National Bump stocks to be banned

[nammac]

#RESIST-INFRINGEMENT

 

[DONOTBUGME]

This sets a bad precedent, but as stated will be challanged as they are not offering to buy them back. If struck down, could actually help us in the long run. And lets not forget, this was pushed to our president from our friends from the NRA. Trump should not have folded though. Its "sad" to see him back this.

 

[JRuby]

I would expect nothing less. Would this be an example of a Republican passing gun control?

 

[DONOTBUGME]

I would expect nothing less. Would this be an example of a Republican passing gun control?

Yes it would. It would also be an example of the NRA pushing gun control too.

 

[DONOTBUGME]

And here is my source, strait from the NRA website:
"Despite the fact that the Obama administration approved the sale of bump fire stocks on at least two occasions, the National Rifle Association is calling on the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATFE) to immediately review whether these devices comply with federal law. The NRA believes that devices designed to allow semi-automatic rifles to function like fully-automatic rifles should be subject to additional regulations."

NRA | Joint Statement

 

[Bealzybub]

Personally I have no use for them. I think its because I reload and can burn through what took many many hours to reload in less than a half hour with a mag loader. Dont climb all over me yet.

This being said I'm all for HashtagNoMoreNewGunLaws !!!!!!!!!!!!! Since "they" obviously believe that all the current laws arent doing the job they wanted them to I say scrap every single gun law currently on the books and lets start over. Hopefully with more people recognizing the over reaches currently in place.

 

[E4mafia]

And here is my source, strait from the NRA website:
"Despite the fact that the Obama administration approved the sale of bump fire stocks on at least two occasions, the National Rifle Association is calling on the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATFE) to immediately review whether these devices comply with federal law. The NRA believes that devices designed to allow semi-automatic rifles to function like fully-automatic rifles should be subject to additional regulations."

NRA | Joint Statement

Thats right, thats why i was hesitant on joining the NRA (though oddly enough almost considered it for CC insurance) I too was awe struck seeing the NRA push this.

Also,

CNN > ""Sources"" and "Expected to announce" i'll believe when he's holding up a signed sheet saying they are. Call me a drumpfster or whatever but until its officially confirmed I ain't buying that it'll actually go through with it. Especially after over a year now. Come on....

 

[JRuby]

Personally I have no use for them. I think its because I reload and can burn through what took many many hours to reload in less than a half hour with a mag loader. Dont climb all over me yet.

This being said I'm all for HashtagNoMoreNewGunLaws !!!!!!!!!!!!! Since "they" obviously believe that all the current laws arent doing the job they wanted them to I say scrap every single gun law currently on the books and lets start over. Hopefully with more people recognizing the over reaches currently in place.

I don't own one either - I have always thought accuracy over speed but the point is we have those that thought were suppose to protect our rights doing the opposite. This just enforces my belief that the Republicans want the same goal as the Democrats but just going about it in different ways.

 

[E4mafia]

Man Breitbart really is the huffington post of the "right side", don't forget to thank Steve Bannon for that term and the co founding of said site which is now going off a CNN """SOURCE"""

two and two here folks. a supposed "RIGHT WING NEWS SITE" citing and actively using a CNN (the left fear mongers) "SOURCE" stating its expected but literally 0 details further and a FULL YEAR after the event in which its been the only time in recent history a bump stock has been used in a mass shooting.

Just sayin' here guys....

Steve Bannon - Wikipedia

Again, I will wait until its set in stone and never forget the NRA encouraged this push.

 

[v0lcom13sn0w]

bumpstocks are useless to me anyway. though i dont agree with a ban, i was thinking about it... is a bumpstock an accessory or an 'arm'?

if its an accessory, we dont have the right to bear accessories do we? maybe im ignorant. maybe someone could clarify so that i know?

 

[DONOTBUGME]

bumpstocks are useless to me anyway. though i dont agree with a ban, i was thinking about it... is a bumpstock an accessory or an 'arm'?

if its an accessory, we dont have the right to bear accessories do we? maybe im ignorant. maybe someone could clarify so that i know?

You raise a good point, its a stock, so part of an arm. Could one say since the upper or any other part of a gun that isnt a serialized part could be banned, thus defacto gun ban.

 

[uberguy]

I would expect nothing less. Would this be an example of a Republican passing gun control?

No - nothing is 'passing'. It's an administrative decision by the ATF.

It's also obviously a public relations fiasco, regarding bump stocks - but highlights the absurdity of ATF arbitrary regs. It's also not remotely close to what democrats want to do to destroy 2nd Amendment rights, federally and in blue states like OR. and WA.

As others commented, it will face legal challange and may well be overturned.

 

[JRuby]

No - nothing is 'passing'. It's an administrative decision by the ATF.

It's also obviously a public relations fiasco, regarding bump stocks - but highlights the absurdity of ATF arbitrary regs. It's also not remotely close to what democrats want to do to destroy 2nd Amendment rights, federally and in blue states like OR. and WA.

As others commented, it will face legal challange and may well be overturned.

Hope your right but Trump and the NRA agree with this.

 

[Member 34319]

Never owned one cause I can bump fire pretty good using my jeans.

They gonna ban 2x4s too?

 

[uberguy]

Am not crazy about the idea of any ban, but am reasonably certain there was an assessment based on public sentiment in the context of frequency of mass shootings, that administratively banning bump stocks would be more of a gesture vs. actual legislation that could be more harmful or serve as a federal precedent to semi-auto restrictions, as passed by multiple states.

 

[DONOTBUGME]

Am not crazy about the idea of any ban, but am reasonably certain there was an assessment based on public sentiment in the context of frequency of mass shootings, that administratively banning bump stocks would be more of a gesture vs. actual legislation that could be more harmful or serve as a federal precedent to semi-auto restrictions, as passed by multiple states.

So again we give an inch....because it was used in one crime?

 

[JRuby]

Am not crazy about the idea of any ban, but am reasonably certain there was an assessment based on public sentiment in the context of frequency of mass shootings, that administratively banning bump stocks would be more of a gesture vs. actual legislation that could be more harmful or serve as a federal precedent to semi-auto restrictions, as passed by multiple states.

Rationalizing does not make it right. It is a gun control measure that is being supported by the Trump and the NRA. Call it what it is.

 

[uberguy]

Are you seeking argument? It appears so. I said "Am not crazy about the idea of any ban"

I also said in reply to your question/statement of "Would this be an example of a Republican passing gun control?" NO, explaining why. Don't be so dense, try anyway.

 

[albin25]

Never owned one cause I can bump fire pretty good using my jeans.

They gonna ban 2x4s too?

Don't worry, they'll never ban 2x4's....
....but they'll just ban all semi-autos if/when this becomes a big blip on Pelosi's radar. So, let's please not blab about how, "any semi-auto can be "bump-fired".

Good grief! Sometimes it almost seems like anti-gunners are producing some of these videos.

 

[JRuby]

Are you seeking argument? It appears so. I said "Am not crazy about the idea of any ban"

I also said in reply to your question/statement of "Would this be an example of a Republican passing gun control?" NO, explaining why. Don't be so dense, try anyway.

I see this as a Republican supported issue - if Trump decided not to sign the bill it would go no where but instead he is approving it. Respectfully I think you need to wake up and recognize it for what it is.