House Speaker Ryan Backs Away From Bump Fire Ban Bill

Wisconsin Republican House Speaker Paul Ryan (courtesy

“House Speaker Paul D. Ryan backed away Wednesday from legislative action to ban ‘bump stocks,’ the device a mass shooter used in Las Vegas earlier this month to create machine-gun-like rapid fire from his legal semi automatic rifle, killing 58,” reports. “Instead, Ryan and many of his fellow House Republicans hope the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) will act administratively to outlaw the devices, which the agency ruled legal in 2010.” Translation . . .

Ryan’s feeling the heat from NRA and, perhaps, The People of the Gun.

Ryan’s newfound support for the NRA’s solution — asking the ATF to reverse their previous, completely rational decision approving bump fire stocks — is only a less-bad option. If the ATF is free to interpret law, rather than follow it, the NRA and its supporters will have opened a proverbial Pandora’s box.

What other firearms accessories or parts could the frequently disgraced federal agency outlaw by regulatory fiat without following the rule of law? Competition triggers? Pistol braces? Drum magazines? Tracking Point’s targeting system?

Speaker Ryan doesn’t see it that way: “We think the regulatory fix is the smartest, quickest fix, and then, frankly, we’d like to know how it happened in the first place.”

I gather that Rep. Ryan doesn’t read TTAG or use Google much. Anyway, our sources at the ATF say the Bureau is unlikely to reverse its previous ruling on bump fire stocks. Could that change with sufficient political pressure? Anything’s possible.

Including the possibility that your emails or calls could stop this whole bump fire ban thing dead in its tracks — despite the fact that a reported 79 percent of registered voters support the notion. No doubt the phones in Congress have started to light up in recent days as the bump-stock ban push has gained momentum. Expect that to only increase.


  1. avatar TrueBornSonofLiberty says:

    This was my email to my congressman yesterday:

    Congressman Paulsen,
    I was both shocked and infuriated to see your name attached to Carlos Carbelo’s gun control ban. I’ll give you the benifit of the doubt and assume you know so little about guns and the anti-American gun control agenda, that I’ll take the time to educate you about the existential threat to the Second Amendment this bill really is.
    Just a few points-
    The bill calls for the banning (and felony prosecution) for the possession of anything that increases the “rate of fire” in a sled loading firearm (semi auto).
    Would you care to cite the universally accepted “rate of fire”, as it now stands? If you can’t, there are folks who will perceive your participation in this legislation as a TREASONOUS attempt at usurping the Second Amendment.
    Do you realize that there’s an entire industry that exists for after market triggers? And that since your legislation (and it is now YOUR anti-gun legislation) doesn’t specifically define products and accessories, this bill becomes an open ended poisonous law that will be forever expanded and exploited by gun grabbing Liberal Terrorists™, posing as reasonable democrats, and unelected traitors at the ATF, until all semi autos are banned.
    We are all saddened and outraged by what an individual lunatic in Las Vegas did. But I’m not peacefully going to surrender my God given, unalienable, Constitutional Rights, because of some knee jerk reaction to the murderous actions of a vile man.
    As my representative, I pledge and promise to you, that if you don’t immediately rescind your affiliation with this bill, that not only will I never support you in the future, I will make it my life’s work to destroy your political career, in return for your betrayal.
    Please take 10 minutes and educate yourself on why this bill is as bad as I suggest and not partisan hyperbole. This video explains it much better than I can.

    1. avatar KMc says:

      Wow, spot on!!!

      1. avatar Anthony Vecchio says:

        I haven’t seen the AR that was supposedly equipped with a “bump fire” has anyone here seen this rifle. What I HAVE seen are the acoustic measurements scientifically showing that there were more than one shooter. No conspiracy theory, that’s scientific truth. So, a casino, probably the most surveilled establishment in the world has no recording of this guy entering or exiting his hotel room??? What’s up here? False flags? Something duplicitous is going on people and the goal is to take away our GOD GIVEN 2nd Amendment rights. Just listen to the rhetoric coming out of these Anti Gun Leftists. This Carbelo bill is written so open ended that if it passes they will be able to take your guns for just about any reason. So, don’t think this is about “bump stocks” because it’s not. If they get it passed you won’t even be able to keep your Remington 700 blind receiver “hunting rifle” cause of it’s “hi capacity”. Think I’m crazy? Check out Australia among others. We had better ALL get out there and write Congress, the Senate, the President and whoever else. Sit back? You’ll be living in the 1939 Weimar Republic quicker than you think.

    2. avatar henry bowman says:

      …We are still going to primary his ass, right?

      1. avatar TrueBornSonofLiberty says:

        As a single issue voter, I’d support anyone who ran against him that was a Second Amendment absolutist, regardless of what he does here. But I don’t know if that will happen.

      2. avatar JasonM says:

        This guy already is.

        1. avatar DDay says:

          Nehlen is a nutcase. Ryan is very popular in his district and will crush any challenge.

        2. avatar Jonathan-Houston says:

          What makes Nehlen a nutcase?

          It can’t just be because he’s going after the Speaker. Big time congressmen have been toppled before, among them Dan Rostenkowski and Jack Brooks, as well as leaders like Eric Cantor and Speaker Foley.

          In the case of Brooks, the longest serving congressman ever to be defeated, not only was he beaten, he was beaten by that nutcase Steve Stockman. Anything’s possible.

    3. avatar John - the real one says:

      I used to write stuff like this, the replies I received reminded me that they don’t actually read them…

      1. avatar TrueBornSonofLiberty says:

        There’s a better than average chance he got this, as it was sent almost immediately after the announcement. Surely it was the first he received on this topic. Undoubtedly, he received many more, as I posted the relevant info to the Minnesota gun forum afterwards (and has since blown up since then). Those may have been dismissed. But it’s not hard to imagine that he probably understands that this huge influx of emails are all very similar to the first. Ultimately, he got the message. How he chooses to react, has yet to be determined. Now the local NRA equivalent in Minnesota has sent out a call to action. He’ll be buried, shortly.

        1. avatar YaDaddy says:

          That last part made me smile. Give ‘em hell!

          Waiting to hammer any Georgia critters who step out of line. None I’m aware of…

          …. yet.

      2. avatar sian says:

        Hand-written on dead trees (and optionally delivered manually via rock or brick) will tend to get them read.

        1. avatar BLAMMO says:

          This. ^^

          Send email only as a supplement.

        2. avatar TX_Lawyer says:

          The day after the shooting I stopped by my Congressman’s office and told the lady there “I’m [my name], and we met at the [recent event]. I’m just here to say that the shooting in Las Vegas hasn’t changed my support for pro Second Amendment legislation.”

      3. avatar cruzo1981 says:

        Very true, but now I write short and to tje point emails. I think its still important to write them.

    4. avatar Swilson says:

      I essentially sent my rep (Walter B. Jones) the same e-mail. I advised him that I have voted for him in every election since I turned 18, however any support on his end for the proposed legislation would cost him my vote.

    5. avatar The Punisher says:

      Missing the forest for the trees.

      We’ll all cheer that they drop the legislation and approve that they want an un-elected agency to reverse an opinion.

      How insane!

      So now the precedent will be set. Anytime something happens in the future, welp, Congress won’t even need to get involved. Just defer to an alphabet soup agency and let them deem it “legal” or “illegal”. Problem solved right?

      We are such an idiocracy. It’s astounding really.

      1. avatar Jonathan-Houston says:

        I’m no lawyer–and Lord knows I wouldn’t admit it even if I were–but doesn’t the principle of estoppel come into play here? The ATF has already ruled on this, found that rifles thus equipped are not machine guns under the NFA, and so may not be regulated as such.

        Whereas private entities can be bound even by the unauthorized acts of their employees, government cannot. However, the government is still bound by the authorized acts of its employees. So I would think that once they approved these devices, that’s it. By government, of course, I’m referring to the ATF, not Congress.

        1. avatar barnbwt says:

          No. ATF just reversed their thirty year explicit stance on silencer wipes for literally no reason besides they felt like it.

    6. avatar sound awake says:

      the problem with your letter is that you used several big words that he wont understand like existential usurping and rescind

      remember hes a politician

      ryan is starting to worry about his job though which is cool

      he doesnt want the same thing to happen to him that happened to eric cantor

      yes hes popular in his district but things have changed since the election

      voters are now seeing real change for the better in the federal government and its because americans sent a man there from new york who was never an elected politician before

      they may not particularly care for some of his mannerisms but without a doubt the more they see trump do the more they like the results

      the more they see people like ryan and mcconnell and mccain standing in his way the less likely theyre going to be to send entrenched incumbents like them back for more

      the midterms are going to be very interesting

      i say vote em all out

    7. avatar Marlin says:

      Exceptionally well written and to the key points. My compliments. Thank you. If you agree many of your fellow 2A supporters would like to use your letter.

      1. avatar TrueBornSonofLiberty says:

        But I’m an unhinged extremist 😂😂. But of course, that’s why I posted it. Anyone interested in using parts of it, or it in its entirety, is welcomed to it, without asking. I had just hoped to inspire folks to become proactive. I can’t ever recall seeing such nebulous legislation that leaves so much to interpretation and eventually, unrestricted exploitation. There’s been worse legislation, for sure. But none so open-ended. There’s a wickedness in my mind that forced me to draw a line in the sand over this. Patriotic Americans need to stop this.

  2. avatar James Earl Hoffa says:

    I blame this all on social media, the social media people have been blowing up the phone lines on Ryan’s office and his email. We’re doing the same thing to the NRA right now. And all the congressperson that are voting for house bill that will restrict rate of fire on all firearms.

  3. avatar John Boch says:

    With each passing day, emotions cool and rational thought returns. At least for normal folks.


    1. avatar MamaLiberty says:

      Yes, but you don’t get a second chance to make a first impression. All of the people who made their decisions on this in the heat of their emotional response to the LV massacre will NOT be changing their minds. Probably never. Especially if that emotional response feeds the already irrational opinions and decisions the snowflakes have. The great hope is that they don’t have any real idea what to do about it, and no courage to do anything even if they thought of something.

  4. avatar David N says:

    Weasels like him have excellent reverse gears

    1. avatar strych9 says:

      Mechanical weasels… that’s downright frightening.

  5. avatar MDH says:

    “Ooh I love to dance a little sidestep!”

  6. avatar Kenneth G Maiden says:

    Humm???? Having some trouble with trusting any of these gray suited overlords.

  7. avatar Noishkel says:

    GOOD. Not that I expect this kind of consistency from any neo-con scum bag to last, but it’s still nice to see some willingness to listen to the people in his constituency.

    As much as I still advocate a hardliner approve to this, we all know that we have to let the left have it’s screaming fit long enough for the next moral outrage to catch they’re attention.

  8. avatar MeRp says:

    I wrote to my con-man and told him that not only should he not support this pile and explained why it is a pile (ie that it would outlaw everything in the world), but also explained that he should make overtures towards party leadership to make sure this bill goes right where it belongs; the circular file.

    It is possible that he heard my plea, but far more likely that he sent my email to where this bill belongs, per standard operating procedure. Maybe I should be explicit about that; my con-man knows that nothing will knock him out of his seat so he completely ignores the input of his constituents; he’s a party-line R statist. Better than a party-line D statist… but only by a little.

  9. avatar TyrannyOfEvilMen says:

    We need to keep pressure on these bozos. It matters.

  10. avatar Matt says:

    This is great news

  11. avatar Curtis in IL says:

    Ryan’s Congressional district is right across the state line from me. The folks up there are already tired of his antics and growing more so. He may not be able to buy another election.

  12. avatar ozzallos says:

    I’m apparently on the Trump flash poll list, so the last one they sent me about taxes I pretty much marked “other” in every single question and told them this issue is not as important as the erosion of out gun rights in so many words.

  13. avatar Mike Oregon says:

    It must be very difficult to get through life with no moral compass and no beliefs or goals beyond profit and reelection.

    1. avatar HP says:

      Actually, it’s probably a lot easier that way. Just go where your greed and impulses take you. It’s decent, moral people like ourselves that wind up having a tougher road to hoe.

  14. avatar Ralph says:

    “Ryan’s newfound support for the NRA’s solution — asking the ATF to reverse their previous, completely rational decision approving bump fire stocks — is only a less-bad option.”

    Pretty much. This mass killing is a shit sandwich, and every day we have to take another bite.

  15. avatar Joe R. says:

    T H E _ S H IT _ C A N












    1. avatar barnbwt says:

      Going to Vegas, are you, or just full of crap? Seriously, you gotta tone it down a hair. We’re human beings here that have to read your rants, not a sweat sock you rub your two minutes hate out in.

      1. avatar strych9 says:

        “We’re human beings here that have to read your rants, not a sweat sock you rub your two minutes hate out in.”

        BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Oh man, that’s… genius.

      2. avatar TX_Lawyer says:

        Nobody has to read his rants. I always skip Cisco Kid’s, Jim’s, that guy with the long tag, and any replies to them.

      3. avatar HP says:

        Joe is one of those guys that is probably screen-shotted by the anti’s to help their cause. That aside, I do find some of what he says incredibly amusing.

  16. avatar Brosephus says:

    The problem with Ryan is that he’s often tempted to go for gun bans, because it might mean he might not look as DYEL mode as he does now. Unfortunately, no matter how many guns he bans, he will always be a skinny manlet and there will always be someone with bigger guns.

  17. avatar EJQ says:

    No, I don’t believe your Congressman and mine actually read the e-mails. However, someone in his/her office makes them aware that there are so many e-mails and phone calls that are either “for” or “against.” May check to see if the name matches with a registered voters list. Toss the ones who don’t/can’t vote, and then Congress knows how to take a stance. Just like us, he or she usually votes a bill on his or her paycheck.

  18. avatar _Tupa says:

    My letter in templet form, please edit for personal use.

    Attn: [Replace with representative’s name]

    Subject: Bills affecting 2nd Amendment Rights

    Synopsys: Vote “NO” on any and all bills banning “Rate Increasing Devices” and uphold the Constitution

    My name is [Name], I am a [State] resident, as well as a lawful and responsible gun owner, who supports the rights given to us by the constitution and its amendments. [I have sworn to uphold the constitution and have served three years in the United States Army, including a fourteen-month deployment to Iraq.]

    I am writing in opposition to any and all proposed bills banning “rate increasing devices” for firearms. I ask that you uphold the ideals of the constitution and vote down any bill banning “rate increasing devices” for firearms. Not only would such a bill arbitrarily dictate what constitutes a “rate increasing devise”, it would also be in direct opposition to the 2nd amendment. As such the cadence of my finger could be considered a “rate increasing device”.

    Using basic logic it is clear that no law, however well crafted, can stop people determined to break them. Often times such laws infringe upon our basic constitutional rights, netting nothing more than feel good theater.

    I digress.
    In regards to semi-automatic firearms; the only factor dictating the mechanical rate of fire, is the rate at which the trigger is pulled. What then constitutes a “rate increasing device”? The answer is, effectively anything. The act of bumpfiring can be performed simply using one’s thumb and the belt loop of one’s pants. Even a simple dowel can be used as a “rate increasing device”

    It is clear that this new round of gun control is an underhanded attempt to erode our constitutional freedoms, by chipping away at our rights. While today it may be a bumpstock, tomorrow it could be a competition trigger replacement, eventually it could lead to an outright ban of semi-automatic firearms.

    Where does it end? Does it stop at the 2nd amendment?

    Our founding members of the United States understood the importance of a Constitutional Republic. As such, it is your responsibility as a Senator/Congressperson to uphold our constitution, regardless of any prejudice or personal fears. Those who cannot uphold the constitution and the rights of the people will certainly not have my vote when up for re-election.

    On that note, I am doing everything in my power to educate my peers on what’s at stake, as well as your personal involvement in the matter.

    Please vote down any bills infringing on our constitutional rights, but more specifically vote against any bill in regards to “rate increasing devices” for firearms.

    Thank you for your service,

  19. Ryan is saving face. he can say that he did not back the ban and yet to the others he can say he tried to do something about it. so he is thinking of re-election and trying to make both sides happy. the ATF does not have the power to make up laws so if they try to do something about this they will get a lot of flack. and either way Ryan looks good. and that’s why he did what he did. expect more republicans to so the same. they are worried about re-election. and let’s keep the pro gun heat on them . especially since we are going to have to do this with out the NRA’s help.( and I think they really hurt themselves this time by trying to play both sides).

  20. avatar johnny108 says:

    All politicians are traitors.
    It’s in their nature- how else can they negotiate against an adversarial party?
    Never trust them.
    You cannot earn their faith. You can only rent it.

  21. avatar Winterborne says:

    My Congress Critter is John Yarmouth. Full on Progressive nut job. Only reason he keeps gettingg elected is because Louisville is trying so hard to be Berkley-on-the-Ohio. Bunch moonbats.

    So a waste of time.

  22. avatar Sivartius says:

    Honestly, I personally view even Freaky Feinstein’s bill as the lesser of 2 evils in this case. Laws can be overturned or repealed, and congresscritters who vote for it can be primaried. Does anyone here have a process for primarying an ATF mid-level beaurocrat? The IRS & veterans admin have shown them that the individuals responsible will never suffer. And if a law is struck down by the court a new one has to be written and voted on. If a beaurocratic regulation is struck down, the agency can change 1 word and reinstate it the next day.

  23. avatar Ralph says:

    I couldn’t imagine a Republican Speaker of the House more sleazy than John Boehner. And then Paul Ryan came along and suddenly Boehner looks good.

  24. avatar Mmmtacos says:

    Good news: Ryan backs off of anti firearms bill

    Bad news: Ryan backs off pretty much every bill anyway.

  25. avatar Buzz Word says:

    Congress will pass the buck to some faceless bureaucrat, who’ll rule over gun owners by “regulatory fiat,” as the article says. Up next: “Bullet buttons,” low-capacity magazines, the end of the single-action trigger, bans on pistol-grip rifles and shotguns, … ad infinitum.

    There’ll be no trade of bump-fire stocks for silencers as some naive commenters wish for. Ban one thing, you ban a thousand things.. that’s the way of bureaucracy.

    1. avatar barnbwt says:

      You mean Trump’s bureaucrat in Trump’s ATF, right? He’s already said he’s open to regs, so it isn’t like he’ll be blameless. I just hope he knows how immensely dumb it’d be to get blamed for the shooting AND for gun control (by Rs and Ds respectively)

  26. avatar Sam I Am says:

    RF –

    First you write that the NRA/Ryan two-step”….is only a less-bad option.” Then, you follow immediately with a full explanation of why the NRA-Ryan two-step is an absolute worse option.


  27. avatar Don says:

    Here’s a Clue. The BATF already Regulates Firearms in this way and has for over 50 Years. But this prevents a “LAW” from being passed which is damned near irrevocable and prevents Liberals from attaching all kinds of Gun Ban stuff to a bill at the last minute, which is what they want the ability to do.

  28. avatar TX_Lawyer says:

    I don’t care what ATF says. Bump fire stocks will be legal in the 5th Circuit after the first court challenge.

  29. avatar little horn says:

    told ya so. its all a PR stunt

    1. avatar DoomGuy says:

      You mean his backing off or initial support?

  30. avatar Mikail says:

    Ryan’s a worm who is more concerned with his next free vacation in DC than in representing the rights of the people he is supposed to represent.

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