TX: How to dispose of your bump stops in Houston

[TreyHouston]

The goverment cannot force you to destroy your own property without due compensation.

Yes, they can. And I am answering in a legal fashion, not as some others have posted about realistic based on might.

This is one of the greatest misunderstandings of the law. Most people think the Fifth Amendment stops the government from seizing your property without compensation. But you will note that it actually says the property cannot be taken FOR PUBLIC USE without compensation. A confiscation of this type is not property taken for public use. The rest of the amendment says it cannot deprive you of property without due process of law, but the argument would be that the rule making was due process of law.

I believe that the ban would be legal under the Fifth Amendment.

There is only one way I can see that this ban is not legal. I see this as an illegal reinterpretation of the way Congress wrote the law and it does not meet the definitions in the law. But this has happened with other laws and been upheld. One example is the law that says health insurance companies cannot discriminate against people because of their activities (such as motorcycle or horse riding). The regulations written by HHS specifically allow insurance companies to not provide coverage for certain dangerous activities, exactly what the federal law was trying to stop. I have little faith that federal courts will not uphold this ban.

Didn’t the ATF originally write an opinion for these saying they are legal. How can they then come backna couple of years later after millions are sold and ban them?

[K.Mooneyham]

The goverment cannot force you to destroy your own property without due compensation.

Yes, they can. And I am answering in a legal fashion, not as some others have posted about realistic based on might.

This is one of the greatest misunderstandings of the law. Most people think the Fifth Amendment stops the government from seizing your property without compensation. But you will note that it actually says the property cannot be taken FOR PUBLIC USE without compensation. A confiscation of this type is not property taken for public use. The rest of the amendment says it cannot deprive you of property without due process of law, but the argument would be that the rule making was due process of law.

I believe that the ban would be legal under the Fifth Amendment.

There is only one way I can see that this ban is not legal. I see this as an illegal reinterpretation of the way Congress wrote the law and it does not meet the definitions in the law. But this has happened with other laws and been upheld. One example is the law that says health insurance companies cannot discriminate against people because of their activities (such as motorcycle or horse riding). The regulations written by HHS specifically allow insurance companies to not provide coverage for certain dangerous activities, exactly what the federal law was trying to stop. I have little faith that federal courts will not uphold this ban.

Well, isn't "public safety" for "use" by the public? Supposedly the public at large, taken as an entity, are the ones benefiting from both stopping the manufacturing of those stocks and the taking away of those stocks from those who legally purchased those items in good faith. The government should be forced to compensate every owner, AND the manufacturers, for every stock taken, at fair market value.

[bbhack]

What would happen if I made several bump stocks that did not fit any existing rifle, and tried to sell them online?

[srothstein]

Didn’t the ATF originally write an opinion for these saying they are legal. How can they then come backna couple of years later after millions are sold and ban them?

Yes, they did, but there is no rule or law saying the government cannot change their mind on an interpretation of the law. This happens regularly as the administration changes. I agree that this poses problems for defending the new interpretation in court, but it is not the first time that the government has said you cannot trust our previous opinion on something. Ask any accountant if you can rely on the IRS' interpretation of their own rules, for example.

[srothstein]

Well, isn't "public safety" for "use" by the public? Supposedly the public at large, taken as an entity, are the ones benefiting from both stopping the manufacturing of those stocks and the taking away of those stocks from those who legally purchased those items in good faith. The government should be forced to compensate every owner, AND the manufacturers, for every stock taken, at fair market value.

This is an argument that might work but is a stretch. The question is if by banning an object, is the government using it. You could try to use the argument made in the New London eminent domain case as a basis, but I am not sure it will work. Remember that in that case, they said it was for public use IF it would produce a higher tax base to produce revenues the government could use for other things. In this case, you would have to argue that "public safety" reduces the cost to government allowing them to use that money for other works.

I doubt this would work but it might. I personally think the best argument is still that the interpretation is a rewriting of the law and the trigger is only being worked once per shot, no matter how fast the devices make it work. I think the legal question the court will have to decide is what is meant in the law by one function of the trigger, and even more technically, what is the trigger.

[Oldgringo]

Jumping back to the beginnings of this thread and "the fear of being the test case" comments: I suspect there are more than a few who would volunteer to be "the test case" if someone else was bearing the cost of "the test case". You reckon?

[WildRose]

https://www.click2houston.com/news/how- ... in-houston

So after the Dems take over at some point, is this the story we will be seeing in the news. Except it will be about semi automatic handguns and rifles or will it be all guns.

Trump can do this because we have no other choice. He didn’t even get any points about it from the lib media.

I am always reminded that the final solution for global warming will be for people with odd numbered birthdays to report to a nearby termination facility for disposal.

Channel 2 will most likely have a cheerie piece just like this one for that event as well.

Bump stocks may just be an expensive gimmick for idiots that want to waste a whole bunch of ammo but by caving in here Trump is absolutely wrong. All it will do is empower the anti gun left to go for even more restrictions.

As much as I like most of what he's done policy wise since entering the WH this is just proof he has no core morals or values and that he's never been a conservative.

He hijacked the republican party to get elected to feed his own ego, no more, no less.

[Oldgringo]

https://www.click2houston.com/news/how- ... in-houston

So after the Dems take over at some point, is this the story we will be seeing in the news. Except it will be about semi automatic handguns and rifles or will it be all guns.

Trump can do this because we have no other choice. He didn’t even get any points about it from the lib media.

I am always reminded that the final solution for global warming will be for people with odd numbered birthdays to report to a nearby termination facility for disposal.

Channel 2 will most likely have a cheerie piece just like this one for that event as well.

Bump stocks may just be an expensive gimmick for idiots that want to waste a whole bunch of ammo but by caving in here Trump is absolutely wrong. All it will do is empower the anti gun left to go for even more restrictions.

As much as I like most of what he's done policy wise since entering the WH this is just proof he has no core morals or values and that he's never been a conservative.

He hijacked the republican party to get elected to feed his own ego, no more, no less.

You are right about the utility of bump stocks; otherwise, not so much.

[WildRose]

https://www.click2houston.com/news/how- ... in-houston

So after the Dems take over at some point, is this the story we will be seeing in the news. Except it will be about semi automatic handguns and rifles or will it be all guns.

Trump can do this because we have no other choice. He didn’t even get any points about it from the lib media.

I am always reminded that the final solution for global warming will be for people with odd numbered birthdays to report to a nearby termination facility for disposal.

Channel 2 will most likely have a cheerie piece just like this one for that event as well.

Bump stocks may just be an expensive gimmick for idiots that want to waste a whole bunch of ammo but by caving in here Trump is absolutely wrong. All it will do is empower the anti gun left to go for even more restrictions.

As much as I like most of what he's done policy wise since entering the WH this is just proof he has no core morals or values and that he's never been a conservative.

He hijacked the republican party to get elected to feed his own ego, no more, no less.

You are right about the utility of bump stocks; otherwise, not so much.

I'm a fairly intelligent and very well educated guy so by all means show me the evidence to the contrary.

[Oldgringo]

https://www.click2houston.com/news/how- ... in-houston

So after the Dems take over at some point, is this the story we will be seeing in the news. Except it will be about semi automatic handguns and rifles or will it be all guns.

Trump can do this because we have no other choice. He didn’t even get any points about it from the lib media.

I am always reminded that the final solution for global warming will be for people with odd numbered birthdays to report to a nearby termination facility for disposal.

Channel 2 will most likely have a cheerie piece just like this one for that event as well.

Bump stocks may just be an expensive gimmick for idiots that want to waste a whole bunch of ammo but by caving in here Trump is absolutely wrong. All it will do is empower the anti gun left to go for even more restrictions.

As much as I like most of what he's done policy wise since entering the WH this is just proof he has no core morals or values and that he's never been a conservative.

He hijacked the republican party to get elected to feed his own ego, no more, no less.

You are right about the utility of bump stocks; otherwise, not so much.

I'm a fairly intelligent and very well educated guy so by all means show me the evidence to the contrary.

Opinions, we all have 'em. G'day, mate!

[crazy2medic]

Tid Bit I learned today, my son works for a firearm distributor so I ask him about the ability of ATF to find somebody who had purchased a Bump Stock, he said it would be virtually impossible!
I find that interesting!

[WildRose]

Tid Bit I learned today, my son works for a firearm distributor so I ask him about the ability of ATF to find somebody who had purchased a Bump Stock, he said it would be virtually impossible!
I find that interesting!

Shipping records and credit card receipts will create a direct line to most purchasers.

If they don't already have warrants for all the records of the producers and distributors you know they will ASAP.

[crazy2medic]

Tid Bit I learned today, my son works for a firearm distributor so I ask him about the ability of ATF to find somebody who had purchased a Bump Stock, he said it would be virtually impossible!
I find that interesting!

Shipping records and credit card receipts will create a direct line to most purchasers.

If they don't already have warrants for all the records of the producers and distributors you know they will ASAP.

True! I don't have a credit card and typically pay cash for firearm related stuff, so that didn't occur to me!

[K.Mooneyham]

Tid Bit I learned today, my son works for a firearm distributor so I ask him about the ability of ATF to find somebody who had purchased a Bump Stock, he said it would be virtually impossible!
I find that interesting!

Shipping records and credit card receipts will create a direct line to most purchasers.

If they don't already have warrants for all the records of the producers and distributors you know they will ASAP.

Your theory sounds quite plausible. However, as I stated before, where are the resources in people and money to accomplish that goal?

[anygunanywhere]

Tid Bit I learned today, my son works for a firearm distributor so I ask him about the ability of ATF to find somebody who had purchased a Bump Stock, he said it would be virtually impossible!
I find that interesting!

Shipping records and credit card receipts will create a direct line to most purchasers.

If they don't already have warrants for all the records of the producers and distributors you know they will ASAP.

Been watching too many teevee fiction cop shows lately? Like when they get DNA matches in milliseconds from the crime labs?