Saturday 3-10-18, Justice Dept Just Made Next Move to BAN Bump Stocks

Status
Not open for further replies.
D

DoubleMag

Member
Joined
Sep 4, 2011
Messages
1,684
Heard it on a 4 second news AM radio blip, verified by news article (link below) and others will soon follow...

In a rather unusual (???) weekend release, Mr. Sessions just announced the next step in a total ban of ''bump stocks.'' Illegal to own, no adding to machine gun registery etc. I chose this news article because it is clear & concise SHORT and seems to portray the whole issue fairly, including a statement whereas the ATF said a few years ago, they could not do what they are now trying to (??) do.

Here it is....sorry to be the one who posts 1st for a change...

http://www.thenewstribune.com/news/business/article204492389.html

a 2nd source, although for my browser the webpage is a bit hard to follow...

http://www.wtsp.com/article/news/na...sell/465-feceb44a-80c1-4838-9da4-dcf9b9a99085
 
I'm not thrilled about it, but I'm not surprised, either. Frankly, I'm more surprised that they lasted as long as they did.
 
Do they ban rubber bands next? 20 years BEFORE Bump Stocks people were using the rubber band on right side belt loop trick.
 
MEHavey said:
I am not surprised.
IMHO, the "bump' stock and other such devices negate the intent/effect of the NFA
In fact I am surprised... that it lasted this long.
Click to expand...

I agree but here’s the question.... Would that also be true about
Arm braces
The mossberg shockwave
The henry mares leg
Taurus Judge
That double barreled 1911
Etc...etc....

Half the semi autos for sale in California, are designed to be in compliance with law.. and we all know what their “intent/effect” was.

BTW theirs no need to answer, the NRA, the GOP, and apparently many gun owners say it’s ok for the ATF to decide. I’m sure theirs nothing to worry about.
 
Last edited:
DeepSouth said:
I agree but here’s the question.... Would that also be true about
Arm braces
The mossberg shockwave
The henry mares leg
Taurus Judge
That double barreled 1911
Half the semi-autos for sale in California
Etc...etc....


BTW theirs no need to answer, the NRA, the GOP, and apparently many gun owners say it’s ok for the ATF to decide. I’m sure theirs nothing to worry about.
Click to expand...

I guess an oath (or or life long lip service) doesn't carry the weight that it did for men in times past.

I hereby declare, on oath, that I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty of whom or which I have heretofore been a subject or citizen; that I will support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I will bear arms on behalf of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform noncombatant service in the Armed Forces of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform work of national importance under civilian direction when required by the law; and that I take this obligation freely without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; so help me God.
Click to expand...
 
Somethingsomething 4d chess. J/K, current POTUS is the biggest gungrabber to hold the office this century.

Even if we’d gotten silencers or national reciprocity it still would have been the wrong move. Mental gymastics of the MAGA crowd notwithstanding, this was a dead giveaway of our rights, completely optional and 100% anti.
 
"I WILL NOT COMPLY." Seems so long ago, doesn't it, yet here we are again.

If our enforcers refuse to conduct themselves according to the laws, why should we? It's not like only one of us has the guns, after all.

Anyone think Trump or Sessions have the slightest clue what seeds they are sowing by making casual rapid fire as unlawful as actual machine guns, without even the decency of ramming an unconstitutional law down our throats first?

God help us, we should never elect a Republican president again; this is about the fourth time in living memory a unified government of *either* party has conspired against gunowners. The office of president is fundamentally incompatible with individual liberty. The president CANNOT be pro-gun.
 
Jim Watson said:
Me, too. I figured a "quacks like a duck" interpretation would be coming down the pike.
Click to expand...
Well, get ready for a ban on ALL semiautos. They can ALL "quack like a duck" if desired, so figure out now whether you're willing to accept that. The opposition is so ignorant they think revolvers are semi-automatic, for Christ's sake!
 
barnbwt said:
"I WILL NOT COMPLY." Seems so long ago, doesn't it, yet here we are again.

If our enforcers refuse to conduct themselves according to the laws, why should we? It's not like only one of us has the guns, after all.

Anyone think Trump or Sessions have the slightest clue what seeds they are sowing by making casual rapid fire as unlawful as actual machine guns, without even the decency of ramming an unconstitutional law down our throats first?

God help us, we should never elect a Republican president again; this is about the fourth time in living memory a unified government of *either* party has conspired against gunowners. The office of president is fundamentally incompatible with individual liberty. The president CANNOT be pro-gun.
Click to expand...

Who should we elect?

Until a viable third party or third and fourth party come about. The GOP is the lesser of two evils on 2nd Amendment issues.
Clinton said she wanted Australian style confiscation.

I guess it’s why, I’ve been very vocal. We need to stop being the quiet majority. We need to do a better job of educating people of the importance of the 2nd Amendment. We also need to fight the lies of our enemies.
 
MEHavey said:
I am not surprised.
IMHO, the "bump' stock and other such devices negate the intent/effect of the NFA
In fact I am surprised... that it lasted this long.
Click to expand...
The intent being to ban all rapid fire, you mean? Because the actual intent of the NFA was to ban all concealable firearms. Well, what's one more broad and extremely common category of weapons banned among friends?

Originally the machine gun section was more of a magazine ban, btw, so let's toss mags over 8 rounds in while we're at it.

Everyone who voted on that awful bill is long dead; why should we accept intent, or even care? We're not a bunch of ignorant, cloistered NYers trying to disarm immigrants or political opponents, and we should not tolerate this kind of thinking from our government.
 
Hokie_PhD said:
Who should we elect?

Until a viable third party or third and fourth party come about. The GOP is the lesser of two evils on 2nd Amendment issues.
Clinton said she wanted Australian style confiscation.

I guess it’s why, I’ve been very vocal. We need to stop being the quiet majority. We need to do a better job of educating people of the importance of the 2nd Amendment. We also need to fight the lies of our enemies.
Click to expand...
Our "Lyin'" runner-up is out there, right now, defending our RKBA as he always has against the arguments of the "law and order" president who wants to circumvent both due process and the legislature.

"Who should we elect?" Maybe vote for candidates with even a basic understanding of this issue, and better yet a positive record on it. Refuse to re-elect leaders who work against us, and fail to demand the opportunity to vote for bills in our favor.

Frankly, the best future I see now is the once-again anti-gun Trump being bum-rushed out of Washington by a supermajority of the gunowners that sent him there, and a major schism splitting the useless NRA Fudds off for good. As Heston's "cold dead hands" replaced compromisers of years past, we need leaders who understand the need to stand firm, and win back lost ground at least occaisionally. So long as congress is divided we need fear no new laws; that is Obama's legacy if nothing else.
 
Reading the sources cited in the OP, this appears that it's being done by regulation rather than ATF ruling. That means that it has to follow the Administrative Procedure Act, which means that it has to be published as a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in the Federal Register, there has to be a new comment period, the comments and objections have to be carefully considered, and only then can it be issued as a final rule. We're looking at probably at least a 6-month delay, during which bump stocks remain legal.

The larger issue is that this does not follow the statutory definition of a machine gun. Even ATF said so. The fact that they're going the regulation route rather than the ruling route tells me that ATF once again balked at doing their bidding. (A ruling would have had immediate effect and would be preferable from the administration's viewpoint to a regulation.)

I want to see how they address the issue of existing, legally-purchased bump stocks. This has to be a legal minefield, and is guaranteed to foster litigation. All this will come to a head right about the time of the midterm elections this fall. Shows complete lack of political dexterity on the part of the administration. Trump needs to let the controversy die down, not stoke the fires.
 
''Reading the sources cited in the OP, this appears that it's being done by regulation rather than ATF ruling. That means that it has to follow the Administrative Procedure Act, which means that...''

Yes that is correct. This does NOT mean, announcement today, hearing A.S.A.P. Wed. , done by end of the month.
For those who are vigilant, you still have time to defend your GLocK w/modified triggers, 1911s, over 10 round mags, Geissele National Match rifle trigger in your NRA Match target rifle(s), Ruger 10/22, etc. Doesn't everyone put in a 3.5 disconnector in their GLocK? Mod their 10/22?






Oh....you REALLY don't think it's all about a stupid piece of plastic stock that less then .5% of shooters own, and even shoot less, do you???? ;)Hmmm;)???
 
Last edited:
DoubleMag said:
For those who are vigilant, you still have time to defend your GLocK w/modified triggers, 1911s, over 10 round mags, Geissele National Match rifle trigger in your NRA Match target rifle(s), Ruger 10/22, etc. Doesn't everyone put in a 3.5 disconnector in their GLocK? Mod their 10/22?
Click to expand...
They will dismiss comments like that as not being relevant to bump stocks. I would suggest you couch your comments in terms of bump stocks. Specifically, that their proposal contradicts the plain language of the statute. They need the general public to tell them the same thing that the ATF technical experts have apparently been telling them.
 
.5% of shooters is still 500,000 people being expropriated of their belongings or made felons...
 
''They will dismiss comments...''
Well, no,no they will not. In the article I cited it actually states people commented on Sandy Hook, Constitution etc. The sample selected states that those who were opposed had comment sections longer (more detailed) then those supporting the ban. Twenty three thousand (23,000) people commented in the negative, in unique comments. That's seventy two percent - far far far beyond stats class definition of ''significant.''
To dismiss such a significant portion of a comments period due to slighly off topic comments would be foolish.

In any event, post #21 was/is just a thought-stir for those who really think it's all about one item.
 
This is where it gets interesting. The key will be the precise wording of any proposed regulation. Take no "news" report as honest, go read the actual words.

This isn't just about bump stocks. As others have noted, it's about the whole business of ATF rulings setting legal precedent - the core of the "rule of law".

Properly, they've got two legitimate courses of action. Option 1 would be to reclassify the stocks as NFA items and paper them using the amnesty power. Option 2 would be to reclassify the stocks as NFA items mistakenly not so labelled, declare them contraband, and pay compensation. Expect to cough up scalper's prices.

The third option would be to reclassify as NFA, declare contraband, and refuse to pay compensation. In which case it's going to be major-caliber lawsuit time.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

M5-Shogun
  • Locked
July 9th - Virginia GA Convenes to talk Gun Control
2
Replies
33
Views
3K
hso
hso
2
  • Locked
The 1994 Assault Weapons Ban - A Public Opinion Nightmare
Replies
0
Views
684
2dogs
2
Justin
  • Locked
Analysis of the new ban in the house- 2nd draft
2
Replies
44
Views
4K
mr_dove
M
Justin
  • Locked
Analysis of the new ban in the house- 1st draft
Replies
13
Views
785
bsf
B
C
  • Locked
Understanding Arms Control
Replies
3
Views
451
hso
hso
Back
Top