Bump Stock Ban Allegedly Close

[giantpune]

One concern I have if they do get banned. Every collapsing type stock will be labeled a "bump stock" by those who haven't got a clue (the general public, news media, 90% of law enforcement). It will be up to us firearm owners to prove that it's not a banned item, probably as a defendant in court!

Well every collapsible stock is like an 80% bumpstock if you think about it.

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-qM1WVYMynmM/UTpEJsc0dmI/AAAAAAAAADc/k3W0M6irWDU/s1600/IMG_4787.JPG

[johnsonlmg41]

It now sort of looks like ATF doesn't want to get involved at all with any of the stocks or devices? Probably a smart move on their part since none of them are firearms and beyond their purview.

 

https://www.atf.gov/firearms/notice-discontinuance-accessory-classifications

 

Effective Immediately

The Firearms Technology Industry Services Branch (FTISB) classifies firearms as defined by the Gun Control Act (GCA) and National Firearms Act (NFA) based on the configuration and the design features of the firearm as submitted by members of the industry. Effective immediately, any requests for a determination on how an accessory affects the classification of a firearm under the GCA or NFA must include a firearm with the accessory already installed. Except in cases of conditional import determinations, FTISB will not issue a determination on an accessory unless it is attached to the submitted firearm.

If you have previously submitted a sample accessory for classification, FTISB will be returning your sample without classification. FTISB will contact you in the near future with further instructions to facilitate the return of your sample.
Last Reviewed December 11, 201

[Speeddemon02]

I read and speak English, but I have no idea what I just read and what it means in legal speak.

[giantpune]

I read and speak English, but I have no idea what I just read and what it means in legal speak.

To me, it reads like the ATF is saying that they will no longer make a ruling on a part or accessory unless you send it to them attached to a gun.

 

Legally (and I'm no lawyer), it sounds like they are doing a couple things. First, they are ready to go with the story that they ruled bumbstocks were not a machinegun without actually seeing the stock installed and functioning on a gun. So now they can say "well shit, we didn't know you guys were gonna use them to THAT. Thats not how we thought they'd be used at all." Second, they are making it so from now on, if you send in some accessory like a pistol brace or whatever, it gets certified as "not an NFA item" only on that one specific gun you sent in. If it was a Ruger AR-15 you sent, then that's what they'll certify. Meaning if you install that same pistol brace on a Ruger Charger pistol, the ATF ruling doesn't cover your setup and it may be subject to NFA.

Edited December 12, 2018 by giantpune

[giantpune]

Scuttlebutt is this is going down this week. The official wording isn't out, but so far there isn't a grandfather clause or a path to a tax stamp. 90 days to destroy or turn them in.

[APEXgunparts]

Here is the link to the ruling.
It was signed this morning.

https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/5635249/Bump-Stock-Final-Rule.pdf

 

ACTION: Final rule. 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 bump-stock-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.

 

DATES: This rule is effective [iNSERT DATE THAT IS 90 DAYS AFTER PUBLICATION IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER].

 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Vivian Chu, Office of Regulatory Affairs, Enforcement Programs and Services, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives, U.S. Department of Justice, 99 New York Ave. NE, Washington, DC 20226; telephone: (202) 648-7070

 

Richard

[geefal]

I don't give a tinker's damn about a bump stock, and after the Las Vegas atrocity I think they should be heavily regulated.

 

No offense intended by my next comment.

 

You think it should be heavily regulated. May I ask why. The murder he committed was already illegal and didn't stop him. If the bumpstocks were (and or now ARE) illegal, it wouldn't have stopped him. I can honestly convert most any semi auto into a full auto in less than an hour. So it really does not do a spits worth of good if your being honest about things.

 

I think machineguns should be cash and carry just like semi autos.

 

Because honestly, if someone is doing something as illegal as shooting a bunch of people, one more law does not stop anything.

 

Not sure why that is hard for people to understand.

[The Lone Ranger]

GOA confirms they are filing:

 

https://www.gunowners.org/goa-file-bump-stock-suit.htm

[The Lone Ranger]

And in a bit of irony, NRA expresses disappointment in the regulation they asked for:

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/the-latest-nra-disappointed-by-bump-stock-ban/2018/12/18/57243464-0308-11e9-958c-0a601226ff6b_story.html?utm_term=.010d15fdf350

[giantpune]

Regarding that Las Vegas atrocity that set this whole bumpstock thing off, have you wondered exactly how many people were shot? They keep saying 500 people injured, but they are including twisted ankles and scraped knees in that. The guy fired 1100 rounds from 300yd away with a bumpstock, which basically everybody agrees makes the gun less controllable. I'm calling a big fat BS on the 500 injured number. In all the videos of the incident, you can hear hundreds of rounds hitting the pavement. I bet honestly, the number of direct bullet hits was under 100. Then about 300 bandaids from ricochets. And the last 150 were twisted ankles or other booboos leaving the scene.

 

So you have this 1 guy who committed a crime. The numbers for how bad that crime was are greatly inflated. And they're using that to take away the rights of 700M current US citizens and billions of them in future generations.

[Gio]

What troubles me on this Bump Stock Ban is that you have to turn them in or destroy within 90 days. The NRA didn't do a thing to stop the ban from not grandfathering the bumpstocks.

 

This sets a president on putting a band on a gun then goverment collecting them. If some nut uses a MG to kill a lot of folks and the goverment bans MG giving you 90 days to destroy or turn in. You can bet the NRA will not be around.

 

Something to think about when you give 45k for that Colt Thompson.

 

Frank

[CptCurl]

The BATFE could not "re-interpret" a statute or regulation to outlaw MGs. That certainly would take an act of Congress.

 

Curl

[giantpune]

The BATFE could not "re-interpret" a statute or regulation to outlaw MGs. That certainly would take an act of Congress.

 

Curl

When it comes to the government and politicians, don't put anything past them.

There are state level assault weapon ban bills that would classify a glock 26 and a ruger 22/45 as assault weapons and ban them with no grandfather clause. They're coming for the machineguns, too. And they won't stop till they get them.

Edited December 20, 2018 by giantpune

[RoscoeTurner]

What troubles me on this Bump Stock Ban is that you have to turn them in or destroy within 90 days. The NRA didn't do a thing to stop the ban from not grandfathering the bumpstocks.

 

This sets a president on putting a band on a gun then goverment collecting them. If some nut uses a MG to kill a lot of folks and the goverment bans MG giving you 90 days to destroy or turn in. You can bet the NRA will not be around.

 

Something to think about when you give 45k for that Colt Thompson.

 

Frank

 

 

The NRA has an established history of screwing NFA owners, Chris Cox is on record speaking against machine guns, why people even think the NRA would be supportive of NFA owners is a mystery to me.

[Petroleum 1]

Im guessing the definition of machine gun will be a focal point in the goa court case.

[johnsonlmg41]

Of course the flip side may be Trump did exactly what the democrats asked him to do with effectively complete confiscation, and as draconian as possible, knowing full well that it would be shot down by the courts when challenged? Win win for everyone but the liberals and he gets to say he banned them. If I had a postie lower I'd submit the whole thing to tech branch and ask for a ruling as to whether it was one machine gun or two and see what the response is? And if mfr's can posses them if form 2'ed as post samples?

 

I agree if this holds it's an inch and it will result in further demands. I just wish the hill we were pushing up wasn't necessarily bump stocks?

[The Lone Ranger]

Im guessing the definition of machine gun will be a focal point in the goa court case.

 

One of several hopefully. I don't have unlimited faith in the judiciary to limit the expansion of executive power (which in most cases is supported by congress to avoid actually voting on something that might risk re-election) but there are multiple aspects to pick from: the classification itself, taking (no due process, no compensation), and using a regulation to expand a statute.

 

If I had a postie lower I'd submit the whole thing to tech branch and ask for a ruling as to whether it was one machine gun or two and see what the response is? And if mfr's can posses them if form 2'ed as post samples?

 

I agree if this holds it's an inch and it will result in further demands. I just wish the hill we were pushing up wasn't necessarily bump stocks?

 

 

Based on this regulation you would have two (no exemption for these being MGs if attached to or being in proximity of another MG). Allegedly people were allowed to F2 the Accelerators (but I have never actually seen a registration). There is no provision in law to do that but doesn't mean it didn't happen.

[johnsonlmg41]

So if I put a binary trigger into an M16 registered receiver and add a bump stock, it's three machine guns with one barrel? Vs. a chain gun with one receiver and three barrels is only one gun?

 

I don't see any way ATF will be able to defend the executive order in court based on their (fairly) longstanding definitions, which I would contend is why the order was written as is in the first place....to be easily defeated. Gonna be tough to even classify a stock as a weapon in the first place? A long fiberglass M14 stock, maybe, but a short light plastic nub that's already two pieces with no sharp edges and flimsy.....going to be fun to watch. While I know the mainstream media selectively reports, I'm pretty sure I would have heard about the nations first bump stock beating at some point? Since a bump stock cannot hold or fire ammunition the odds of a shooting with one are rather unlikely? Like a knife or a firearm, they sit there rather docile until some human makes a choice to utilize them in an aggressive manor. If one surrenders a bump stock to ATF is there a bump stock jail where they put these things so they don't endanger the agents? LOL

 

Yes there are registered akins stocks. A local 02/07 has one.....postie and I have no idea what he called it when he registered it so stuff like that is generally untrackable. Fortunately in the US there is a mechanism for owning everything legally including nuclear materials, heroin, fentanyl, etc. the question is how much of the restriction is reasonable to comply with for the average citizen.

[giantpune]

The ruling says nothing about binary triggers or cranks. They still aren't machineguns.

 

The ATF site has instruction for how to destroy bumpstocks. They're very specific down to individual models and manufacturers. They listed like 15 different bumpstocks an not one page about binary triggers.

[johnsonlmg41]

giantpune, on 22 Dec 2018 - 10:20, said:

The ruling says nothing about binary triggers. They still aren't machineguns.

 

The ATF site has instruction for how to destroy bumpstocks. They're very specific down to individual models and manufacturers. They listed like 15 different bumpstocks an not one page about binary triggers.

What you mean is they haven't figured out it meets their definition yet. What do you call a gun that fires twice with a single function (pull) of the trigger? The trigger return spring stores potential energy and is used to fire the second round regardless of whether your finger is there or not...effectively the same as an Atkins or other type device that utilized stored energy to move the receiver to facilitate one or more additional rounds without an additional "pull". Cranks, (unless you attach a large flywheel) do not do this and will be fine. Took a couple years to assess the stock/ spring concept. This is government, not google who has already cataloged and assessed what I already typed and tweaked my browser to capitalize on my content or packaged and sold that information. Government became motionless at 12:01 this morning LOL......expect delays, but they will get there.

 

The other way to "destroy" bump stocks would be to fusion weld the action in numerous ways making the stock solid, but you didn't see that offered did you? Courts have banned some people from drunk driving their cars, but I've not heard of the court ordering their car be sawed in two pieces?

Edited December 22, 2018 by johnsonlmg41

[Sandman1957]

Well for those with an advanced sense of humor, while they are still "legal" mail them to your favorite government official with timing such that "it looks good when it left here" but arrives when it is contraband, so "they" are in possession of (then) illegal devices...

Edited December 24, 2018 by Sandman1957

[CptCurl]

Well for those with an advanced sense of humor, while they are still "legal" mail them to your favorite government official with timing such that "it looks good when it left here" but arrives when it is contraband, so "they" are in possession of (then) illegal devices...

 

 

Great idea! You could enclose a message: "Dear slimeball politician, I can't have this and don't know what to do with it. Thought I would send it to you since you took away my right to it. Enjoy!"

[Mike Hammer]

Here's the link to the ATF instructions on how to destroy your bump stock if you have one.

 

https://www.atf.gov/rules-and-regulations/docs/undefined/bump-fire-stocks-and-devices-destruction-diagrams/download

 

MH

[StrangeRanger]

 

Well for those with an advanced sense of humor, while they are still "legal" mail them to your favorite government official with timing such that "it looks good when it left here" but arrives when it is contraband, so "they" are in possession of (then) illegal devices...

 

 

Great idea! You could enclose a message: "Dear slimeball politician, I can't have this and don't know what to do with it. Thought I would send it to you since you took away my right to it. Enjoy!"

Just remember that Congress had NOTHING to do with this. The only slimeball politician involved was the orange bag of diarrhea in the White House.

[ppgcowboy]

Wish I could find mine it got stolen.