The NFA shouldn't exist to begin with, since it's a blatant violation of the 2A.Should have been NFA to begin with.
The NFA shouldn't exist to begin with, since it's a blatant violation of the 2A.Should have been NFA to begin with.
As a mostly-regulatory lawyer, I'm with you!
I'm just pointing out that playing the game of hoop-jumping is not something President Trump has regarded as constraining his actions thus far.
WHy don't civilians have to worry about suppressive fire? The whole point of the 2A is to protect civilian's ability to use military weapons and train in military tactics. Semi auto rifles aren't needed for "regular" self defense from other civilians.
Well, in this case at least, he can give orders to the ATF to review its own regulations on the issue. The ATF, whatever I think of the particular action, is at least following the APA procedures in promulgating a formal rule that can be effectively challenged.
That is far better for the rule of law than "guidance letters" such as the Dept. of Education's Dear Colleague letter that gutted due process for students or some other clap trap such as refusing to declare an agency action final to prevent lawsuits challenging the action (the Sackett v. EPA case). Same thing as votes on laws in Congress. Clarity in who did what and to whom is necessary in a democracy for accountability.
Better learn to navigate slippery slopes. 2A advocates seem to find them everywhere.I’m not an owner of bump-stocks but I don’t agree with this. It’s a very slippery slope.
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/...ck-ban-citizens-have-90-days-to-turn-them-in/
The NFA shouldn't exist to begin with, since it's a blatant violation of the 2A.
I don't see a credible source cited for this report.
Better learn to navigate slippery slopes. 2A advocates seem to find them everywhere.
If the bump stock ban was going to be inevitable, why couldn't we at least get something out of it??!! (Like opening the MG registry.) What we have here is a failure of imagination on the part of gun-rights advocates. They should have jumped in ahead of the curve instead of being purely reactive.The bump stock was always pretty borderline when it came to legality - its whole raison d'etre was to skirt the full auto ban. It never had a prayer of surviving after Las Vegas. The fact that a Republican President is pushing the ATF for a ban kind of tells the whole story.
If the bump stock ban was going to be inevitable, why couldn't we at least get something out of it??!! (Like opening the MG registry.) What we have here is a failure of imagination on the part of gun-rights advocates. They should have jumped in ahead of the curve instead of being purely reactive.
No.Bump stocks are not needed for anything. Nothing more than creative engineering. Bannnig them is probably a good thing.
1st, We don't know Ms. Warren will be running in 2020.
2nd, not voting for Trump doesn't mean voting for Warren/whom-ever.
Maybe it means if someone primaries Trump as Nov. '20 approaches, I vote for him/her.
In 2016 I hoped that anyone of the other @16 contenders had won over Trump. I voted for Trump because I did not want Hillary as president.
It's not what we lost, cheygriz, it's the principle of the thing --- and the precedent.
If the bump stock ban was going to be inevitable, why couldn't we at least get something out of it??!! (Like opening the MG registry.) What we have here is a failure of imagination on the part of gun-rights advocates. They should have jumped in ahead of the curve instead of being purely reactive.