CNN: Trump to Announce Bump Stock Ban Within Days

trump cnn bump stock ban

courtesy CNN

We were a tad premature with our recent post announcing the ATF’s final determination that bump fire stocks will now be considered and regulated the same way as machine guns. But we apparently weren’t off by much. According to the unimpeachable news source that is CNN . . .

The Trump administration plans to announce the long-anticipated federal rule officially banning bump stocks in the coming days, according to US officials familiar with the matter.

Given the President’s virtual order to the ATF directing the agency to reexamine their determination that bump fire stocks are perfectly legal firearm accessories under current law, it wasn’t a matter of if, only a question of when.

Under the new rule, bump stock owners would be required to destroy or surrender the devices to authorities. Members of the public will be given 90 days to turn in or otherwise discard their bump stocks, according to a source familiar with the final rule.
“Bump stocks turn semiautomatic guns into illegal machine guns. This final rule sends a clear message: Illegal guns have no place in a law-and-order society, and we will continue to vigorously enforce the law to keep these illegal weapons off the street,” a senior Justice Department official told CNN Wednesday.
As Luis Valdes wrote here earlier, this sets a terrible precedent that is almost sure to could be abused by future, less gun-friendly administrations to outlaw more than just range toys.
We’re living in interesting times.

comments

  1. avatar Don from CT says:

    Tyranny. Plain and simple. They are taking property without due process, AFTER a government agency approved the sale of these devices.

    1. avatar rosignol says:

      Yeah, I’m pretty sure that’s going to be challenged in court pretty much immediately.

      This isn’t anywhere near being over.

      1. avatar Robert C Hanlin says:

        It will be… I know the GOA will be filing suit immediately. The NRA will remain silent. What’s that say to everyone..?

        1. avatar Craig in IA says:

          Well, for one thing, if GOA can muster the money to file a lawsuit they’ll lose…

          Not taking a side, just talking reality.

        2. avatar Green Mtn. Boy says:

          You would expect something different of Negotiating Rights Away since 1934.

        3. avatar Craig in IA says:

          “You would expect something different of Negotiating Rights Away since 1934.”

          And exactly what, beyond blather and rhetoric (those be words, btw) has anyone gotten from GOA over the span of their existence? Be specific.

        4. avatar anonymous says:

          Right here on TTAG, we had people in the comments section, telling guns owners its their own fault because they didn’t follow the law. “Break the law, pay the consequences” they said. They ridiculed and teased because a guy tried to make a motorized trigger glove to simulate full auto. They ridiculed. “if you can’t handle the time, don’t do the crime.” With silly soundbites and criticism.

          Well – this will be one step further for you guys. You better do what you are told and get in line. After all, it’s your own advice.

        5. avatar Craig in IA says:

          “Right here on TTAG, we had people in the comments section, telling guns owners…” is this in response to any of the comments in this short side bar or pertaining to NRA’s supposed collusion (like that word?) with the antigun Leftists?

      2. avatar Jean-Claude says:

        Sometimes people say Trump is playing 4D chess. This may be one of those times. When RBG drops dead soon, Trump gets another SCOTUS appointment, since the Senate is fully in Republican control.

        Amy Comey Bryant is a solid 2A conservative. Kavanaugh is. Gorsuch is. Thomas is. Roberts isn’t depenbdable. But there’s a good chance these gun restrictions end up in front of SCOTUS and get overturned, which may be Trump’s plan.

        Or he could be giving up bump fire stocks because he’s not really solidly 2A

        1. avatar TheUnspoken says:

          I don’t think he is doing 4D anything, he could just stop mentioning it and never let it see the light of day if he was stalling. Who would be holding his feet to the fire to get this done anyway? Moms and parkland kids? Is seeking their support helpful, are they going to say “yay Trump, we like you now?” The language doesn’t sound like “we support the second amendment and want to protect gun owners from spurious regulation.” It sounds more like the Republicans are, in fact, coming for your guns (parts). And want you to go to jail.

          Making bad rules and hoping the Supreme Court or others will clean up the mess would be counter productive, and only makes you look weak when overruled, good luck claiming “ha, see I wanted that thrown out from the start!”

        2. avatar DDay says:

          It’s Coney Barrett. She would be an excellent pick. There are MANY excellent picks though, Amal Thapar would be outstanding, James Ho of the 5th circuit would be the first Asian American (same with Thapar who is Indian ethnicity) Ho is very pro 2a and young. Britt Grant on the 11th circuit, etc. There are TON of great judges to pick from. We just need ginsburg to retire from the court (soon)

  2. avatar pod says:

    No one’s gonna comply.

    1. avatar Excedrine says:

      And (almost) nobody’s gonna’ get caught or prosecuted, either.

    2. avatar doesky2 says:

      1) Folks hold tight and essentially have a 0% compliance rate.

      2) Propose a plan to spur compliance by encouraging people to turn in their evil un-registered bumpstocks in exchange for a chit that allows them to purchase a newly made fully-transfearable full-auto AR15 lower or AK47 receiver that has a wonderful background check.

      3) When gun-grabbers scream that these new FA receivers are better than bumpstocks we now go and pull up endless CNN/NPR/ABC/MSNBC/etc past stories of how “OMG….BUmpstocks are just like machine guns !!!!!”. We say, nope, you said they were the same., and with this new plan we get all these wonderful background checks that you say you love and that will solve all problems.

      4) Even if this plan does not get implemented we get endless examples of the entire Leftist media and gun-grabbers being shown as big fat liars.

      1. avatar Jude MacAbaech says:

        Big fat liars? Gonna need a wider scope …

      2. avatar SouthAl says:

        Fantasy, but I like it. That would result in some quality entertainment.

      3. avatar LarryinTX says:

        Oh, yeah, just get me goin’, now I need to know do I want actual select fire lowers or those drop in auto sear thingies, I’ll need a few dozen.

    3. avatar barnbwt says:

      With a ten-year prison sentence and 100,000$ in fines and probably your house burned down & family murdered…why yes, yes people will comply. Just like how they comply with MG laws currently.

      1. avatar Jomo says:

        Actually, given all the incidents of families finding unregistered machine guns in ‘grand-dad’s trunk’ in the attic over the years, I’d bet he’s more right than you are. They got zero turn-ins in both Vermont and Florida. CT and NY got very few ‘assault-weapon’ registrations. Things are moving in a very nasty direction right now.

      2. avatar Excedrine says:

        No, no they won’t comply, you mean. Just like they don’t comply when The People’s DemoKKKKratiKKK RepubliKKK of ZOO York passed the UNSAFE Act. Or when The People’s DemoKKKratiKKK RepubliKKK of DIS-connected-cut passed similar legislation. Or when cities within The People’s DemoKKKratiKKK RepubliKKK of KKKommiefornia demanded that their subjects turn in their standard-capacity magazines. Or when Sheriffs across all of those LEIberal cesspools made it clear that in no uncertain terms would they ever enforce those laws.

        Mass civil disobedience IS the order of the day, and that WON’T change any time soon.

      3. avatar Buckaroo Bonzai says:

        The $ sign goes in front of the amount, outlander.

  3. avatar New Continental Army says:

    I’m sure it’s coming, but could you find another source other then CNN? CNN really, really is made up fake news. Trumpisms or no Trumpisms, CNN is the biggest joke of a news organization in history. I occasionally have to look at it to remind myself how terrible it is. I’d honestly rather trust Pravda, weekly world news, or even msnbc.

    1. avatar Mr Wu says:

      CNN Cacksackers

    2. avatar DJ says:

      Communists News Network

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

    Slightly OT, but very relevant just happend :

    Something *very* interesting happened during a SCOTUS oral argument session, that may be very good news for us if a 2A case happens to be granted cert. in the near future :

    “Justice Neil M. Gorsuch cut off the state’s attorney before he could launch into his defense and upbraided him for ignoring decades of court history and centuries of English law.

    “Can we get one thing off the table. We all agree the ‘excessive fines’ clause is incorporated against the states,” he said, meaning states and cities must abide by it just as federal officials do. The court struggled over the reach of the Bill of Rights in the 1940s and beyond, he said, but that fight is long settled.

    “Here we are in 2018 still litigating incorporation of the Bill of Rights. Really?” Gorsuch said to Indiana state solicitor Thomas Fisher.”

    and –

    “But Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh intervened to agree with Gorsuch. “Isn’t it just too late in the day to argue that any of the Bill of Rights is not incorporated?” he said.”

    http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/he-lost-dollar42000-land-rover-for-dollar385-crime-supreme-court-considers-whether-excessive-fines-are-unconstitutional/ar-BBQdFj6?li=BBnb7Kz&ocid=iehp

    TTAG legal folks, I’d like to hear your opinions on what that may signal about the new balance of SCOTUS justices…

    1. avatar Jon in CO says:

      This is one of those simple “the punishment must fit the crime” things. Total BS. I’m all for legalization of all drugs, but at this point in time, absolute BS.

    2. avatar TFred says:

      I don’t think it means anything. Incorporation of the Second Amendment was already confirmed in McDonald v. City of Chicago, in 2010.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McDonald_v._City_of_Chicago

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

        “Incorporation of the Second Amendment was already confirmed in McDonald v. City of Chicago, in 2010.”

        …and just how well did that do when areas banned ARs outright?

        1. avatar SoBe says:

          We are awaiting the test cases with deep defense pockets to take these new laws to the SCOTUS. Unfortunately, as billionaire antis are willing to part with their money for their causes, I do not see a lot of cash flowing from pro2A sources to bring test cases against all of the new anti2A legislation. Until then, US[SR] of A will see more anti2A laws since no one is discouraging the left.

        2. avatar Joe in San Antonio says:

          Not to be a jackass but the bill of rights was ratified by Congress in 1791. Its only in this modern day that we give such deference to the judicial branch to interpret for us what our rights mean. My don’t mean to disrupt the checks and balances, though I argue they already are, but why are we content to be ruled by executive fiat, with the judiciary actively interpreting our laws? If our legislative branch is so vote new members in, restrict legislation to no more then 25 pages, with exceptions only by 2/3 of congress, and the language needs to be such that a 8th grader can read and understand it.

        3. avatar barnbwt says:

          @Joe

          No kidding; I mean, you’d think 3/4 of the states ratifying the stupid amendments would be reason enough to argue they had always been incorporated, regardless of whether that was how post-Madison courts interpreted things. “It’s far too dangerous for a federal government to impose cruel & unusual punishment, but there’s nothing to worry about giving states that power.” It’s asinine…and it’s obvious, which is why *some* amendments –namely the 1st amendment– state that the restriction applies specifically to congress (“congress shall make no law”) so the states would be freed from those few limitations.

    3. avatar SoBe says:

      I agree, this is the best thing the SCOTUS has said in recent years regarding any aspect of the Bill or Rights and that should be good news for all civil rights (2A) included. The Bill of Rights applies equally across the nation and the States (you too California, and soon to be copycat Florida) are incorporated, i.e., the BoR applies not just the Federal government in its dealings with the States (and the ephemeral “Militia”) but the States and their dealings with individuals (the often ill-defined People).

  5. avatar Chiquita4011 says:

    If he bans bump fire stocks, I’m not voting in 2020. Felons are not supposed to vote.

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

      Talk about cutting off your nose to spite your face.

      You will be handing a vote for the Leftist who runs against Trump in 2020.

      Thanks for stabbing us in the back, jackwad…

      1. avatar JasonM says:

        People like you who continue to vote for republicans who repeatedly break their campaign promises are the reason they feel they can repeatedly break their campaign promises.

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

          You really don’t GET IT, do you?

          How are justices appointed to SCOTUS?

          Elect a Leftist to the presidency in 2020 and you *WILL* get a ‘Progressive’ justice who will more than happily gut the 2A in a SCOTUS decision that cannot be reversed.

          Have you forgotten Hillary’s statements that she considered the Heller-MacDonald decision was wrongly decided?

          Are you *SERIOUSLY* that fucking stupid, jackwad?

          Your little ‘protest’ to “teach them a lesson” will DESTROY the 2A.

          Hold your little nose and vote ‘R’, or you hand the presidency to a Leftist…

        2. avatar troutbum5 says:

          Jason, you can wish for a successful, influential third party in one hand, and s**t in the other. Guess which one will fill up first? Our political system was designed to work with only 2 parties, and it’s not going to change. The change you seek must come from within the Republican Party, just as the socialists are slowly taking over the Democratic Party. This particular, terrible decision aside, Trump is forcing the GOP to move away from the establishment toward a more conservative agenda. Get involved, vote, and keep pushing. The alternative isn’t pretty.

        3. avatar Warlocc says:

          It’s been said by wiser men than me: Every vote is always between a giant douche or a turd sandwich.

        4. avatar SoBe says:

          troutbum5, how wrong you are. Those who fail to absorb the lessons of history are doomed to repeat its mistakes and those who fail to heed the advice of its sages are doomed, plain and simple. Have you not read anything by the first president, a Mr. Geo. Washington, “However [political parties] may now and then answer popular ends, they are likely in the course of time and things, to become potent engines, by which cunning, ambitious, and unprincipled men will be enabled to subvert the power of the people and to usurp for themselves the reins of government, destroying afterwards the very engines which have lifted them to unjust dominion.” [Farewell Address | Saturday, September 17, 1796]

        5. avatar Salty Bear says:

          I’m with you, Jason. Let the Republicans find out what happens when they break their promises. Let the nation go to pot. Let it all burn down. Don’t give in to the gaslighting by these dyed-in-the-wool, head-in-the-sand Republican voters. Vote your conscience, and demand that everyone do the same.

        6. avatar Ash says:

          Agreed. I’m not “holding my nose …” and proping up these jackasses anymore. This 4D chess talk is just dumb.

          Some decisions we make must be based on principle. And yes, I’m keenly aware of the potential consequences … let it be here and now.

      2. avatar Specialist38 says:

        You dorks have your ass on the dashboard.

        He was making a joke…read it again…..all the way to the end.

        1. avatar Robert C Hanlin says:

          LOL… You’re asking folks to lay aside emotion and think before responding? Good luck with that!

      3. avatar Bob Jones says:

        A democrat Congress can and will impeach Kavanaugh, Thomas and Alito and replace them with far left 9th circuit judges. We will see guns banned. Nope, they won’t come and collect them all, they will get banks, mortgage companies, insurance companies and utilities to do the dirty work. Getting mad over useless crap like bumpstocks is flat out idiotic.
        And don’t forget, the last time democrats controlled Congress, the DOW lost half it’s value, 8,000,000 good jobs were replaced by 2,000,000 shitty jobs and the unemployment rate more than doubled.

        1. avatar Newb says:

          Lol, that’s not going to happen. If it could, why hasn’t it already been done in the past by one party or the other? Unless something crazy comes out about Kavanaugh he’s there for life.

        2. avatar Vorkon says:

          They can’t necessarily just pull impeachment charges out of their ass like that, but what they CAN do is pass a law saying “now the Supreme Court has 13 seats” and have their President appoint those four new justices. There’s nothing in the Constitution that specifies how many justices should be in the Supreme Court, that’s all just legislation. FDR almost did the same thing, and only stopped when they gave in and ruled in his favor.

    2. avatar SoBe says:

      Move to Florida and help the pro2A cause. Florida just undisenfrachised felons at the last election. Felons have had their voting rights restored here.

      1. avatar TheUnspoken says:

        Why not their gun rights too? Perhaps they will be more pro gun if they can actually legally own them? Otherwise on Florida we can all be voting felons together, once the ban semi auto weapons…

    3. avatar Tom in Oregon says:

      Chiquita,
      One must be convicted of a felony and have it sentenced as such to be a felon.
      I respect what your saying though.

    4. avatar Craig in IA says:

      “If he bans bump fire stocks, I’m not voting in 2020. Felons are not supposed to vote.” Yeah, way to go, Chiquita- YOU SHOW ‘EM. Not voting will really hurt them more than the country… Critical thinking seems to be dead in the world. BTW- you’d not be a felon anyway, until you were convicted in a court of law but you likely didn’t know that, either.

      Side bar to that- there’s a new push to allow felons to vote, it’s even come back to Iowa. I believe the first round is to allow those who have served their sentences to regain their right but I can also see the democrat operatives arriving at the large prisons with boxes of ballots to deliver to the inner cities, too. That way a lot more boxes in the trunks of rental cars can be discovered when needed. What a country we’ve become.

    5. avatar LarryinTx says:

      I’ll wait until one person hears the jail door clank behind him before I’m ready to rock, thank you. I cannot think of any construction of such a ban that would pass SCOTUS review.

  6. avatar Saint Mike says:

    Why? No one was talking about Bumpstocks, Commie States banned them already, so why Donald?

    I say he’s a one term Pres. Or getting bad advice. Either way he’ll be a one term pres if he ban’s them.

    1. Either that, or he’s intentionally putting up an Unconstitutional EO, knowing it will be challenged in court, and they will lose. They have been slow rolling this arbitrary rule for months now. Bump fire stocks don’t really turn semi autos into fully automatic machines guns, it takes more than that, as I have one. Anyone can get the same effect by putting their thumb through their beltloop

      1. avatar Newb says:

        Like someone else posted above, the idea of him saying after the fact “I wanted it to get overturned the whole time” is ridiculous. Trump doesn’t care about guns, he cares about votes and popular opinion. He gets to say he’s the first person to take action and say to fudds how he prevented people from taking more.

    2. avatar doesky2 says:

      Well it will be very interesting to see if there is one judge in the entire U.S. that will jams this up in court just like every other Trump decision about the border or immigration.

      The only way to stop this black-robe bullsheet is that the right has to start playing like the Left.

      1. avatar daveinwyo says:

        Start to “dis-robe” these judges at the local level. I refuse to vote for an incumbent judge. Remember a judge is a lawyer that sucked up to a politician.

      2. avatar LarryinTx says:

        Someone has to be charged, first.

  7. avatar JOHN B THAYER says:

    Nunn v. Georgia
    Nunn v. State, 1 Ga. (1 Kel.) 243 (1846) is a Georgia Supreme Court ruling that a state law ban on handguns was an unconstitutional violation of the Second Amendment. This was the first gun control measure to be overturned on Second Amendment grounds.

    “Nor is the right involved in this discussion less comprehensive or valuable: ‘The right of the people to bear arms shall not be infringed.’ The right of the whole people, old and young, men, women and boys, and not militia only, to keep and bear arms of every description, not such merely as are used by the militia, shall not be infringed, curtailed, or broken in upon, in the smallest degree; . . . “

  8. avatar Jon in CO says:

    Explain to me how this EO is at all even close to constitutional and how in the hell they can force people to surrender property without compensation, remedy, or other means of compliance? Is this not America?

    I hate hippies, but if they told hippies they had to turn in Birkenstock’s and that they were now illegal, I’d be raising the same exact argument. The item is not in question, the action is.

  9. avatar former water walker says:

    A ban no one cares about…Trump will lose all important 2A support. On a lighter note I’m picking up my very own evil black rifle(sans bumpstock) tomorrow. The pawnshop gal threw in a very expensive AR carry thingy. Paid it off and picked up ammo & Pmags at Cablela’s(with a coupon). A good day😎

    1. avatar binder says:

      And how much of the center is he going to loose the next time someone uses one to shoot a few hundred people.

      I know that the current ban will not stop that from happening, but at least he can’t be blamed for doing nothing. That is the same reason the NRA whats to get rid of them. Same reason Slide-Fire went out of business. No one want’s to eat the blame for the next mass murder.

      1. avatar Scoutino says:

        The same argument can be used for semi automatic rifles. Or any firearm. Or anything else, from gasoline to machetes.

        The bump stock has been used for exactly one, admittedly large, crime during its whole history. That’s much better track record than any other consumer product I can think of.

        It doesn’t fall under NFA as BATFE itself ruled. Flipping the decision now just shows how capricious the bureaucracy is. Who would trust such government?

        1. avatar LarryinTx says:

          I really like that aspect, should it arrive at the SC I cannot see how that would not make the decision nearly automatic.

  10. avatar TFred says:

    Ha, maybe since it’s CNN, he’ll change his mind just to make them wrong – yet again…

    1. avatar New Continental Army says:

      That’s… A very interesting concept. Maybe if we give him the idea via Twitter he’ll go for it.

    2. avatar LarryinTx says:

      Just why are we taking CNN’s word for anything?

  11. avatar RA-15 says:

    Yup. I see many a law abiding citizen becoming a felon. The minute this foolish announcement comes out of Trump’s mouth. I’m not surprised one bit. There is the final part of their inch. I for one will be keeping my property. As should we all. The establishment has taken all its going to get from me.

  12. avatar anarchyst says:

    Maybe this could be a way to get an approved ATF “form 1” to “make a firearm”. Since the “Street Sweeper” was reclassified (illegally) as a “destructive device”, owners were given a chance to register them without payment of the $200 tax.
    If one can register a bump stock that fits an AR-15, that one move would make it possible to “convert” a semi-automatic AR-15 to “full auto” a “loophole” the ATF has not thought through…
    Let’s hope that the “supreme court” puts a stop to ANY ban of bump stocks…

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

      “Maybe this could be a way to get an approved ATF “form 1” to “make a firearm”. Since the “Street Sweeper” was reclassified (illegally) as a “destructive device”, owners were given a chance to register them without payment of the $200 tax.”

      Bingo. That is what I propose the relief we should seek in the lawsuit against it.

      Simply, we want to be legal. Let us register them, by re-opening the registry.

      Machine guns are legal, when taxed. The legal framework exists to make them legal.

      We sue them to make them legal…

      1. avatar doesky2 says:

        Think bigger.

        Have a plan to let us turn in our evil non-background checked bumpstocks for a chit that allows us to purchase a newly made full-auto AR15 or AK47 receiver…..because the gun grabbers say that “bumpstocks are JUST LIKE full auto machine guns”. The argument will be that with this plan we now have a better chance of getting people registered.

    2. avatar Sian says:

      It’s fully within the President’s power to order an anmesty period for the NFA.

      And if it’s open for bumpstocks to be registered as full-auto, it’s open for anything to be registered as full-auto. Re-open the registry, and watch the leftists heads explode.

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

    Could this be a deliberate action by Trump to (hopefully) force a 2A issue onto SCOTUS?

    And could a constitutional challenge to it be ‘fast tracked’ to SCOTUS?

    1. avatar rosignol says:

      Possible. With Kennedy gone, the likelihood of a pro-2A ruling is more likely. I wouldn’t bet money on it, but Trump has surprised me enough times that I wouldn’t rule it out, either.

      Gun owners have been pretty solid supporters for him, and he does try to reward loyalty. This would be a pretty roundabout way to do it, tho.

    2. avatar Nanashi says:

      If he wanted to do that he could do something pro gun like order the ATF to re-evaluate “sporting purpose” and signal his intent. This is treason plain and simple. I will have no sympathy when the Democrats impeech him on Trumped (ha) up charges. Maybe Pence will be smarter.

      1. avatar Newb says:

        Exactly. There are more direct pro-gun type options available that make way more sense then some convoluted scheme that relies on courts, someone ready to sue, etc.

        1. avatar Ash says:

          It’s hilarious to me that people on this board think that he’s just playing 36D underwater chess. This EO will potentially created millions of new felons out of law-abiding supporters.

          But, hey, maybe he’s doing it so the courts will overturn it in 5 years /sarc/

  14. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

    Fake news.

  15. avatar Samr says:

    So are they gonna outlaw shoe laces and belt loops now too?

  16. avatar Satcastro says:

    I am a huge Trump fan, but I fail to see how this would be okay under the takings clause. If a bump stock is now legally a machine gun, it appears to be self evident that the federal government must either allow existing owners to keep them or either offer the current market rate for a fully automatic firearm to the owners.

    Please explain to me how the feds wouldn’t owe $15,000 to every bump stock owner?

    1. avatar Derek says:

      If they ban bump-stocks, obviously I’m still keeping mine…but if they offer 15k…sold, I don’t use it very often. :p

    2. avatar doesky2 says:

      $15,000 is too low for a FA AR15 or AK47.

    3. avatar Ragnarredbeard says:

      They wouldn’t owe $15,000 because they only cost a couple of hundred bucks. If they offer compensation, they will offer retail value not some inflated number based on what you think its worth.

      1. avatar Ash says:

        That’s when they were just novel pieces of plastic; however, they are about to become full-fledged machine guns. 15k would be appropriate.

        They’re not going to offer anything though. Thanks for your vote, suckers, you’re a felon now.

        1. avatar binder says:

          I can see the class action law suit. And guess what, they will win and the government will pay out and then this will all go away

    4. avatar LarryinTX says:

      Oh, damn, you’re right! So you paid $300 for it, found it goofy, and the feds insist you have to sell it to them for $15,000! Amazing. And guess who will be doing the paying and collecting? Anti-gun doofusses. So, I go buy 10 collapsible stocks and head down to turn them in for $150,000. I’m liking this, by the time they give up we’ll have hundreds of millions of $$ to buy real select-fire.

  17. avatar GW says:

    No firearm warship or Cannon is illegal under #2a NONE!!

    When the Constitution was written and the Revolutionary Way citizens had cannons and warships and shall not be infringed is final….its not a negotiating tool.

  18. avatar Jay in Florida says:

    Nobody will comply.
    This is no different then all the “banned” AR15s in the Northeast.
    100s of thousands and almost none turned in.
    They might all show up at the same time when and if needed.
    No sane person will give up property paid for with their own hard earned cash.
    Law or no law.
    Lets just call it a Fake Law and be done with it.
    [email protected]##$k em.

    1. avatar Sian says:

      Compliance wasn’t the goal of the SAFE act.

      Instant felony charges for any undesireables with the stroke of a judge’s pen on a search warrant is.

    2. avatar LarryinTX says:

      Yeah, Jay, the least they will do is to sell their property to the highest bidder. So, possibly at least, all the ARs in the country would be acquired by criminals. What could possibly go wrong?

  19. avatar Hannibal says:

    I see this as more a violation of the 5th Amendment than the 2nd.

    But if there’s anything involving guns, judges will ignore it.

    1. avatar pwrserge says:

      That was the point of electing Trump, thanks to him and the Senate fastrackinfg judges like there’s no tomorrow, we get to go judge shopping and laugh as this proposed “rule” is used to strike down the NFA.

      1. avatar Stateisevil says:

        Dang serge, you are completely delusional. You’ll get nothing, but I guess you’ll like it and ask for more. Sound like a beaten wife. He beats me cuz he loves me kind of thing.

        1. avatar Delusional says:

          Your just now figuring out this guy is delusional?

  20. avatar Ryan Sabin says:

    Does this mean I have to turn in all of my belt loops?

  21. avatar ryan sabin says:

    I literally just bought a bump fire stock. I dont even own an ar15

    1. avatar Anner says:

      The best thing to do is post about it online with your name and photo attached.

      1. avatar doesky2 says:

        I laughed bigly.

      2. avatar Anymouse says:

        They’re going to know I own one. Anymouse v. Whitaker will kind of be a tip off.

  22. avatar Sian says:

    No compliance, instantly challenged in court, never enforced.

    Still it will put bumpstock makers out of business, and this is bad.

  23. avatar Michael says:

    Has anyone ever hit anything they we’re ‘aiming at’ with a bump stock. If you’re gonna spray and pray, you better be REAL good at praying, ’cause the aiming part just ain’t gonna be there.-30-

    1. avatar doesky2 says:

      You obvioulsy never used one.

      Aiming isn’t the problem.
      The bigger issue is getting nice and relaxed and applying the correct FORM and FORWARD HAND PRESSURE.
      Neither of which a mere mortal would have in a real fire-fight.

      But on the range it bring grins from everybody around.

      BTW, WTF is the deal with complaining about bumpstock aiming?Nearly every video I see of Vietnam and the Middle-East conflicts is showing BOTH SIDES just spraying during full-auto (maybe a little less so with US forces)

      1. avatar binder says:

        But 100 round mag dumps into a crowd is NOT a real firefight. The truth is that they are really good for mass murder, but not so much for combat.

        1. avatar Scoutino says:

          Trucks are also great for killing bunches of people in crowd. Just ask the French. Should we ban tractor-trailers because they might be used for mass murder too?

        2. avatar LarryinTX says:

          I examined them. I can afford them. I think they are excessively stupid and horrendously overpriced (I was quoted $450). So I did the unthinkable, I DID NOT BUY ONE! Take that! That’ll teach you! OH! You want to buy one? Be my guest, just not with my money. Guys, this is not rocket science.

  24. avatar Sora says:

    STOP your complaints.

    Don’t buy the bumpstocks, send your money to http://www.saf.org or Gun Owners America (Gun Owners Foundation).
    I’m glad Trump made it into ATF thing instead of legislation.
    ATF can be sued much easier at the Supreme Court, put in by Trump.
    This is the best possible move there is. Let the supreme court legalize bump stock

    No Democrats will be able to ban in by law after Trump leaves.

  25. avatar Bill says:

    Everyone blames Trump, But the power is in the hands of the people.

    Instead of sitting on your couch complaining about how Trump isn’t fighting to keep bump stocks, how about doing the fighting yourselves, make your voice heard. That’s how things get done.

  26. avatar Shire-man says:

    If government can ban inertia can government just declare cancer cured and establish outer rim space colonies with the stroke of a pen as well? I expect we’ll see the lowest number of deaths by vehicle accidents and falls in 2019 without this inertia thing hanging over our heads.

  27. avatar Adam says:

    All the idiot MAGA nationalists still think Trump is playing that 4D chess?

    Maybe he is gonna ban bump stocks, then have the case challenged by the Supreme Court, and then send the dumbest lawyers to defend it so the law gets overturned and creates good legal precedent?

    Nah, I think it’s just that you all fell for voting in a nationalist that falls in line with Bernie Sanders when it comes to the size, scope, and spending levels of government. All I keep thinking is “We could have had Rand Paul.”

    1. avatar doesky2 says:

      Only an azzhat thinks American nationalism is bad.
      So you prefer tribalism and class-ism?
      Boy you’re stupid regurgitating Leftist tripe.

      As usual Dennis Prager brings clarity….and of coarse he was talking about this years ago ……..
      https://www.dennisprager.com/is-a-national-identity-necessary-left-right-differences-part-ix/

      1. avatar Adam says:

        Nationalism is tribalism and shares many similarities with Socialism/Communism, they are all beliefs that big government can somehow “protect” people from other countries economies and that this “protection” is for some reason needed. It’s a belief that economics is a zero sum game and that one countries benefit is another’s loss, despite that this is not how economics works. Trump’s nationalism is a complete rejection of free market economics, aka, that thing that actually made America great.

        If you think America benefits from Trump’s “nationalism” such as his tariffs, trade wars, or immigration policy, you need to bust open a book on economics or even read what the founding fathers had to say about economics. I suggest you start with F.A. Hayek and work your way towards Milton Friedman.

        1. avatar LarryinTX says:

          I’ve read those books. They advocate a world without tariffs or other trade controls AT ALL, not simply we drop all of them and let the rest of the world shit on us forever. I suggest, now, that *YOU* read them. Trump points out that with a $500 billion imbalance with China it is impossible to lose a trade war with them, no trade at all would benefit the US economy $500 billion a year.

    2. avatar New Continental Army says:

      No you couldn’t have. Paul would’ve lost. I like him too, but he’s just not presidential material. He doesn’t have the charisma, or the backing to win. You need one or both of those to win. Though platform and party matter a lot, a he’ll of lot of people still vote for the person, and and as great as Paul is, he doesn’t come across to most people as someone who can lead the nation.

    3. avatar Ton E says:

      Wrong Paul Rand isnt even in his dad’s shadow.

    4. avatar LarryinTX says:

      Maybe you could spend a bit of time explaining just *how* we could have had Rand Paul? Are you figuring that if he announced the Dems would stand down? Because Hillary would have stomped him so hard he would still have not gotten up. And it’s quite possible she would have had my vote.

  28. avatar Aaron Walker says:

    With current Government SJW speak…Anything can and will be defined as ILLEGAL… Any questions where things are going…. Look here…

    https://youtu.be/yrb7bjv3bcY

  29. avatar MAGA says:

    QUESTION: How will they know if you have one????

    1. avatar Ragnarredbeard says:

      They’ll subpoena sales records. Its not that hard to get the data. The real trick is to round them up.

      1. avatar Sian says:

        And you can say you traded it for ammo last November.

        Are they going to get a search warrant for a $100 piece of plastic?

        1. avatar Scoutino says:

          No. Most likely not. But for illegal unregistered machine gun, and that’s what it will legally become, that’s different question. Remember that you can get up to a life in prison for ownership of that piece of plastic in at least one state already.

        2. avatar LarryinTX says:

          Jury trial, right now, guaranteed by Constitution, I submit the US Constitution and you submit what? Come and take it.

      2. avatar LarryinTX says:

        Why would the manufacturers have kept records of who bought them? If they did, why would they have not burned them by now?

  30. avatar possum says:

    I member Ironicatbest saying,” That Paddock’s going to open up a can of worms”, I also remember,” You guys keep talking belt loops and rubber bands, they’ll come for semi autos next”. Also where’s my Presidents stance on the 2A, I thought he was all about America. And golly gee, I guess no one listened when I said Ive worked for a Trump company and he’d sell his own mother if the price was right. But none of that matters because it’s not Republicans( good cop) or Democrat’s( bad cop) both parties are the same. I also predict that we are going to MAGA,and become competitive in the world market, and the answer to that is cheap immigrant labor. And in the future when AI and robotics advance the cheap immigrant labor force will perish from a disease that only money can cure. Maybe not, maybe “They’ll” keep us around to get their jolly’s off like they do by manipulating the world’s population.I thank the Spirits I’m a possum

    1. avatar LarryinTX says:

      Trump’s companies hire possums? What pigs.

  31. avatar Quasimofo says:

    Oh man, all this winning and eleventy-dimensional chess-playing from Trump… /sarc

  32. avatar Don from CT says:

    Here’s the irony. I wouldn’t be surprised if the ACLU signed on to this. They can see the dangerous precedent this could set if its allowed to stand.

    Pickup truck is sold in compliance with US laws.
    President/Congress decides to outlaw pickup trucks
    Law says all trucks must be destroyed or turned in with no compensation.

    Its an ex post facto prohibition with no compensation.

    The reason this is different from the state bans is you always could comply by either moving or selling the stock out of state. With a federal prohibition, there is no lawful method of compliance that doesn’t constitute a “taking” of your property.

    As such, this has nearly nothing to do with the 2A.

    If they banned bump stocks but either
    1) paid me $500 for it
    2) opened up the NFA and allowed them to be registered as MGs

    Then there wouldn’t be this problem.

    1. avatar Phil Wilson says:

      “They can see the dangerous precedent this could set if its allowed to stand.”

      That generally doesn’t give leftists pause. It’s one reason they’ve all gone apoplectic over Trump’s election. They think their power will (and should) only ever increase.

    2. avatar LarryinTX says:

      Sheesh. Registration, and the NFA itself, are massive problems without bumpstocks even being involved. And the ACLU is never going to support firearms rights, just as I am never going to support the ACLU.

    3. avatar Broke_It says:

      I don’t think you quite understand ex post facto. Uncle Sam didn’t compensate everyone for the value of their stash when cocaine was outlawed. It simply became contraband that had to be destroyed to avoid catching a charge under the new law. Ex post facto in the bump stock case shields people from being charged under the new rules for actions taken prior to the rules effect, i.e. I possessed a bumpstock but rid myself of it once it was banned. Declaring an item contraband does not fall under the taking clause either since said item is now illegal to posses. Legalese is a real bitch.

  33. avatar AlanInFL says:

    Why are we quoting from the Fake News source.

    1. Because even a blind squirrel occasionally finds a nut. Teflon Don has voiced his support for a bump stock ban. No reason to not believe CNN in this case.

      1. avatar LarryinTX says:

        Say that in a week.

  34. avatar A Brit in TX says:

    It wouldn’t surprise me for CNN to be ‘reporting’ this to turn the President’s base against him. The President can’t unilaterally ban anything, he instructed the ATF to revisit their previous bump-stock determination as a result of pressure arising from the (still ‘unsolved’) Las Vegas massacre.

    Even if the ATF reverse their previously thought out & justified decision, the court cases will begin.

    Remember, CNN is a political party mouthpiece, everything they do or do not report is for propaganda reasons.

  35. avatar Arandom Dude says:

    I have it on good authority that Donald of Orange is playing 6D chess and is going to own the libs any second now.

    Of course, by “good authority,” I mean slack-jawed Trump worshippers who have Punisher/Calvin peeing on their Ram 1500.

    1. avatar Fudds Mckenzie, the Party Fudd says:

      6D full-contact underwater speed chess. Praise Kek. MAGA

  36. avatar Fudds Mckenzie, the Party Fudd says:

    Act all surprised and angry, you tool bags. You know you just got done voting for his party, even though you knew this was happening, and will do it again next chance you get.

    1. avatar Craig in IA says:

      So tell us- How’d voting for YOUR party come out?

      1. avatar Fudds Mckenzie, Original Party Fudd says:

        I have a party the way Vin Diesel has a hairstyle. How did it come out? SSDD. We lost a once-in-8-years opportunity due to boomers with time on their hands since retirement and delusions of being the establishment. Then they were too ignorant to learn from the experience, which hardly matters since it’s too late, their relevance will be declining from here out.

        1. avatar Craig in IA says:

          So- you think the Gen Xers and Millenials will save you?

          Ever been to a Trump rally? Doesn’t appear to me that they are filled with bunch of younger ones- more like a lot of people trying to hang onto the America they grew up in that is quickly going over a cliff and into 3rd World status under the establishment of both political parties.

          A bit of history for you from a “boomer”: When I attended public schools during the late 50s/60s every male teacher, and there were plenty, had served in the military and most defended this nation on foreign soil. We were taught a love for this country at school and at home, church, too. After college I spent 40 years in education, at first things weren’t much different- males having stood up for the country as opposed to all the quack college profs who were out in the protest crowds with the commies. By the time I retired (at least in the larger, urban schools where I was) it would be nearly impossible for a male with any world experience, especially military, to last a year as a public ed teacher. They’d stand up for themselves, they’d stand up for the country, and having done something other than “go to school” since age 5 and still doing likewise in their 30s and 40s with no other real life experience, they’d laugh and scoff at the idiot in front of the kids every daty warning them about “the real world”- a place where the teachers/administrators have never been.

          Long story short, put the blame where it really is and check out the people who voted Trump into office, not those who didn’t vote or want government to be their benefactor and protector. Trump has, in the very least, offered a change in the dialogue and scenario from the standard, pure-as-the-driven-snow type candidate everyone seems to be looking for, and in the very least, he’s been a resident of the real world, using his own money and his own brains.

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