Report: President Trump Signing Bump Stock Ban, Citizens Have 90 Days to Turn Them

[bearcreek]

Should have been NFA to begin with.

The NFA shouldn't exist to begin with, since it's a blatant violation of the 2A.

 

[boom boom]

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.

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.

 

[Tommygunn]

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.

There HAVE been incidents in which semi auto guns have been VERY useful in civilian self defense. Each incident is unique.

Having said that .... as I pointed out, bumpstocks are stupid. I don't care about them, it's the principle.

 

[Steve S.]

Politics discussion today is extremely volatile; I do not think that anything is gained by discussing it from an emotional position. My “one man’s opinion” is that bump stocks or anything that sprays ammo is nothing more than a adrenaline rush waste - vehicles that go 200+ mph are a waste - women with ultra humongous mammary glands are a waste. I get the attraction and the “legalness” of this kind of stuff; I would never tell anyone that they cannot have this stuff. For me, I could not care less if bumpstocks are legal or available - I simply just don’t care. I get why non-gun people are afraid of them; I get that fear - I do not want to be outgunned by some nutcase either. This is just one opinion - nothing for the believers to get upset about. Good shooting!

 

[ATLDave]

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.

The "guidance" stuff has really gotten out of hand at the federal level. Agencies now routinely issue de facto new regulations as "FAQ's" on their websites. When/if someone actually challenges them in court, they often fall... but that's a lot of hassle and uncertainty in the meantime.

 

[rpenmanparker]

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/

Better learn to navigate slippery slopes. 2A advocates seem to find them everywhere.

 

[25-20 WCF]

Let’s face it, bumpstocks were just a way to circumvent the law against fully automatic weapons. Closing that loop hole is not the same as grabbing our guns. No “slippery slope” since FA weapons have already been regulated for almost 85 years. Remember the ‘auto sear’ issue in the 1980s? We still have black guns.

To me this is not worth any hand-wringing, tears or angry diatribes.




.


.

 

[Zerodefect]

The NFA shouldn't exist to begin with, since it's a blatant violation of the 2A.

I agree, but since it does, bump stocks belong in there. They're skirting a technicality to shoot full auto. Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. This is our prize.

This was going to hit the fan eventually. ''It's inevitable, Mr. Anderson.''

 

[Jeff H]

I don't see a credible source cited for this report.

As of me typing this, this story hasn't been reported on the AP, Reuters or ABC News. At least not yet.

 

[AlexanderA]

Here's the direct citation to the article referenced by Breitbart:

https://www.cnn.com/2018/11/28/politics/final-bump-stock-ban/index.html

And here's an important part of that article:

some Democrats, such as Sen. Dianne Feinstein of California, have repeatedly cautioned that such a ban would likely result in lawsuits given ATF's earlier interpretation.

ATF Acting Director Thomas Brandon acknowledged in a Senate hearing this summer that he has been advised that banning bump fire stocks through executive regulation could lead to court challenges that would delay the implementation of a ban.
​

So, there's more to come.The ban will be challenged within the 90-day implementation period, and there's a good chance that the courts will at least temporarily stay the deadline. Meanwhile, the new Democrat-controlled House will take office, and it will undoubtedly weigh in legislatively. Then it will be a matter of negotiations between the House and the Senate. There are going to be lots of opportunities for creative lobbying.

 

[<*(((><]

Better learn to navigate slippery slopes. 2A advocates seem to find them everywhere.

You do know what the end game for gun legislation is, right? It's a death by a thousand cuts, plain and simple, the opponents to the RKBA/2A gain ground and want more; that is who they are.

There are many who don't subscribe to the "slippery slope" argument in many facets of life. With that I'll leave you with this heavy point of view on the subject of "slippery slope," as it relates to firearm legislation.

New England Holocaust Museum, Boston Massachusetts

First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a socialist.

Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.​

I get that bumpstocks are a direct work around for "simulated full-auto" and despite what one thinks about this maneuver of firearm accessory manufacturers it was done, and we have to deal with the consequences. But the fact of the matter is that the firearm accessory manufacturer made a product that fell well with in the guidelines of the law (18 U.S.C., § 921(A)(7) and 27 CFR § 478.11) "of one pull one bullet." One has to be a proponent of the NFA to accept that banning bumpstocks is not an infringement of our 2A rights. The fact of the matter is that we've given ground since 1934 and it won't stop, until we the People hold no power over our elected officials to rightfully elect person's into office in accordance to the will of the People.

 

[Mosin Bubba]

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.

Editorial here, and this is just my opinion: pistol braces are eventually going to meet the same kind of fate. Legally very borderline (just look at all the nonsense about shouldering them), designed to work around NFA laws, and never further than one bad ATF ruling away from going away.

 

[AlexanderA]

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.

 

[JONWILL]

All I have to say is that if there is a Bumpstock ban it won't be a standalone bill. It will be a rider on a budget bill.

There aren't many politicians that would come out and take a direct stance on this. They fear the blowback from the gun owning citizens

I don't agree with any ban, in fact I disagree with the 1936 act which took away Fully Automatic weapons from the public. There should be no restrictions on what kind of gun we can buy

 

[boom boom]

Might want to take a look at this as well. Machine gun is actually defined in the U.S. Code in a separate place.

26 U.S. Code § 5845 - Definition
(b)Machinegun
The term “machinegun” means any weapon which shoots, is designed to shoot, or can be readily restored to shoot, automatically more than one shot, without manual reloading, by a single function of the trigger. The term shall also include the frame or receiver of any such weapon, any part designed and intended solely and exclusively, or combination of parts designed and intended, for use in converting a weapon into a machinegun, and any combination of parts from which a machinegun can be assembled if such parts are in the possession or under the control of a person.

As a matter of law, the statute trumps whatever regulation or administrative letter was issued as it is a law passed by Congress and signed by the President. Thus, if the ATF re-considers the action of a bump stock as a machine gun as it generates multiple shots then the courts will probably go along with it.

I would urge anyone concerned to actually read the proposed rule in detail rather than news reports as generally the media has abysmal reporting on legal issues.

You can find it from the horse's mouth here:
https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2018/03/29/2018-06292/bump-stock-type-devices

A final rule has not yet been published but will be available at the same website when it does as a matter of law.

 

[Mosin Bubba]

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.

Getting rid of pseudo machine guns as a trade for real machine guns? Who's going to compromise on that?

The furthest thing I could see bump stocks being used for politically is as a bargaining chip during a 2013 type AWB proposal ("you can tell your constituents that you closed the 'machine gun loophole' in exchange for X..."), but after Vegas, there was no leverage. There was just no positive way to spin them.

 

[Oldman1151]

Bump stocks are not needed for anything. Nothing more than creative engineering. Bannnig them is probably a good thing.

 

[P5 Guy]

October 1st 2018 bump-stocks became illegal in Florida, where are the video clips of owners destroying or turning their now contraband bump-stocks?
So, now that firearms accessory is contraband all across the USA. No compensation for taking privately held property. Seems to go against one of those pesky other items in the Bill of Rights.

 

[Sistema1927]

I guess that we are going to need to cut at least one belt loop on every pair of pants if/when this passes.

 

[cheygriz]

We all need to get real on this slippery slope business. It's mostly baloney.

When we get into the mode of ?"nothing, no how, no way" we appear to the majority of folks as far right nutjobs.

Sometimes there have to be rules to prevent anarchy.

 

[Deus Machina]

Bump stocks are not needed for anything. Nothing more than creative engineering. Bannnig them is probably a good thing.

No.
No, no, and no again.
Banning nothing is a good idea.
Don't like them? Then don't use them. This is setting a precedent. Next it will be binary triggers. Then making the act of bump firing illegal. Then owning a gun that malfunctioned and doubled or slamfired. Then, eventually, any autoloader because you could do those with it.
"And I said nothing."

I'm not a believer in the slippery slope anywhere outside politics. I wouldn't be there, if they weren't applying grease.

 

[rpenmanparker]

Most people in the USA don’t agree with the most committed of the 2A advocates. Remembering that there is a mechanism for amending the constitution, you can reasonably conclude that you enjoy 2A rights only by the grace of the majority. As the minority you don’t have the stroke to lord the 2A over the majority and demand that it be your way only. Learning to give a little to keep a lot would behoove all gun enthusiasts. Bump stocks are stupid in every respect. Stomping your feet on the ground and demanding to keep something that stupid will hurt your cause much more than it will help it.

 

[340PD]

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.

A vote for someone other than Trump IS a vote for the opposition so please rethink your anger over this non issue. I highly doubt you will find a primary candidate that is anywhere as strong pro-second amendment as Trump.
As an instructor, one of our pet peeves is people mag dumping. Anyone with a bump stock or a Binary Trigger (which I am surprised was not included in this bill) is a potential accident waiting to happen. I am sure I will be flamed for this but I support the removal of this very unneeded product which does nothing to enhance the accuracy or performance from an MSR. As stated above, there are dozens of videos demonstrating how to turn ammunition into noise on the internet using a string or even your thumb.

 

[Old Dog]

At this point, the true believers (absolutists) become separated from those who advocate compromise.

While logic should dictate some give and take on any issue, it is all taketh and no giveth on the part of the opposition, so ... yes, the slope, it becomes slippery.

 

[Zerodefect]

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.

Suppressors. Hopefully they'll be non NFA soon.