Bump stock ban news

[kidicarus13]

https://www.cnn.com/2018/11/28/politics/final-bump-stock-ban/index.html

[kidicarus13]

Bump



Obviously no one reads the Legislation and Politics sub-forum

[MattR]

I just went through and read the "rule" at least they made it crystal clear that all this covers is bump stocks and not anything else like binary triggers, or whatever. It was eye opening to read that the support was 2 to 1 for it. And everything somebody brought up as against they just said no you're wrong, lol. I found it funny that they specifically say the founding fathers wouldn't want things like this to be legal because they couldn't imagine anything like this then they reference a ruling from the 1880s as support for the atf rule. Because a ruling for a state government vs a farmer in the 1880s is relevant to this.

[SouthPaw]

http://www.armslist.com/posts/8920505/denver-colorado-gun-parts-for-sale-trade--slide-fire--ssar-15-

[Irving]

Bump



Obviously no one reads the Legislation and Politics sub-forum

Apparently not. :/ https://www.ar-15.co/threads/171864-Is-this-true-(Bumpstocks)

[Eric P]

Boom...

Take your bump stock ban and shove it up your azz ATF

https://americanmilitarynews.com/2021/03/us-appeals-court-rules-bump-stock-devices-are-not-machine-guns/

[kidicarus13]

Nice!

[Gman]

I still take exception to the clarification as to why a bump stock isn't a machine gun. It's not that it allows firing one shot per trigger pull. The damn thing has no trigger, no receiver, no barrel, etc. To classify a piece of plastic furniture as a "machine gun" is ludicrous.

[Irving]

Do you feel the same about a lightning link? No right or wrong answer, just curious.

[00tec]

I would argue that any weapon restriction is against 2A

However, a lightning link/swift link does not actuate the aftual trigger in an AR platform, so the ATF definition plays a role. Their definition is as flexible as play-doh, so here we are.


Shall not be infringed, apparently, isn't legible.

[Eric P]

ATF shouldn't exist. Absolutely zero need for it.

[ray1970]

ATF shouldn't exist. Absolutely zero need for it.

I don?t know. Do you really want to live in a world where alcohol and tobacco regulations don?t exist or aren?t enforced?











(Sarcasm. Learn it. Live it. Love it.)

[TEAMRICO]

https://m.theepochtimes.com/us-military-court-rules-bump-stock-isnt-a-machine-gun_3993674.html?utm_source=partner&utm_campaign=CFP

[Eric P]

https://m.theepochtimes.com/us-military-court-rules-bump-stock-isnt-a-machine-gun_3993674.html?utm_source=partner&utm_campaign=CFP

That is huge. But will it be ignored by the USSC when it eventually gets there?

[Gman]

I don?t know. Do you really want to live in a world where alcohol and tobacco regulations don?t exist or aren?t enforced?











(Sarcasm. Learn it. Live it. Love it.)

Bring it!

[battlemidget]

Shwag booze is nasty stuff. As far as the T goes, I think they're more about the tax stamp otherwise cigarettes would look like this;
87566

[earplug]

Get a COVID shot and you can have a bump stock

[CS1983]

Get a COVID shot and you can have a bump stock

or at least a twitchy finger.

[Skully]

This whole bumpstock and now Rare Breed triggers being considered Machine guns just show how stupid ATF and this all is. Ya'll know that, under this level of guidance someone's finger could be considered a "machine gun" next by the ATF.

Milspec-Mojo is one of the fastest trigger fingers around. (5:25 mark) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TCFRWFh4Uyc

[O2HeN2]

Ya'll know that, under this level of guidance someone's finger could be considered a "machine gun" next by the ATF.
I hear that Kay Clark-Miculek is applying for a tax stamp in order to keep possession of her husband. :)

O2

[WETWRKS]

This whole bumpstock and now Rare Breed triggers being considered Machine guns just show how stupid ATF and this all is. Ya'll know that, under this level of guidance someone's finger could be considered a "machine gun" next by the ATF.

Milspec-Mojo is one of the fastest trigger fingers around. (5:25 mark) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TCFRWFh4Uyc

If they can make it stick with Rare Breed Triggers they will then start going after the various binary triggers next.

[Little Dutch]

This whole bumpstock and now Rare Breed triggers being considered Machine guns just show how stupid ATF and this all is. Ya'll know that, under this level of guidance someone's finger could be considered a "machine gun" next by the ATF.

Milspec-Mojo is one of the fastest trigger fingers around. (5:25 mark) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TCFRWFh4Uyc

This is the main problem as I see it. It's an undefined restriction on how fast a person is allowed to pull a trigger.

[Gman]

They shouldn't be doing any of what they're doing, so I'm not surprised we're now discussing limits on how fast the trigger can be actuated.

A bumpstock isn't a "gun" (no barrel or fire control group), so there's no way it should be defined as a "machine gun". We're now debating on what level of stupidity is "acceptable".

[O2HeN2]

We're now debating on what level of stupidity is "acceptable".

No, I think we're all pointing out how unacceptable this all is...

O2

[WETWRKS]

They shouldn't be doing any of what they're doing, so I'm not surprised we're now discussing limits on how fast the trigger can be actuated.

A bumpstock isn't a "gun" (no barrel or fire control group), so there's no way it should be defined as a "machine gun". We're now debating on what level of stupidity is "acceptable".

Yes...well with the Akins Accelerator the ATF decided a spring is all that constituted a MG so not really surprised at this.

[kidicarus13]

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-10-03/bump-stock-ban-left-intact-as-supreme-court-rejects-challenges

The US Supreme Court left intact the federal ban on bump stocks, the attachments that can make a semiautomatic rifle fire like a machine gun, turning away arguments from advocates including the National Rifle Association.

The justices without comment rejected two challenges to a criminal ban the Trump administration put in place after the October 2017 Las Vegas concert massacre, when about a dozen bump stocks were found in the shooter?s hotel room. Sixty people were killed in that attack, the deadliest mass shooting in modern American history.

The order comes three months after the justices?ruled?in a New York case that most people have a constitutional right to carry a handgun in public. It follows a series of mass shootings this year, including the rampage that left 19 children and two teachers dead at an Uvalde, Texas, elementary school.

The bump-stock rejections end months of behind-the-scenes maneuvering. The justices were originally scheduled to discuss one of the appeals, pressed by Utah gun lobbyist W. Clark Aposhian, at a private conference in December. They rescheduled the case 20 times, and eventually decided to carry it over to the new term.

The Supreme Court also rejected a separate challenge pressed by people and groups led by Gun Owners of America.

The challengers argued that Congress didn?t give the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives authority to classify bump stocks as machine guns, which have been virtually banned in the US since 1986.

They also faulted a federal appeals court for invoking ?Chevron deference,? a legal doctrine requiring judges in many cases to defer to regulatory agencies on the meaning of ambiguous laws. The opponents said Chevron deference shouldn?t apply to the interpretation of criminal statutes.?

?Imposing criminal liability comes with certain stigmas and a loss of liberty,? the NRA argued in a friend-of-the-court?brief?in the Aposhian case. ?Those moral judgments are the types of important questions that Congress must answer itself.?

ATF estimated when it proposed the rule that US residents possessed 520,000 bump stocks, which the ban required to be relinquished or destroyed. The Supreme Court?let?the ban take effect in 2019.

The Biden administration urged the Supreme Court to reject the appeals without a hearing. The administration said ATF didn?t rely on Chevron deference, making the case a poor choice for determining the reach of that legal doctrine.

?ATF?s interpretation reflects the best understanding of the statutory language,? Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar argued.

The National Firearms Act defines a machine gun as ?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.?

The cases are Aposhian v. Garland,?21-159, and Gun Owners of America v. Garland,?21-1215.

[Joe_K]

Decent overview of the current status. https://youtu.be/93vIi9Ew4BA

[Clint45]

They shouldn't be doing any of what they're doing, so I'm not surprised we're now discussing limits on how fast the trigger can be actuated.

A bumpstock isn't a "gun" (no barrel or fire control group), so there's no way it should be defined as a "machine gun". We're now debating on what level of stupidity is "acceptable".

Respectfully, IIRC, a "full auto conversion kit" in and of itself was previously deemed a "machinegun" even if no firearms were present. I reckon those Glock happy switches sold off Wish and Ali Baba a few years back also meet that definition, uninstalled.

[theGinsue]

Source: https://www.foxnews.com/politics/supreme-court-strikes-down-federal-ban-bump-stocks


Supreme Court strikes down federal ban on bump stocks
In a 6-3 decision the Supreme Court struck down a federal ban on bump stock accessaries on firearms

The U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday ruled that a bump stock does not transform a firearm into an automatic weapon, striking down a federal rule that banned bump stocks.

In a 6-3 decision, Justice Clarence Thomas wrote, "Congress has long restricted access to "'machinegun[s],'" a category of firearms defined by the ability to "shoot, automatically more than one shot . . . by a single function of the trigger."

"Semiautomatic firearms, which require shooters to reengage the trigger for every shot, are not machineguns. This case asks whether a bump stock?an accessory for a semi- automatic rifle that allows the shooter to rapidly reengage the trigger (and therefore achieve a high rate of fire)?con- verts the rifle into a 'machinegun.' We hold that it does not," he wrote.

The case, Garland v. Cargill, asked the court whether a "bump stock" device is a "machine gun" as defined by federal law because it is designed and intended for use in converting a rifle into a weapon that fires "automatically more than one shot ... by a single function of the trigger."

The high court's majority found that that statutory definition of a "machinegun" is any weapon capable of firing "automatically more than one shot . . . by a single function of the trigger."

"We hold that a semiautomatic rifle equipped with a bump stock is not a ?machinegun? because it cannot fire more than one shot 'by a single function of the trigger.' And, even if it could, it would not do so ?automatically,'" Thomas wrote.

"ATF therefore exceeded its statutory authority by issuing a Rule that classifies bump stocks as machineguns," he said.

After a 2017 mass shooting in Las Vegas that left 60 people dead and 500 more wounded, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) issued an interpretive rule concluding that "bump stocks" are machine guns.

"This tragedy created tremendous political pressure to outlaw bump stocks nationwide. Within days, Members of Congress proposed bills to ban bump stocks and other devices ?designed to accelerate the rate of fire of a semiautomatic rifle,?" Thomas wrote in Thursday's opinion.

The Trump administration initiated a ban on the devices ? reversing earlier regulations ? and President Biden's Justice Department defended it in court.

Justice Sonia Sotomayor, joined by Justices Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson, dissented from the majority saying, "the Court puts bump stocks back in civilian hands. To do so, it casts aside Congress?s definition of "machinegun" and seizes upon one that is inconsistent with the ordinary meaning of the statutory text and unsupported by context or purpose."

"When I see a bird that walks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, I call that bird a duck. A bump-stock-equipped semiautomatic rifle fires 'automatically more than one shot, without manual reloading, by a single function of the trigger. Because I, like Congress, call that a machinegun, I respectfully dissent," she wrote.

A bump stock is an attachment that replaces a semi-automatic weapon's standard stock, the part of the long weapon that rests on the shoulder.

Michael Cargill, owner of Central Texas Gun Works, sued the government after he was forced to surrender several "bump stocks" under the ATF's rule. He says the agency overstepped its administrative authority to impose a ban, absent any congressional action.

"It really goes back to ? freedom," Cargill said in an interview with Fox News Digital. "And it goes back to just the basics of something that my customers and myself legally purchase. The government should not have that power, that authority in an administrative agency ? to come back and ban that. You know, something that Congress has not banned. That's going to be a job that's reserved for Congress,"

Bump stocks came into circulation early this century, as one of a number of devices that can be attached to semi-automatic weapons.

As the shooter applies forward thrust on the barrel, the device harnesses the recoil energy so that the trigger will "bump" against the stationary finger, which then allows another round to be fired. The effect is more rapid shots than with a standard stock.

The ATF says more than a half-million bump stocks were in circulation when the federal ban came into effect five years ago, requiring them to be turned in or destroyed.

[CS1983]

^ so what’s that mean for if they start showing up in the Firearm Accessories for sale forum?

[SouthPaw]

^ so what’s that mean for if they start showing up in the Firearm Accessories for sale forum?

So you don't have to wait:

$174 - https://www.firequest.com/AB227.html

[BPTactical]

Can you imagine the caterwauling occurring at Giffords Law, Moms Demand and the like?
[panic]




Justice Thomas strikes again [bad-banana]

[bellavite1]

Next up: Rare Breed.

[arbol]

Actually, not sure what she had... will need to review.

I was thinking about Binary Triggers, which can give a machine gun type experience.

I don't have any experience with bump stocks...

-John