Republicans are coming for your guns!

[normiss 619]

NOT Obama!
Bump stocks are now fully auto weapons.

[billvon 2,379]

They can have Republican's bump stocks when they pry them from their cold, dead fingers!

[NewGuy2005 51]

And they say Americans don't recognize irony!

[BIGUN 1,042]

normiss

NOT Obama!
Bump stocks are now fully auto weapons.

I don't have an issue with this. Any time you change a weapons cyclic rate; you've re-classified as a manufacturer which requires a separate FFL License. It was invented for physically disable veterans by a physically disabled veteran. Not sure why a special license was never required.

Nobody has time to listen; because they're desperately chasing the need of being heard.

[ryoder 1,380]

Bumpstocks?
Meh, who needs them?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7RdAhTxyP64

"There are only three things of value: younger women, faster airplanes, and bigger crocodiles" - Arthur Jones.

[wolfriverjoe 1,339]

BIGUN

***NOT Obama!
Bump stocks are now fully auto weapons.

I don't have an issue with this. Any time you change a weapons cyclic rate; you've re-classified as a manufacturer which requires a separate FFL License. It was invented for physically disable veterans by a physically disabled veteran. Not sure why a special license was never required.

Do you have any proof of that claim?

I've never heard that it had anything to do with veterans or the disabled.

And semi-auto guns don't have a 'cyclic rate'. The bump stock simply slides back and forth, allowing the trigger to be pressed repeatedly when the recoil impulse relaxes.

It never required a 'special license' because it was a 'gun part', which are really not regulated (unless they are parts to a NFA firearm, which is a whole different world).

The makers of it submitted it to the BATF and got a ruling on that. The letter from the BATF was included with each stock. There is (or was) a copy of it posted at the range I am part of to so that anyone who was worried about full auto could be shown.
The BATF ruled that the firearm was not changed, and that the gun was still firing only one shot per press of the trigger.

There have been a variety of attachments to guns for a long time that would simulate full auto. Bump stocks were just the easiest to use.
There was a spring device called a "Hell Fire" that pushed the trigger back up firmly. The shooter would have a loose grip on the stock/pistol grip and a firm forward push on the fore end. It was not easy to use, especially if you didn't have biceps the size of sewer pipes.
People also have used rubber bands around the back of the trigger (pushing forward) or simply holding the gun in a way that basically simulates the bump stock action. I knew a young guy with an old WW2 M1 Carbine who could fire off entire magazines from the hip simply using 'technique' (no attachments or anything).

And I have to laugh.

The NRA screamed at the top of their lungs how 'evil' Obama, HRC, Schumer, Pelosi, Feinstein and all the Ds were.

Yet no gun regulations were passed under Obama.
Just under Trump.

Looks like they didn't get their money's worth from him ($30 mil in Russian money funneled through them).

"There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy

"~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

[billvon 2,379]

>I don't have an issue with this.

Of course you don't. And if Trump comes up with some other gun-related restriction, you won't have any problem with that, either. "Well, Obama would have done much worse."

[Hooknswoop 19]

I don't have an issue with stopping the sale of bump stocks. I don't know if currently owned bump stocks will be grand-fathered in, but they should be (even if I don't see the point of them).

My opinion is not politically motivated. Not a Trump fan at all and I would be surprised if I was was not against any further gun restriction legislation.

Derek V

[SkyDekker 1,119]

Hooknswoop

I don't have an issue with stopping the sale of bump stocks. I don't know if currently owned bump stocks will be grand-fathered in, but they should be (even if I don't see the point of them).

My opinion is not politically motivated. Not a Trump fan at all and I would be surprised if I was was not against any further gun restriction legislation.

Derek V

This wasn't done through new legislation. This was the executive branch changing definitions in current legislation.

Something if done by Obama would have caused uproar. Something that when it is going to be done by a D will be widely bemoaned.

[Hooknswoop 19]

Quote

This wasn't done through new legislation. This was the executive branch changing definitions in current legislation.

Something if done by Obama would have caused uproar. Something that when it is going to be done by a D will be widely bemoaned.

Not arguing either point. I don't care if someone has a D or R next to their name. I have voted for both. If Obama had done this, I would have had the same reaction. I have never seen a bump stock.

Derek V

[billvon 2,379]

>Something if done by Obama would have caused uproar.

Exactly.

"Look, it's not the bump stocks, it's the whole slippery slope. First he comes for your bump stocks, then he's after your handgun. That's why we have to stop him NOW."

"If he wants to pass a law, why not pass a law? Why subvert the US government by doing it as an executive action? He knows it's illegal, that's why he's not trying to get a law passed the normal way!"

"Oh, sure, they ban bump stocks for us - but I bet they keep them for themselves! Hypocrites."

"I had a friend who used a bump stock to defend his family from a gang. Do Democrats hate families that much? They must!"

[headoverheels 291]

Hooknswoop

I don't know if currently owned bump stocks will be grand-fathered in, but they should be (even if I don't see the point of them).

Grandfathering doesn't seem to be in the language. Full pdf is quite long. Qualifying destruction procedure is given in the links.

https://www.atf.gov/rules-and-regulations/bump-stocks

[JerryBaumchen 1,046]

Hi Derek,

Quote

I don't know if currently owned bump stocks will be grand-fathered in

According to the news that I watched last nite, no; everyone must get rid of them by some date in the not so distant future.

Jerry Baumchen

[SkyDekker 1,119]

JerryBaumchen

Hi Derek,

Quote

I don't know if currently owned bump stocks will be grand-fathered in

According to the news that I watched last nite, no; everyone must get rid of them by some date in the not so distant future.

Jerry Baumchen

I wouldn't know how you would grandfather this, specially consider how they have made the change.

[ryoder 1,380]

Hooknswoop

I don't have an issue with stopping the sale of bump stocks. I don't know if currently owned bump stocks will be grand-fathered in, but they should be (even if I don't see the point of them).

SUMMARY:
The Department of Justice is amending the regulations of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) to clarify that bump-stock-type devices-meaning "bump fire" stocks, slide-fire devices, and devices with certain similar characteristics-are "machineguns" as defined by the National Firearms Act of 1934 and the Gun Control Act of 1968 because such devices allow a shooter of a semiautomatic firearm to initiate a continuous firing cycle with a single pull of the trigger. Specifically, these devices convert an otherwise semiautomatic firearm into a machinegun by functioning as a self-acting or self-regulating mechanism that harnesses the recoil energy of the semiautomatic firearm in a manner that allows the trigger to reset and continue firing without additional physical manipulation of the trigger by the shooter. Hence, a semiautomatic firearm to which a bump-stock-type device is attached is able to produce automatic fire with a single pull of the trigger. With limited exceptions, the Gun Control Act, as amended, makes it unlawful for any person to transfer or possess a machinegun unless it was lawfully possessed prior to the effective date of the statute. The bumpstock-type devices covered by this final rule were not in existence prior to the effective date of the statute, and therefore will be prohibited when this rule becomes effective. Consequently, under the final rule, current possessors of these devices will be required to destroy the devices or abandon them at an ATF office prior to the effective date of the rule.

Source: https://www.justice.gov/opa/press-release/file/1120876/download

"There are only three things of value: younger women, faster airplanes, and bigger crocodiles" - Arthur Jones.

[wolfriverjoe 1,339]

SkyDekker

***I don't have an issue with stopping the sale of bump stocks. I don't know if currently owned bump stocks will be grand-fathered in, but they should be (even if I don't see the point of them).

My opinion is not politically motivated. Not a Trump fan at all and I would be surprised if I was was not against any further gun restriction legislation.

Derek V

This wasn't done through new legislation. This was the executive branch changing definitions in current legislation.

Something if done by Obama would have caused uproar. Something that when it is going to be done by a D will be widely bemoaned.

Something like this was done by Obama. Or at least the idiots claimed so.

It was claimed that he signed an executive order banning "Green Tip" .223 ammo. The reality was that the BATF was going to ban it because it could be used in AR type pistols.
After overwhelming public opposition, the ban was not enacted.

That didn't stop the right wing and all the gun rights types (usually but not always the same) from blaming Obama and accusing him of overstepping his authority.

"There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy

"~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

[normiss 619]

It's interesting how the "well regulated" part of the amendment is generally forgotten.

[wolfriverjoe 1,339]

normiss

It's interesting how the "well regulated" part of the amendment is generally forgotten.

Well, at the time it was written, 'well regulated' didn't mean 'subject to lots of rules and regulations', it meant 'working properly.'

"There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy

"~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

[ryoder 1,380]

wolfriverjoe

***It's interesting how the "well regulated" part of the amendment is generally forgotten.

Well, at the time it was written, 'well regulated' didn't mean 'subject to lots of rules and regulations', it meant 'working properly.'

^This.
That is how Yale Law Prof Akhil Amar explains it.

"There are only three things of value: younger women, faster airplanes, and bigger crocodiles" - Arthur Jones.

[dorkitup 1]

Hooknswoop

I don't know if currently owned bump stocks will be grand-fathered in, but they should be (even if I don't see the point of them).

90 days from publication of the final rule to turn them in or destroy them. Otherwise, owners are in violation of the law (criminals).

[Hooknswoop 19]

Quote

I wouldn't know how you would grandfather this, specially consider how they have made the change.

Easy, require a date of manufacture on any newly produced bump stocks.

Co>orlando did this on magazines. So Magpul left the state and took their jobs with them. Now you can go into Colorado gun stores and buy 30-round magazine kits.

Derek V

[wolfriverjoe 1,339]

Hooknswoop

Quote

I wouldn't know how you would grandfather this, specially consider how they have made the change.

Easy, require a date of manufacture on any newly produced bump stocks.

Co>orlando did this on magazines. So Magpul left the state and took their jobs with them. Now you can go into Colorado gun stores and buy 30-round magazine kits.

Derek V

No new production is going to happen.

If these have been reclassified as machine guns (NFA items), then I'm guessing they will be lumped in with "drop in" auto sears.
Since the BATF considers that sort of part 'the machine gun', and since new manufacture for civilians is prohibited, then that means no new ones (no police force or military would want one if they can have real full auto).

Everything I'm hearing is saying 'turn in or destroy'.
I have to wonder if they are going to try to obtain sales records to see who bought them and track the stock kits down.

I wonder how many owners are going to keep them.

I'm also not hearing anything about compensation for owners.
I have a funny feeling this will go to the courts.

No guess as to how it will turn out.

"There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy

"~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

[normiss 619]

Yet the SCOTUS stated that the right to bear arms is not unlimited and that guns and gun ownership would continue to be regulated.

[billvon 2,379]

>Easy, require a date of manufacture on any newly produced bump stocks.

If a democrat had proposed something so logically flawed you'd be screaming that it could never be enforced, it wouldn't work anyway, it's an illegal law and therefore it should be ignored and repealed.

[wolfriverjoe 1,339]

normiss

Yet the SCOTUS stated that the right to bear arms is not unlimited and that guns and gun ownership would continue to be regulated.

Absolutely. But that's still not the 'regulated' meant in the wording of the 2nd A.

The point at which the various rules and laws reach 'infringement' is where the disagreements occur, and where the SC steps in and rules. Same as any other right.

"Regulated' has a variety of meanings.

A 'well regulated' clock keeps accurate time.
A 'well regulated' shotgun (usually used in reference to a double) has both barrels hitting in the same spot, aligned with the sights.

"There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy

"~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo