Gun Owners of America to File Suit Against the Trump Bump Stock Ban

Gun Owners of America to File Suit Against the Trump Bump Stock Ban

courtesy GOA

As we reported, Adam Kraut and the Firearms Policy Coalition have filed suit challenging the Trump bump stock ban. But they’re not alone. I have been in contact with Erich Pratt and Gun Owners of America over these past months and they will be joining the fight against President Trump’s violation of the Second Amendment.

Gun Owners of America to File Suit Against the Trump Bump Stock Ban

GOA stated the following;

The new ATF regulations would define bump stocks as “machineguns” — and, down the road, that new definition could implicate the right to own AR-15’s and many other semi-automatic firearms. ATF’s new bump stock regulation clearly violates federal law, as bump stocks do not qualify as machineguns under the federal statute. Moreover, bump stocks, which have been in circulation for many years, have repeatedly been ruled by ATF as lawful to own. This ban was imposed through regulations because Congress has repeatedly refused to amend the law to ban them. But the ATF has no authority to radically “re-interpret” a statute that is clear and unambiguous.  To do so would allow agency regulations to overturn the clear provisions of statutory law.

Another problem with the regulation is that it is overly broad and could later be relied on to ban semi-automatic firearms in the process of trying to ban “bump stocks.” The ATF has previously said that “[Bump stocks] convert an otherwise semiautomatic firearm into a machinegun…”

But hold on a minute.  If the AR-15 becomes a “machinegun” — or even if it is readily convertible into a “machinegun” — then AR-15’s could eventually become illegal as well. Think the ATF wouldn’t use this regulation to summarily outlaw semi-automatics?  Maybe not right now.  But you can bet that the first anti-gun Democratic president to win the White House will order the ATF to do so.

Gun Owners of America to File Suit Against the Trump Bump Stock Ban

I can say this as a NRA Life Member. I back any and all gun rights organizations that will take up this fight. GOA has my support (both physically and financially) as does Adam Kraut and the Firearms Policy Coalition. I hope more will come on board as well. Another friend of mine, Stephen Stamboulieh, the man behind a few prominent cases such as Hawaii’s open carry lawsuit, Young v. Hawaii. Is also planning and strategizing his fight against this violation of the Second Amendment.

So I ask you, fellow gun owners and law abiding People of the Gun, to support those who are taking the fight to the ATF and DOJ and, more importantly, join the fight.

comments

  1. avatar JMR says:

    Don’t worry if it looks like they’ll win vs the new ruling the NRA might actually try and attach their name to one of these challenge late in the game so they save a little face.

    Though, I wonder if that will piss of all the current Fudds and anti 2nd member of the NRA that support the ban.

    1. avatar L says:

      I’m for anything that causes fudds grief.

      1. avatar Nobody special says:

        Amen.

    2. avatar Garrison Hall says:

      “NRA might actually try and attach their name to one of these challenge late in the game so they save a little face . . .”

      I never thought this was a battle the NRA should be involved in. For one thing, the NRA effectiveness has always rested on it’s ability to be influential with both Republicans AND Democrats from gun-owning states. Maintaining that unique relationship is important enough that there are some gun-issues issues that the NRA ought to avoid. Nonetheless, I am glad that GOA has decided to take on this fight.

    3. avatar Eric says:

      Of course they will because there is no Second Amendment challenge in the suit.

      I offered to participate in the case if they would add a “Second Amendment claim”.
      Offer rejected.

      I will likely file my own suit if I can find the funds.
      [email protected]

  2. avatar BATF Criminal Fraud says:

    Tim to challenge the Jack Booted Thugs of B.A.T.F. on it’s LACK of standing and Jurisdiction. – ( just look at all the fuckery used to ‘ create ‘ this non-agency )

    The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms, has no venue or jurisdiction within the borders of any of the 50 States of the united States of America, except in pursuit of an importer of contraband alcohol, tobacco, or firearms, who failed to pay the TAX on those items. As proof, refer to the July 30, 1993 ruling of the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, 1 F.3d 1511; 1993 U.S. App. Lexis 19747, where the court ruled in United States v. D.J. Vollmer & Co. that “the B.A.T.F. has jurisdiction over the first sale of a firearm imported to the country, but they don’t have jurisdiction over subsequent sales.”

    and fuck both Judas Trump & NRA

    http://usa-the-republic.com/revenue/BATF-IRS%20Criminal%20Report.html#tgotm

    1. avatar LarryinTX says:

      Yeah, yeah, but there is a lot of tomfuckery behind BATF. To begin with, in 1993 ATF was still part of treasury, concerned with taxes. Since then, without consulting me, they have been moved to DOJ, and I don’t recall them explaining just why that is, or what they are supposed to enforce if not *taxes*, which would have them in Treasury. The entire original concept, as explained since 1934, was that “the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed”, but that did not preclude taxation. When removed from the taxation question, what is the justification for BATF existence? That puts it squarely in the middle of unconstitutional infringement, so far as I can tell, and they slid it right past us without any explanation at all.

    2. avatar Ton E says:

      Can’t call the ATF jack booted thugs…….it’s frowned upon!!!

  3. avatar Aaron Walker says:

    “Lawsuit ! Lawsuit ! Lawsuit! Lawsuit! ”

    Next heavy court action I’d like to see is ALL these groups take on states like MD., NJ., Massachusetts, CT., NY., Washington, etc…For direct infringements to prevent lawful US citizens from Keeping and Bearing arms with Draconian Anti-2nd Amendment laws!

  4. avatar Napresto says:

    I don’t own a bump stock, and I think they’re kind of silly. I hope the ban is tossed in the trash where it belongs, nonetheless. Fingers crossed.

  5. avatar Squiggy81 says:

    I don’t personally own one, but an inch will turn into a mile if the dems get their way. I’m already a member, but will be making an additional donation to GOA. I hope others will do the same.

    1. avatar LarryinTX says:

      I actually have a trigger group which is supposed to do the same thing, my son can make it work but so far I have not. I just like the safety moving to the “full” position!

  6. avatar Rusty Chains says:

    This is why the donations I use to give NRA go to the GOA. I haven’t dropped my membership, but until Adam Kraut is on their board no more money for them.

    1. avatar Dave in PTC Georgia says:

      Same here. I pay the NRA for my membership. And now I contribute to the relevant active players – the 2nd Amendment Foundation and Gun Qwners of America.

      We shouldn’t have to defend our rights. We should go further and reclaim what we’ve lost to the past egregious restrictions that have cost us liberty.

    2. avatar LarryinTX says:

      Hell, I contribute to everybody, I think. So do they, judging from my weekly mail. But here will come another to GOA, once they get things rolling.

    3. avatar Eric says:

      I made an offer to participate in the case if they would add a “Second Amendment claim”.
      Offer rejected.

      I will likely file my own suit if I can find the funds.
      [email protected]

    1. avatar HP says:

      I gather the FPC and FPF are sort of the same thing?

      1. avatar L says:

        Different organizations.

    2. avatar Eric says:

      I certainly made an offer to participate in the case
      if they would add a “Second Amendment claim”.

      Offer rejected.

      I will likely file my own suit if I can find the funds.
      [email protected]

  7. avatar Bloving says:

    I still think this court fight was what Trump was looking forward to all along. It goes to court, can’t stand up to scrutiny based lack of due process, a requirement for self-incriminating, and other problems and gets summarily tossed.
    Trump gets to say “hey, we tried!” And moves on to the next issue on his desk.
    🤠

    1. avatar L says:

      I hope you’re right. I’m usually skeptical of 4D chess arguments.

    2. avatar HP says:

      I’d like to believe that, and I’d be able to if Trump or someone near and dear to him wrote up the interpretation on bump stocks that is to be implemented. However, it was written up by the ATF and there is no way they’d deliberately do something that would fail. Trump would have had no way of knowing exactly what language they’d use, so I don’t think there’s anyway that he could magically guide this to fail in court. It might fail regardless, but that won’t be Trump’s doing.

    3. avatar barnbwt says:

      We have to ban the guns in order to bring them back, derp.

      Instead of tying yourself in knots trying to figure out what the ‘straight shooter,’ pay attention to his actions & words. He is no friend of the second amendment.

  8. avatar pg2 says:

    What’s worrisome is how many people here think we have an honest, independent court system….

    1. avatar 300BlackoutFan says:

      The four boxes of liberty is an idea that proposes: “There are four boxes to be used in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury and ammo. Please use in that order.”

      This is simply box #3. It doesn’t matter how honest or independent the court system is believed to be. This is how liberty is maintained.

      While the sentiment may be that the courts are already failed, in this case, we cannot skip that step. Unfortunately, this step takes the longest and is the most expensive for the lay person.

      1. avatar BATF is Criminal Fraud says:

        Perfectly said , if NRA was on our side they would use their bankroll to wipe out the ATF with non-stop court action and public news spots on their illegal actions , especially after WACO …… but they love them some status quo.

      2. avatar Michael says:

        There are actually five boxes, you left out the “pine box”. Widely used when the first four either don’t work or ignored for too long. “I’ll die on my feet before I’ll live on my knees”. It’s more than just a brag on a tee shirt. I’ve spent the last money on gun rights organizations I’m gonna spend, from here on in it all buys ammo. Shall not be Infrindged. No compromise, no retreat, no surrender! -30-

        1. avatar 300BlackoutFan says:

          Interesting sentiment, although dying for one’s country, unless as a martyr, isn’t going to do much for liberty.

          “No poor bastard ever won a war by dying for his country. He won it by making other bastards die for their country.” – Gen George S. Patton

  9. avatar YaDaddy says:

    I threw GOA 25 smackers yesterday as a donation to fight this BSB BS. Would be a good idea for YOU to do the same.

    1. avatar LarryinTX says:

      I wish I knew how to write checks that small.

    2. avatar Eric says:

      I personally offered to participate in the case if they would add a “Second Amendment claim”.
      Offer rejected.
      I will likely file my own suit if I can find the funds.
      [email protected]

  10. avatar possum says:

    Courts, laws, can’t do this can’t do that, uhh yeh they can. They can ban anything they want , they can do anything they want. But but, the Bill of Rights, John vs U.S.law, subsection c of 2134/99.. . Paper and words, and in the meantime the Feds executioner sharpens his axe.

  11. avatar LickedButt says:

    Just became a member/donated $100 to GOA. Seems to be much better than the NRA.

    I don’t have a bumpstock, but will support my neighbors with whatever amount of force is necessary.

    This is the red line, I will not comply.

  12. avatar Saint Mike says:

    But since nobody was even asking or talking about it, let’s ban Bumpstocks and piss off a 1/2 million plus voters. Trump will not win 2020. Period.

  13. avatar Anonymous says:

    Quick! Let’s all switch over from the NRA to GOA.

  14. avatar Oliver says:

    I agree with the content of this lawsuit. As much as I hate to say it, the only way to lawfully do a bump stick ban would be to pass legislation to ban them specifically. You cannot just overturn your own technical judgements and make up new definitions whole cloth. The way this is written and they way it is being adopted essentially means that ANYTHING can be redefined by fiat with no recourse to either technical specs or precedent. If this is accepted there is absolutely no reason why any semi-auto or even a flintlock for that matter cannot now be redefined as a machine gun. Or even water as alcohol, since the ATF does have jurisdiction there as well. May as well define a water well as a taxable still then. This is appallingly dangerous and does a complete end run around the legislative process.

    1. avatar LarryinTX says:

      Is there any precedent for Congress passing *any* ban of firearms or components? I can’t think of one, all had to do with taxing things, where does the ability to prohibit firearms suddenly come from, with no authorizing Amendment? AH! Wait. I remember, there was Clinton’s AWB in ’94. I don’t think SCOTUS ruled on that one, but my brain is foggier every day.

  15. avatar Oliver says:

    Bump “stock”. Any typos please attribute to tiny phone keys and fat fingers.

  16. avatar Michael says:

    Once again the communists have made a brilliantly simple and successful move to divide firearms owners. Two years ago, I’d never even heard of a bump stock, now the controversy may well determine the winner and losers (spoiler alert…it’s all of us), of the next presidential election. So …I’ll give $ to this…but I won’t give $ to that…”true believers” vs. “da fudds”…the government needs to be…too many opinions to list here. Feel free to add in anything they want us to do to cause more polarization. The communists have already succeeded with the national and state elections. I can’t remember when there were so many 51~49 splits. Every move they make successfully drives the split deeper. (I believe) Franklin, “If we don’t hang together, we will certainly hang separately”. Me, I wan’t to steal straight from Joe Hill, International Workers of the World. He MUST have been onto something because, him, they EXECUTED. Don’t MOAN, organize. -30-

  17. avatar GunnyGene says:

    I’ll suggest that anyone intending to follow the progress of this and other legal actions stock up on beer, popcorn, and Dramamine. Because the spin that will be forthcoming by both sides, in the media (including social media) and political circles will be dizzying.

  18. avatar Michael says:

    300 BlackoutFan, first, thanks for keeping this civil, it’s appreciated. For me, it’s not a sentiment, it’s a hard line drawn in the sand and it only matters to me. I don’t expect anyone else to care or understand. The name on the map reads the same…we all cross a different river.-30-

  19. avatar Vlad Tepes says:

    I have a question. How can the Government confiscate formerly legally owned property and not pay a penny in compensation? If this stands and I am sure it will that means one day they could confiscate an entire persons collection of say AR15’s with no compensation. At least Australia gave some money to gun owners when they took their guns.

    And by the way the Republican President Trump supported it and today Republican Governor Kasich vetoed Ohio’s new self defense law saying he hated gun owners.

  20. avatar Warlocc says:

    The real question is, what does the outcome of this suit do for the state level bans already in effect?

  21. avatar Eric says:

    I made an offer to participate in the case
    if they would add a “Second Amendment claim”.

    Offer rejected.

    I will likely file my own suit if I can find the funds.
    [email protected]

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