Jump to content

 

Omega

Bump-Fire Stock Ban

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Oh Shoot said:

How could they be regulated any differently, assuming they follow, you know, the actual NFA law, which is why ATF found them to be legit in the first place?


"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."  -- 26 U.S. Code § 5845 - Definitions

 

- OS

Maybe the public gets the perception that action is being taken as it goes to an ATF hearing and then fades away into the night like the M855 debate. Maybe Congress knows the ATF can't do anything about it, but they'll give the issue the DC shuffle to take the heat off themselves (for a while anyway). :shrug:

Or... maybe I'm giving them too much credit :lol:

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Wingshooter said:

Maybe the public gets the perception that action is being taken as it goes to an ATF hearing and then fades away into the night like the M855 debate. Maybe Congress knows the ATF can't do anything about it, but they'll give the issue the DC shuffle to take the heat off themselves (for a while anyway). :shrug:

Or... maybe I'm giving them too much credit :lol:

I hope so. Honestly that would be pretty ok, push it off on the ATF while knowing they cannot interpret "Machine Gun Language" any differently and then it fades away six months from now after everything has died down.

 

With that being said, assuming that the bill is actually just a bill and was presented to actually pass, I guess I'm just numb to the whole thing in a big way now. With Legislative and Executive branches both Republican controlled, I guess that ANY legislation that is passed will come across as a betrayal to me. I never falsely believed that Republicans were truly 100% Pro-2nd Amendment, but a lot of them present themselves as that way. However, when it comes down to it, a lot of "Pro-2nd Amendment" people are simply the "hunting rifle don't touch my six-shooter, I don't own any of that military type stuff and I think it should be banned variety".

In all honestly, I think I generally like 100% anti-gun people more than the pseudo gun loving hypocrite described above. Everyone is entitled to their own opinions, I just happen to find a lot of error the in the extremely strong "Pro-Gun Anti-Scary Gun" type of people out there.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, CZ9MM said:

I never falsely believed that Republicans were truly 100% Pro-2nd Amendment, but a lot of them present themselves as that way. However, when it comes down to it, a lot of "Pro-2nd Amendment" people are simply the "hunting rifle don't touch my six-shooter, I don't own any of that military type stuff and I think it should be banned variety".

In all honestly, I think I generally like 100% anti-gun people more than the pseudo gun loving hypocrite described above. 

An honest enemy is always preferable to a false friend. 

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, CZ9MM said:

I hope so. Honestly that would be pretty ok, push it off on the ATF while knowing they cannot interpret "Machine Gun Language" any differently and then it fades away six months from now after everything has died down.

There is another issue that may not matter to us. The NRA is constantly under attack. Steering this thing away from congress, and into a black hole can be interpreted, by folks with less knowledge, as an show of "common sense". If I lived in a swamp, I may use tactics like that.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/11/2017 at 7:36 PM, Oh Shoot said:

How could they be regulated any differently, assuming they follow, you know, the actual NFA law, which is why ATF found them to be legit in the first place?

"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."  -- 26 U.S. Code § 5845 - Definitions

 

On 10/11/2017 at 9:39 PM, Oh Shoot said:

Whatever regulatory wackiness the BATFE may be guilty of through the years, they can't revise the wording of an enacted federal law.

Keeping emotion out of this I don’t foresee the courts, both state and Federal, having any problem finding that putting a bump stock on meets the definition of a machine gun.

The problem with the ATF regulating them (As in Class 3) is that they don’t have anything to authorize them to okay a machine gun made after 1968 for private ownership.

What we heard in the video, as a few here stated, was an automatic weapon. You can make all the arguments that you want about whether or not we should be able to have automatic weapons, but the argument that that those weapons weren’t automatic won’t stand.

Thats just my opinion on the law. The ATF can say anything they like, but the courts can overrule them. I don’t believe the higher courts will support them on this.

Now, as far as whether or not you should be able to own a machine gun; the intent of the 2nd amendment is not so that you can hunt, target shoot, or even protect yourself and your family. It’s to keep the people from being disarmed and not have the ability to stand against a tyrannical government. That is it’s only purpose. Common sense tells me that we would need fully automatic weapons to make that stand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, DaveTN said:

 

Keeping emotion out of this I don’t foresee the courts, both state and Federal, having any problem finding that putting a bump stock on meets the definition of a machine gun.

The problem with the ATF regulating them (As in Class 3) is that they don’t have anything to authorize them to okay a machine gun made after 1968 for private ownership.

What we heard in the video, as a few here stated, was an automatic weapon. You can make all the arguments that you want about whether or not we should be able to have automatic weapons, but the argument that that those weapons weren’t automatic won’t stand.

Thats just my opinion on the law. The ATF can say anything they like, but the courts can overrule them. I don’t believe the higher courts will support them on this.

Now, as far as whether or not you should be able to own a machine gun; the intent of the 2nd amendment is not so that you can hunt, target shoot, or even protect yourself and your family. It’s to keep the people from being disarmed and not have the ability to stand against a tyrannical government. That is it’s only purpose. Common sense tells me that we would need fully automatic weapons to make that stand.

 Just because it looks or sounds like a machinegun does not make it one, at least not unless they change the legal definition. If I show anyone, that is not accustomed to the messed up ATF rules, my 300 Blackout pistol, they will swear up and down that it's a rifle, yet currently ATF says it is not.  The courts have made bad decisions in the past, but for the most part they try and keep it within the letter of the law, so I doubt they can rule any other way. The unknowing public will just have to get over it.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/12/2017 at 9:06 AM, CZ9MM said:

... a lot of "Pro-2nd Amendment" people are simply the "hunting rifle don't touch my six-shooter, I don't own any of that military type stuff and I think it should be banned variety".

There is a derogatory term for such a person.  The term is that the person is a 'Fudd' - as in Elmer Fudd.

Personally, my own 'likes' lean more toward shotguns, lever rifles and revolvers and I don't own an AR or AK variant but I don't want to see things banned even if, like bump stocks, I have no personal interest in owning them.

Edited by JAB
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

bump stocks are not MG, MG are not bump stocks, by the second time I heard a video I already assumed it was a BS the ROF was to choppy, if a really MG was used the outcome would have been much worse.

Not sure what the ATF would do if they out law them, Id wager they would be grandfathered in or confiscate, who knows!!

I'll also wager BF and Slide Fire will get sued at some point and they'll go away because there pure evil in the publics eyes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Johnny Rotten said:

bump stocks are not MG, MG are not bump stocks, by the second time I heard a video I already assumed it was a BS the ROF was to choppy, if a really MG was used the outcome would have been much worse.

Not sure what the ATF would do if they out law them, Id wager they would be grandfathered in or confiscate, who knows!!

I'll also wager BF and Slide Fire will get sued at some point and they'll go away because there pure evil in the publics eyes.

I could swear there is already a lawsuit filed, I'll have to dig up a link..

Yup our Brady "friends" at it again: https://www.dallasnews.com/news/guns/2017/10/10/texas-bump-stock-maker-faces-lawsuit-following-las-vegas-mass-shooting

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


The Fine Print

Tennessee Gun Owners (TNGunOwners.com) is the premier Community and Discussion Forum for gun owners, firearm enthusiasts, sportsmen and Second Amendment proponents in the state of Tennessee and surrounding region.
TNGunOwners.com (TGO) is a presentation of Enthusiast Productions. The TGO state flag logo and the TGO tri-hole "icon" logo are trademarks of Tennessee Gun Owners. The TGO logos and all content presented on this site may not be reproduced in any form without express written permission. The opinions expressed on TGO are those of their authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the site's owners or staff.
Before engaging in any transaction of goods or services on TGO, all parties involved must know and follow the local, state and Federal laws regarding those transactions. TGO makes no claims, guarantees or assurances regarding any such transactions.
×

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to the following.
Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Guidelines