NRA Releases Statement on the Trump Bump Stock Ban

NRA bump stock ban national rifle association

The National Rifle Association has issued an official statement on the Trump bump stock ban.

NRA Releases Statement on the Trump Bump Stock Ban

courtesy NRA

Now that the ATF has complied with President Trump’s virtual order to reclassify bump fire stocks as machine guns, the NRA claims that it was either “let ATF review its prior determinations” or risk even more restrictive action…from a GOP-controlled congress…that could have jeopardized semi-automatic firearms.

The NRA is obviously backpeddling here now that the ATF review is complete and the ban is a reality. The NRA backed  the ATF review, which they made clear in 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.

Furthermore, Marion Hammer (Former NRA President, current board member and Florida lobbyist) released a scathing email blast to NRA members on October 9, 2017 stated the following:

The “bump-stock” device, used by the killer in the Las Vegas shooting, converts a semi-auto rifle to a full-auto rifle.

It was not until later that information was released disclosing that bump-stocks had been used to convert semi-automatic firearms to perform like full-auto firearms.

In spite of the seemingly noble reason the manufacturer claims for developing it, the bump-stock circumvents federal law. Regardless of the quality and reliability or lack thereof of this device – it converts a semi-auto to full-auto when installed.

Do you have any idea how many people were shocked out of their minds when ATF decided bump-stocks were not subject to regulation and APPROVED them for sale and use? That was under the Obama administration for crying out loud. Your mind is forced to run wild wondering why.

Once the ruling was made, what would you expect NRA to do? Do you think NRA should have said, Oh! No, ATF is wrong, ATF made a mistake?

Make no mistake, the NRA has NOT cleared the way for more regulation. If it were not for ATF’s wink and nod to the manufacturer of the bump-stock, it would already be regulated under federal law. NRA has tossed it back into ATF’s lap where it belongs. NRA has not agreed to any new legislation nor has NRA said we agree with any existing NFA legislation. NRA has not agreed to a ban. NRA has not agreed to anything. NRA simply insists upon enforcing existing law.

It’s clear that the NRA supported a ban on bump stocks and a ban is what we now have. What Hammer fails to acknowledge is that the ATF applied existing law when they approved the bump fire stock back in 2010.

In their latest statement, the NRA claims that their push for an amnesty by opening the registry for bump stock owners is proof that they never wanted bump stocks to be banned. But the NRA knows that the Hughes Amendment to the Firearm Owners Protection Act bars the registry from ever being open for post ’86 machine guns to be added. So the push for opening the registry is a fool’s errand.

To this NRA life member, this looks like an attempt to shore up support after a bad week of press that included openly supporting the White House’s recommendation for red flag laws.

Will Wayne LaPierre, Marion Hammer, Chris Cox, and the NRA admit that it was a mistake to back bump stock re-regulation/prohibition? Will the NRA join the Firearms Policy Coalition and Gun Owners of America in filing suit against this dangerous, arbitrary re-regulation? Inquiring minds — and members — want to know.


  1. avatar Buddy says:

    At the rate they’re going it wont be long until there are no restrictions at all because of the boat loads of grenades rockets and machine guns in circulation to carry on the civil war

    1. avatar Aerindel says:

      Very true!

    2. avatar doesky2 says:

      The NRA missed the following opportunity for a win…

      1) All the MSM and political hacks said that the problem with bumpstocks were that they “Are just like Machine guns!!!OMG!!!” and also that “Bumpstocks are unregistered!!! OMG!!!”

      2) NRA says…”Fine, in order to get the most of these evil un-registered bumpstocks recovered, we propose that the current bumpstock owners can exchange them for a permission slip from the ATF for the owner to be able to purchase a fully-registered full-auto AR15 lower or AK reciever”. Now the world is better off that all those bumpstock machine guns are off the street and registered owners are known.

      3) For all the idiots that complain that Hughes ammendment forbids opening up MG registry , well hey, all that takes is another “creative interpretation” of the law that we see everyday by the back-robed tyrants.

      4) There is no reason why the NRA couldn’t come out with the above statement in #2 for the the reality that there will be zero percent compliance. They can step up with this “grand compromise” tomorrow if they had the balls.

      1. avatar Brian says:

        There is an auction going on right now where a person is selling a transferable complete full auto M16 lower on GB and the person is asking for 23 grand for it. There is no way every bump stock owner is going to be able to front that kinda cash

        1. avatar doesky2 says:

          If there were hundereds of thousands of people now able to buy a newly made AR15 lower with a 3rd pin location I’d estimate that the free market would dictate a sale price of well under $500.

        2. avatar Brian says:

          Not if the Hughes amendment is still in place. And you know they won’t open the registry for everyone- the NRA would see to that as it would devalue their collections by a lot. If anything- provided they DID open registry for new post-86 civilian transferables- it would probably RAISE the prices because of so many people being able to buy them.

  2. avatar Nanashi says:

    They don’t actually backtrack. They merely pretend they do. NOTHING in the statement is a retraction.

    “We don’t beleive that bans have ever worked on anything”
    Tell me why Wayne LaPierre said the NRA supports the existing ban on automatic weapons then? If he doesn’t believe they keep them out of the hands of criminals, the only logical conclusion is that he likes the 8% annual increase in value his grandfathered ones have enough to screw everyone else in the country over.

    Write letters to the retailers who offer NRA donation options at check out. Tell them to suspend these options now that it’s clear the NRA actively and openly opposes gun rights. Money is the only language they speak.

    1. avatar Steve B says:

      Here, Here! Well said!

  3. avatar Arandom Dude says:

    Got here before Serge explained how the brilliant Trump and NRA are playing interdimensional chess.
    Trump is not on our side, he’s a shady opportunist, and the (hopefully) few remaining Trump supporters here need to get that through their skulls.

    1. avatar derp says:

      No, you’re right. We should have “stuck to our guns” and shouted “REEEEE NO COMPROMISE” while we all watched a legislative turd get shoved down our throats over this, costing us all even more.

      There is no way, none whatsoever, bumpstocks were going to hold up to that much heat. None. A bill WAS GOING TO PASS. I knew it, the NRA knew it. They made the best choice they could. Better to lose a pain nobody gives a shit about than the whole chess game..

      1. avatar Arandom Dude says:

        Maybe a bill would have passed, but using executive authority and torturing the English language to pass a ban through improper means opens up the door to a future anti-2a President doing something similar. Look at what the Mass. AG is doing. Now picture that on a federal level.

        1. avatar Noozeyeguy says:

          The *only* ray of sunshine here is that banning bumpstocks, without compensation and by EO, is so clearly unconstitutional that this cannot help but wind up before the Supreme Court.

          Now if RBG will hurry up and cash in her chips, we can *maybe* get a solid five votes to uphold the Second Amendment (I don’t count Roberts among the conservatives anymore).

        2. avatar Nobody special says:

          If this garbage is upheld the next democrat president need only have the doj write an order saying semi autos fire too fast and now are full autos which are now banned. Whatcha gonna do then. That’s where this went. Traitor trump has blurred the line between a semi auto and a full auto and opened the door for a Kings decree to ban what ever they want. He’s lost my vote forever regardless of what he does now.

        3. avatar Broke_It says:

          Quick question, why do so many people feel that the gov will compensate for declared contraband? Once it becomes illegal your compensation is not going to jail for having gotten rid of it. It sucks but I don’t recall all the dealers getting fair market value when the gov decided maybe unfettered access to cocaine and such wasn’t that great of an idea.

      2. avatar CZJay says:

        Trump did what Obama couldn’t. Who’s fault is that? Make sure to ask that question when standing in-front of a mirror.

        1. avatar Angry Dad says:

          As both 0bama and Trump have said, elections have consequences. Indeed they do. But so do mass shootings. You can pretend it didn’t happen, but Trump’s victory in 2016 was razor thin, and unless you want Biden or any other demorat totally threatening your 2A rights, try to choose winnable fights, which bump stocks are not. You don’t think the RINOs in the senate would have displayed such backbone as was displayed in the Kavanaugh fight absent Trump do you? I don’t care to have my sacred 2A rights, the right that guarantees all the others, threatened by your tactical stupidity.

        2. avatar CZJay says:

          @Angry Dad

          Serious question, it’s not rhetorical. Do you drink a lot of alcohol?

        3. avatar Angry Dad says:

          On the alcohol front, so did Gen. Ulysses S. Grant, to the point that Lincoln, when informed that Grant was a drunkard, instructed an aide to find out what Grant drank, and to have it sent to all his other generals. So, guilty as charged (with an explanation).

          Remember, Hitler was teetotaler, and Churchill drank like a fish. Whom would you prefer?

        4. avatar LarryinTX says:

          AngryDad – “Razor thin”? Is winning 80% of the counties in America “razor thin”? How about 75% of the states? Is that razor thin? 2/3 of the electoral vote? Maybe THAT is “razor thin”, do you think? Tell us more about what defines “razor thin” for someone as delicate as yourself, poor little snowflake?

      3. avatar Aleric says:

        You sound like the GOP in 1996 when they stopped representing Conservatives and concentrated on simply keeping their jobs and just enough power to keep the money flowing in. THAT is all the NRA is doing, ensuring they keep tools like you paying them to PRETEND they are fighting for rights you lose more and more of. But I suspect you also are a Fudd who doesn’t think anyone should own automatic weapons as well.

        1. avatar george says:

          i`d rather be a tool for the NRA, as other tools support the Democrats, maybe you should worry about the red flag law!

      4. avatar Eli2016 says:

        Fully agree here. But unfortuately there are still some gun right’s folks who believe that a piece of cheap plastic is worth losing everything. At least the left is loyal to their insanity.

        1. avatar Christin Hale says:

          You are exactly right.

        2. avatar Larry says:

          It just seems funny to me that you can pay the BATFE $200.00 for a tax stamp to own a REAL, GENUINE, FUllY AUTOMATIC MACHINEGUN with only one condition, pass a background check and it’s fine. But a bumpfire stock that still requires a trigger pull for every shot fired is now illegal. The only reason I don’t have a machinegun is because I simply can’t afford one. I grew up shooting guns for fun and hunting, and it is a very fun sport. You like to go play golf, I like to go to my range and shoot guns. I don’t criticize you for liking to play golf, so you have no right criticizing me for liking to shoot guns and go hunting. I have a sneaky feeling that this new ban is only the beginning. All of you NFA Class 3 firearms owners might ought to start preparing for all of your Class 3 firearms to suddenly become illegal to own. It will be a hard pill to swallow if the BATFE comes to your place and confiscates all of your toys. Will the NRA, and I’ve been a member for a long time, tell the BATFE to do a retake on Class 3 firearms? If they do and declare them illegal to own, don’t cry about losing a very expensive piece of metal because it’s better to lose a little than everything, which is what the democrats are going after when they take over the House on January 3rd.

        3. avatar LarryinTX says:

          Actually, I sorta agree! No reason to fuss about silliness, the bump stock “ban” will be totally unenforceable, just remember to tell everybody there is no reason to comply, and we’ll all be agreed.

        4. avatar John Malcolm says:

          What are you prepared to give up next time?

      5. avatar Jonathan-Houston says:

        No federal bill was going to pass. It’s been over a year. Nothing had happened. Feinstein introduced her bump stock ban bill just three days after Las Vegas. It has languished since Oct. 2017. Only a handful of radical anti-2A states even bothered to pass bans of their own.

        The bump stock hysteria had already died down. Slidefire stopped making them in April. Trump’s justice department announced around the same time that they would review their legality. That was sufficient to appease the public, while many new shiny objects have hit the news cycle since then.

        What this is, is a flagrant rewrite of federal law in violation of both the clear language of that law and the regulatory agency’s own previous interpretation of that law. How this has been done is is a far greater threat to our freeeom than the ban itself.

        1. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “How this has been done is is a far greater threat to our freeeom than the ban itself.”

          No, no, no. The really, really important thing about bump stocks is that is is just another piece of non-essential crap that we can trade for slowing down the inexorable erosion of our constitutionally protected rights. Don’t you get it? If we just give up on the little, tiny stuff the anti-gun advocates will be so busy celebrating “winning” that they will not be tending to even worse legislation that further increases government control over our lives. If we give up enough peripheral things, our opponents will get so tired of winning, they will leave us alone.

        2. avatar Steve B says:

          Gheez, Sam I am, I hope that your comments were of a sarcastic nature!

        3. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “Gheez, Sam I am, I hope that your comments were of a sarcastic nature!”

          Provided for entertainment and enjoyment.

          There were obvious clues.

    2. avatar Yarbles says:

      Well that’s one idiot’s opinion.

      Thanks for sharing.

    3. avatar CZ Rider says:

      The pawn of “not having the executive branch arbitrarily ban things by reinterpreting words to mean things and arguing from demonstrably false premises”? Yeah, small potatoes. Not like it could be used just as easily to argue that the capability to bump fire makes any and all semi-auto firearms machine guns. After all, the ATF specifically notes that bump fire itself doesn’t make a machine gun, just the stock, and they’d never go back on their own statements, right?

      1. avatar CZJay says:

        I read in the ATF’s new dictionary the definition for a 30 round magazines, it states a 30 round or larger magazine is a weapon of mass destruction. Now the federal government can invade your compound without congressional approval.

        Oorah, motherfuckers. Get some!


        1. avatar LarryinTX says:

          For you children out there, when I was a kid we were originating the concept of “weapons of mass destruction”. The basic (only) example at the time was nuclear weapons. Please try to just imagine how stupid I consider a government agency who wants to tell me that a magazine carrying x number of rounds of a pissant rifle cartridge is supposed to be considered a WMD. Even when it is not loaded! That statement, if confirmed, should be all the evidence required to completely disband ATF, fire every agent, and assure that none will ever be employed in government service or LE in any capacity, ever again. I never want a single penny od my tax dollars to go to anyone that blindingly STUPID.

    4. avatar CORNELIUS RING II says:

      Who, sir oracle of political wisdom, should we Trump supporters shift our allegiance to?
      Chucky, Nancy, who?

      1. avatar Chester Bee Arthur says:

        How about ourselves? Why is everyone so eager to be led around by the nose by some suit that’s about as far-removed as the average American as someone from Luxembourg?

        Boggles the mind, freaking cult-of-personality wins out over scruples, merit and honor.

        1. avatar Chester Bee Arthur says:

          *far removed from
          (seriously, why’d you guys disable edits? This sucks!)

    5. avatar LarryinTX says:

      Boy, Troll, you sure are right! I am so ashamed that I did not vote for Hillary! Can you now collect your bonus from Soros and STFU?

  4. avatar frankw says:

    First of all, its never been shown definitively that bump stocks were actually used in the LV shooting. Too many questions about the whole episode and contradictory statements by the LVPD and FBI throw the whole thing into a muddle of unanswered questions. Having said that its obvious that the shooting public are the ones who will take it up the keister and pay for the whole episode with loss of rights- again.

    1. avatar Kroglikepie says:

      And we’re *still* waiting on that FBI report from that night…

      1. avatar CZJay says:

        Didn’t the government say the investigation has concluded and they cannot find the evidence to produce a motive? Didn’t they release what they were ordered to by a court after being sued?

        1. avatar Kroglikepie says:

          Nope. No report from the FBI nor Metro has been released. They were taken to court over some of the evidenciary logs, and there is a list of recovered items from the suites produced by Metro, along with some body cam footage from people on the ground, but that’s it.

    2. avatar Angry Dad says:

      Merely from using your ears and listening to the interrupted spastic staccato of the stream of gunshots in any string from the asshat in Las Vegas can you know that it’s not a full auto weapon being fired but a bump stock semi auto. And no full auto guns were found at the scene, but a goodly number of semi autos with bump stocks attached. Why don’t you go back to ruminating about the grassy knoll and stop spreading nonsense here?

      1. avatar Kroglikepie says:

        How about you explain all the glaring inconsistencies with Metro and the FBI since that evening? Or better yet, question why the final report *still* has not been released to the public, despite it being promisee back in October?

        Oct. 1 was shady as hell. The few scant details released since that night have been even shadier.

      2. avatar CZJay says:

        If it was a M249 there would be links everywhere. They only claim the guns were converted through the use of a bump fire stock. Not all the guns had bump fire stocks. Not sure if they stated how many guns were fired.

        You don’t even need a bump fire stock to bump fire from a bi-pod. He could have learned to do it; he wasn’t a stupid man.

      3. avatar LarryinTX says:

        Yo, AngryDadTroll, SO WHAT???

  5. avatar Swarf says:

    I don’t give a shit about bump stocks.

    I DO give a shit about a federal agency changing the rules willy billy at the whims of one person, especially considering the lengths the manufacturer went to get rick something kid confirmation that their product was legal, and I do give a shit about insisting that citizens turn in or destroy their legally purchased property or face the full wrath of the American legal system.

    1. avatar Swarf says:

      My phone and clumsy fingers are really hoping the “edit” feature comes back.

    2. avatar John Archibald says:

      Agree 100 percent.

    3. avatar Angry Dad says:

      The single person being one presumes the actual Presidente of the actual USofA? Who is after all the head of the executive branch of which BATF and DHS and DOJ are subordinate parts? I don’t get your point. Bump stocks are and always were frivolous toys which through the stupidity of ATF were wrongly allowed, it being entirely obvious what their true purpose always was (see my other post). Now that bureaucratic error has been corrected. Too bad for those who like toys and for those who make toys, the 2A is much more serious than that, and bump stocks were if anything a risk not worth taking. Think of the fallen mast in Master and Commander, acting like a sea anchor in the water while the ship was almost foundering going ’round the Horn, and how the entire crew sent down below to avoid being swept off the main deck cheered the instant the lines holding the broken and impeding mast and sails were cut free and the ship instantly responded positively meaning they weren’t going to die right there. That’s how you should view bump stocks, just a frivolous way for the antigunners to harm all we hold dear in the 2A just so Jim Bob can amuse himself and friends at the range.

      1. avatar CZJay says:

        We didn’t come here to fight for bump fire/semi autos…

      2. avatar Kroglikepie says:

        How has that logic worked out for NFA items for us? Or imported ‘non-sporting’ firearms? Or handguns? Or even imported Russian and Chinese ammo? Stop ‘othering’ gun owners and realize that every inch given is one you will never get back.

      3. avatar Michael J Spaulding says:

        So what you’re saying is the Constitution is crap and the President should be able to make laws at will, Congress be damned?

      4. avatar LarryinTX says:

        AngryDad, I hear your claim that we should support your looney view of the world and ignore that of the President of the United States, and be ready to engage in armed revolt against elected government in support of your excellency, but fuckup, it ain’t gonna happen, just like your social worker told you. You have a problem, seek help.

    4. avatar sparkyinWI says:

      This ^^^^^ When the government can order it’s citizens to turn in or destroy without compensation what was a legal product, you no longer have any sort of democratic republic. Especially since then they can come down on the citizens they are supposed to represent with the full force of said government. Soon I guess we will be referring to a future POTUS as Caesar. Ben Franklin was right, they gave us a republic if we can keep it. We have lost it.

      1. avatar Angry Dad says:

        You overstate, especially after Heller and MacDonald. We have not lost it, but may well should we be stupid enough to draw a line in the sand over bump stocks, a toy and frivolity enjoyed mainly by Jim Bob idiots, and which also constituted the essence of the lethality of the Las Vegas mass shooting. So man up, be of good cheer, take your meds, and self medicate with a drink, keep your powder dry and try to control your instinct to hand the gun grabbers an obvious and easy win. Your welcome.

        1. avatar Christin Hale says:

          ^^^^ This.

        2. avatar Sian says:

          We gave them a win anyway.

          We could have got something out of it. CCW reciprocity and right of transportation, HPA, ANYTHING.

          Instead we gave it away for nothing.

        3. avatar Steve B says:

          I think anyone who is not upset over the ban because they feel that bump stocks were/are frivolous toys, should have never been legalized in the first place and choosing to draw a line in the sand over them out of fear that line would have created more regulations against the 2A are completely missing the point!
          I don’t own and never had planned to own a bump stock, because I viewed them as gimmicky and unnecessary. In fact, if they were never legalized in the first place, I doubt I would have lost any sleep over it. The way the government went about the ban after the fact, should be a concern to EVERYONE! It clearly demonstrates how future bans on the 2A can and probably will occur. This time it might be something that you personally don’t care about losing. You might not be so lucky next time and to think otherwise is foolish.

      2. avatar Zupglick says:

        I subscribe to Thomas Jefferson. “Every 30 years, you need a bloody revolution.”

        1. avatar Ga Shooter says:

          How about Winston Churchill “Your Government cannot give you anything except what has been taken”. We just gotta learn to not keep giving!

    5. avatar Larry says:

      That came with a copy of the BATFE’s explanation saying that it does not constitute that putting a bumpfire stock on a semi-automatic rifle makes it a machinegun. Reason being that is still requires a separate trigger pull for each round fired whereas a machinegun requires only one trigger pull to fire multiple rounds.

  6. avatar wiggles says:

    >rather than sit back and watch a legislative over reaction.

    See, nearly every single person on this website doesnt freaking get it. A bill banning bump stocks, with whatever vague language or other crap Democrats could tack on to it was GOING to pass.

    “Reee no compromise” grow up and wake up, you could probably count on two hands the number of GOP politicians who would have had the calls to defend bumpstocks which were clearly just a gimmicky way to giggle around the NFA. Am I happy about this? No. But this is better than the alternative.

    1. avatar Cory C. says:

      Not if Trump had a spine and would veto it.

      1. avatar CZJay says:

        They just don’t get it.. The President can veto unconstitutional bills. They already forgot that the Republicans had the Congress and Senate. They seem to ignore that the ball gets transfered back and forth yet we don’t score when we get possession.

        With friends like that, who needs enemies?

        1. avatar Steve B says:

          I completely agree! The entire Republican Party has continually failed us at every turn. They constantly demonstrate an inability to capitalize on any advantage while they have it.

        2. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “The entire Republican Party has continually failed us at every turn. They constantly demonstrate an inability to capitalize on any advantage while they have it.”

          Maybe one has to have “been there” to understand the macro themes in play. One party wants absolute power to control the lives of every subject of government. The other party wants to be invited to all the right parties and photo ops. One party wants to transform this nation into a totalitarian government immediately. The other party is comfortable with a more leisurely schedule. One party wants to own the banquet table and all the offerings. The other party just wants a seat at the table.

          And so on.

  7. avatar No Infringement says:

    Talk to the hand, NRA. Talk to the hand.

  8. avatar Michael Buley says:

    “In spite of the seemingly noble reason the manufacturer claims for developing it, the bump-stock circumvents federal law.”

    Could we say ‘unconstitutional’ federal law?

    I keep thinking that the idea of the 2nd Amendment was that we the people, have at least as much, or more, firepower than the state, so that we could toss them out. And that politicians serve US, rather than we serve them.

    1. avatar Sam I Am says:

      Afraid it is a little late in the day to talk about strict application of the constitution, in any form, that does not benefit (or does not restrict) the federal/central government. The SC established the principle that they have the final authority to decide what is/is not constitutional, and built stilts under their reasoning. That is why you have “levels of scrutiny”, “compelling government interest”, and Penumbra theory that allows whatever distortion of the original intent of the founders is convenient for the day.

      This is nothing new. Politicians have a long history of using simple legislation to bypass the constitution. One might take note of the history of politics between 1845 and 1868 to see an example of how wrong things can go.

      1. avatar SeenitAll says:

        Strict application can still be made but the means to do it seem to be too much for most to undertake.

        1. avatar CZJay says:

          That’s what you call culture.

          Teach your youth about liberty, human rights and what the country is supposed to be. When they become the leaders of the country it won’t be hard to restore it without violence. Hence why the statists control the education system and family courts.

          Have many children and teach them well.

    2. avatar CZJay says:

      That would be proper thinking if you lived in a free country. Americans live in a banana Republic. You have California after all…

    3. avatar Larry says:

      I guess the next thing they’ll do is require Jerry Miculek to cut off his trigger finger.

  9. avatar former water walker says:

    Funny but I got a “enter the NRA sweepstakes” thingy in the mail yesterday. So I see plenty of gun retailer’s support ’em. THEY put the bumpstock ban into the conversation. After Newtown they were the bulwark of protection. NOW they might as well be democrats😖 Oh yeah bring back the edit!!!

    1. avatar CZJay says:

      Oh yeah bring back the edit!!!

      Oh, don’t the NRA wish they had it right about now?

    2. avatar Nanashi says:

      Mail the retailers. Ask them to stop donating to the NRA. This kind of thing worked well enough to kill Gawker.

      1. avatar Angry Dad says:

        FU lefty troll, say hi to Vlad the Impaler (I refer, of course, to the tongue-in-cheek play on Vlad Tepes in the fairly recent cover of the NY Post with a pic of Vlad Putin and a story about a purported girlfriend who found herself preggers; I think their headlines are a form of high art (perhaps you remember when alleged capo de tutti capi Carmine “Lilo” Galante of the Bonanno family was assassinated in the outside back of a restaurant in Brooklyn, the Post ran a pic of him crumpled with an eye shot out and his cigar still in his mouth with the headline “Godfather Blown Away Al Fresco in Brooklyn”)). Anyway, FU. Or, given that we’re speaking Italian, vaffanculo!

        1. avatar Nanashi says:

          This is how nonsense NRA defenders are.

  10. avatar MouseGun says:

    Translation: “Yeah, we bitched out, but we’ll get ‘em next time guys, we mean it this time………can we have more money now?”

    1. avatar SouthAl says:

      Yup. Like Lucy holding a football for Charlie Brown to kick.

  11. avatar Angry Dad says:

    I said earlier when Luis Valdes originally reported these events in the last few days something worth repeating I think, so I’ll do so:

    I don’t mean to piss on anyone of my fellow enthusiasts’ shoes, but despite all the hot talk above no one is going to take the slightest step to rebel against a ban against bump stocks. No one. All bump stocks ever did, and they mainly only applied to the .223/5.56mm (ladies’) round and the AR15 platform (try using one with a .308/7.62mm on a semi auto M-14 to learn the meaning of uncontrollable), was to be a cheap way to achieve automatic fire, but without the same control and aiming auto weapons actually offer, thus to dodge both the NFA filing and permission regulations and the $200 tax AND the wildly increased prices for true automatic weapons manuf. prior to the mid 1980s and thus still legally transferable (typical price for an actual transferable Thompson today: $15K++). The asshat who shot up the Las Vegas concert was right about one thing: a bump stock is the perfect way to pull off that atrocity (absent an actual automatic) as he was “aiming” if you will at a blob a hundred yards away approximately at least 50-60 yards long and wide, shooting down from a perch, with no particular target or real aiming involved. In that context, the limitations of the bump stock disappear and its benefits are manifest – and apart from only generally aimed suppressive fire in other contexts, the bump stock is totally useless other than a way to amuse friends at the range and to waste ammo on unaimed fire. Any ban does, of course, wipe out any company whose manufactured products consisted solely or largely of bump stocks – so bring a suit for recompense in the Court of Claims. But it otherwise doesn’t touch the 2A one bit. If you think otherwise, your real beef is with the NFA and its prohibition/heavy regulation of fully automatic weapons, which you should have fought sometime in the long period since the mid 1930s (putting aside the SCOTUS opinion upholding that “tax” law long ago). Too bad your redneck junk yard full auto toy is now properly classified as a full auto weapon or part, just like a full auto sear. Big deal. And anyone who thinks this prohibition on bump stocks is THE time or reason to draw any line in the sand is a total idiot – they were always obvious what they were, the ATF just got stupid when it held they didn’t really change the characteristics of the gun and thus were ok. Really?! This is not the fight to have, the ground is worse than at Gettysburg and the loss will harm much more important issues than a win for Jim Bob and his bump stock would gain, for any of us.

    1. avatar S.Crock says:

      No, that actually wasn’t worth repeating.

      Yes bump stocks suck at almost everything. Yes the Vegas shooter picked the right tool to carry out his evil plan. And?? Neither of those two facts are relevant when talking about the 2A.

      As for people not being willing to rebel against this ban, lmao. I would be shocked if more than 20% of bump stock owners actually did comply.

      This is absolutely a fight worth having. Not because bump stocks are so important or anything like that. They aren’t important. But I would rather have this “fight” when it is just bump stocks in question and not pistol braces, standard capacity mags, or optics with a high level of magnification. This sets a horrible precedent. An unelected alphabet agency being able to ban accessories at the request of any president is ripe for further erosion of our rights.

      If you don’t think that fighting against people being forced to turn in their legally acquired property or face a felony is a fight worth having then the NRA is the right group for you.

      1. avatar Angry Dad says:

        I also said this re the NRA and comments thereon, and repeat. Too bad you disagree. (OTOH, in that other post many of the comments on the problems with “Red Flag Laws” were valid and I didn’t mean those, just those taking absurd shots at the NRA).

        I don’t have the time or energy today to respond to the various comments above, most of which are total drivel. And the hilarious idea of replacing the people at the NRA with any of the idiots above would ensure the loss of our 2A rights within 12 months if not sooner.

        But for the NRA we would have lost most of our gun rights years ago a la Australia and the UK. Indeed, as you may have noticed, the left gun grabbers aren’t even bothering to hide it anymore, they have finally fully come out of the closet, like Hillary Clinton’s 2016 campaign, four square for confiscation, which they long denied, mainly as a way of hiding the fact that that was on their agenda and that “common sense” registration, which they also suggest, is obviously a precursor to confiscation, and it used to be that they wouldn’t touch that latter word with a 10 foot pole – not any more. Their expressed and avowed purpose and intentions are (as they have always been to anyone with half a wit) now crystal clear and undeniable. We need the NRA now more than ever. In fact, with all the latest media reports and Senate intelligence committee findings about Russian social media hacking and interference, I wouldn’t be surprised that some of the above comments are. from that source, they have that whiff about them, although they also sound like many pseudo expert gun idiots you’re likely to meet at your local gun shop.

        Thank God for the NRA. Any god you like, Jehovah, Allah, G-d, Zeus, Jupiter, Vishnu, whatever. And piss on those who think otherwise.

        1. avatar Nanashi says:

          “But for the NRA ” my ass. The NRA is the ONLY reason the GCA passed. With the NRA gone the power vacuum will be filled with REAL gun rights supporters.

          You lousely, worthless, complacent FUDDS need to look at history. Not only is the NRA not our friend, but the Democrat party has NEVER attacked them remotely as hard as anyone that’s actually a threat to them. Rule 13 of rules for radicals: Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it. Gay conservative journalist? They pull out every stop to destroy him. Wayne LaPierre? Chris Cox? Never, ever mentioned. The only coordinated attacks on the NRA are worthless empty attacks on a hollow “NRA” name that make no serious attempt to inflict lasting damage. That the Dems NEVER dare mention leadership names like they would for ANYONE else should be proof enough SOMETHING is seriously wrong.

          The ONLY serious attack on the NRA was the insurance thing, which was not only the work of a single person (no coordination here), but something the NRA walked right into by entering a business (not activism, not teaching, business), trying to destroy the existing pro-2A company and forgetting to check the law and how the existing companies legally got away with it.

        2. avatar Jamie in North Dakota says:

          Angry Dad, you’re posts have been spot on!

      2. avatar Truckman says:

        who can say for sure that bump stocks were for sure used at Las Vegas the only word we have is the ATF & FBI and how good of a track record do they have nobody saw any pictures of the room and guns and empty shells and also there is to many people that said there were shooters on the ground . yall know there have been to many shootings since the first one at Waco in that the ATF & FBI fired the first shots and to many lies in everything in all these shooting from Sandy Hook to Parkland they have been lie after lie from the Government and for everybody info I have never owned A bump stock heck I can waste enough ammo without one but if somebody wants one to play with it there right

      3. avatar WhiteDevil says:

        Pseudo expert gun idiots. That’s super duper clever. Perhaps applying that to yourself is prudent?

      4. avatar Sian says:

        ” Yes the Vegas shooter picked the right tool to carry out his evil plan. ”

        Bull. He had the time, funds, and clean record to drop $80,000 on a real M1918 or two instead of 20 modified rifles. There is still no concrete evidence that his use of bump stocks increased the casualty or fatality count of his attack. In all likelihood it reduced it, making him waste ammo and time with inaccurate fire.

    2. avatar WhiteDevil says:

      Too bad you can’t understand what differentiates a fully automatic firearm from a semi-automatic one. It’s a simple function of a simple part of the firearm, the trigger. Heard of it? Reclassifying something into what it is clearly not seems to a society-wide issue. Also, an auto-sear and a bump stock perform two entirely different functions. One allows you to hold the trigger down, allowing for complete functional repetition of the action until the ammunition supply has been extinguished. The second does not. The repetition of the action has to be reinitiated sequentially, until the source of the ammunition is gone. It’s sad that this has to be explained in this day and age, but there it is. No benefits of a bump stock “manifested” themselves due to his choice of venue for carrying out his acts. He may have killed far more with carefully aimed and deliberate automatic fire than rapid and inaccurate bump stock fire.

      1. avatar Angry Dad says:

        Your view that full auto guns would’ve done a better job in Las Vegas is total bullshit. My point was simple, that the inherent aiming error using a bump stock was entirely superseded by the blob like size of the target – he simply could not miss. But apart from that bump stocks are entirely useless except for making a lot of noise and the occasional random hit when used for suppressive fire (much of the point of suppressive fire is the noise). They are toys and a cheap way to subvert the NFA law, which we usually accuse rightly the left of doing. Just because ATF screwed up doesn’t mean that the actual serious constitutional rights in the 2A are worth risking. Those who took advantage of them now appear like those who allow themselves to be conned by three card monte street hustlers, meaning you can’t con an honest man, only someone who sees (or thinks he sees) a way to grab something illicit for hisself but who indeed is being manipulated, to his later chagrin. My 2A rights are far too important to risk on this jive.

        1. avatar George from Alaska says:

          Your 2A rights will hinge on how this bumpstock issue pans out, mark my words. After the bumpstocks it will be guilt by association with binary triggers, something else you probably don’t care about, then semi-autos and standard capacity magazines. You sound like either a troll or like some of the gun snob shotgun only shooters at our range with their suede elbow batches and their engraved Brownings who don’t even hunt or fish or believe in personal protection. The don’t care about silly bumpstocks and expensive triggers that just make a gun shoot fast. Last time I checked, this was still America you moron… Divided we fall… idiot.

        2. avatar Sian says:

          “he simply could not miss.”

          He fired over 1100 rounds.
          422 were injured with gunshot wounds. 58 were killed.

          So at least 2/3 of his rounds fired didn’t hit anyone, accounting for over-penetration and people hit by multiple rounds.

          Fish in a barrel and he couldn’t even get a 50% hit rate.

      2. avatar Angry Dad says:

        Thanks for lecture re auto vs. semi auto. Obviously, stocks are not sears – except when they are. And both are attached to the gun. So bump stocks were attached to the gun for one purpose only, to achieve full auto fire without internal changes to do so, like the sear. Same result. The ATF screwed up, simply put, an error now corrected. But you would go full nucular on this small inconsequential issue, beloved only by Jim Bob and his mates, while the newly born Heller and MacDonald struggle, as does Trump, to overcome the leftist tactic of delegitimization. You rearrange deck chairs as the Titanic founders. Thanks but no thanks.

        1. avatar WhiteDevil says:

          You obvisouly direly needed the lecture as you are still making the same, laughable mistakes as you did in your previous posts. Perhaps you re-reed it so it can sink in a little further. He is never achieving “full-auto” fire as that is the function of the weapon to produce such action. He is simply increasing the rate of his firing. Also, careful and deliberately aimed fire would most definitely led to more deaths and is not bullshit. Simply firing into a crowd doesn’t guarentee anything, but aiming ensures that he would have hit the targets in critical zones. Something which spraying into a crowd does not ensure. Perhaps you haven’t heard of Jerry Miculek and a host of other shooters with far less capacity shooting their semi-auto weapons at a rate close to bump stocks and full-auto weapons. Some full-auto weapons have a rate of fire less than what could be achieved by someone intentionally dumping a mag as quickly as possible through a semi-auto weapon. Keep it up though. You’re showing that you can’t intelligently and cogently assess a situation through the fog of emotion. Angry dad.

        2. avatar Broke_It says:

          ” Obviously, stocks are not sears – except when they are. And both are attached to the gun.”

          Would you also say up is not down – except when it is? Yes is not no – except when it is. Whatever point you’re trying to (drunkenly?) make isn’t happening. This fudd bullshit of punish the whole for actions of others is the antithesis to freedom in general. You really seem to enjoy painting owners of these items as rednecks. Fucking sellout. Not. One. More. Inch. Especially when that inch is gained in the way this ban has come about. The fact that your sweetly retarded enough to turn tail and surrender over what amounts to toys in your opinion has no bearing on the much more sinister overtones allowing that “toy” to be banned will have on gun rights in general.

        3. avatar Flying Fish says:

          My red dot sight is attached to my rifle and it sort of lets me shoot faster than iron sights, so by your definition they fall in the same category as bump stocks and thus my rifle according to you is a machine gun. I don’t own a shotgun but suppose I wanted to hunt dove. That shotgun would have a thingy attached to the front of the barrel called a bead. Here we go again, a thingy attached that lets me fire faster, oh I get it just like a bumpstock and thus the shotgun is now a machine gun. Don’t tell Dianne Goldman Berman Feinstein, this is just the logic she would love!

        4. avatar LarryinTX says:

          Lordy, mercy, just how far afield can we possibly get from the absolutely OBVIOUS truth, that any restriction on my ability to own and carry in public fully loaded actual full auto weapons is without possible argument an infringement on my right to keep and bear arms, and thus a violation of the Second Amendment. As such, the NFA required a constitutional amendment, or it is null and void. All this bullshit is of no consequence.

    3. avatar Manse Jolly says:

      It’s not about Bump Stocks, belt loops, or rubber bands.

      It’s about breaking the rules that the majority of Gun Enthusiasts live by.

      It’s about a gov’t agency overstepping its charter and re-writing what Congress decided. (Representative Government)

      It’s about a un-confirmed AG signing off on this.

      1. avatar Angry Dad says:

        When exactly did Congress legislate anything specifically allowing bump stocks, which you say the ATF then wrongly (like now) overturn? You overstate and miss as effectively as overcompensating at the range. The target laughs at you. Your other points were good and valid, but the linchpin was the one you blew.

        1. avatar Manse Jolly says:

          The definition of a ‘Machine Gun’ voted into law by Congress.

          Congress decided this…’34..’68..I guess throw ‘1986 in there too.

          Listen, If the States want to appeal the 2nd Amendment and it’s done by the rules set forth by the Constitution I’m on board. (ain’t happening) If Congress wants to change the definition of a ‘Machine Gun’, more power to them….but until that happens..The DOJ and ATF can bugger off IMO.

          After 24 years in uniform I care not about auto fire or bumping..whatever. For me, all I see is $$$ going down range.

          The point is this.

          Are we a Nation of Laws or a Nation of Men?

        2. avatar LarryinTX says:

          AngryDad, since you asked, Congress (and each state) passed that legislation in 1791, no one has amended it since, in any way. In fact, every territory which has since joined the US has specifically reconfirmed it and acceded to its dictates. Does that answer your question?

      2. avatar rt66paul says:

        Not just gun enthusiasts, Americans. We were either born here, or immigrated here. We have been taught about freedom, the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. This is our legacy. Having other people, many from other countries, trying to set policy on our rights should make us all angry. We support all of our rights, not just the ones we like. In for a penny, in for a dollar – we all have the same rights. Until we all do, we all must fight for these rights for all Americans.

        1. avatar Angry Dad says:

          The use of a frivolous toy as a point on which to mount a serious challenge to gun restrictions, when there are so many other real challenges which need attention, is mindless and absurd. I live in the Peoples’ Republic of Nueva Jersey, and I know what having your actual rights limited by demorat a’holes means. Bump stocks aren’t even close.

        2. avatar Broke_It says:

          Put down the bottle angry dad. You’re making an excellent case for prohibition. Fuck your liquid toys.

    4. avatar LarryinTX says:

      The point is, no “slightest step to rebel” is needed, we need to simply ignore the orders, as those in NY have ignored the SAFE act. Just ignore it, let the other side commit to some action as a step to conquer all opposition, IOW to make fools of themselves. Note, nothing has been even mentioned about the abysmal rate of compliance with several “orders from headquarters” in the past 5 years or so, just a lot of pretense about how wonderful our shiny new laws are, while no one pays a bit of attention to them. If you are “angry” enough to start shooting people, please take your shit to Canada or Mexico first so as to not embarrass us while you die.

  12. avatar S.Crock says:

    At this point the NRA is only useful as a punching bag for the radical anti gun people to be mad at. It distracts the anti gun people while the GOA and FPC actually work to defend our rights.

    If anyone needs to do last minute Christmas shopping, a GOA membership would make a great gift. Future generations will thank you.

    1. avatar Nanashi says:

      Not even that. Can you name one other Democrat punching bag the Democrats make every possible effort to AVOID attacking the leadership of?

      The NRA is either controlled opposition, or useful idiots.

      1. avatar Angry Dad says:

        And you are an obvious Russkie troll and divider, tovarich! Piss off.

      2. avatar S.Crock says:

        Well to be honest I don’t think many anti gun Dems are informed enough to hate on the leadership. They just scream “NRA bad! Orange man bad! The NRA is a terrorist organization.” But they don’t really know why they hate the NRA. I have seen them attack LaPierre a little bit. They have attacked Dana Loesch a lot because she is a pretty public face. Their attacks against her were personal and despicable.

        1. avatar Nanashi says:

          They’re pretty dumb, but they’re not THAT dumb. They can go to Wikipedia and see who is in charge of the NRA.

          Not to mention they NEVER come up with their own talking points. It’s always leadership who are shifty, immoral, and depraved, but absolutely not stupid.

          Through all this all they have ever attacked is a replaceable spokeswoman.

  13. avatar George from Alaska says:

    Nothing I’ve ever read, watched or listened to has said or shows where the NRA has come out and said that bump stocks should be banned. Trump could have banned them immediately by Executive Order but he didn’t. He referred it Sessions and now the new person to review them.
    Do you think Trump could do absolutely nothing after Las Vegas? He had to say something or risk having Congress immediately passing a bumpstock ban and it’s well known that Diane Feinstein had her 25+year old, already failed twice, ban on ugly looking semi-autos ready to introduce after LV. So he focused on bumpstocks, possibly saving semi-autos from even Republicans wrapped up in the emotions of the massacre.
    Don’t forget that Trump’s son or son-in-law is an avid pro 2A person who owns NFA items and frequently visits Silencerco and communicates with the the something Suppressor Association. I’m sure he keeps the Donald up to date on everything gun.
    The NRA wields consider power and when they talk even their haters in Congress listen. When the NRA suggested that the bumpfire issue go back for review to the very agency that has had over 10 years of saying and writing that maybe 10+ models of bumpfire stocks were OK and not firearms or subject to the NFA. I see a wisdom in that as opposed to sitting quiet and letting Congress outright ban the things, which is exactly what they would have done. Now the ATF/NFA is going to be involved in challenges to their recent ruling. If you have read it you can see where the very wording used by the ATF is flawed when it comes to the definition of a machine gun, and they have to fight uphill against their own history of “Past Practice” rulings of over 10 years… remember that term “Past Practice”. I’ve been in court a lot and past practice can often override City Ordinances and State and Federal Law if that has indeed been the practice.
    You can say “Not Another Inch” and that you will proclaim yourself as a felon and publicly resist a federal law… and then what?? Get in a gunfight with the agents? Blow up your family as a sign of how much you believe in whatever? Prepared to go to Federal Prison for a Federal Felony? Look, I hate what’s going on in our country too and I write letters, give money and other things I don’t want to discuss publicly. I have a bumpstock and I like it… I can afford the cheap ammo for it and I can shoot it just as accurately as my registered NFA select fire and full auto only guns. I don’t know what to do with my stock – and now I have 80 something days to figure it out. I’m hoping for a legal injunction very soon.

  14. avatar Specialist38 says:

    I don’t own a bump stock but I would support a class action lawsuit for a taking from Uncle Sugar.

    Maybe we ought to stage some bump-fire matches before the rule takes effect and include classes for bumpstocks, belt loops, rubber bands, and freestyle (finger only).

    This is a major fail for the NRA, they should be ashamed. And get rid or Hammer and LaPierre. Time for some new blood.

    1. avatar LarryinTX says:

      Hammer is a FL functionary, why do we care?

  15. avatar Jared Fann says:

    It is sickening how some on our side are seemingly ok with this ban because Trump and the NRA say it is the best solution.The government just required citizens to turn in or destroy lawfully held property with zero compensation!!! If that isnt your line in the sand then you have none.Roll back into the fetal position and wait for others to defend your rights.

    1. avatar LarryinTX says:

      It certainly is not MY “line in the sand” until there is some indication that there is a method and/or motivation for ANYBODY to dream of attempting to enforce it. It is a bullshit proclamation by an unelected bureaucrat, just IGNORE IT!!!

  16. avatar FortWorthColtGuy says:

    I am tired of “The Art of the Deal”, I want “The Art of Victory”!

    1. avatar Angry Dad says:

      The Kavanaugh victory wasn’t enough for you? The first GOP president since Nixon who can still find his balls and use them isn’t enough for you? You prefer Paul Ryan? Puhleeze, move to Venezuela.

      1. avatar CZJay says:

        Kavanaugh wasn’t a victory.

        1. avatar Angry Dad says:

          And Pearl Harbor wasn’t a victory for the Japs. Up is down, black is white, left is right. I can’t say I like your “thinking” but I can follow it – just pick whatever naturally comes to mind at any moment, and reverse it.

          Thanks but no thanks.

        2. avatar CZJay says:

          Like banning full auto guns isn’t an infringement of the people’s right to keep and bear arms? And those bump fire devices…

          Liberty and justice for all…

        3. avatar LarryinTX says:

          Quote yourself, now, full auto guns are not banned. Taxed, yes, banned, no. Of course, if banning bump stocks flies, banning full auto will not be far behind.

        4. avatar CZJay says:


          You cannot produce new full auto guns to sale to civilians. You can only own what is already in existence until it wastes away. That is the privilege you were given. Not every state allows ownership of full autos. You must ask permission to transfer any of the guns they allow you to own, you must pay an extortion fee and give up your rights. They are effectively banned…

          You have the privilege to own one of the few machineguns still around, you no longer have a right to buy a full auto.

        5. avatar LarryinTX says:

          Jay, like I said. You can still buy, and you can still own, full auto. Bump stocks (theoretically), you cannot buy, sell, own, possess, or anything else. They are FAR more banned than actual machine guns. If grabbers get away with this, an identical ban of real full auto won’t be far behind, as both or either is so clearly unconstitutional.

  17. avatar anarchyst says:

    From an engineering standpoint (yes, I’m am engineer) “bump stocks” ARE NOT “automatic weapons”. A rifle with a “bump stock” operates the same as one without a “bump stock”. The “bump stock” allows the inertia of the rifle to bounce against a person’s trigger finger, allowing a rapid rate of fire–nothing more. The rifle still operates as a semi-automatic, one-shot per pull of the trigger.
    From an engineering standpoint, the ATF has NO CASE. Of course they will attempt to make a case for a ban…

    1. avatar Angry Dad says:

      I would happily take, and easily win, the ATF’s case banning bump stocks as machine guns under the NFA. No juror and 98% of appellate judges would follow the technical distinctions you raise (which which as a matter of engineering in the abstract I agree) to allow such a cheap and easy end run around the NFA. Yet you would risk what we now try to build on to cement our gun rights for all time with this frivolity.

      Elections have consequences. So do mass shootings. You can pretend it didn’t occur, but it did. You can pretend the lack of obvious motive means you can screen it out, but the soccer moms can’t, and maybe you didn’t notice but the recent midterms were a case study in soccer mom suburban stupidity particularly on issues like gun rights. So this isn’t a fight worth having.

      1. avatar Angry Dad says:

        Correction: No juror nor …

      2. avatar LarryinTX says:

        In the subject under discussion (firearms, et al.) the only “consequences” legally possible are AMENDMENTS to the Constitution, bring them on, the process is crystal clear. Your suggestion (rather clear) that due to an election or a maniac, we should toss the entire Constitution into the shitter and put a crown on Nancy Pelosi is just stupid.

    2. avatar Flying Fish says:

      You have called it for what it is. Not a machine gun = one pull of trigger results in one round firing. Bumpstock = one pull of trigger results in one round firing. Therefore, bumpstock ≠ machine gun. Multiple pulls of trigger resulting in multiple rounds firing is the definition of a bumpstock but not a machine gun. (Well, if you really want to asinine about it, a selective fire weapon with the selector on Pew vs PewPewPew is now a “machine gun” with multiple rounds firing with multiple pulls of the trigger). The ATF originally acknowledged this and were correct in their original ruling. My only issue is that the NFA is an unconstitutional law that could have been declared so had anyone been able to argue against it at SCOTUS in United States v. Miller, 307 U.S. 174 (1939).
      Hopefully Angry Dad has passed out by now or I contributed to his hangover headache.

      1. avatar Sam I Amq says:

        “You have called it for what it is. Not a machine gun…”

        How truly sad you are, not having learned a thing from Alice’s interchange with Humpty Dumpty. Ah yes, the failing of not receiving a classic education, but one manufactured in a wayward colony having abandoned the Mother Country.

  18. avatar Aleric says:

    The NRA lost my membership 5 years ago and the way they are now I wont pay them a penny to lie to me like a common Leftist POS Politician. All you NRA fanboys can claim they are simply doing their best and I will say Bullshyt and find others that actually want to REMOVE the restrictions we now have on Law Abiding citizens and keep us from getting MORE. More are coming because Leftist now smell blood in the water and like the Scavengers they are they will feed on it.

  19. avatar possum says:

    That’s why us ,o as in operating, opossums use revolvers when we whack some wise guy.. no spent cartridges lying around.

  20. avatar lowell says:

    The NRA’s position on the Bump Stock Ban : “Nancy Pelosi will soon have the ability to introduce anti-gun bill that will barely get out of committee, SEND US MONEY TO STOP HER because that’s how that works.”

    Me: But, the bump stock ban-


    The NRA sells a product, and that product is the fear of gun-confiscation. That means that you can absolutely count on the NRA to fight outright gun confiscation, but to surrender to a death by a 1000 cuts because that maximizes their revenue stream. They want to lose little by little because that keeps the fear up that keeps the lifetime memberships rolling in.

    1. avatar Doug says:

      “That means that you can absolutely count on the NRA to fight outright gun confiscation, but to surrender to a death by a 1000 cuts because that maximizes their revenue stream.”

      Very well stated.

  21. avatar Manse Jolly says:

    Some long reading here, but very interesting…..talks about the Atkins accelerator (anyone rem those) ..Lightning links..Request for immediate injunction filed in DC I think.

    Might want to grab a beverage to wade through it.

    just sayin : -)

  22. avatar RMS1911 says:

    Make no mistake, the NRA has NOT cleared the way for more regulation. (Yes it has)
    If it were not for ATF’s wink and nod to the manufacturer of the bump-stock, it would already be regulated under federal law. ( No regulation i.e. legislation is Constitutionally legal see the infringement part)
    NRA has tossed it back into ATF’s lap where it belongs. (The atf is unconstitutional and the executive branch has zero power to legislate)
    NRA has not agreed to any new legislation nor has NRA said we agree with any existing NFA legislation. (Bullshit)
    NRA has not agreed to a ban. (Bullshit)
    NRA has not agreed to anything. (Bullshit)
    NRA simply insists upon enforcing existing law. (Try article 1 section 9 for starters then article IV, article VI then the second amendment…… there’s a reason that unconstitutional nfa is from 1934 and not 1791)

  23. avatar Green Mtn. Boy says:

    Beyond time for Negotiating Rights Away,so called leadership,Wayne LaPierre, Marion Hammer, Chris Cox,Mac Ack and most of the board that has enabled this current crop of Capitulation masters to Go or be Separated.
    Time to return the NRA to it’s members,so as not to”Stand and Capitulate” at the drop of a hat or dollar bill,No More Compromises,hey that sound like Negotiating Rights Aways competition GOA. When next the NRA calls my reply is CLICK.

    Now there is a fresh infringement to add to Negotiating Rights Away list of accomplishments

    1791: The Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution is ratified.
    The amendment reads:

    “A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state,
    the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.”

    After That
    1871: The National Rifle Association was formed by Union Army veterans Col. William C. Church
    and Gen. George Wingate.

    After that, they start going the other way







    *2018 Bump Stock Ban*

  24. avatar Alan says:

    The management types at the ATF, BATFE more fully are, in my view, a bunch of political whores, no disrespect for or to HONEST WHORES intended. As for the NRA, assuming that I have neither misread or misunderstood their output here, I’m rather close to telling them what they might do with my long standing, since 1975, LIFE MEMBERSHIP. By the way, the original passage and retention of The Hughes Amendment never did speak even slightly well for The Congress.

    1. avatar Angry Dad says:

      You plan to terminate your life to protest the NRA? You go too far. Bump stocks are a joke, allowed because of a bureaucratic FU by ATF (just think how scared you clever engineers made them had they not allowed bump stocks, which after all only change the rate of semiauto fire, blah blah blah; the very definition of sophistry). And you would draw a line in the sand over this? Well, I can’t say I applaud your tactical sense. Maybe you should top yourself.

      1. avatar Alan says:

        What has the NRA done to eliminate the Hughes Amendment? Oh by the way, what have our “congressional supporters” done?

  25. avatar Garrison Hall says:

    ” . . .the NRA claims that it was either “let ATF review its prior determinations” or risk even more restrictive action…from a GOP-controlled congress…that could have jeopardized semi-automatic firearms. . .”

    Exactly. Bush I signed a restrictive gun-control bill which was supported by elected Republicans. Bush II would have signed another if it came across his desk (thanks to the NRA, it didn’t). Just because the GOPe is in control IN NO WAY means that gun control measures will be opposed. Gun controllers know that a moral panic always results from a mass killing. They understand this well enough to have their propaganda machine oiled and ready for action while they wait for the next mass killing tragedy. When one happens— and the always do—they spring into action and begin making “do-something-right-now” demands based on their claim to have a moral imperative to demand action.

    This is how coercive gun controls get passed into law. Politicians, regardless of ideology or party affiliation, are vulnerable to moral demands for action that is issued during moral panics. Although I was very surprised to see him do it, we saw Trump get stampeded into the same kind of bad decision regarding bump-fire adaptors. The NRA knows this quite well which is why it pushed for an ATF “reinterpretation” rather than seeing new gun-control measures go before congress. This is what the NRA is very good at doing. Make no mistake, a policy interpretation isn’t nearly as permanent of an actual law. The NRA knows this and anybody who follows the gun-control controversy ought to know it to.

    Although I’m glad to see others taking up the fight against the ATF ruling, I can understand what the NRA did. The organization is very good a choosing its battles and this is a hill on which the NRA decided it wasn’t going to die.

    1. avatar CZJay says:

      Yet we sent American men up hills simply to die and give it back over and over again in an attempt to destroy communism. Now we give the communists in America what they want whilst we sit at home playing 4D chess.

      -Me love you too much, America.
      -What do we get for bump fire stocks?
      -Everything you want…

  26. avatar jeff says:

    The mistake was made when the NRA did not oppose the ban on fully automatic weapons. That opened the door for endless debate on what we should be allowed to have. There are no such restrictions in the 2nd Amendment. The Second Amendment recognizes that citizens have the right to protect themselves. The right to bear arms is not granted by the government, but is recognized as a right we already have. Individuals have the right to determine what type of fire power they need to protect their families.

  27. avatar Michael says:

    The problem is not entirely that unregistered possession of bump stocks is now a felony. It is not entirely that there was already an ATF ruling that no fully automatic weapon could be made legally after a certain date, 1986 if I am remembering right.

    But the problem includes the fact that now every person with two hands capable of holding up a semi automatic rifle, with two or more fingers on the trigger hand, is guilty of being an unregistered machine gun. Cause we all are capable of bump firing without a stock, at admittedly differing levels of competence.

    But the ‘law’ is the ‘law’ as interpreted by whomever wants to ban things.

  28. avatar Ton E says:

    “Without the NRA we wouldn’t have a 2nd amendment!” – Every NRA apologist ever

    I’ve been a lifetime member since 2014 and I to this day believe the Vegas statement was a the act that told me every member of the board or directors who was OK with the Vegas statement, Wayne LaPierre & Chris Cox should step down immediately. Sorry not sorry.

    1. avatar Angry Dad says:

      You don’t see the irony of claiming old boy life member status since only 2014? Sorry, not much street cred there, to put it mildly. You sound like a troll stooge; go find another rightist (in both senses) organization to try to trash and subvert, leave the NRA alone.

      1. avatar Ton E says:

        Street cred…..someone has watched way too many movies. You’d think the Board was paying you with the amount of sucking you’ve been doing throughout the comments here.

    2. avatar Fudds McKenzie says:


  29. avatar Ken A Saw says:

    I’m not an authority on “anything”, but I was under the assumption that the
    ATF as it is, was not an enforcing entity, but a regulating/reviewing entity.
    Just sayin, probably will get a ration of s&[email protected] on this. Personally I don’t understand
    why you NEED a bump stock in the first place. Peace

    1. avatar LarryinTX says:

      Check your list of founding documents, let us know when you find the “Bill of Needs”, I’d like to read it. If you willingly surrender your rights for no reason, then when they decide to take one you DO want, you can listen to fading voices telling you they don’t see why you need that anyway. you don’t need access to the voting booth in order to hunt, so voting is cancelled.

  30. avatar Phil Hill says:

    I am a lifetime N.R.A. member, and must say that after the N.R.A. executive boards’ betrayal on bumpstocks, coupled with their $MILLION$ dollar per year salary, it is time to STOP SENDING THE N.R.A. MONEY! WISE UP!

    1. avatar Angry Dad says:

      You also sound like a troll; leave the NRA alone, Ivan.

      1. avatar Ing says:

        You also sound even more like a troll. If not a troll, then a verbose idiot.

        Get this through your thick skull: Letting the president tell a gigantic government agency to ignore the plain language of the law is NOT good news for anyone who may need the protection of any law, anywhere, at any time, ever. (And that’s all of us.)

        You and the NRA are both on the wrong side of this. And yes, I’m an NRA member and will remain one…for now.

      2. avatar CZJay says:

        “Trolla-la-la-la-la… Tis the season to be jolly…” –Donald “The Art of The Deal” Trump

      3. avatar Ton E says:

        Yes you’re a troll for calling out the actions of an organization you’re apart of! Shame on him for not being an apologist like you!

    2. avatar Nanashi says:

      Only now? Did you miss the outright embezzlement Wayne LaPierre was caught in in 1997?

  31. avatar Ronald Wright says:

    What is the problem with going back and revisiting the original “law” that violated our 2nd Amendment Rights and the Constitution? The 1934 comedy act that should be REPEALED for VIOLATING THE Constitution! Just the pure fact that WE have to PAY a $200 “fee/tax” to BUY A RIGHT is ridiculous. There is nothing in this “law” about “safety for the public”; the wording that they try and use when passing another ILLEGAL LAW.. The last time I looked, the wording; Shall Not Be Infringed” means exactly that; SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED. If they want to change the Bill of Rights/Constitution with an AMENDMENT, then okay, do it the LEGAL way, not through a back door! We have LAWS and a Constitution that is to be followed BY EVERYONE, INCLUDING POLITICIANS AND LAWYERS AND JUDGES. Yes, I’m a Benefactor member of the NRA and I also donate to several other gun groups!

    1. avatar Alan says:

      Among other bo-bo’s of FDR, we have that legislation, the 1934 Act. Additionally, respecting objectionable legislation, during FDR’s time as governor of N.Y., the state legislature had repealed The Sullivan Law. FDR vetoed repeal, and obviously, the legislature didn’t override, to it’s ever lasting shame. The passage of many years does not appear to have improved the quality of the state legislature, sad to note.

  32. avatar Aaron Walker says:

    The Terrible Truths: Me-thinks that OUR government is just 🏃 running amok, NOT representing the American people, or upholding the U.S. Constitution/Bill of Rights…That the NRA membership NEEDS to call for an Emergency meeting and shake up its board of directors, IT’S leadership! Cause it sure looks like the NRA has been compromised by ANTI-2nd Amendment forces from the inside! I noticed a lot of the usual NRA big mouths like Teddy Nugent has been very quiet as of late…Furthermore, the bump thing was generated by a suspicious Vegas/mass shooting event that has NEVER been fully explain without a shadow of a doubt…And by ALL reasoning APPEARS to been a .GOV “Put-Up-Job” (a Hostile, Rogue Goverment action…With the intent to initiate drastic political changes through the means caused by the assassination deaths of a large amount of American citizens…)

  33. avatar Angry Dad says:

    Your discomfort about this matter is a cri de cœur; in law school, there is an entire course on Administrative Law, which this is but one example of. Be of good cheer, it ain’t that bad, and as others have noted it was masterly for the NRA to kick the can back to the ATF for further administrative decision (since as I have said, after all it was their FU in the first place). But your larger point in the tendency in our modern lives to have the bureaucracy expand malignantly is always correct.

  34. avatar Rocketman says:

    Trump, who’s SUPPOSED to be a master negotiator, royally screwed the pooch. He should have gone to Schumer and said “If you want a bump stock ban, it’s going to cost you.” “You will get it only if you agree to change the law to make civilian machine gun manufacturing legal again.” He did that he would have been a hero to gun owners.

    1. avatar CZJay says:

      You don’t have to win it all, you simply have to fight. Americans will love you for putting up a fight.

    2. avatar rt66paul says:

      The whole point here is that the elites that use the political parties for power do not want the unwashed masses armed. They either say that the armed people are too dangerous or they give lip service and pretend to care about our gun rights.

      These elites in government need to be voted out, vote in some people that are actually part of the middle class and work as hard as we can to destroy the 2 party system.

    3. avatar Alan says:

      How come it seems that it seems that when our supposed supporters are in positions of power, they make some noise, but seemingly fail to utilize said power.

    4. avatar LarryinTX says:

      Rocketman, Chucky would be happy to agree to your terms, read them again, and just as soon as you banned bump stocks, he would forget the exact terms, and nothing further would be done. This stunt is old news, now, anybody who falls for it in the future is not going to pass it off as stupidity.

  35. avatar PatriotCrier says:

    This is the red line. Groups around the country are prepareing to correct this government over-reach. Patriots prepare, you can assist.

  36. avatar Alan says:

    What has the NRA done about ridding us of The Hughes Amendment. What have our Congressional Friends done to obtain the same ends, and by the way, how did this amendment ever come to pass? As I understand, on an unrecorded voice vote. Correct?

  37. avatar Davidio Flavio says:

    OK, I am a 07/SOT, so, I know the function of the AR15 and M16 intimately.

    Some morons are arguing that a bump stock converts a AR into an M, and that’s not the case, and it only takes one simple action to show why.

    Take any bump stock for any gun, and using one hand only, pull the trigger, and see how many shots you get from that one trigger function.

    A one armed man, who cannot push the rifle forward to initiate the firing sequence, is stuck with a funky plastic stock.

    Give that one armed man an M16, and it still fires full auto, always, and forever, until the magazine is empty or the trigger is released.

    Its not the bump stock resetting the trigger, its not the bump stock firing a second round, its your non trigger hand pushing the rifle forward that causes it to fire, and fire again.

    Don’t believe me, go try it, especially you retarded gunsmiths who claim to know how to make an illegal machine gun.

    One of the reasons I found a bump stock so useless, is that I just could not get into the “Curve” of using my front hand to move the rifle forward, while NOT trying to pull the trigger.

    Basically, I am not defending what I see as a useless bullet spraying helper, what I am defending is using made up bullshit to justify banning anything you don’t like.

    And if you don’t understand why that should concern us all, then, you really don’t belong in this debate.

  38. avatar Stateisevil says:

    Well, a future administration will absolutely ban standard mags and AR’s by fatwah? Why not?

  39. avatar Fake News = Fake Laws says:

    Instead of arguing the ‘ fools errand ‘ about ATF alleged ‘ rules ‘ , the unlawfully created agency must be challenged on its lack of JURISDICTION that arises from the illegal side-stepping of Congress from Prohibition ( through several dubious ‘ name changes ‘ ) to the present day.

    ” Secretary Humphrey with NO AUTHORITY, creates an AGENCY of the Department of the Treasury called “Internal Revenue Service”, out of AIR, from AN OFFSHORE PURE TRUST, called “Bureau of Internal Revenue”. The “SETTLER” and “BENEFICIARIES” of the trust are UNKNOWN. The “TRUSTEE” is the “SECRETARY of THE TREASURY”. Acting Secretary Walker further LAUNDERS the trust by CREATING from the alleged “Internal Revenue Service”, the “BUREAU OF ALCOHOL TOBACCO AND FIREARMS”. ”

    It gets better –

    Walker created the [Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms] from the [Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms Division] of Humphrey’s [Internal Revenue Service]. He then says, that, what was transferred, is the same ENTITY as the [Commissioner of Internal Revenue]. He KNEW he could not create something from nothing without the AUTHORITY OF CONGRESS and/or the President, so he made it look like he did something that he had, in fact, not done. TO COMPOUND THE FRAUD, the FEDERAL REGISTER PUBLISHED the unbelievable assertion that a PERSON HAD BEEN REPLACED WITH A THING; ” the term Director Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms Division has been replaced with the term Internal Revenue Service.”

  40. avatar Fudds McKenzie says:

    I‘ve never paid the NRA a cent or taken the free memberships. Those of you who have sicken me. You ignorant slobs did this with your tribalism and childish wishful thinking.

    They know I’m a shooter and spam me, some POS vendor must have sold them my name. But whatever, waste effort trying to appeal to me.

  41. avatar james says:

    This ‘ban’ was by design headed to the Courts.
    Put schematics of a full auto AR next to a semi auto AR.

    The necessary parts are missing from the semi auto AR, you don’t have to be an engineer or an expert in firearms to look at the parts list and see there is no auto sear.

    Now look at the US Patent # 8,607,687, please read the Abstract.

    A bump stock and interface system for a semi-automatic firearm.

  42. avatar james says:

    Here is the abstract from the US Patent

    Slide stock for firearm with contoured finger rest


    A bump stock and interface system for a semi-automatic firearm.

    The interface system includes first and second bearing elements. A handle is provided with an integral finger rest.
    The finger rest is concave to form a cradle for the user’s trigger finger. In use, the user grasps the handle with one hand and places an index finger of the same hand firmly on the finger rest.

    When intending to fire a round of ammunition, the user pushes the receiver forward with their other hand so that the trigger collides with the stabilized finger.

    Recoil force quickly separates the trigger from the user’s finger on the finger rest. The user again pushes forward the receiver to repeat the firing cycle.

    A lock can be selectively engaged to restrict longitudinal movement of the firearm relative to the handle, thereby returning the firearm to normal semi-automatic functionality.

  43. avatar Mad Max says:

    Ya’all know the bump stock ban isn’t going to make it through judicial review, don’t ya?

    Congress will actually have to pass a law in the end (which is what they were trying to avoid under the circumstances of the time – both the NRA and Congress). Once Congress decides to act, we really need to pay attention. If Congress just outright bans bump stocks by name and compensates all of the owners for turning them in (a taking like eminent domain), no problem (except the lawsuits over the value/compensation).

    There is a remote possibility that the SCOTUS declares them protected by the 2nd Amendment and prohibits the taking. That might get the registry reopened by Congress.

    It appears that the SCOTUS is about to overturn one of the Defference doctrines (forgot the name) in relation to administrative agencies in a currently pending case. This bump stock case may be the one that kills the Chevron Defference.

  44. avatar Doug says:

    As hot as this topic is, this is a pretty good thread of comments on the subject.

    I fully appreciate the slippery slope argument. I also don’t grasp the value of the bump stock, perhaps because I’m more concerned with marksmanship.

    I do, however, understand the tactical value of throwing the bump stock to the hysterical anti-gunners. Let them perceive it as a victory all day and all night. If it keeps them distracted from real 2nd Amendment issues, all the better.

    What does concern me is the spineless RINOs who don’t understand a damn thing about the Constitution. And if you don’t understand the need for the right to keep and bear arms (not accessories) in this tumultuous assault on our Republic, then you are a liberal and deserve no quarter.

    1. avatar Fudds McKenzie says:

      Haha, silly leftists, percieving a trojan horse as a victory. How stupid of them. MAGA

    2. avatar TomC says:

      So infringement is ok with you so long as it isn’t YOUR particular pet toy being infringed.

      You don’t mind the ATF deciding to ignore the existing law to pretend bump stocks are somehow machine guns.

      And you won’t mind when the ATF decides they were wrong about pistol arm braces and declares that installing one makes a pistol into an SBR.

      And you won’t mind when the ATF decides that a smooth bore gun with a 14″ barrel is either a Short Barrel Shotgun or an Any Other Weapon despite not fitting within either definition in existing law.

      And, I suppose you won’t mind when a Democrat-majority House and a Democrat-plus-RINO-majority Senate decides to ban “Assault Rifles” and just happens to define “Assault Rifle” as any semi-auto that can take a replaceable magazine.

      But what will they ban after that? How about banning those dangerous ‘Sniper Rifles” — you know, any centerfire rifle with a barrel over 18″ in length with an adjustable stock or an optical sight. Would that finally wake you up?

      As Ben Franklin is supposed to have observed: “We must, indeed, all hang together or, most assuredly, we shall all hang separately.”

      1. avatar Sam I Am says:

        Well, good ol’ Uncle Benny got it all wrong. Should have said, “I don’t have to outrun the bear, I just need to outrun you.”

    3. avatar CZJay says:

      If it keeps them distracted from real 2nd Amendment issues, all the better.

      1. avatar LarryinTX says:

        I am enthusiastic about NY outlawing Chuck. The rottencrotch asshole has been in the Senate far too long, it is good they have seen the truth.

  45. avatar Doug says:

    Further, I may try to pull my Life Membership from the NRA and give the balance to GOA. I doubt this will happen and I’ll just have to become a life member of GOA and the SAF. But the NRA is the establishment, just like the Democrat and Republican party. It exists for itself. It’s only marginally better because it generally advocates for the 2nd Amendment. But it is the establishment, no less.

    Biggest game in town perhaps, but the NRA needs a sea-change in leadership across the board.

    1. avatar Fudds McKenzie says:

      Good idea, but the NRA probably won’t even subtract you from their alleged membership number. Rather they’ll keep acting as the broker for your vote.

      Back on the main topic; the mental actobatics by Trump apologists never ceases to amaze me. Yeah, the bump stock ban is a trick – what was Scalia’s commentary in Heller then? One way or another the pro-RKBA side are tools.

    2. avatar LarryinTX says:

      The “balance” on your NRA Life membership was zero the day after you paid it. Don’t schools teach ANYTHING these days?

  46. avatar 2WarAbnVet says:

    “Shall not be infringed” doesn’t mean what it used to.

    1. avatar Sam I Am says:

      ” ‘Shall not be infringed’ doesn’t mean what it used to.”

      If you look really closely at an original copy of the original constitution and amendments, you will not a little curlicue right after “infringed”, and under neath the signatures, as a foot note, the following, “~Except in cases of “compelling government interest”.

  47. avatar Greg says:

    Screw these Russian stooges

  48. avatar Jug says:

    It seems that no one but myself, thanks God that the dummy in Vegas “tried” to use bump stocks!

    If he had, had any expertise at all, he would have left the “short range” stuff behind and used the more dangerous long range tools, 100 percent.

    That would likely have reversed the “kill vs wound” rate!

    Now, what are they gonna do when it becomes well known that one doesn’t need either a special stock or a bi-pod?
    I am sure that there is no way to ban just “a technique”!

  49. avatar Brocus says:

    Trump disregarding the constitution? Oathkeepers, roll out! Oh wait, it’s not a black democrat in the white house, never mind.

    1. avatar LarryinTX says:

      What developed nation would be stupid enough to put a Democrat in office?

  50. avatar TomC says:

    This is the same basic story line that the NRA has used for every anti-RKBA action in the last 50 years: “You should be thanking us for supporting the anti-gun action because without us it would have been worse. Now hurry up and write another check so we can protect you from the next attack.”

    EVERY single piece of anti-gun federal legislation that has passed Congress in the last 50 years did so with the active support of the NRA — always with the claim that this new infringement was the “best compromise we could get” and, of course, combined with yet another fund raising appeal.

    The amazing thing is that, even now, there are still a few gun owners left in America who honestly think the NRA is on our side. The NRA wants to fight for Gun Rights, but they don’t want to win because if they win we won’t need to keep sending all those checks.

    The 2016 national election results were the NRA’s worst nightmare – a Republican President and a Republican majority in both houses of Congress. Gun owners all across America breathed a sigh of relief — but the NRA was in a total panic because without the Democrats to support the NRA fear-mongering they knew donations would dry up.

    When the rabid anti-gun faction didn’t present enough of a threat, the NRA had to step in to suggest new anti-gun measures to keep the pot boiling (and, of course, to keep the cash flow coming in). It was the NRA that gave the move to ban bump stocks its first serious push. The NRA leadership decided that “bump stocks” were an easy target because nearly everyone who isn’t into guns had no clue what they were or how they worked and even most gun owners didn’t know or care much about them. So this was something the NRA thought they could sacrifice without alienating too many of their donors.

    So which niche product will the NRA offer up next? Anyone want to bet how long before someone suggests that the ATF should “reexamine” their determination on pistol arm braces. Or do you think they will go after those not-a-shotgun “firearms” first and leave the braces for later?

    The NRA got exactly what they wanted — a whole series of new threats to frighten gun owners because now even if Congress won’t pass anti-gun legislation, they can get the ATF to ignore existing laws by “reexamining” and “clarifying” regulations.

  51. avatar john says:

    NRA: “sorry we [email protected] you over. THEY’ COMMIN FOR YOUR GUNS….donate…donate…donate…donate…donate…donate…donate…donate…

    NRA is a bunch of gutless b!tches that just want donations and do nothing in return.

    Sort of sounds like a bunch of unemployed losers sitting at home collecting benefits.


    1. avatar LarryinTX says:

      NRA Benefactor Life Member here, and before you get all in a snit, I was a life member before SAF or GOA existed. Still, if you have not committed and are on the fence, buy into one year of membership, within 6 months you will realize NRA has spent your dues and more sending you requests for more money. Your mailbox is never empty, and if you allow it they have called your phone many times asking for more and more. Some jerks on this site assert that is the nasty NRA, I assert that is the current state of graduate degrees in marketing, all schools teach the same thing, if you donate to the republican, or the democratic party, you will get exactly the same treatment, all the same lies, if you contact a senatorial candidate from a state which you do not live in, ANYBODY in public life or any charity, all will treat you exactly the same way, like an incredibly stupid piece of shit which needs to be mined for every penny they can extract by lies, harassment, and constant badgering.

  52. avatar Matt says:

    “If you’re not part of the NRA, you’re part of the problem.”

    – The Truth About Guns

    Duplicity much?

    1. avatar Fudds McKenzie says:

      It’s too big to fail. Your duty as a non-fudd gun owner is to make it bigger by joining, then try to change it from the inside, then hope the GOP changes from the jnside, then wait for both houses and the oval office to fill up with pro-gun republicans. Meaning you have to toe the fudds line for 30 years minimum. Yeah right. Proselytizing NRA supporters are transparent, selfish, ignorant old losers who can’t control their government but they think they can lead you.

  53. avatar Carl B. says:

    Yeah, trash the NRA. Real f******* smart. “I have seen the enemy and he is us.”

  54. avatar Larry says:

    This “sell out” by the NRA if why I’m dropping my membership and joining Judicial Watch.

  55. avatar Slovko says:

    The NRA is as done to me as Dick’s Sporting Goods. Never again will a support that “700 Club” scam of an organization. In the wise words of former president George W Bush, ” fool me once, shame on — shame on you. Fool me — you can’t get fooled again.”

  56. avatar George Venable says:

    Benefactor Life NRA Member here. Don’t own a bumpstock, can’t afford a full auto.
    No American citizen should be deprived by his government of property obtained legally WITHOUT compensation.
    Maybe everone should be restricted to just one car. The government should be able to come by and pick up that restored 1965 Corvette gas guzzler in your garage because you already have a newer/slower car. No compensation required.

    1. avatar Sam I Am says:

      “No American citizen should be deprived by his government of property obtained legally WITHOUT compensation.”

      Confiscating contraband (illegal items) is not compensable. If you own a home, and government decides you need to be removed in order to use your property for the good of the community, THEN you are eligible to be compensated (you legally bought the house, it was not illegal to own a house). If you build a liquor store, and liquor becomes illegal, all the liquor in the store is now illegal, and subject to confiscation; not compensation for removing illegal items. What government is forbidden is to charge you with a crime because you owned and sold liquor before liquor was made illegal. So, yes, government can make everything you legally own to be illegal to possess, and take all your property without compensation.

  57. avatar TC says:

    Let’s examine the NRA myth. I know, I know, a lot of you out there are NRA members handing over your money and have accepted without question the myth that the NRA is a guardian of our Right to Keep and Bear arms, but that just ain’t so.

    Let us go back to 1934 where the NRA was instrumental in the passage of the National Firearms Act. A review of the Congressional Record reveals that then NRA President Karl Frederick was an active participant in moving gun control legislation forward at both the State and Federal level. In his testimony before Congress in 1934 he stated: “I’ve never believed in the general practice of carrying weapons. I seldom carry one…I do not believe in the general promiscuous toting of guns. I think it should be sharply restricted and only under licenses.” Mr. Frederick when asked if thought that the NFA would interfere with a person’s right to keep and bear arms, here how he responded: “I have not given it any study from that point of view. I will be glad to submit in writing my views on that subject, but I do think it is a subject which deserves serious thought.” Mr. Frederick is completely unconcerned about our rights.

    One thing was evident throughout the hearings, all parties seem to understand that such a bill was unconstitutional, but since the bill levied taxes on certain firearms and on firearms dealers it could be passed as Mr. Fredrick stated, “under the guise of a revenue raising bill.”

    The Congressional Record from those hearings is quite enlightening and you can read more here:

    Fast forward to 1968 from the NRA’s American Rifleman Magazine, where the NRA boasted about their 97 year record of supporting gun control, or as they euphemistically called it “workable gun laws.”

    “The NRA supported The National Firearms Act of 1934 which taxes and requires registration of such firearms as machine guns, sawed-off rifles and sawed-off shotguns. … NRA support of Federal gun legislation did not stop with the earlier Dodd bills. It currently backs several Senate and House bills which, through amendment, would put new teeth into the National and Federal Firearms Acts.”  —American Rifleman, March 1968, P. 22

    The NRA was squarely behind the Unconstitutional 1988 “Undetectable Firearms Act” signed into “law” by Ronald Reagan.

    In Congressional Testimony in 1999, NRA Executive VP Wayne LaPierre had this to say:

    “We think it’s reasonable to support the federal Gun-Free School Zones Act. … We think it’s reasonable to expect full enforcement of federal firearms laws by the federal government. … That’s why we support Project Exile — the fierce prosecution of federal gun laws…we think it’s reasonable because it works. … We only support what works and our list is proud.”

    Again, the NRA is proud of their historical support of Unconstitutional legislation, the leadership of the NRA is either constitutionally ignorant or worse they actively ignore it for profit, either way they are charlatans .

    Moving forward to present day, the NRA supports banning “Bump Stocks” and supports the equally unconstitutional National Conceal Carry Reciprocity bill. It is clear from the NRA’s faux opposition to any gun control is to alarm folks and expand their membership rolls, it’s all about the Benjamin’s.

    One thing when it comes to gun control legislation, the NRA is generally for it, true they might disagree with individual piece of legislation, or part thereof, but if you’re paying attention you will not hear the NRA opposing any legislation on its unconstitutionality.

    “The federal government has no authority whatsoever under the Constitution—even if the Second Amendment were repealed—to ban or regulate handguns, high-caliber guns, shotguns, sawed-off shotguns, rifles, assault rifles, extended-capacity magazines, bump stocks, ammunition, automatic weapons, machine guns, grenades, or bazookas.
    And neither does the federal government have any authority whatsoever under the Constitution to establish or mandate gun-free zones, background checks, waiting periods, trigger locks, limits on gun purchases, age restrictions on gun purchases, gun-barrel lengths, concealed weapons laws, licensing of gun dealers, gun-owner databases, gun licensing, or gun registration.
    If anything should be repealed it is all federal gun laws—even the ones supported by Republicans and conservatives.”

    1. avatar Sam I Am says:

      Thanks for the NRA quotes. Keeping this comment on file.

  58. avatar Tom says:

    The NRA is dead to me – they sound as reta**ed as the brainless libtards on the west coast and don’t care about supporting gun rights or even the constitution. It is all about making money so the NRA executives can carry their big share home every month. Members are just there to pay for their lifestyle. They have not achieved ANYTHING for gun rights – the actual work is being done by grassroots organizations all over the country – not by the NRA anymore. They became fat, lazy and useless.
    There is nothing “fully automatic” with a bumpfire stock. Jerry Miculek fires almost as fast as a full automatic firearm even without a bumpfire stock – he should be put in prison for being a machine gun. Idiotic? YES, as idiotic as stating that stocks are machine guns.

    1. avatar JT says:

      F the NRA! GOA for me now on!

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