Reflecting the growing split within the pro-Second Amendment community, Mark Larue of LaRue Tactical has let it be known he won’t be sad to see bump fire stocks go the way of the dodo. Staunch gun rights supporters like the Military Arms Channel aren’t happy about it. To recap . . .
Bump fire stocks have been widely available for six or seven years, since the ATF made the [entirely proper] determination that they aren’t machine guns. The Bureau ruled that bump fire stocks merely aid the shooter in pulling the trigger faster — without altering the firearm in contravention of the National Firearms Act and previous ATF interpretations.
But with video and audio from Las Vegas showing a man with a bump fire stock murdering more than 50 people and injuring another 500, the once-obscure range toy — SlideFire’s tag line: “Prepare to change the way you play” — made a push to outlaw them inevitable.
Eventually, a puff of white smoke emerged from Fairfax when the NRA handed down its official position on bump fire stocks:
To be fair, the NRA powers that be were in a difficult position. The average American can’t or won’t distinguish between a bump fire stock and a proper fully-automatic machine gun. It’s difficult to defend something most people thought was already illegal, a device just used to increase the death toll of innocent Americans.
So the NRA assumed what many thought was the only politically tenable position: a preemptive call for bump fire stock regulation. But by trying to head federal legislation off at the pass, they alienated gun rights advocates and ended up with a PR mess on their hands.
Since the Clinton assault weapons ban, the pro-gun side has taken a largely absolutist stance, steadfastly opposing any move to limit gun rights in any way. After a quarter century of almost un-interrupted success, rolling back unconstitutional carry laws and expanding the number and demographics of gun owners, the bump fire issue has bifurcated the gun rights community.
Yesterday, ten Republicans signed on to the House version of a vaguely-worded bill making it a felony to possess any device that “increases the rate of fire” of a legal firearm. More than a few gun owners blame the NRA for providing them the political cover to do so.
In our wildly un-scientific Twitter poll, opinions of the NRA’s position were split. Some 45 percent of respondents are dead set against the NRA’s “the ATF should do its job” stance. The remaining 55 percent agree — to one extent or another — that the NRA didn’t have many good options.
Mark LaRue’s support for bump fire stock regulation — if not an outright ban — further highlights the split. Will more gun companies and gun right supporters signal their willingness to jettison bump fire, either through regulation or in a poorly crafted bill? Will guns rights absolutists be saying “I told you so” down the line, when a legislatively-emboldened ATF wields the ban hammer on other gun parts? Or the guns themselves?
Watch this space.
Freedom cuts both ways. Buh-bye, LaRue.
I was probably never going to patronize Mr. LaRue anyway, but I probably will bring this up, if somebody else doesn’t anytime I see a discussion of his products on any forum.
Never heard of this guy. If only there was such a split among the citizen-disarmists!
Military Arms Channel nails it…This bill is NOT about “bump fire” it’s about the rate of fire of any part or parts that are designed to increase the rate of fire, will result in severe jail time.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sCLoIorYguU&t=28s
Military Arms Channel nails it…This bill is NOT about “bump fire” it’s about the rate of fire of any part or parts that are designed to increase the rate of fire; will result in severe jail time.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sCLoIorYguU&t
The NSSF is a paper tiger. The Left has now learned this. They will lose what power they have.
I’ve said for a few days now that I feel this is a tempest in a teapot. Legislatively and regulatory wise I still think that’s true.
However, I may have made a grave miscalculation in the overall statement. Perhaps it’s just me but it seems like the whole 2A community is basically tearing itself apart over this and that ain’t good. There is a lot of venom being spit and I’m not sure the wounds we’re opening up on each other are going to be the type that heal.
Ironically enough, this stupid little piece of plastic may be the undoing of a lot of potential future advancement simply due to the fact that we, the gun community ourselves, can’t decide if this thing is worth defending and would seemingly rather remove each other’s eyes with a grapefruit spoon than fight the fights we should be fighting. This is, IMHO, going to generate A LOT of bad blood within the community and people who basically agree on 99.9% of things are going to potentially refuse to work together in the future because of it.
And the antis are laughing all the way to the bank, er, ban.
Looks like American Defense is getting my business from now on. Would be quite a stunt if they offered to trade their equivalent mount of customers sending them their LaRues.
Well, I got a response, and my response to her response follows:
Hi David,
Thanks for reaching out with your concerns.
I can assure you Danielle did do research for her article, mainly citing Mother Jones and an article by Thom Hartmann in Truthout. All quotes included are the opinions of DePaul students.
This is her opinion, which she is entitled to just as you are entitled to yours.
I believe a healthy debate of opinions and speech is what makes this country strong. If you would like your opinion to be heard we are always open to submissions.
Best,
XXXXX
___________________________________________________
Hello XXXXX,
Thank you for your thoughtful response. I would humbly suggest that Danielle use less bias sources of research in the future. However that is her choice.
I believe you are very correct in your assertion that healthy debate has proven to be a genuine asset to prudent decision making. However, healthy debate, to be successful, must be based upon truth and good faith by the participants. My main issue is not Danielle’s opinion, but that fact that so much of the “statements of fact” within the article were not actually factual. Deflecting these incorrect “statements of fact” by the use of a student quote is improper and in my opinion unethical. This is the very core of the “fake news” complaint leveled at modern media.
I hate to sound so fervent, but truth in media, especially from a respected institution like ours, is the bedrock and insurance of a strong First Amendment. Each right enumerated in the Bill of Rights relies upon the other rights for support. The Second supports the First, The First supports the Eighth, and so on. Seeking to limit one right damages the strength of all the others, and I am always compelled to speak for the security and protection of our freedoms.
Again, thank you for your time and attention. I suspect that any article written in response would not be well received by your general readership, and I can respect your publication’s intent to stay within the good graces of its readers. If I am incorrect in my assumption, I will gladly submit an article presenting a factual case for the other side of the discourse.
Respectfully yours,
“Comments are closed.”
Fucking cowards.
No need. Learned decades ago that it’s up to me to protect me and mine. My awareness is a part of who I am. Never go anywhere unarmed or unprepared for a SHTF moment. I understand the world is full of criminals and nut cases. Hoping someone else will protect me and mine is a recipe for disaster.
Well, I’m not going to point any moral;
I’ll leave that for yourself
Maybe you’re still walking, you’re still talking
You’d like to keep your health.
But every time I read the papers
That old feeling comes on:
We’re waist deep in the Big Muddy
And the big fool says to push on.
— Pete Seeger
…that’s…virtually reversing his previous position.
That’s not a failure of eloquence, methinks…
“But with video and audio from Las Vegas showing a man with a bump fire stock murdering more than 50 people and injuring another 500…”
Ummmm…what’s this video and audio you speak of?
Last I checked there was no video of any person firing anything. And the gunshots could easily be from true full auto. We’ve just been told that the ALLEGED gunman ALLEGEDLY used bump-fire stocks…
Actual video and audio evidence actually contradicts the lone shooter storyline…
Need to change the article here as this is just plain not factual.
The stupidity is high… Or they are traitors who just want money.
Mr LaRue, its to late for you now. You had your chance. When a disaster hits people reveal themselves. Coward, hero, defender, or just trying to survive.
You sir are a coward.
I think realistically the bill would just ban bump stocks which suck anyway.
Your’re not even close. This bill will ban semi autos PERIOD!!
Not in the least. My situational awareness is very acute. For one, I have always been intensely observant and with a martial arts background, situation awareness fell into place. Also, we should all recognize where our highest vulnerability is. Granted, an incident or assault can occur virtually anywhere at anytime, but in all practicality, our most vulnerable times are when we are out and alone, for example walking to your car in a parking lot. That is when a person should employ their highest situational awareness. This can be done by scanning the entire area, not just in a persons immediate vicinity, or your little bubble. Watch for feet under cars which could give away someone hiding on the far side of the vehicle or other clues that could indicate behavior inconsistent with what normal activity for that area would be. Someone milling around in a parking lot at the grocery is inconsistent with someone coming and going from shopping. That should trigger red flags. When I come and go from the store, I always make sure my right hand (gun hand) is free. I never carry grocery’s in it. I carry them in the left hand which can also obscure me going for a weapon, which is IWB appendix. Additionally, use a shopping cart. A shopping cart can be used as a barrier to prevent someone getting close to you in an attack. You could even push it at an attacker, step back and draw. Recognizing a person highest vulnerability and planning for it is no different that having a planned escape route in your home for a possible fire, or having a plan for an earthquake, like what is done for the Great Shake Out https://www.shakeout.org/
These are skills everyone can hone and in doing so, enhance their personal safety.
Watching Tucker manhandle this idiot was like watching a baby seal get clubbed.
Ignoring the bill for a moment and simply going to “motivation” I think it’s important to point out some facts about the districts these folks represent, which I have happily dredged up for you all. It’s not exhaustive because… well this is the interwebz if you want details on every district look them up yourself.
Dent (PA) 15th District. Yes, it’s an R+4 district but it’s also 87.30% urban.
King (NY) 2nd District: South Shore Long Island. Nuff said.
Lance (NJ) 7th District. 90.38% urban and in NJ.
Meetlan (PA) 7th District. Phili suburbs.
Royce (CA) 39th District: District includes parts of L.A., Orange County and has gone “blue” eight of the last nine elections.
Smith (NJ) 4th District: 93% urban and in NJ.
Paulsen (MN) 3rd District: Suburbs on the Western side of the Twin Cities. 96% Urban.
Costello (PA) 6th District: 85.78% urban.
Curbelo (FL) 26th District: D+6
Ros-Lehtinen (FL) 27th District: South Miami-Dade D+5.
So we have 9/10ths of these people from the coasts. All represent “urban” areas and some of them have won elections in places where Democrats are pretty heavily favored.
No mystery why they’re jumping ship. Constituencies considered and all. As such I doubt lighting up their phone lines is going to change much unless those calls come from within their district which, as I think we all know, they won’t.
I get that people are pissed but this shit is a LONG way off from passing and the pro-gun groups have not yet begun to pressure the other folks in Congress. I still don’t see this bill making it out of Committee, never mind getting to a floor vote and then passing.
I was gonna buy into the whole new 244 Valkyrie at and Ammo they are coming out with. Guess he saved me a easy 5-7k.
Thanks mark!
Here’s an easy opinion to wrap your head around.
I don’t need a bump-fire stock. But I need you less.
I assume that you’re saying it with me.
Is the bump-fire issue a “sticking point” for me? NO, because this ain’t a sticking game.
Is that the same as 90% of Americans support UBC’s?
In any case it wouldn’t surprise me. Most Americans are worthless morons who hate the idea of true freedom and liberty because they’re more concerned with micromanaging the affairs of their fellow citizens than they are with countering the true threats to liberty like the good little soviets the establishment wants them to be.
God, Americans are so stupid…
I thought the 90’s were over a long time ago. Just goes to prove how easily your fellow citizen will so eagerly give up your rights (and mine).
Shouldn’t the NRA demand that this straight pull bolt be outlawed?!! Just think of how many more and faster shots can be gotten off than a regular bolt action. The straight pull bolt is just the bolt action equivalent of a bump stock! Something MUST be done … for the children!
For those whose sarcdar is non-functional … /SARC
I used to think that bumpstocks were a useless gimmick and I still do, but if if the government is going to tell me I can’t have one, well . . . get me grandfathered in.
Jon, you always get me the best presents.