Bumpstock Comments Open

[WETWRKS]

https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=ATF-2018-0002-0001

Comment button in upper right.

[Joe_K]

Done. Thanks for the link.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[DOC]

Done. I feel like I was pushing a boulder up a hill. But if they back down it will be worth it.

[O2HeN2]

But if they back down it will be worth it.
I'm sure they'll listen just as well as they listened to the overwhelming negative comments on 41P.

O2

[kidicarus13]

An overwhelming amount of comments worked for M855 ammo...
http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2015/03/daniel-zimmerman/breaking-atf-backs-down-on-m855-ban-for-now/

[wctriumph]

That was one heck of a lot of writing. In guess someone has to justify their employment.

Done

[Bailey Guns]

This is what I'm posting to comment on the rule change and CC'ing it to all my elected representatives:


This proposed rule change regarding bump stocks is misguided, unfair and arguably illegal and I want to register my opposition to the proposed rule change in the strongest terms possible.

The main purpose of the proposed bump stock ban, among other reasons, is apparently in the interest of safety. Well, that's just nonsense. Aside from the single incident where one madman used a bump-stock equipped rifle(s) in Las Vegas, NV, I can't recall a single incident where a bump stock was used in a crime…at least a crime of any significance. This knee-jerk reaction is attempting to solve a problem that doesn't exist.

Even those who advocate for gun control, while they likely support this proposed ban, recognize it's symbolic only and many say it's just a distraction designed to divert attention away from an administration and congress that generally doesn’t consider gun control to be a top priority. They’re right. This will do absolutely nothing to enhance the safety of American citizens and to state otherwise is to be dishonest with the American people. Dishonesty seems to be running rampant within the US government, especially within the DoJ, recently and only tends to make a distrustful population even more apt to distrust the federal government.

By the BATFE’s own estimates up to 500,000 bump stocks have been lawfully sold over the past 10 years or so. That’s 500,000 American citizens that paid good money, sometimes up to $400 or more, for a product that had the blessing of the very agency that now wants to rewrite the rules. People purchased these bump stocks which often, or perhaps always, included a letter from the BATFE stating the items did not use any sort of spring or other mechanical assist to alter the firing rate of the gun to which it was attached. They bought them in good faith that the same agency that said it was lawful wouldn’t arbitrarily change their minds. Fancy explanations notwithstanding, that’s exactly what this is - an arbitrary decision. Nothing has changed with the bump stocks or the way they function. The only change has been in the political climate that demands the government “do something”.

Now the BATFE is telling hundreds of thousands of law-abiding American citizens that lawfully purchased an item they have no choice but to surrender it to the government or destroy it. They’re being forced, ironically at the point of a government gun, to give up their property because of one man who broke any number of already existing laws to murder innocent people. What happened to due process? Apparently that doesn’t exist in the BATFE world. Due process has been replaced by bureaucrats attempting to placate anti-gun groups without regard to real solutions and without regard to the rights of law-abiding American citizens. Why would the BATFE take an action that adversely affects the rights of American citizens, confiscates their lawfully owned property without compensation and potentially turns honest citizens into criminals?

Patriots of the American Revolution went to war with a king over the same type of tyrannical actions. Freedom from an oppressive government is important to Americans.

Why is there not a provision in this rule to either grandfather or register bump stocks already lawfully owned by private citizens? Make no mistake…I don’t condone registration of any sort. But I suppose, given the two bad choices of confiscation or registration, I’d take the lesser of the two evils. There is certainly precedent for this type of solution.

If this is about safety, why is the government not confiscating cellular phones and cars? Distracted drivers, many of whom are distracted by their cell phones, are responsible for far more deaths and injuries than bump stocks. If this was really about keeping the public safe we’d be seeing potential bans on many, many other items. But we all know it’s not really about safety. It’s about political correctness and nothing more. After it’s done the DoJ can proudly say, “We did something”. It apparently doesn’t really matter to the DoJ that “something” is an utterly useless gesture that negatively affects only law-abiding people who have done nothing wrong other than trust their government.

Gun confiscation, unlawfully taking private property from individuals, failure to allow due process and over-reaching government regulations are sure signs of a heavy handed, tyrannical government that has no regard for law-abiding citizens. The BATFE has a history of such actions along with other illegal activity such as the infamous “Fast and Furious” scandal. And now BATFE bureaucrats want to take private property away from Americans and we’re supposed to trust that it’s in our best interest? It’s not right and it’s not what the Founding Fathers of this country had in mind when they wrote the Constitution and the Second Amendment.

I urge the DoJ and BATFE to reconsider this ruling.

[hatidua]

done did.

[Skip]

Hit!

Did you guys see the stats/numbers?


In other words, the number of bump-stock-type devices held by the public could range from about 280,000 to about 520,000.


Since the majority of bump-stock-type devices are made of plastic material, individuals wishing to destroy the devices themselves could simply use a hammer to break apart the devices and throw the pieces away.


Overall, ATF estimates that the total cost of this proposed rule would be $297.2 million over a 10-year period of future analysis.

They don't clearly separate out the government vs private costs. But assuming all private costs are incurred in 2018 from destruction and surrender, this rule change is going to cost taxpayers about $20M each year.

Imagine what a mag ban would cost!

Oh, and if these were metal the destruction costs would be greater which would make the rule change appear to be more expensive. Their assumed costs are based on individuals being able to take a hammer to break them apart.

[crays]

Comment submitted.

[Great-Kazoo]

How much is the .gov going to be reimbursing the owners for the stocks ?

[Big E3]

Let me see if I understand, the Government screwed up and approved something for public consumption, then years latter changed its mind about approval. Now, that same government wants to just take these away after a half million people bought one. I’m sure the ACLU will step in and help us with this egregious abuse of power…………right?

Is this just a trial balloon to see if they can get away with confiscation of legally owned private property without compensation? If this is allowed to stand if/when they outlaw “assault weapons” they will use this precedence to say it’s been done before, no grandfather clause necessary, turn them in.

[CS1983]

Here's the comment I'll be leaving:


I just cannot understand how they think this is true:

In this proposed rule, the Department accordingly interprets the definition of “machinegun” to clarify that all bump-stock-type devices are “machineguns” under the GCA and NFA because they convert a semiautomatic firearm into a firearm that shoots automatically more than one shot, without manual reloading, by a single function of the trigger.



That's on par with saying Air Jordan's make you jump higher. It's just not true. Were it so, bump stocks would indeed be classified under and subject to the NFA already. They are not because they employ no concept which would classify them as being an NFA item.

In order to affect continuous shots, one must either have a semi-automatic and pull the trigger quickly (which is what non-spring assisted bump stocks do via recoil -- assist the shooter to actuate the trigger for every shot), or have an auto/burst feature such as in the military's M4/M16's. It is mechanically impossible to have a semi-automatic firearm that shoots more than one shot per trigger pull, unless it is malfunctioning. The capability of 1 trigger pull = mor ethan 1 round fired is affected by modification of the fire control group(FCG), not a shoulder stock. Modifying the FCG

is already covered under the NFA. As for semi-automatics and bump stocks, the force which actuates this physical phenomenon is in fact endemic to every semi-auto firearm in existence: namely, recoil and the ability to load a new round with the cycling of an action, and the trigger being pulled again, actuation of the firing process, recoil, repeat until the magazine is empty.



This is contrasted with burst or automatic fire which literally only requires 1 pull of a trigger for either a burst (typically 3 rounds) per trigger pull, or automatic fire which continues until the trigger is released
or the magazine is empty.

Pursuant to the phrase "increase the rate of fire" (Section II), this is in reference to cyclic rate of fire (CRF) and not the actual rate of fire (ARF). Increase of the CRF is impossible without modification to multiple parts, and results in a mechanical degradation and reliability of such a firearm, quickly rendering it useless. By ARF, all that is meant is the literal rate at which one fires. This can and does fluctuate, just as a car's speed fluctuates based on multiple factors. However, the intention behind its use by the Media, etc., is in the realm of the Cyclic Rate of Fire, which is mechanically set. For proof of this concept of ARF by the military's own training manuals, reference U.S. Army TC 3-22.9, Chapters 5 and 8 (introduction, 8-17, 8-18, 8-19, 8-20, 8-21, 8-22, 8-23). CRF reference per (depricated) FM 3-22.9, Chapter 2 (section 1, table 2-1). All semi-automatic firearms have a CRF which is what the Media has been trotting out, but then explaining it as if it is ARF. Additionally, the CRF, while usually around 600-900 rounds per minute, is hampered by the reality of magazine changes, jams, and mechnical breakdown of the system -- often due to heat which is generated by such a ARF nearing the CRF.

In short, it is absolutely ridiculous that the BATFE, Trump Administration, and the Media are trying to reclassify and turn on its head almost 84 years of legal language and precedent. There is literally no modification of the legally termed firearm, as defined by the NFA, which affects this reality of ability to bump fire. It is endemic to the reality of semi-automatic firearms. To change this is to engage with the slippery slope of the eventual reclassification of semi-automatic firearms as "machine guns", which is effectively what this proposed ruling is doing.

[CS1983]

Let me see if I understand, the Government screwed up and approved something for public consumption, then years latter changed its mind about approval. Now, that same government wants to just take these away after a half million people bought one. I’m sure the ACLU will step in and help us with this egregious abuse of power…………right?

Is this just a trial balloon to see if they can get away with confiscation of legally owned private property without compensation? If this is allowed to stand if/when they outlaw “assault weapons” they will use this precedence to say it’s been done before, no grandfather clause necessary, turn them in.

The government didn't screw anything up by approving bump stocks as not subject to NFA. Saying bump stocks are not subject to NFA is one of the few things the ATF has done which isn't utterly retarded. Read my comment which explains why from a mechanical perspective.

[Great-Kazoo]

Here's the comment I'll be leaving:

well written. Of course it will go over their head, once they get to the Air Jordan part.

[Joe_K]

well written. Of course it will go over their head, once they get to the Air Jordan part.

ATF Agents can’t jump.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Gman]

I left my 2 cents, primarily stating that their tortured language to change the function of a semi-automatic via a 'bump-stock' accessory into a "machinegun" is blatantly false.

[CoGirl303]

This is what I'm posting to comment on the rule change and CC'ing it to all my elected representatives:

great response, but I have to disagree with the registration portion.

We already have to register Class III/NFA firearms. If you do it with bump stocks, well it's like banning this accessory and that type of gun...it opens the door to more of the same and pretty soon we'll have to register our handguns, shotguns, bolt action rifles, lever-action rifles, ar-15's and the like.

Registration of any sorts can go die in a fire.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Big E3]

The government didn't screw anything up by approving bump stocks as not subject to NFA. Saying bump stocks are not subject to NFA is one of the few things the ATF has done which isn't utterly retarded. Read my comment which explains why from a mechanical perspective.

I personally don’t believe for a minute that approving bump stocks was a screw up. The Government has, all on their own, determined that they screwed up.

[DOC]

I forgot to add to my comment to them that if a ban is past, somehow, they want us to turn in private property, that is legal, without compensation.

[Dlesh123]

I left my 2 cents, primarily stating that their tortured language to change the function of a semi-automatic via a 'bump-stock' accessory into a "machinegun" is blatantly false.

I have been trying to figure out how to describe their twisted manipulation of the language, “ tortured” is a perfect description, hope you don’t mind if it finds it way into my comment.

[Bailey Guns]

Grossly tortured.

[Gman]

I have been trying to figure out how to describe their twisted manipulation of the language, “ tortured” is a perfect description, hope you don’t mind if it finds it way into my comment.I don't mind at all. I couldn't find any other way to describe the nonsensical language trying to twist words into a meaning that was in total conflict of the words used.

Sent from my electronic leash using Tapatalk

[Eric P]

Left a comment asking if they will ban pants with belt loops, since they can just as easily convert a semi auto into a machine gun, actually easier since no modification to the gun is needed.

[Gman]

Left a comment asking if they will ban pants with belt loops, since they can just as easily convert a semi auto into a machine gun, actually easier since no modification to the gun is needed.
I made a similar argument, although I pointed out that the firearm still exhibited semi-automatic function since the trigger must be actuated by the finger for each firing operation. I also pointed out that some skilled shooters are able to bump fire with just their finger, no modification required. Some skilled shooters can fire a semi-auto just as fast as an automatic, so the rate of fire shouldn't have anything to do with changing the historical definition of what defines 'semi-automatic' vs. 'automatic' mechanical function.

[bellavite1]

Posted:
"This is unacceptable and morally wrong!
People wants to follow the law so they purchase a LEGAL item trusting the Government.
Then the Government turns around, because of the action of ONE individual out of HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS of law-abiding owners of the exact same items.
The Government therefore changes the cards already on the table and declares the same item illegal.
Law abiding citizens are instantly turned in potential felon, just for trusting their Government.
The only other option is surrendering such item, WITHOUT COMPENSATION, or destroy it, with no grandfathering clause.
This is NOT the America I love.
This is NOT the America I choose.
SHAME ON YOU."
Not that they will give a shit...

[Dlesh123]

Grossly tortured.

Just like some lawyers argue for torture and others argue against, Twist and manipulate the language to suit their purposes and boss of the day.

[Eric P]

So, I talked to one ATF field agent and he said the ATF is generally against this. Many have submitted comment against this, and said that they only placed this on the register to stop further legislation on binary triggers and other speed enhancing features. It was written as is, so that I could be struck down in court. Just need to have it heard in conservative courts 1st.

[Rucker61]

Foxtrot, what do you think it will take for SCOTUS to hear a 2A case, and what do you think the subject would be?

[Great-Kazoo]

Foxtrot, what do you think it will take for SCOTUS to hear a 2A case, and what do you think the subject would be?

6+ R appointed judges, minimum.



Standard disclaimer: I don't pretend to be a moderator or play one in real life. [Coffee]

[Justin]

Y'all are doing something right.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-guns-bumpstocks/pro-gun-voices-dominate-in-debate-over-trumps-bump-stock-ban-idUSKBN1I5111


Of the more than 17,000 public comments received so far by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), a review by Reuters of 4,200 turned up only 10 favoring the bump stock ban. Almost all the rest criticized the proposal as heavy-handed, unnecessary or unconstitutional.

[CoGirl303]

[emoji102]

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20180524/179d670a5ccc01de94b253d95d027e51.jpg




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Zundfolge]

I'm kind of surprised there are 13,000 bump stocks in the entire country, let alone in just those two liberal states.

[Zundfolge]

Y'all are doing something right.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-guns-bumpstocks/pro-gun-voices-dominate-in-debate-over-trumps-bump-stock-ban-idUSKBN1I5111

Of the more than 17,000 public comments received so far by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), a review by Reuters of 4,200 turned up only 10 favoring the bump stock ban. Almost all the rest criticized the proposal as heavy-handed, unnecessary or unconstitutional.


Except that seems to me to be the best reason (from F-Troops haughty perspective) to ban the things. :p

[UrbanWolf]

I saw the below comment posted multiple times in the comments, anti gun bleeding hearts are out in full force.


On the night of October 1, 2017, a gunman opened fire from a hotel room on the 32nd floor of the Mandalay Bay hotel into the 22,000 person crowd at the Route 91 Harvest country music festival in Las Vegas, Nevada, killing 58 people and injuring more than 500. The gunman fired more than 1,100 rounds of ammunition in 11 minutes, using semi-automatic rifles modified with dangerous firearm accessories designed to dramatically accelerate the rate of gunfire, commonly known as "bump fire stocks." These devices are intended to circumvent the restrictions on possession of fully automatic firearms in the Gun Control Act of 1968 and the National Firearms Act of 1934 by allowing an individual to modify a semiautomatic rifle in such a manner that it operates with a similar rate of fire as a fully automatic rifle, posing a substantial risk to public safety.

In the absence of immediate action by Congress, I urge ATF to finalize its proposed rule clarifying that bump fire stocks, along with other "conversion devices" that enable semiautomatic weapons to mimic automatic fire, qualify as "machineguns" under the National Firearms Act. And then Congress must act as wellto ensure that manufacturers cannot continue to endanger public safety by designing devices that imitate machine guns and subvert the law. The continued presence of these dangerous devices puts all of our communities at risk, and both Congress and ATF must take action quickly to address this threat.

[Rucker61]

I saw the below comment posted multiple times in the comments, anti gun bleeding hearts are out in full force.

Wasn't the Hughes Amendment part of FOPA 86, not GCA 68?

[TFOGGER]

Wasn't the Hughes Amendment part of FOPA 86, not GCA 68?

Liberals are confused by facts...

[rondog]

If bumpstocks are banned, someone will probably just come out with a kit, or an 80% completed one.....

[DenverGP]

If bumpstocks are banned, someone will probably just come out with a kit, or an 80% completed one.....

Someone has already released 3d printer files to build them.

[rondog]

Someone has already released 3d printer files to build them.

Really? Huh, an actual valid use for one of those printers now.....

[Zundfolge]

Someone has already released 3d printer files to build them.

OR you can just go to Walmart and buy one in the shoe department.

https://i5.walmartimages.com/asr/99dda933-56bf-4b14-b78f-629208f529c6_1.08a6c53a1881f00c99694823946b0272.jp eg?odnHeight=450&odnWidth=450&odnBg=FFFFFF

[Rucker61]

OR you can just go to Walmart and buy one in the shoe department.

https://i5.walmartimages.com/asr/99dda933-56bf-4b14-b78f-629208f529c6_1.08a6c53a1881f00c99694823946b0272.jp eg?odnHeight=450&odnWidth=450&odnBg=FFFFFF

Jax, Dick's and Amazon have just announced they are no longer selling shoelaces.

[Martinjmpr]

Jax, Dick's and Amazon have just announced they are no longer selling shoelaces.

Tim Johnston just told my those shoelaces were TOOLS FOR MURDER!!!!! [Rant1]

[wyome]

These shoelaces don't scream murder...they scream PAR-TAY!
74951