So whatever happened to the bump stock ban?

NRA and supporters in Congress drug their heels until the next news story that hit the headlines.

Nothing lasts more than 2 weeks in the headlines. Anything before is forgotten.

It's time to resurrect this thread, now that the midterm elections are behind us. I believe that we're just days away from final action on the bump stock ban.

The big question is what will happen with the existing bump stocks. As originally proposed, it looked like they would simply be declared contraband, and required to be turned in or destroyed. The NRA, in its last-minute comment, raised the issue that this would be a 5th Amendment "taking," requiring fair-market compensation. This is a valid point, and one that is sure to be litigated if the ban goes through as originally proposed.

It would make sense that there be some sort of "window" within which existing bump stocks could be registered as the machine guns that the proposal contends they are. That, however, would run afoul of the Hughes Amendment, since all bump stocks were manufactured post-1986. It would then become a pressing matter for 18 U.S.C. sec. 922(o) to be "technically amended" or repealed altogether. And this would have to be done before the new Congress is seated at the beginning of January and the political calculus changes.

AlexanderA said:

It's time to resurrect this thread, now that the midterm elections are behind us. I believe that we're just days away from final action on the bump stock ban.

The big question is what will happen with the existing bump stocks. As originally proposed, it looked like they would simply be declared contraband, and required to be turned in or destroyed. The NRA, in its last-minute comment, raised the issue that this would be a 5th Amendment "taking," requiring fair-market compensation. This is a valid point, and one that is sure to be litigated if the ban goes through as originally proposed.

It would make sense that there be some sort of "window" within which existing bump stocks could be registered as the machine guns that the proposal contends they are. That, however, would run afoul of the Hughes Amendment, since all bump stocks were manufactured post-1986. It would then become a pressing matter for 18 U.S.C. sec. 922(o) to be "technically amended" or repealed altogether. And this would have to be done before the new Congress is seated at the beginning of January and the political calculus changes.

Click to expand...

I think from an equity point that a lot of folks have these and depended on the federal government's advice that they were legal. Although ex post facto prohibitions only apply to criminal statutes, it seems that making something criminal via rulemaking retroactively for potentially hundreds of thousands of people (estimates from the ATF that roughly between 250,000 and 500,000 such stocks were sold to an unknown number of people) across the U.S. that bought these stocks in good faith either be compensated maybe through a tax credit or the registry reopened so that they can register them.

As I've said in earlier threads, I believe that a temporary registry reopening could avoid a filibuster because it would be a deficit reducing matter (e.g. tax)--that is the same way that the individual mandate tax penalty was set to zero and I don't see how this would be much different.). A past Congress cannot bind a present one and thus such a revenue bill will be a temporary (or even up to ten years under budgeting rules amendment to the original Hughes Amendment.) There are still some must pass government spending bills that still remain for lame duck Congress to go through.

boom boom said:

As I've said in earlier threads, I believe that a temporary registry reopening could avoid a filibuster because it would be a deficit reducing matter (e.g. tax)--that is the same way that the individual mandate tax penalty was set to zero and I don't see how this would be much different.). A past Congress cannot bind a present one and thus such a revenue bill will be a temporary (or even up to ten years under budgeting rules amendment to the original Hughes Amendment.) There are still some must pass government spending bills that still remain for lame duck Congress to go through.

Click to expand...

If historical precedent is followed (going back to 1934), the initial registration under the NFA of something that was previously unregulated would be free. The bump stocks would have a free registration. But if the registry were opened to things that were previously illegal (an MG amnesty), then a $200 tax would probably attach. That would bring the whole thing under the budget reconciliation rules, which would obviate the need for 60 votes in the Senate. If 18 U.S.C. sec. 922(o) (the Hughes Amendment) was amended or repealed, then the amnesty provision of GCA '68 would once again become operative, and the AG could declare any number of 90-day amnesties going forward.

The bump stock controversy may have a silver lining in that it could provide an opening for legalizing real machine guns.

I read it somewhere (ar15.com I think ?) Where there is a way to get these or similar items into a registry, if they are so declared, via a Secret Service 'loophole' provision in some admin ruling. Something to that effect. Has anyone else heard this?

After the elections may mean action is just as probable as, after elections not going 100% as desired it may all be left alone...

I wouldn't be surprised if it was classified as a "DD" (Destructive Device) or an AOW (Any Other Weapon) in an attempt to avoid opening the Machinegun Registry.

When they wanted to get rid of the Street Sweeper, it was classified a DD and given time to register it. The Bump Stock isn't a Machinegun but they want it gone, so claim/make it a DD and give time to register it.

kanook said:

I wouldn't be surprised if it was classified as a "DD" (Destructive Device) or an AOW (Any Other Weapon) in an attempt to avoid opening the Machinegun Registry.

Click to expand...

The proposed regulation was based on reclassifying bump stocks as machine guns. That was the whole rationale. There is no way it could come under the definition of a Destructive Device.

kanook said:

When they wanted to get rid of the Street Sweeper, it was classified a DD and given time to register it. The Bump Stock isn't a Machinegun but they want it gone, so claim/make it a DD and give time to register it.

Click to expand...

The Street Sweeper's reclassification as a DD was based on bore size plus the fact that it was a shotgun without a "sporting purpose." There was no contention that it was a machine gun. There was no problem with retroactive registrations because the Hughes Amendment doesn't apply to DD's. You could make yourself a DD (via Form 1) right now.

First off, this imminent ban you mean would come from BATFE regs, not Congress, correct? Why do we think such a thing is imminent? Would it include binary triggers? I'll give up my Echo II when..... (you know the rest).

Adding them to AOWs with only a $5 stamp wouldn't be too bad, but could BATFE classify them as AOWs alone, without Congress?

DannyLandrum said:

First off, this imminent ban you mean would come from BATFE regs, not Congress, correct? Why do we think such a thing is imminent? Would it include binary triggers? I'll give up my Echo II when..... (you know the rest).

Adding them to AOWs with only a $5 stamp wouldn't be too bad, but could BATFE classify them as AOWs alone, without Congress?

Click to expand...

Yeah really. All I ever heard/read, was about the bump stock. Not anything concerning binary triggers.

October 1st bump stocks became illegal in Florida.

Can you combine a binary trigger with a bump stock?

Alte Schule said:

Can you combine a binary trigger with a bump stock?

Click to expand...

You could, but why, and what would you gain?

Sistema1927 said:

You could, but why, and what would you gain?

Click to expand...

dat cyclic

Sistema1927 said:

You could, but why, and what would you gain?

Click to expand...

Just curious if it could be done. Except for glass and lights both my AR's are bone stock and have no plans on changing that.

That video makes the case why it is a machine gun!

AlexanderA said:

That video makes the case why it is a machine gun!

Click to expand...

Negative ghostrider. If cyclic rate was all that was needed to define a machine gun Jerry Miculek would be in prison.

I never followed it much. I could never get a bumpstock to work on my bolt guns or single shots.

Bah Humbug!

Archie said:

I never followed it much. I could never get a bumpstock to work on my bolt guns or single shots.

Bah Humbug!

Click to expand...

Well stick around. The totality of it is, they want them all. All as in, all. As the opposite of very little. A lot. A ''double toothpicks''. So we fight and resist for the little pieces to stop them getting the big chunks.

And so it goes. To one & all, follow it much.

Any more on this?

Can someone explain to me how banning bump stocks will make things better?

Ehhh......no.

Vern Humphrey said:

Can someone explain to me how banning bump stocks will make things better?

Click to expand...

It makes unknowledgeable people feel safe.... all for false security we chisle away at liberty.

So they're going to ban bump stocks.
Now the panic children will have to find something else to hyperventilate over.

The amusing thing is that the "Resist" crowd has to decide whether or not to try to block this "fascistic" law created by a presidential memo or take it to court and have it declared unconstitutional...