DOJ Reclassifies Bump Stocks as Machine Guns

[The Annoyed Man]

It’s ok guys, we’ll get national reciprocity and suppressors removed from the NFA any day now.

Obviously you fell into a Rip Van Winkle deep sleep, so let me advise you of a couple of events that changed the political landscape. On Oct. 1st, 58 people were murdered and 851 were injured at a Las Vegas outdoor concert when a nutjob opened up with AR-15s using bump-stocks. On Feb. 14th, another nutjob shot up a high school killing 17 students and teachers and wounding 17 more. The media and the Democrat Party have been spewing lies ever sense. I'm sure if you had known about these events and the subsequent media frenzy, you would better understand why it's going to take longer to pass pro-gun legislation in Washington.

Chas.

This is exactly why I've been saying all along that bump stocks are a distraction. Decriminalizing and / or normalizing something that affects a LOT more gun owners than bump stocks should be the proper priority. I don't know for certain how many bump stocks have been sold since they were invented a few years ago, but I'm willing to bet that suppressors have sold far more units than bump stocks; and people with concealed carry licenses WAY outnumber the total number of suppressor or bump stock owners. The problem with bump stocks is that they are the tail wagging the dog when it comes to gun rights priorities ...... and they are a LOT harder to defend to the non-gun-owning public ..... particularly that part of the public that is actively advocating for banning them.

CCW Reciprocity facilitates safe interstate travel and is a desirable national goal which can be argued on its own merits. Deregulation of suppressors serves a hearing health-related purpose and is a desirable national goal which can be argued on its own merits. Bump stocks exist so that gun owners can more easily make their "fully semi-automatic" weapon fire like a machine gun while circumventing existing laws. I agree that they should not be regulated, given the fact that one can bump fire a semiautomatic without a bump stock. That doesn't change the fact that bump stocks exist for the sole purpose of making it easier for a semiautomatic to be fired at a fully automatic rate, thereby circumventing NFA restrictions on the purchase of machine guns. There is a portion of even the gun-owning world that has no problem with private ownership of semiautos, but has serious misgivings about the private ownership of fully automatic weapons. Given the national hysteria over semiautomatic weapons, does anyone seriously think that burning up political capital, at this moment, to defend bump stocks is going to do anything except suck the oxygen out of reciprocity or suppressor bills?

As Charles says, it's going to be almost impossible to pass any pro-gun legislation at all in the current climate; but things will calm down eventually (we hope), and there will be an opportunity to get some things done. When that happens, CCW reciprocity and the HPA should have the priority. I seriously doubt that bump-stocks will ever get a fair hearing.

[snorri]

It's Saturday, most people are enjoying spring break, its nice outside, time to plant flowers, take the kids to the zoo, go camping... perfect time to sneak in new regulations. Wonder what else is coming? I bet it's not removing suppressors or sbr's from the NFA, or national reciprocity.

THE GOP WILL SAVE US

[dlh]

Don't believe the various federal gun statutes give the President enabling power to redefine what a machine-gun is---that is a function of Congress.

Remember the Obama Administration, which hated guns by the way, thought bump stocks were legal. One of the rare instances where I have agreed with President Obama.

[TreyHouston]

Did they ever realease the list of weapons the las Vegas shooter used????????

[treadlightly]

Ok, now that the world is safe from military rates of fire and these weapons of mass destruction, is the next step to ban weapons of selective destruction, those that can be fired with excessive accuracy beyond what any mere civilian has any legitimate use for?

When my Dad took me deer hunting, despite the fact he held a PhD, his woodsmanship made getting ten yard shots about as easy as finding Bambi at 100.

What's the difference between a sub MOA deer rifle and a sniper's rifle, anyway?

Actually, let me answer my own question. There should be about four inches difference between them when not in use in the gun safe.

The ninnies wanting to protect us from evil with defenselessness are a terrible threat. They just don't realize it.

[The Annoyed Man]

Did they ever realease the list of weapons the las Vegas shooter used????????

Yes. I’ve posted a link to it before on these pages.

[Grundy1133]

It’s ok guys, we’ll get national reciprocity and suppressors removed from the NFA any day now.

Obviously you fell into a Rip Van Winkle deep sleep, so let me advise you of a couple of events that changed the political landscape. On Oct. 1st, 58 people were murdered and 851 were injured at a Las Vegas outdoor concert when a nutjob opened up with AR-15s using bump-stocks. On Feb. 14th, another nutjob shot up a high school killing 17 students and teachers and wounding 17 more. The media and the Democrat Party have been spewing lies ever sense. I'm sure if you had known about these events and the subsequent media frenzy, you would better understand why it's going to take longer to pass pro-gun legislation in Washington.

Chas.

This is exactly why I've been saying all along that bump stocks are a distraction. Decriminalizing and / or normalizing something that affects a LOT more gun owners than bump stocks should be the proper priority. I don't know for certain how many bump stocks have been sold since they were invented a few years ago, but I'm willing to bet that suppressors have sold far more units than bump stocks; and people with concealed carry licenses WAY outnumber the total number of suppressor or bump stock owners. The problem with bump stocks is that they are the tail wagging the dog when it comes to gun rights priorities ...... and they are a LOT harder to defend to the non-gun-owning public ..... particularly that part of the public that is actively advocating for banning them.

CCW Reciprocity facilitates safe interstate travel and is a desirable national goal which can be argued on its own merits. Deregulation of suppressors serves a hearing health-related purpose and is a desirable national goal which can be argued on its own merits. Bump stocks exist so that gun owners can more easily make their "fully semi-automatic" weapon fire like a machine gun while circumventing existing laws. I agree that they should not be regulated, given the fact that one can bump fire a semiautomatic without a bump stock. That doesn't change the fact that bump stocks exist for the sole purpose of making it easier for a semiautomatic to be fired at a fully automatic rate, thereby circumventing NFA restrictions on the purchase of machine guns. There is a portion of even the gun-owning world that has no problem with private ownership of semiautos, but has serious misgivings about the private ownership of fully automatic weapons. Given the national hysteria over semiautomatic weapons, does anyone seriously think that burning up political capital, at this moment, to defend bump stocks is going to do anything except suck the oxygen out of reciprocity or suppressor bills?

As Charles says, it's going to be almost impossible to pass any pro-gun legislation at all in the current climate; but things will calm down eventually (we hope), and there will be an opportunity to get some things done. When that happens, CCW reciprocity and the HPA should have the priority. I seriously doubt that bump-stocks will ever get a fair hearing.

How do you move a mountain? you cant just take a pick axe and destroy it in 1 swing. you have to chip away at it little by little which is what dems are doing to our gun rights... little by little they're disarming us. this time in 10-15 years all guns could be illegal... you never know.

[bigtek]

Did they ever realease the list of weapons the las Vegas shooter used????????

They released a list of the firearms in the hotel room but that's not the same thing.

[The Annoyed Man]

It’s ok guys, we’ll get national reciprocity and suppressors removed from the NFA any day now.

Obviously you fell into a Rip Van Winkle deep sleep, so let me advise you of a couple of events that changed the political landscape. On Oct. 1st, 58 people were murdered and 851 were injured at a Las Vegas outdoor concert when a nutjob opened up with AR-15s using bump-stocks. On Feb. 14th, another nutjob shot up a high school killing 17 students and teachers and wounding 17 more. The media and the Democrat Party have been spewing lies ever sense. I'm sure if you had known about these events and the subsequent media frenzy, you would better understand why it's going to take longer to pass pro-gun legislation in Washington.

Chas.

This is exactly why I've been saying all along that bump stocks are a distraction. Decriminalizing and / or normalizing something that affects a LOT more gun owners than bump stocks should be the proper priority. I don't know for certain how many bump stocks have been sold since they were invented a few years ago, but I'm willing to bet that suppressors have sold far more units than bump stocks; and people with concealed carry licenses WAY outnumber the total number of suppressor or bump stock owners. The problem with bump stocks is that they are the tail wagging the dog when it comes to gun rights priorities ...... and they are a LOT harder to defend to the non-gun-owning public ..... particularly that part of the public that is actively advocating for banning them.

CCW Reciprocity facilitates safe interstate travel and is a desirable national goal which can be argued on its own merits. Deregulation of suppressors serves a hearing health-related purpose and is a desirable national goal which can be argued on its own merits. Bump stocks exist so that gun owners can more easily make their "fully semi-automatic" weapon fire like a machine gun while circumventing existing laws. I agree that they should not be regulated, given the fact that one can bump fire a semiautomatic without a bump stock. That doesn't change the fact that bump stocks exist for the sole purpose of making it easier for a semiautomatic to be fired at a fully automatic rate, thereby circumventing NFA restrictions on the purchase of machine guns. There is a portion of even the gun-owning world that has no problem with private ownership of semiautos, but has serious misgivings about the private ownership of fully automatic weapons. Given the national hysteria over semiautomatic weapons, does anyone seriously think that burning up political capital, at this moment, to defend bump stocks is going to do anything except suck the oxygen out of reciprocity or suppressor bills?

As Charles says, it's going to be almost impossible to pass any pro-gun legislation at all in the current climate; but things will calm down eventually (we hope), and there will be an opportunity to get some things done. When that happens, CCW reciprocity and the HPA should have the priority. I seriously doubt that bump-stocks will ever get a fair hearing.

How do you move a mountain? you cant just take a pick axe and destroy it in 1 swing. you have to chip away at it little by little which is what dems are doing to our gun rights... little by little they're disarming us. this time in 10-15 years all guns could be illegal... you never know.

I completely get that, and I agree. What I don’t think is that bump-stocks are the hill we should choose to make our stand, because it is a losing battle .......for now. Right now, reciprocity and HPA are more important issues, and they are the issues that can get even remotely close to a fair hearing these days. CCW didn’t kill any students or concert-goers, and neither did the use of suppressors.

[TexasJohnBoy]

But, even thought I think bump stocks are dumb, reclassifying them as has been proposed presents may issues. This should be legislative action to add them to the definition of a machine gun. The executive branch pulling this isn't a good precedent to set.

Even if they are added to the definition, they should be an NFA item just like a SBR. And lets just ditch the Hughes Amendment all together.

[The Annoyed Man]

But, even thought I think bump stocks are dumb, reclassifying them as has been proposed presents may issues. This should be legislative action to add them to the definition of a machine gun. The executive branch pulling this isn't a good precedent to set.

Even if they are added to the definition, they should be an NFA item just like a SBR. And lets just ditch the Hughes Amendment all together.

I’m one of those crazies who thinks that machine guns should be handled on a 4473 - just like any other firearm - period. So it’s not that I have anything against bump stocks per se. It’s just that I understand what political capital is, that it is in limited supply at any given time, and that there are productive and unproductive ways to invest it. Right now, at this point in time, investing political capital in bump stocks is total loser, throwing good money after bad.......AND......it burns up political capital that would be better spent on reciprocity and suppressor deregulation, which have a chance of passage if we are patient and ride out the current hysteria until things calm down. So I think that, right now, it is politically foolhardy to spend even 5 minutes arguing with gun-controllers against banning bump stocks; and on a personal level, it’s a waste of energy.....energy that would be better spent promoting issues that at least have a chance of passing in the not too distant future.

Tomorrow morning, I am going to teach a totally phobic person about guns, over coffee at my kitchen table. She and her husband are friends of mine, and she describes herself as having an irrational fear of guns, to the point where they are genuinely panic inducing to her. Just the thought of a gun terrifies her, even when there is no gun present. I offered to show her how they work in a safe environment, and let her handle some of mine - using dummy ammunition so she can learn how to load/unload a gun safely. He’s a republican, but she is a liberal democrat. She votes accordingly when it comes to guns.....but she is honest enough to admit that she votes that way based on ignorance about them, and she was willing to find out exactly what it is that she was in fear of. My long term goal is to get her to a range, actually to empower her. But in the interim, my goal is to get her to start thinking when she votes, instead of reacting out of fear.

I believe that, given enough time, I could probably get her to the point where she and her husband buy a gun for home protection, and maybe even go to the range once in a while with each other. I can show her an AR15 or a Glock, and get her to understand and accept that neither is a machine gun or an “assault weapon”. I can show her a suppressor, take it apart and show her how it works, and get her to understand that it isn’t any more complicated (or effective) than a lawnmower muffler, and probably get her to agree that there’s not much point in regulating them. But I am absolutely convinced that I’ll never get her to support the unrestricted sale of bump stocks. Heck, it is a hard sell IN the gun community. There’s no way on God’s green earth that I can get her to agree that people should have the unrestricted right to buy a product that allows their semiautomatic weapon to fire at the same rate as a fully automatic weapon.

If we want to protect our rights, we need to make voters like her into voters like us. Promoting bump stocks after Vegas and Florida is NOT the way to do that.

[Oldgringo]

{snip}
If we want to protect our rights, we need to make voters like her into voters like us. Promoting bump stocks after Vegas and Florida is NOT the way to do that.

[/quote]
Ina nutshell, there it is. Well said, TAM.

[Flightmare]

That's awesome TAM. I'm glad that she is not only honest about her position, but open minded to allow for education. Those are the sort of people we should ALL be reaching out to. These are the sort of people who are receptive to education. Perhaps even potential 2nd Amendment allies. And who knows? perhaps future NRA members. Thankyou for promoting responsible gun ownership and the 2nd amendment.

[Oldgringo]

That's awesome TAM. I'm glad that she is not only honest about her position, but open minded to allow for education. Those are the sort of people we should ALL be reaching out to. These are the sort of people who are receptive to education. Perhaps even potential 2nd Amendment allies. And who knows? perhaps future NRA members. Thankyou for promoting responsible gun ownership and the 2nd amendment.

Perhaps letting her, and others of her ilk, start safely with CO2 air guns in your, or my, backyards? You know, just for the 'safe' fun of it. Break 'em in gently, they'll love it....maybe?

[apostate]

The ninnies wanting to protect us from evil with defenselessness are a terrible threat. They just don't realize it.

Perhaps not, but their puppet masters certainly do.