, but you don’t think it should be legal, either. You don’t want to ban it, but just assume & accept that others will do so for you.

  39. avatar kenth says:

    How does an enforcement arm of government create law?

    1. avatar Anymouse says:

      They don’t. They create regulations for how they interpret and enforce a law.

  40. avatar GunnyGene says:

    Y’all trying to pick this apart and bitch and moan about it are wasting your breath. It will be published, it will be taken to court. We’ll just have to wait and see what happens when SCOTUS sees it – if they do.

    In the mean time, just have a drink and relax.

  41. avatar Vlad Tepes says:

    If the ruling becomes law (and we all know it will) and it goes through the courts it will be interesting to see if the new Conservative Supreme Court agrees to hear the case. We all know the lower courts will rubber stamp it as legal. If the Supreme Court refuses to hear the case gun ownership will be doomed as other gun ban laws will then also become permanent law and the 2A becomes then meaningless. Current law is clear and that is that bump stocks are legal and are not a machine gun part. To simply ignore our own codified laws and twist them because of political expediency completely destroys the credibility of all laws and dooms every other 2A protection we have had in the past including the Scalia decision. This decision will have far reaching consequences in regards to not just 2A rights but all of our Constitutional Rights as well.

    1. avatar Geoff "Mess with the bull, get the horns" PR says:

      “…it will be interesting to see if the new Conservative Supreme Court agrees to hear the case.”

      After the ACA ‘is a ‘tax’ ruling, I fear Roberts will now decide to be the ‘squishy’ vote on 2A cases.

      That said, I think he may agree to to rule with us on the constitutionality of may issue, but ‘bump stocks’ he will likely pass on.

      I hope he proves me wrong on that…

  42. avatar Widdler says:

    So is Jerry gonna have to cut his finger off then? Pretty sure he beats a bump fire.

  43. avatar strych9 says:

    I don’t own a bump-fire-stock. I consider them a huge waste of ammo and really just kinda dumb.

    That said, this “ruling” surprises me to some degree because I thought (and said here) that it wouldn’t happen due to the fact that there is no way you can argue that a bump stock makes a semi-auto rifle into a full-auto due to the clause in the NFA that says “…by a single function of the trigger.”

    The fact that the ATF would issue this ruling stating clearly, and incorrectly, “…such devices allow a shooter of a semiautomatic firearm to initiate a continuous firing cycle with a single pull of the trigger.” makes it obvious that we are quickly moving to a place where the law means absolutely nothing since it will be ignored when it’s inconvenient. It can and will be applied as those in power prefer regardless of how it’s actually written or intended to be applied.

    We’ve been sliding towards this kind of shit for quite a while. The last administration made a mockery of the law on several occasions [that we know of] and got away with it because no one was willing to challenge them on it and, when courts did rule against the administration, no one was willing to enforce the ruling. Now it’s just getting to be more “in your face” and obvious.

    I had hoped I wouldn’t see a day where this kind of tomfuckery became SOP. Unfortunately now I have. Hopefully this is struck down in court based on the plain text of the actual law but I won’t hold my breath. The agencies that regularly make a mockery of our rights (The DEA and ATF just to name two obvious culprits.) have been getting away with it long enough that I suspect it will continue unabated.

    1. avatar ACP_armed says:

      Continuing that quote…

      “…..Specifically, these devices convert an otherwise semiautomatic firearm into a machinegun by functioning as a self-acting or self-regulating mechanism that harnesses the recoil energy of the semiautomatic firearm in a manner that allows the trigger to reset and continue firing without additional physical manipulation of the trigger by the shooter….”

      Ignoring the fact the user makes the hole thing work — what I quoted contradicts what you quoted, unless the DOJ/ATF/WTF is saying that trigger press and release is now a single function…

  44. avatar PavePusher says:

    We fucking TOLD you jackasses that he was, and IS, a New York Lib/Prog.

    You wouldn’t fucking listen…..

    And the NRA needs to choke to death on acid-soaked cacti.

    Fucktards.

  45. avatar Chadwick says:

    And then they came for me and there was no left to speak up.

  46. avatar GunnyGene says:

    Many of y’all seem to be giving up a little too soon. You can fight for your rights at the State level as we did in MS a couple years ago when we passed this little nugget.

    ———————————————————————————————————

    “Miss. Code Ann. § 11-65-1

    § 11-65-1. Enforcement of certain federal laws, orders, or rules prohibited.

    No federal executive order, agency order, law not enrolled by the United States Congress and signed by the President of the United States, rule, regulation or administrative interpretation of a law or statute issued, enacted or promulgated after July 1, 2016, that violates the United States Constitution or the Mississippi Constitution of 1890 shall be enforced or ordered to be enforced by any official, agent or employee of this state or a political subdivision thereof.”

  47. avatar WARFAB says:

    So will they follow the model of the original NFA passage and have an amnesty/registration period? Will the value of existing bump stocks that get registered as transferable NFA items go through the roof?

    1. There will be no amnesty. You either have to get rid of it or be a felon.

  48. avatar Pig Barber Phil says:

    Any exemptions for bumpfire stock owners traveling in caravans?

  49. Sweet. I get to be a real felon now. I bet i’ll get all the girls.

    All joking aside though, this “rule” is pointless. Just look at the dismal compliance rate of the VT bump stock ban. No one is going to dispose of a valuable asset. Especially when the value is only going to go up.

  50. avatar Nanashi says:

    Reminder that Wayne LaPierre, Chris Cox and Marrion Hammer explicitly endorsed this. The NRA is the enemy, not friend, of the Second Amendment.

    1. avatar Indiana Farmer says:

      NRA. Selling out Americans’ Rights since 1933.

  51. avatar Nanashi says:

    Just called the NRA. They actually tried to tell the NRA’s statement wasn’t calling for a “ban” but “regulation”. When I asked what kind of regulation the rep said “like a machine gun”. He acknowledged you can’t buy a new machine gun but tried to claim it wasn’t a ban.

    Self proclaimed terrorist organization.

  52. avatar I don't make these laws says:

    Pepe Le Pewpewpew and Cock’s statement-

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

  53. I guess the main question is…Has the NRA been bought out by the globalist gun and weapon control agenda…(re: Because if this international agenda just stopped at firearms. The U.K. wouldn’t have had a “knife 🔪 ban” by decree, THEIR royal Goverment wouldn’t be rounding off the points on kitchen knives, or corking the the tines on forks!!!)

  54. avatar Sian says:

    Well if it passes like this it’s wide open to legal challenge and being neutered, since I don’t know of a single device or accessory related to bump stocks that will allow the weapon to fire without manipulating the trigger for each shot.

  55. avatar Larry finney says:

    Has any of the bump stock ar15’s been positively tested as being used in the shooting? if so how many were used? Have all the rifles found in the room positively been identified as semi automatic? I have seen no reports on this. For all we know anyone of them could have been full auto.

  56. avatar BigJohn says:

    Vermont recently passed a law banning bump stocks and gave Vermonters until Oct 1st to turn them in at 10 State Police barracks,no questions asked.On October 3rd,Vermont reported 2 ,TWO, citizens had turned theirs in.all these gun control laws do is make honest citizens become felons

  57. avatar Gun Owning American says:

    And once again, a president screws people over.

  58. avatar George from Alaska says:

    This DOJ ruling disturbs me. I believe it will be the first time in the US that a gun or device has been ruled illegal to own without considering the people who legally purchased them with a copy of the ATF ruling.
    When the ATF decided many years ago that the “Streetsweeper”, and the South African gun the Streetsweeper was based on… I believe it was called the Stryker, were bad boys and decided to redefine them as a Destructive Device any who had completed a 4473 and actually owned one was allowed to register their gun as a DD, they may have even been able to do it for free. Companies and stores and small FFL businesses that had them in inventory but not transferred lost them I believe after whatever the effective date was. I know one FFL who had two and signed one out to himself and still has it, I never asked him about the registration process because I was not fully aware of what was going on.
    The least the Feds and doesn’t Trump still have to sign this? should do is let past purchasers keep them outright or open the registry for the hundreds of thousands… a million? of people so they don’t become instant Felons – this is beyond absurd.
    I would have thought that Trump’s son or son-in-law, the one who is gun and silencer friendly, would have kept dad appraised on all that is wrong with going back on an at least 10+ year old determinations on at least three companies bump fire stocks.

  59. avatar Jason says:

    The DOJ is ignoring the fact that neither machine guns, or semi autos are legally defined by how fast they are able to empty a magazine. They also ignore the statutory language of what defines a machine gun, specifically where it says “by a single function of the trigger”, they interpret single function to mean single pull. The Browning 1919, The Browning 50cal machine gun, the Dillon M134 Minigun are fired by a “press” of a paddle, or a button. There is also NOTHING in the NFA or the GCA of 1968 that stated that a trigger has to be pulled, or that the firearms trigger has to be pulled with a finger.

    Assuming the whole point of this reclassification of bump stocks to be defined the same as machine guns is directed at public safety, why does the DOJ list “alternatives” to simulate what the bump stock does specifically attaching rubber bands, using belt loops, or training your finger to fire faster?

  60. avatar mark s. says:

    …………………….and then comes Trump’s Supreme court .
    can everyone say ……………OVER RULED ?
    It’ll take a few years though .
    We’ll have to have an arrest or two .

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