NRA bump stock ban national rifle association
Previous Post
Next Post

NRA national rifle association bump stock ban

The National Rifle Association has issued an initial comment regarding today’s news that the Trump Administration will be banning bump fire stocks (and current owners have 90 days to dispose of them or become felons).


The National Rifle Association is “disappointed” with the Trump administration’s plan to outlaw bump stocks, which allow semi-automatic weapons to fire continuously.

Spokeswoman Jennifer Baker says the Justice Department should provide amnesty for gun owners who already have the devices. …

Baker says the regulation “fails to address the thousands of law-abiding Americans” who followed the government’s previous guidance.

True enough. But forcing gun owners to get rid of their “assault rifles,” standard capacity magazines, or whatever gun-grabbers deem to be out of bounds — with no compensation — is a longstanding tradition.

Oh, and in case it slipped your mind, the NRA was on board with the ATF taking another look at bump fire stocks after the Mandalay Bay shooting. Here’s an excerpt from their statement at the time:

Despite the fact that the Obama administration approved the sale of bump fire stocks on at least two occasions, the National Rifle Association is calling on the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATFE) to immediately review whether these devices comply with federal law.  The NRA believes that devices designed to allow semi-automatic rifles to function like fully-automatic rifles should be subject to additional regulations.

And additional regulation is exactly what we now have.

Previous Post
Next Post


  1. I’m sure everyone is ready to turn in their bump stock…😅🤣😂😅🤣😂🤣😂😅🤣😂. I can just see the lines of people waiting to turn them in…😅🤣😂😅🤣😂😅🤣😂. I just can’t stop laughing…

    • Actually, it is funny. All the NRA members, all the law enforcement defenders, all the Trump nationalists, all the water the tree of liberty guys are shaking in their slippers. “Oh please, your honor, save us from your coworkers. I beg of you! You are our only hope until Jesus returns.”

      If you keep that piece of liberty you will be a felon. It will be a matter of time for you to become a convicted felon. Unless the government decides to treat you like they did Hillary. Who we kidding? They will come to shoot your dog and rough you up as they take you to your cage. “Just enforcing the law, that is my job.”

      Get some!

        • The “amnesty” plea is BS. The NRA should file suit if he signs the order. Bump stocks do not fit the definition of a machine gun. “Words” have meaning. Words are in “laws.” If the words aren’t there in the law, the ban isn’t there.

      • Hopefully the gun community will step away from the authoritarian apolgia and the blue line worship. That bullshit has been going on far too long.

        police aren’t your friends. Of course be civil and cordial, it doesn’t pay to draw unnecessary attention to yourself, although keep it in the back of your mind that all hypothetically shitty laws will lead them to throwing you in a rape cage. They value their jobs more than your rights.

    • Trump can sign it. Then someone can immediately file suit and the Supreme Court can knock it down. If you want to ban bump stocks, then you have to have the legislation to ban them. You don’t just order the ATF to do whatever they want. There is these things called “laws”. And the laws have these things called “text” in them. And the text has meaning. If the meaning is not there, you don’t get to have your ban.

      • There is a very important part within that supreme text: “shall not be infringed.” Have to get rid of that first, at least in theory.

        Most Americans these days don’t have one of the two texts to live by. Those texts being the Bible or the U.S. Constitution. Most law enforcement don’t carry around the U.S. Constitution or own one.

    • sounds like the NRA’s trying to cover their ass…to a large degree they set these events in motion…

    • The stock will be considered a machine gun or at least a machine gun part. They will essentially treat it as a machine gun. Can you own a newly manufactured machine gun if you simply stop the fun switch from moving to fun? No. You are a felon.

      • “Can you own a newly manufactured machine gun if you simply stop the fun switch from moving to fun? No. You are a felon.”

        The answer is a bit more nuanced than that –

        You can LEGALLY buy de-militarized machine guns, with the receivers cut with a torch in prescribed ways by the BATF. I’ve seen STEN guns legally sold in such a manner…

    • “Would it be legal to just modify these stocks not to slide?”

      Considering what the penalty is for being caught with an un-registered MG is, why risk it?

      Now, I will offer some speculation, and that’s *all* it is, speculation on the question asked, SPECULATION –

      Bolted together is a no-go, since it could easily be un-done.

      What *MAY* be legal is some way to melt-fuze (AKA plastic ‘weld’) the sliding parts together, so they cannot move.

      But *DO NOT* rely on my speculation…

  2. Thanks for including the last paragraph Dan. They are not disappointed, they got what they wanted. Also, watch their revenue increase.

        • C’mon, RBG, broken ribs hurt like a motherfvcker.

          Hurts real bad to cough. If Ruthie were to catch a bad cold, or the flu, it *could* kill her.

          Invite lots of little kids over to hang out with you, RBG. You know the kind, the snot-nose variety, hacking and coughing constantly…

    • “If you get caught lie, lie and lie some more.”

      The FBI is counting on people doing that when they ‘investigate’ them.

      Ask Martha “It’s a good thing” Stewart how that worked out for her…

  3. The National Rifle Association is “disappointed” with the Trump administration’s plan to outlaw bump stocks, which allow semi-automatic weapons to fire continuously.

    I’m disappointed in the NRA for only being disappointed and not filing legal action against the ban.
    Not another penny for the NRA!
    Sent money to GOA and FPC for the 2A fight that our (not so) great NRA doesn’t seem to want to be bothered to defend.

  4. Under which law can the ATF offer an amnesty for post-ban machine guns? The ATF has exactly zero Congressional authority to issue NFA registrations for bump stocks as post-ban machine guns. More smoke and mirrors from the NRA.

    • 27 CFR 479.101 – Registration of firearms:

      (b) Each manufacturer, importer, and maker shall register each firearm he manufactures, imports, or makes in the manner prescribed by this part. Each firearm transferred shall be registered to the transferee by the transferor in the manner prescribed by this part. No firearm may be registered by a person unlawfully in possession of the firearm except during an amnesty period established under section 207 of the Gun Control Act of 1968 ( 82 Stat. 1235).

      Emphasis mine. Note, the US v Miller court case which “tested” the NFA found that it ran afoul of the 5th amendment (possession of an unregistered NFA item without any ability to register it constituted self-incrimination). The GFA ‘addressed’ this by giving the executive branch the ability to create arbitrary amnesty periods where one could ‘register’ an NFA item.

      Given that bump-stocks are ‘once legal, now illegal’, it again runs afoul of the 5th amendment.

      • I guess I found what you mean, the GCA of 1968, Section 207(d), see

        “(d) The Secretary of the Treasury, after publication in the Federal Register of his intention to do so, is authorized to establish such periods of amnesty, not to exceed ninety days in the case of any single period, and iinni unity from liability during any such period, as the Secretary determines will contribute to the purposes of this title.”

        I don’t think that applies here, though. Such amnesty for registration of an NFA item would only apply to pre-1986 machine guns. The 1986 machine gun ban simply does not allow for registering post-1986 machine guns. The possession of a post-1986 machine gun is simply illegal according to 18 U.S.C. § 922 (o) (B). That’s why an amnesty for bump stocks would require an act of Congress.

      • Someone should march down to an ATF field office with a bump stock and a bill for fair market value. They will refuse to pay, the owner will refuse to surrender the bump stock, and that will set up the fight.

        One could argue that by violating the takings clause, Trump has set up a court battle he will lose. I’m not giving him such credit, but that’s what should happen. All other issues (“it’s not really a machine gun”, for example) are irrelevant.

  5. I’m not sure what the NRA wanted, this is exactly what they asked for…

    “Despite the fact that the Obama administration approved the sale of bump fire stocks on at least two occasions, the National Rifle Association is calling on the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATFE) to immediately review whether these devices comply with federal law. The NRA believes that devices designed to allow semi-automatic rifles to function like fully-automatic rifles should be subject to additional regulations. In an increasingly dangerous world, the NRA remains focused on our mission: strengthening Americans’ Second Amendment freedom to defend themselves, their families and their communities. ”

    OK, they asked for this, and got exactly what they asked for.

    • They don’t want gun owners to become felons because they won’t be able to buy more guns. That’s their major issue. So do it for the NRA: Turn in your bump fire stocks. We will just fight it in courts indefinitely until some day we win our 2nd Amendment back.

  6. BuT hiLlaRy WoUld HaVe BeEn WoRse. Yes she absolutely would have been. Now that has nothing to do with the fact that people on the right are now defending politicians on the right for enacting NRA prompted gun control. If bump stock bans don’t bother you because they are dumb and you don’t own one then you miss the point. The government has no right to dictate how people exercise their 2A rights. Don’t think for a second that pistol braces or standard capacity mags couldn’t just as easily be next. At least when anti gun attacks come from the left, the 2A community comes together and recognizes a common enemy.

      • It will be for the worse I think.

        Pence, being the quiet guy in the corner, is scary dude and I believe he will be even more right wing than DJT will be. He will certainly be more pro-establishment and pro-national security state, at any rate.

        Of course, he will be more personable and civil than DJT, which will cause most of the country to ignore the real fat fuckery that he will be doing like what they did with BHO.

        The democratic party? forget it. There will *NEVER* be a pro-2A democrat ever again to run for president. Them days are over with. That party has permanently hitched their wagon to the ‘eventual disarmament’ campaign (disguised as ‘common sense regulations’ of course)

        • Ignorance is bliss!

          With the Democrat House, there will be never-ending political fireworks aimed at President Trump. President Trump’s ego does get in his way and he will do or say something stupid, again. He may willingly or accidentally reveal that he did commit a crime or actually commit a crime. Some of his shady past may come to light too (in his tax returns, for example).

          The Democrat House can and will impeach him for whatever they deem is sufficient. As for the Senate, one may want to read the rules for removal from office. It requires “the concurrence of two thirds of the members present”. This may give Republican Senators the option to not vote yes on the removal, but to support it by being not present.

          This is a purely political process and removal is simply not going to happen as long as President Trump has significant backing in the voting population. Impeachment without removal may actually work to his advantage, as it is seen as an attempted overthrow of the presidency and reversal of the 2016 election.

          However, if President Trump continues to lose support in his own ranks, then that is an entirely different story. “Gun control Donald” has certainly lost support within the 2A community yesterday. A community that strongly supported him in the 2016 election.

          Will President Trump get invited to the 2019 NRA Annual Meeting? Will he ever get invited again? The NRA itself has already received significant damage from this bump stock ban debacle. Will the people ever trust President Trump again when he tells them that he is a pro-2A candidate?


        • “The Democrat House can and will impeach him (Trump) for whatever they deem is sufficient.”

          Let ’em. They won’t get a Senate conviction.

          What effect did impeaching Bill Clinton have on Clinton’s presidency?

          Nothing detrimental to his presidency. If anything, it solidified support for him with his Leftist base…

  7. NRA let this happen on purpose. They knew with Trump membership cash flow would drop. They cucked and be rest assured our mail boxes will be getting flooded with letters begging for money.
    NRA is a business it no longer represents us.

  8. N.R.A. is feeling the STING ….. Revenue is Waaaayyy Down $$$ because of their non-stop compromising to keep THEMSELVES in business !

    NRA Joint Statement :” The NRA believes that devices designed to allow semi-automatic rifles to function like fully-automatic rifles should be subject to additional regulations. “Please come back with your MONEY America …… we were ‘ just kidding ‘ trust us.

    NRA is also fully aware BATF is an ILLEGALLY created agency , but will never challenge them on those grounds.

    Legal Documentation , By Cooper / Meador ( BATF / IRS Criminal Fraud )

    If I had stood in line for hours to see a Trump rally …… this wouls PISS me off even more.

  9. Disappointed huh?!? You the NRA put the thought into the orange one. Helluva’ job guy’s…I got 18 months left on my NRA membership. I doubt I’ll pony up again…

  10. Here’s my plan:

    1. Not voting in 2020.
    2. If the ban is not struck down by courts, then voting (D).

    Let the whole thng collapse.

    • My plan was to have Trump elected for one term so he would throw a wrench into the gears and expose the machine. Then we would elect someone much better in 2020. In those four years leading up to a new leader the Republicants were supposed to wake up and realize they are a bunch of losers and they most reform to defeat the leftists. If they fixed their NRA and party we would save the country from the tyrants and make our way towards a slow restoration of liberty.

      Right now we are still losing, although the system has been exposed. The media is exposed, corporations are exposed, the Republican and Democrat party is exposed, the NRA is exposed, Hollywood is exposed, Alex Jones is exposed, etc, yet we have not made it to a reformation. If we don’t come to terms with our situation and fix our shit we will lose the country for good because the culture is in a transitional phase at this point. If we fail it will be up to the generations that come after our deaths to somehow bring it back from the ashes without guns.

      When this country falls the entire world will be worse off because there will be no where to run to.

      • @CZJay: Interesting analysis; I think I agree. So, after all this exposure, the elites who would govern us have not YET collapsed. Well, Rome wasn’t burned in a day.

        What comes up for me in this description – a fair one – is that it’s going to take some time and tenacity to bring the exposure to the point where the judicial and political systems will be motivated to do their work. It could be doubly-so in our situation.

        Do you remember the gas crisis? That got us all out in the streets, idling our cars while waiting in gas lines. The French are donning their yellow jackets. When things are intolerable, then the masses rise.

        What has Trump done? He’s taken the economic crisis away! Unemployment is low; wages are rising. Profits are strong. And, the public is ever the more-so complacent. Absent some huge shock, it’s going to take a long time to get the country united to do something decisive.

        What was the last huge shock? 9/11 – and that was 17 years ago. The shock lasted for a few years; then dissipated.

        So, unless there is some new shock, it’s going to take a very long time for the effects of the exposures you write of to come out of the wash. What will be needed to maintain the pressure?

        I think the answer is a personality like Trump’s. He won’t be beaten-down into complacency. The more pressure they put on him the harder he fights. Will he finish this job in 2 years? Clearly not. He really has only 1 more year to be effective; and then, the campaign for re-election. The RINOs will hope to find someone to run against Trump; or, hope Trump loses to a Democrat. The Democrats will hope to beat Trump. Doubtful that there will be a breakthrough in the 4’th year of Trump’s 1’st term.

        Should Trump be replaced it will be business-as-usual for the foreseeable future. Conversely, if Trump gets re-elected, then it will be 3 – 4 more years of exposure and continuing pressure to break-up the swamp and drain it. The job won’t be finished in a second 4-year term; however, there may be enough momentum developed that the effort will carry-on under Pence.

        I see no continuing effort should a GOP candidate with a Ford-like personality replace Trump. Certainly not if a Democrat candidate with a Biden-like personality succeeds Trump.

        As I think this through, it makes me wonder about my priorities.

        Which is more important? Bump-stocks, magazines, silencers, AWBs, and on and on? Yes, Trump could have been better on all these issues, but how important are improvements along these lines right now? Bump-stocks aren’t really important. Magazines are, but there are so many now that they can’t evaporate; they will just go underground. We’ve learned to wait a year and pay $200 for silencers. The AWBs are a farce that we have learned to work-around. Our gun-rights can be eroded in the next 20 years, but they won’t disappear in that time frame.

        Exposing the swamp for what a cesspool it is and draining it? How important is that? Given that it’s a long-term project, who will get it done? If Trump has 8 years in office can he bring the project to the point of no-return? Could it be carried-on to the point of substantial completion in an 8-year Pence administration?

        We might ask whether we would have been better off without Trump and with Hillary in the Oval Office. We might have been in a shooting revolution today instead.

        It’s more constructive to ask whether we would be better off running some other Republican in 2020 rather than Trump. Or, whether we would be better off if some Democrat wins the Presidency in 2020. It’s hard to imagine any OTHER Republican getting the GOP nomination and then WINNING in 2020. So, the alternative to Trump in 2020 would seem to be some Democrat. Is there any Democrat whom we would prefer to Trump for the 2021 – 2024 term of office?

        All these questions are a lot to ponder. Maybe I’ll just forget about them and go back to my cave and complain about the infringement of having to wait a year and pay a $5 transfer tax every time I want to buy another AOW.

        • This seems to be a revisionist history in which the economic crisis of 2008 wasn’t a “huge shock”, but yet in 2017 there was still some economic crisis which Trump supposedly saved us from.

        • I’m glad to finally see some strategic thinking. Trump has done more good than any other president has done n their entire terms, n my lifetime. No one known could have or would have fought like he has for us. I understand the frustration with this issue, but something was inevitably gonna happen regardless considering the fact that we’re talking about an addition that allows someone to shoot their weapon without having to stop allowing for a very high number of deaths. They wouldn’t allow a device to b sold that would attach to a gun turning it n2 a full automatic gun. I know there r plenty of ways someone could take out large numbers of people just as easily as this bump stock. I don’t like any rights to b taken away especially with guns because it’s a method used by many that help reach a goal that couldn’t b attained n one giant step, so u take a little at a time until u reach that same point. I could b wrong, but Trump thinks way ahead before making moves, so maybe this will turn out differently than we think, I don’t know. I DO know, though, that I’m not gonna turn my back on the man over this. He’s got a lot pan his plate and a big agenda that I back and he’s the only person that’s gonna even try to clean things up n our govt. I think he knows as well that 2A patriots will fight this and win all the while showing the left that he can and will compromise on tough subjects so they need to as well for things we want, all the while not really giving anything up as long as we fight for it. Last thing…I’m not as up on all of this as maybe I should b, and more than willing to take yalls knowledge into consideration and learn from it so ur intake on this is really desired.

  11. I got the usual stuff in the mailbox today. Them asking for money. Within the last hour, I inserted my membership card in the donation envelope and placed it in the mailbox on the street with the red flag raised. Future mailings will be noted to “return to sender”.

  12. Why is the NRA surprised? This is exactly what the Commiewealth of Massivetwoshits did. No grandfathering, no machine gun license issued, just Draconian penalties for owning a piece of plastic.

    In MA, simple possession is punishable from 3.5 years to life.

  13. NRA leadership is a bunch of two faced bastards. Please ban bump fire stocks, but they are disappointed owners can’t keep them.

  14. I would have loved to be a fly on the wall in that NRA meeting.

    I suspect that since the BATFE told Obama twice that bump-stocks were not a something they could drop the ban hammer on that the NRA expected the same result this time.

    One could say that such an expectation blew up in their face but then the NRA will probably get a ton of donations to help fight the ban so maybe that was the plan. Or not. Whatever. At this point I’m tired of this shit. There’s no need for Bloomberg or MDA or Everytown to put their noses to the grindstone, if we’re to lose, the reason will be the fights between gun owners of various types. FUDD vs. Tactical, GOA/whatever vs NRA, those willing to give up a bump stock vs those who scream it’s cowardice and on and on. They’re all flavors of the same shit-flavored popsicle.

    Someone on another story pointed out that Trump stated that Democrats have terrible policy but stick together and march as one while on the other side Republicans fight amongst each other. The same is true on the pro-2A side. We’re not united but the grabbers are. You can see this play out politically on other topics with the infighting between certain Conservatives and Libertarians (that’s just an example).

    2A, GOP, Conservative, Libertarian… whatever. It comes down to this: We fight about how much freedom the individual should have and often fight each other over minutia on this topic. The other side hates freedom in general and wants it replaced with governmental control. As such, they’re united in trying to centralize power while we argue about whether or not someone who smokes weed can be trusted with a firearm or some other trivial nonsense.

    • Either you side with liberty or you don’t. It’s not complicated unless you are trying to gain power for yourself.

      Once someone thinks about their success they start to argue about how things should be setup because they want the throne. Republicants want the throne just as much as the other leftists.

      People need to realize that the Republican party are Democrats in drag. There are some people in the party who are there because they have no other choice, but they don’t really think of themselves as Republicants. That’s why there is arguing in the Republican party — there are two different parties in one trying to determine which path is the future.

      The Democrats are united in their march towards a future of communism. Socialism is the highway to communism. The current Republican party is full of socialists. So of course the Democrats are going to be victorious until we expel the Republicants. Never forget the Democrats are smarter than Republicants.

      If you let the enemy sleep in your FOB they won’t need to take heavy casualties to get to you.

      • “Either you side with liberty or you don’t. It’s not complicated unless you are trying to gain power for yourself.”

        Or you don’t care about anything past keeping what you have. FUDDs don’t want power they just don’t give a fuck about you or your guns. As long as they get to keep their bolt gun they’re happy. If that means you lose your semi-autos it’s no skin off their nose.

    • @Strych

      Not that you asked, but as a Leftie who will never be regarded as a proper “person of the gun” no matter what, this is what I see from the outside:

      There are a lot of gun owners who think other gun owners shouldn’t be allowed to have guns. It’s ironic. But it’s what I see as a relative newcomer to the world of shooting. No one will openly say that, but it comes across well enough in all the insults and reasons to exclude people.

      You shouldn’t have guns if you’re not a hunter.
      You shouldn’t have guns if you’re a cop.
      You shouldn’t have guns if you’re not an outdoor person who learned when you were 8.
      You shouldn’t have guns if you refuse to own a .22.
      You shouldn’t have guns if you vote Democrat.
      You’re not a real gun person if you only do tactical stuff.

      On and on and on it goes. The thing about everyone having access is lip service only. In reality, what I see is that a lot of people are looking to exclude others for various reasons. You constantly see it playing out in the comment section. I see it play out every single time I post a comment of any kind, as though not being in the “special club” means I have no right to say anything at all although I’m willing to bet money I am more serious about my firearms practice than a lot of other folks. But let me choose a different vote and suddenly I’m a traitor or “tard” or whatever it is.

      None of this builds respect for people who own guns. None of this builds any kind of real community. If you’re a real gun person you have to do things OUR way. That’s how it comes across to those of us who are considered “outsiders.”

      Yeah, that never works out. And that’s what the Democrats figured out. That we had to be inclusive, that we had to listen, that we had to get that disagreement is part of the deal, not just kicking people out of participation because they didn’t fit a narrowly defined set of criteria. That seems to be working well for us. Maybe the gun community could try it out, though I realize there’s some kind of mass allergy to anything suggested by a Blue.

      • Some of it’s exclusivity and some of it is the powertrip of being able to tell other people what to do on whatever the topic may be. A shockingly large percentage of people get off on telling other people what they can and cannot do. They might say they don’t get off on it but they do.

        “Yeah, that never works out. And that’s what the Democrats figured out. That we had to be inclusive, that we had to listen, that we had to get that disagreement is part of the deal, not just kicking people out of participation because they didn’t fit a narrowly defined set of criteria. That seems to be working well for us.”

        I was with you up until you said this. No offense here, but the elite of the Democratic Party are not inclusive at all and therefore neither is the Party. They’re exclusive group-think assholes who don’t believe in freedom at all. The same is true with their media enablers and their followers in academia.

        Sorry, but “inclusive” people don’t try, at every damn turn, to shut down actual honest conversation and debate with name-calling and lies. They don’t trash people publicly for an honest disagreement. They don’t go out of their way to fuck over the entire country while claiming it’s “helping the poor/disenfranchised” etc. They don’t punish people academically, professionally or socially for simply holding a different point of view.

        I don’t have anything against you and I know you get a lot of shit on this website, sorry about that, but on this I simply cannot agree with you. I’ve seen how the Left operates, which is why I personally quit the Liberal side of things when I was 23 and changed teams. The Left isn’t all Democrats but the Left has taken over the Democratic Party. Their views are anything but inclusive. They’re anti-freedom, anti-free thought, anti-science, anti-logic, anti-individual, anti-fact and, quite frankly, just plain mean spirited dickheads who will attack you and actively try to ruin your life if you step out of line in terms of their dogma. They’re not even 1% as smart and educated as they think they are. They’re petulant children who unfortunately hold a hell of a lot of power.

        Personally I find a lot of the shit you get on this website to be reprehensible and I respect you for taking it as well as you do. However, on this one I think you’re completely misguided. Also, I’m not saying that Republicans are great or even good. I’m just noting the fact that today’s Democratic Party isn’t what you seem to think it is.

        • @Strych

          I respect your viewpoint. Mine is different. Why? Because I stayed within the Blue side and work with it. All of it, from the far left everyone should be polyamorous and queer camp to the radical feminists to the centrists or even somewhat conservative Democrats, like myself.

          I can do that because I did not leave. Not having left gives me the power to speak to the issues and to remind everyone that inclusivity is a huge part of what our platform is about. There is plenty of disagreement and spirited debate that you will not see unless you are on the inside; a lot of passionate, reasoned discussion that you will never hear as long as anyone Blue is characterized as somehow deficient.

          I have said repeatedly on this forum that I am surrounded by liberal people who not only are not anti gun, they own guns. Every time I say this I get shouted down even though the people shouting me down have no idea what they are talking about because they don’t actually know what goes on inside the Blue camp. I do know what goes on inside the Blue camp because I’m freaking Blue. There are a lot of liberal gun owners who feel excluded and have given up on trying to participate in the wider gun community because of the constant name calling. Also because of the anti-gay, anti-choice, anti-immigrant and religious stuff that we find abhorrent and that has nothing to do with guns. The gun community is not interested in listening to us and as a result has lost the biggest base of support that could actually influence the Democratic Party.

          That’s the truth of this deal.
          How do I know?
          Because I’m a liberal gun owner and a Democrat.

        • Strangely, or perhaps not, what I always think of around this are things that my shooting teacher says,

          If you’re not winning, don’t spend time griping about not winning. Spend your time looking at why the people winning are winning and look at what they are doing right that you’re not.

          Don’t bemoan failure. Look at it as a lesson in what you need to work on.

          The gun community needs to work on inclusiveness and diversity. These are the things that work these days. It’s what’s carrying the Democratic Party and will continue to carry it forward. We liberal gun owners have been saying this over and over. I just keep wondering how many smack downs it’s going to take from your own side for anyone to listen. Rejecting something that’s actually working because it’s a new idea is patently stupid. At least in the world of my shooting training it is.

          Just my opinion.

        • I don’t pretend to know the future but I will tell you that there’s a very high chance that one day you will engage in an honest debate and find out how nasty the Left can be. Liberal isn’t the Left and the Left is anything but liberal. A liberal gun owner can easily exist. I have no trouble believing this because I know it’s true.

          The difference is that a liberal doesn’t believe they are absolutely correct about everything and have the right to dictate to others what they can and cannot do. A Leftist does believe that they have this power and they believe that, because they are superior, they SHOULD have it.

          Years back, in the heady days of aught-9 I returned home after college and wrote a fairly reasonable op-ed to the local newspaper which was actually published. You know what that got me in the Leftist area where my parents live? Death threats. People threatening to burn down my family’s home. My family physician expressed even concern for my safety and that of my parents when he didn’t even know about the threats. He just knew that “you don’t say that around here”.

          How exactly is this inclusive? Shall I rattle off another, literally, 50 or so instances of such “inclusive” behavior that I have experienced simply for voicing an opinion that didn’t jive with Lefty views? Most of which occurred while I was still young and stupid enough to consider myself a liberal?

          Not to mention, how exactly has the Left’s recent activity on gay rights, abortion, immigration or religion been “inclusive”? Seems to me, as someone who believes in choice, gay rights, intelligent immigration and who is not religious, that the Left has been ramming things down other people’s throats and calling it “inclusive” while using pure vitriol instead of logical argument and rational policy. They just get away with it by screaming that people who disagree are bigots and doing so loud enough that they scare a lot of people.

        • @Strych

          Sure. That happens on all the sides. Right left whatever. And on the blue side, you know who stands up and yells back?


          Because I’m allowed to do that. And I do. And I vigorously take on flawed thinking and prejudice and point out how stupid it is. And a lot of times, I win people over. Even if the only leverage that lets me hammer in an idea is that I’m also Blue, it’s the chink that splits the iceberg.

          You are always going to have intolerant people no matter what. I’ve successfully defended gun rights to many leftists. It can be done if it’s assumed that there is going to be some hotheaded elbow shoving along the way. There will always be those who do not agree and that is alright too.

          In my opinion the NRA fucked up by going in the Russian direction. Who knows but it looks to me like they figured they’d be getting their cash flow from Russian oligarchs if their deal worked out with DJT and so fuck the American people. That’s why I stopped supporting them. But that’s just me.

          Thanks for the civil discourse, btw.

        • “In my opinion the NRA fucked up by going in the Russian direction. Who knows but it looks to me like they figured they’d be getting their cash flow from Russian oligarchs if their deal worked out with DJT and so fuck the American people.”

          This is the kind of thing I don’t get from either side. Let’s look at a few facts here.

          Butina started a gun rights organization in Russia. It makes sense that she would look for support from groups like the NRA. But that’s not reasonable! Sure it is, no one suggests it’s improper for Israel to support Jewish groups in the United States with the goal of lobbying Congress to support Israel. This isn’t much different. It’s cultivating ties with an organization that has political influence in this country in the hopes that our country will pressure her country into doing something she wants, in this case things revolving around gun rights.

          On top of that the idea that this has something to do with a conspiracy involving DJT basically cannot be true because Butina cozied up to the NRA at least a year before DJT announced or was even considered to be a potential candidate for POTUS. She and the NRA would have to know the future for this to be true. No one knows the future. She also met the Treasury undersecretary, Federal Reserve Vice Chairman and people from the State Department under the Obama Administration. Was Obama colluding with Russia to get DJT, who hadn’t announced his candidacy yet, elected to POTUS? Doubtful.

          Butina’s crime is “not registering as an agent of Russia”. However, as far as I have seen, I can say that she definitely failed to register and certainly “acted as an agent” in a lobbying capacity but I have seen no evidence that she did this on behalf of the government of the Russian Federation. The allegation is that she did this “on behalf of the Russian government” due to her relationship with Aleksandr Torshin. However, it would seem that on some level Torshin and Butina share the opinion that Russia’s weapons laws should be liberalized which, in and of itself, could explain her relationship with him.

          On top of all of this, imagining for a moment that Butina WAS working for the Russian Federation, absolutely NOTHING she did in that capacity was illegal. What was illegal was failing to file the proper paperwork with the Attorney General’s office. Had she done that then there never would have even been an allegation against her.

          So why did she plead guilty? Well, just look at Gen. Flynn. The guy fought the charges Mueller brought against him tooth and nail right up until the time Flynn went broke and had to sell his house. Then, completely out of resources with which to fight the charge, he suddenly gave up. Is that a coincidence? Maybe, but it stretches credulity to believe that Flynn suddenly had a change of heart and decided to come clean at exactly the same time the government bankrupted him. More likely he realized he was fucked and decided that the best option was to minimize further damage to himself and his family rather than soldier on.

        • Gotta love the more extremist claims that Ms. Butina and the NRA funneled $30 million from Russia to the trump campaign. Not only is that less than half what Bloomberg spent against them, but assumes that they got $0 from their few million members or from the gun manufacturers (whom we’re constantly told the NRA is only a front for). Obviously false claim, but the gun grabbers on social media love to spread it around as truth.

      • “..Maybe the gun community could try it out, though I realize there’s some kind of mass allergy to anything suggested by a Blue.”

        If you are looking for something specific then you are probably going to find it.

        I see the gun community as a very welcoming group. I am not sure why you don’t. Yes there are a few that are generally a-holes but in any group larger than about four you are going to have that. If you are going to toss the rest of the group into some ‘other’ category worthy of derision because of the few then maybe it better you stay on whatever outside you think yourself part of.

        • Why do I think that?


          Look up just about every piece I’ve ever written for TTAG and read through all the accusatory, negative, nasty comments.

          It’s all out there in print. I don’t need to make any of that up. And strangely even though supposedly I am the liberty hating Communist, I’m getting straight up Communist screed thrown at me. Everything I write is lies, or a plant on the part of the Democratic Party. Which is hilarious, because if I was an actual plant, I would never say I’m openly Democratic. I would do what the Russia lovers are doing – pretend I’m a Red and work it from the inside to create doubt.

          I have a lot of liberal/libertarian gun friends who read my pieces here. They’re utterly appalled at the lack of courtesy and class that commenters here show toward anyone “not like them.” They ask me how such disrespectful behavior expects to be met with support.

          Oh well, it’s just the way it is.

        • “Look up just about every piece I’ve ever written for TTAG and read through all the accusatory, negative, nasty comments.”

          I could say exactly, exactly the same thing. You have to keep in mind that a website like this has a self-selected population. Anything with a self-selected population is going to have a larger percentage of people who feel very strongly about whatever it is that they’re self-selecting for.

          Therefore it’s not surprising that there are nasty opinionated comments. I got loads of them from older folks who didn’t understand why I was writing what I was writing (because RF asked me to) and others who complained about just about everything else. Heck, I even had someone tell me they could make that Exo Mountain Gear backpack I reviewed for like $20 or some such horseshit.

      • ” I see it play out every single time I post a comment of any kind, as though not being in the “special club” means I have no right to say anything ”

        I don’t think anyone on this blog is saying, or even implying, that you have no right to speak your mind here. I don’t read every comment, so I can’t say with certainty that it doesn’t happen. But I do think you try to maintain a presence here the exceeds your credibility, and that is fair game for critical commentary.

        • Thanks for the comment and being civil.

          My point, which I have repeatedly stated over and over again, and which no one here seems to ever listen to, is that I am not seeking nor was I ever seeking “credibility.” I am an artist and a writer and one of the things I find interesting to write about is guns. That’s it and that’s all. I am not paid to do this nor have I asked to be. I simply do it because it’s interesting for me. I’m clear about why I’m doing it and it’s actually really simple, not part of some kind of Democratic Satanist Communist Secret Agent Regime. I have always been a writer, and guns are just one of the things I sometimes write about.

          If there was a list of requirements or some kind of resume I was supposed to submit in order to write pieces here, I was not told about or made aware of such requirements, nor have I been asked for such credentials yet. I write opinion pieces based on my thoughts at the time, or little fluff things about gear and such. It is exactly what it appears to be and I have never once misrepresented or lied about my level of experience or said that my opinions can never change. Like any artist and growing person, I am always taking in new information and growing from it.

          But: This is a free gig. And there are lots of people who write screeds about gear and all the other usual topics. You do not need one more person who writes gear reviews, there are already tons of people doing that who are great at it. I write about the stuff that interests me. That’s it. That’s all. Quite often there seems to be the idea that I’m supposed to earn my way into what appears to be a boys’ club. But I never asked to be part of a boys’ club and I sure as hell didn’t show up to infiltrate one either. I have a demanding profession, a partner, clients, friends, dance training and firearms training to keep up with. That’s more than enough stuff for me to belong to. And I’m not into trying to earn cred from people who don’t write their own articles and don’t put themselves out there to be shot at like I do.

          People can think what they want. At the end of the day I’m the one putting myself out there and the one taking the hits. Just like I do every time I show up as the new person in a class full of experienced shooters or get lectured by one of my operator friends. I show up. That’s it and that’s all, I guess. I’m not complaining. I’m keeping my eyes on the sight picture and keeping growing.

        • a free gig. an opportunity. to explore, to entice, to inspire!
          you get to ~submit~ whatever you want to write about.
          being shot at, taking hits. credibility. helper dog and a half.
          continue to be provocative.
          greener postures.

      • As a gun owning liberal, I think you dangerously misunderstand the nature of the current Democratic Party.

        They are *NOT* united or marching forward. There is a contentious power struggle between the more status-quo ones (who have a long list of sins) and the authoritarian socialist ones beating the Maoist drum. Well see this become more obvious as the new speaker takes her position.

        And I’ve already seen the ‘big tent’ that the democratic party offers, and am completely unimpressed. Its there unless you are from a flyover state, support gun rights, criticize identity politics and globalism, and make arguments that yes the concerns of wage earning working class americans are more important than the rights of illegal immigrants (which is a creation of the corporate donors who want cheap labor) and that liberal democracy cannot survive with open borders or large influxes of populations from irrefutably illiberal societies.

        The gun community is already transformed, or, more accurately, the caricature of the white evangelical guy is becoming extinct. Its vibrant and diverse, with even a anti-authoritarian socialist gun group gaining ground for christ’s sakes.

        Good points overall though. Im picking up with what you’re putting down and am onboard.

        • Note: I forgot to mention this

          After DJT is out of office (whether through impeachment, resignation, or finishing his term), well REALLY see how unified they are then and how big that tent really is. Knowing the nature of power hungry organizations, I already have a good idea on how things are going to shake.

      • If you’re a lefty then you are part of the major problem. Thanks for supporting a bigger and more powerful federal government. Every time it does something it was never designed to do I can thank the lefties. Thank you for not being able to understand smaller government is better unless your end goal is pushing your agenda on someone. So it’s either lefties are ignorant or compliant authoritarians. You don’t strike me as ignorant.

        • Might be too late to post but here goes.

          Your argument is predicated on a falsehood… no POTG has said you can’t own guns. They might say you are a a traitor to the gun cause, a quisling, not a true POTG, but I’m pretty sure they didn’t say you can’t own guns. That would literally be antithetical to what we believe in (some would say it’s a one issue belief): that the right to bear arms should not be infringed.

          Not going to argue about felons or other barred classes, the point is you can vote for every gun law on earth, and I don’t think anyone here has said you can’t own guns.

          Now to be honest I haven’t gone through every negative comment about you with a fine tooth comb, my eyes kinda blur over halfway through most of these.

          Moving on to the next point then, the Democratic Party is not a party of inclusiveness (what was that thing about flyover country?) but rather about the APPEARANCE of inclusiveness. See the crowing about the previous election cycle, it’s not about the politics of who won, but about their outward appearance listed in most liberal media: 2 native Americans won, gay, trans, black, women etc… literally the concept of racism, sexism etc is judging based on outward appearance vs actions and thoughts… and the democrats judge their victory by the outward appearance of who won. Not by what their political and personal beliefs and actions are. I would argue a true democratic group that says it is inclusive would include people who are liberatarian, conservative, strict constitutionalists etc.. they don’t, and when those people speak they meet ridicule, are compared to whatever straw-man boogeyman is fashionable at this juncture, and are shouted down. Tolerance and inclusiveness my ass.

          The interesting thing about free speech is it doesn’t guarantee you can’t be insulted, but it does guarantee that you can’t use your free speech to stop someone else’s from using theirs… guess which side of the political argument does that more often? I’ll give you a hint, who shut down their comment section years ago? Fox or cnn? My point is most of your articles have been met with ridicule and scorn, doesn’t mean you weren’t allowed to post them or continue to do so… and that ridicule and scorn never said that we should limit your rights to guns… which is what the Democratic Party does say and pushes for on a daily basis.

      • @Elaine: Thank you again for participating here. You provide a good external point-of-view, holding the video camera up and then inviting us to watch what you have taped.

        I respectfully disagree with your characterization of the left: “. . . that’s what the Democrats figured out. That we had to be inclusive, that we had to listen, that we had to get that disagreement is part of the deal, not just kicking people out of participation because they didn’t fit a narrowly defined set of criteria.” The left is very good at closing ranks and excommunicating anyone who should dare to breath a word that casts doubt on leftist orthodoxy. That is their strength; but, it also makes them fragile. Should anything shock their solidarity then they could suffer a huge loss. (E.g., when Blacks wake-up and realize that the Democrat Party has abandoned them to embrace illegal immigrants. Then, Blacks will begin asking whether they want to continue to be “captured” voters.)

        Something that might not be obvious to you. Conservatives are “rugged individualists”. They are comfortable with factions. Look, for example, at the uncountable number of Protestant denominations. We all get along quite well claiming that members of every other denomination are going straight to Hell and only our denomination got-it-right!

        That said, we are weak in that we won’t combine like a fasces (from which we derive facist) to face a common enemy. It won’t really matter that we can’t decide who is purist of them all. Those that defend machine-guns, SBSs, SBRs, DDs, or AOWs. Nor will it matter that we can’t decide whether the NFA or the AWB is the greatest infringement on our rights. If we are crushed it will be because the Antis are in substantial agreement that they want to eliminate nearly all civilian guns; but, WE are NOT in agreement as to which civilian guns we are prepared to defend.

      • “Yeah, that never works out. And that’s what the Democrats figured out. That we had to be inclusive, that we had to listen,…”


        Inclusive? Tolerant and accepting of other’s points of view who are different from them? That kind of stuff?

        A *serious* question for you Elaine – Ask your ‘Progressive’ friends how interested they are in respectfully listening to *anything* someone on the political right has to say. Ask them how many of them have conservative people they are friends with.

        You have mentioned several times how your peers give you shit because of your domestic relationship with a conservative cop.

        Stop. Just *STOP* with the ‘tolerant, inclusive, and accepting of others’ crap that Progressives claim to be. Ask LGBT gun owners how tolerant and accepting of their gun ownership their fellow Progressives are.

        Because supposedly tolerant ‘Progressives’ are bald-faced liars and hypocrites to the *bone*…

      • @Elaine: I think you touched on a subtle but critical problem: “There are a lot of gun owners who think other gun owners shouldn’t be allowed to have guns.”

        I think this point needs to be generalized. You rightly criticized gun owners. But that’s where you stopped; and this is an error. You should say the same thing about the Antis and the ambivalent.

        Bloomberg, I imagine, will say that it’s all very well for his Pretorian Guard of 15 “retired” NYPD to have guns. However, he will claim an intuitive sense for who else among “the People” should NOT have guns.

        The ambivalent will claim that it’s all very well for hunters and marksmen to have guns. However, they will claim an intuitive sense for who else should NOT have guns.

        And so, it’s not at all surprising that the PotG should entertain the same fallacy.

        Now ask Black Lives Matter. They will have their own – heartily held – opinions. The real problem comes when you try to write the text of a law. Now you have to draw a bright line separating those who enjoy a right from those who would be barred from that right. And, suddenly, our prejudices become evident.

        Look, historically, at our prejudices about who should vote. Or, who should wear trousers vs. skirts. Long hair vs. short. Or, who should be admitted/excluded from polite society based on sexual orientation.

        I remain unconvinced that British or American traditions are clear about barring criminals from arms. And, once we started this practice the arbitrary nature of our decisions became apparent. Why Martha Stewart? Why NOT Frank Peake? (Not Frank Peake because he was found guilty of felony price-fixing!) We are all very troubled by doubts concerning diverse subtleties of stripping criminals of their 2A rights.

        Still more dubious is the treatment of the mentally ill. There is a PA State Trooper who has been denied his 2A rights for life; he can’t get them back. So, he carries a gun while on duty (which he does by the power vested in the Commonwealth) but must dis-arm when going off-duty. Erectile Disfunction is listed in the DSM-V; is a man incompetent if he is impotent?

        Each of us, as egotistical individuals, is reluctant to admit that his own prejudices are too soft a ground on which to build public policy. Every one of us fancies himself vested with the wisdom to judge between the just and the unjust as respects competence to bear arms. And so, we are all too willing to agree that our legislature is worthy of the power to write laws deciding who, where and when arms are to be kept and borne.

        And then we are shocked – SHOCKED I say! – when Congress or our state’s legislature writes a prohibited-person law that doesn’t square precisely with our own prejudices. What’s going wrong here?

        The absolutists among us will CLAIM they know. Their answer will be that no one who is allowed at large without a custodian should be stripped of her 2A rights. Alas, this isn’t a practical answer. American voters will NOT build enough prisons and asylums to hold all those who OUGHT not be allowed at large without a custodian. (And, it is precisely because of this fact that a simple majority of us need to bear arms to maintain some semblance of public security.)

        Whether it offends our sense of principle or not, American voters WILL have a prohibited-person law. And, that law will satisfy no one. Our problem is: how do we define our prohibited-person law (and other gun-control laws) such that we achieve our legitimate goals:
        – avoid a Civil-War II
        – minimise tyranny
        – maintain public security
        – minimize accidents and bad-shoots
        I suspect that only a few readers of TTAG (you, Elaine, being one of these few) grasp HOW DIFFICULT it will really be to write such laws that achieve our legitimate goals. Yet success won’t be achieved without such a recognition.

        How can we make progress in recognizing the difficulty of the problem of writing gun-control laws such as those defining the classes of prohibited-persons? We will never get the Antis to recognize their prejudices. We need to convince the ambivalent of this problem. But, we PotG ourselves don’t recognize our own difficulty in coming to an agreement.

      • @Elaine: One more time. Thank you for your participation here. As for the shit you have to put up with here; well, take comfort that these are only a minority, albeit a vocal one.

        I suggest you ask yourself. Do you think you would feel safer going and speaking unreservedly, un-armed, into a crowd of random:

        – Leftists; or,
        – armed gun-owners?

        We gun-owners are – ultimately – more-so of the classical liberal bent then are the leftists.

        I take your point that you can speak your mind in leftists’ salons and survive. And, I wonder about this phenomena. What does it really mean? A leftist gun-owning neighbor of mine mentioned that he is “barely tolerated” as a gun owner in the groups he associates with.

        Is it that a person will not be excommunicated if she holds 80%+ with the opinions of the group? However, she is not allowed to question a few sacred cows? E.g., what if you were to announce that you had decided Trump was – despite all his faults – the best President we could have at this point in history? Or, that you were deeply committed to the Right-to-Life viewpoint? Or, that Affirmative-Action was fundamentally and practically a counter-productive idea? (Which issue it might be that would set-off the powder-charge leading to your excommunication doesn’t matter; just that there IS one, or a few.)

        In order for any group to maintain a big-tent it must fein some acceptance for diversity of viewpoint. Nevertheless, if it is to achieve some goals there needs to be a lot of solidarity around several core issues. Could it be that your views resonate with the crucial 80%+ of the leftist tent? Might it be that – let’s say gun-control – is NOT a heresy for which leftists will excommunicate a member?

        (In contrast, if one is of the rugged-individualist mindset, one will not retreat from considering a heretical thought merely because his flirting with heresy will cause him to be barred from his neighborhood saloon. He would rather be excommunicated than forego the right to think independently.)

        You remind us of the existence of other Democrat gun-owners. Why, there is even a Liberal Gun Club with an on-line presence. Perhaps – with your help – we could begin to understand the potential for softening-up the solidarity we perceive among Democrats on the gun-control issue.

        Karl Marx wrote: “The whole proletariat must be armed at once with muskets, rifles, cannon and ammunition, and the revival of the old-style citizens militia, directed against the workers, must be opposed.”

        If leftists are serious about having a seat at the Constitutional Convention 2.0 they really ought to take-to-heart Marx’s council. “You say you want a revolution; Well, you know, We all want to change the world.” Mao taught that: “Political power emerges from the barrel of a gun.”

        I often wonder about the core belief distinction that separates us politically. Perhaps it really turns on one’s willingness/unwillingness to be THE active agent in the struggle for success and survival. If one is reluctant to raise his voice in his own cause he will certainly not raise his arms. Conversely, if one can be persuaded to raise her arms to achieve her own survival, she might consider herself to be self-empowered to raise her own voice as well.

        I wonder about the mettle of Jamie Caetano. A homeless single mother with a violent and abusive ex. She raised her arm – a humble stun-gun – and prevailed; both against her abuser and her state. She got cert in the last 2A case. No briefs, no oral arguments. A unanimous decision – in a 2A case. A stunning rebuke of Massachusetts’ Supreme Judicial Court – they must take their decision and stick it where the sun don’t shine. Is Jamie a woman with the courage needed to preserve this Republic?

        Is it this species of courage that is in short supply in America’s voting-age population – perhaps on the right as much as the left?

    • “At this point I’m tired of this shit. There’s no need for Bloomberg or MDA or Everytown to put their noses to the grindstone, if we’re to lose, the reason will be the fights between gun owners of various types. FUDD vs. Tactical, GOA/whatever vs NRA, those willing to give up a bump stock vs those who scream it’s cowardice and on and on. They’re all flavors of the same shit-flavored popsicle”
      I couldn’t agree more.

  15. So the NRA is “disappointed” that Trump did exactly what they asked him to do!?!

    The NRA apparently thinks gun owners are as stupid as Democrats.

    • Gun owners are stupid. Many imagined that he was pro-gun despite all evidence except camaign rhetoric being to the contrary. Or think so little of themselves as to beg for the lesser of two evils. Either way we’re losers who can be manipulated and treated high-handedly.

  16. Alert!

    FBI to possibly Try and stage mass “shooting” attacks this week!

    Why?…to Try and “Grease the skids” for more gun control before congress goes out infor Christmas recess and more gun control immediately after the Democrats take control of the House in early January.

    Tomorrow ( December 19th ) is 6th week anniversary of Thousand Oaks alleged mass “shooting” attack and Friday ( December 21st ) is anniversary of Sandy Hook and the FBI/NWO like to Try and stage events every six weeks and on anniversary’s. “FBI six week cycle continues with manufacturing another hoax”

  17. Soooo, the NRA is gonna use all the political power and resources they have to fight this, right? Maybe a lawsuit or two? RIGHT!!??

    OH, they ASKED for this? I see. Fuck you NRA. And here I was about to sign up for the first time. Was kinda excited about it too, you know help do my part and all. I think that dues money is better off going to an org that ACTUALLY does shit, instead of issuing fake statements of “disappointment”. Or even going into my fireplace, atlest the heat would be more use than the NRA has been so far. 800lb gorrilla my ass.

  18. Oh and for what it’s worth, I repeatedly called the NRA multiple times and inquired about the “additional regulations” they sought. They told me they wanted them regulated like machine guns, which eventually they admitted were banned.

    Some State AG needs to bring the NRA up on false advertising charges since they do literally the exact opposite of what they advertise and admit it. I don’t care which at this point. Even if it’s some Democrat lapdog looking to make a name for himself I gladly welcome it.

  19. Well, that’s Trump and La Pierre for you. Two con artists, close as two peas in a pod.

    At least there are grounds to go after it in court. The previous approvals by a Democratic administration. The previous statements of the BATFE explaining how they could not do this under any law. The fact that it is a government taking without compensation. None of that bodes well for the new rule standing up to a prolonged court challenge.

    So, who’s ready for a President Pence?

    • If I have a feeling Pence is in and Trump is out soon… and that it will be for the worse.

      Much worse.

  20. I’ve defended the NRA in the past, for better or worse, but for them to come out as “disappointed” at this point is pretty dumb. They screwed the pooch on this one and they can’t walk it back. I still think there’s hope for the organization, though. Members need to put pressure on Wayne to retire and the board needs to be purged. I’d love to see Adam Kraut and a few others get voted in. That would be a good starting point.

    This aside, let’s see how this all plays out in court. I’m not suggesting this is “3D Chess” or some similar cryptic strategy, I’m just thinking the whole re-interpretation might be so stupidly concocted that it will come apart under scrutiny. Exciting times we live in….

  21. WTF did Negotiating Rights Away since 1934 think would happen,when the Capitulator in chief,Wayne ‘Chamberlin” La Pierre told them to go a head and ban them.
    With activists like Negotiating Rights Away who needs the Marxists of both parties trying to destroy the Second Amendment.

    • Don’t call him Chamberlin. Chamberlin was merely incompetent and/or stalling. Wayne LaPierre Laval fits way better.

  22. NRA = please BAN bump stocks……..

    NRA = send us more money to oppose what WE ourselves asked for …. and GOT !

    Libs. were correct ……. NRA really is a subversive terrorist organization , against US.

  23. I think many of you are missing the overall point here: the NRA is compromising on this because they realize the fight to prevent another AWB and magazine limit on a federal level will most likely occur in the future. Its about to get stupid.

    And it doesn’t help that they hitched their wagon to a criminal mob boss that used hatred and resentment to get into the oval office, becoming a right wing organization instead of focusing on supporting gun rights and protecting owners from draconian NY/Cali style legislation. DJT will be lucky to finish his term because he is involved in some shady shit and keeps on digging and the NRA will be lucky if they don’t get dragged down with him.

    With criminal and jackboot Oliver North as president, the NRA is now a poisoned well. They couldn’t have ushered in a more despicable person at a worse time. And the NRA’s weakness now couldn’t come at worse time when actual no shit communists and socialists are starting to shove their heel in the doorway.

  24. If you’re an NRA member, send name, member #, and address in email (as proof of membership) to their NAR board email address and let them hear it.

    I told them straight up I’m keeping membership to vote in the board to be replaced by better people while donating all I can to SAF, GOA, FPC, and RMGO.
    If you don’t talk, they will keep sinking.

  25. Another dark day for FREEDOM and LIBERTY.
    Now don’t get me wrong. I have NO use for a bump stock toy, but this crap shoved down the throats of LEGAL LAW-ABIDING AMERICAN CITIZENS is truly a disgrace. WARNING: Just another one of the thousand cuts. The door for more is wide open.

  26. Just to keep the hate and venom spewing on TTAG:
    I will keep supporting the NRA and contributing to the NRA-ILA and I will keep supporting President Trump. On a basic level, he’s a poker player and chess player rolled into one.

    • It’s still a free country, for now. No one will prevent you to throw your money away. Just don’t expect us to do it. I rather donate to the FPC that actually fights this ban:

      By the way, I am an NRA Benefactor Life Member. I have given plenty to the NRA and the NRA-ILA, and received betrayal in return.

  27. Some group is playing the long game here and Trump and the NRA swallowed the hook and are helping ‘them’ push forward.

    Think about it, Trigger Cranks have always been illegal based on the 1934 act, yet somehow Bump Fire devices weren’t? and repeatedly the BATFE ruled that they were merely accessories, for years!

    Now any real gun owner knows that they are a novelty, not practical unless blowing through a bunch of ammo with reduced chance of hitting what you are aiming at is practical to you?

    But now continue my thoughts here, ‘they’ then have a mass shooting that allegedly a Bump Stock was used at? But details are still out on that one which is really strange as most mass shootings have minute details in hours, yet this one is over a year and still no real detail? But the Evil Bump Stock needs to be banned to stop these mass shootings.

    Trump swallowed the emotional hook and in Trump fashion knee-jerked tweets.

    The NRA swallowed the hook to a lesser degree, they logically were thinking this is the same as a trigger crank and should have never been allowed under the 1934 act as it stands, BUT, forgot what they have been fighting for 50 years and didn’t realize until it was too late what ‘they’ were doing.

    ‘They’ are setting up National wholesale (uncompensated) confiscation with this precedent to Circumvent the Fourth and Fifth Amendments leaving the Second amendment out of this, the government can not confiscate property. Founding Fathers had a major problem with the Monarchy deciding what the people could or couldn’t own and just taking it away on a whim without just compensation and a good reason.

    • Do you have a source on trigger cranks being illegal? My understanding is that if it is hand cranked, it’s legal. It’s only illegal if it’s NOTmanually operated (e.g. electric).

  28. The same NRA that endorsed the bump stock ban and that funneled money from Russia into the Trump Campaign?

  29. I JOINED THE NRA today, they wanted to know if the payment was to be made in dollars or ruples. ,”Why ruples of course.” I’m now a proud member of the Not Really America

  30. Well, that’s it for me. Canceling my NRA membership. This is a disgrace. Trump sure is acting like he wants to be a one-term POTUS.

  31. If you want to do more than cancel your membership or whine on the phone, I have an unusual option for punishing the NRA.

    Gawker was killed, in large part, due to a letter writing campaign that made advertisers pull out. Many gun retailers have an option to donate to the NRA at check out, and often donate further to the NRA. If a retailer you use regularly use has one, email them (ideally with the address you make orders with) and request they remove this option. Marrion Hammer has made it quite clear she’s most afraid of losing money (see both her call for this ban and attack on Adam Kraut.). The NRA doesn’t have a heart, so hurting them in the wallet is the next best option

  32. All I’ve got to say is I will NOT be turning in any bump stocks or destroying any either. Whether that means I am refusing to comply with the order or whether I even own any is up to them to figure out. Good luck finding any that can be traced to being in my possession……

  33. I am curious to find out what blog platform you happen to be utilizing? I’m having some small security issues with my latest blog and I would like to find something more secure. Do you have any recommendations?

Comments are closed.