Is this true? (Bumpstocks)

[Sixgun]

Trump administration officially bans bump stocks
https://www.cnn.com/2018/12/18/politics/bump-stocks-ban/index.html

If so, don?t they need to give us compensation ?

[Scanker19]

I saw it only there and on Yahoo.

I want this to be true. https://www.foxnews.com/food-drink/popeyes-launches-emotional-support-chicken-carrier-at-philadelphia-airport

[DireWolf]

Trump administration officially bans bump stocks
https://www.cnn.com/2018/12/18/politics/bump-stocks-ban/index.html

If so, don?t they need to give us compensation ?

Compensation....hmmm, let's see, what would be a good trade value? Oh, I know! How about a bunch of trees decorated with oath-breakers?


On a seperate note, seems like enough time has passed that the complete BS narrative from LV is now being presented as just plain and simple fact...awesome.

[ChickNorris]

I saw it only there and on Yahoo.

I want this to be true. https://www.foxnews.com/food-drink/popeyes-launches-emotional-support-chicken-carrier-at-philadelphia-airport

Lmao

I just saw the photo.

[Squeeze]

Figured this was coming. The Atkins stocks were banned rather hastily by the Bureau of Agents Trampling Freedom Everywhere not long after they hit the market too. Not sure if folks were compensated for those or not.

[Eargesplitten]

Reminder that the Republicans don't actually care about your gun rights either, just about giving enough lip service to get your vote.

[Rucker61]

A horrible overreach of executive power.

[UrbanWolf]

Trump administration officially bans bump stocks
https://www.cnn.com/2018/12/18/politics/bump-stocks-ban/index.html

If so, don?t they need to give us compensation ?

Sure they will compensate us, by f***ing us in the ass.

[TFOGGER]

Pardon me, but how in the fuck does an "acting attorney general" sign ANYTHING into law? I was pretty sure laws had to obtain the approval of both houses of Congress prior to being tendered to the President to sign or veto.

[buffalobo]

Another step on the path...

[Eargesplitten]

Pardon me, but how in the fuck does an "acting attorney general" sign ANYTHING into law? I was pretty sure laws had to obtain the approval of both houses of Congress prior to being tendered to the President to sign or veto.

Welcome to executive orders, also known as how to do whatever you want as president. Beloved by the party in office, hated by the party not in office, and the opinions change instantly on inauguration day.

[DireWolf]

Welcome to executive orders, also known as how to do whatever you want as president.

This right here's the kinda shit which will have people just saying "too bad, fuck'em" when the D move to impeach/prosecute (which in all likelihood they will at some point).

Stupid fukin move, but awesome way to piss people off across the board, even those who could give a rat's-ass about cheezy friggin bump-stocks.

[waffles]

Plenty of people pointed out he was not a friend of the second, but of course that was all 4D chest and we're totally getting the HPA and reopening the MG registry. Any day now.

[Eargesplitten]

You mean a coastal urban elite isn't pro-gun? But...but... his security uses guns, nobody would have armed security without being pro-gun, right?

[roberth]

He continues to tarnish his presidency.

No wall.
Obamacare still in effect.
We're still in Afghanistan.

Now this.

[Gman]

Beloved by the party in office, hated by the party not in office, and the opinions change instantly on inauguration day.

Not so. Trump attempted to end Obama's over-reaching EO that allowed illegal immigrants to stay in this country, and the courts stopped him.

When will the Constitution burning begin and make what's happening a bit more public?

[Bailey Guns]

So much for the comment period and, by the ATF's own estimation, an overwhelmingly negative number of comments opposed to the ban. But, it was obviously a done deal...just bureaucrats going the motions.

GOA is already working on a lawsuit challenging the ban. If you'd like to contribute something to help fund the lawsuit you can do so here: https://www.gunowners.com/contribute?src=bumpstocklink

Already working on the ass-chewing I'm gonna hand to my US representative and senators.

[Bailey Guns]

A horrible overreach of executive power.

Yes, it is. For the life of me, I can't see how this is legal. It seems pretty clear that, at a minimum, this is a violation of at least the 4th and 5th Amendments. I'm failing to see where anyone is getting due process protections prior to having their property seized by the government here.

I will be anxiously awaiting a SCOTUS ruling on this. At least I think I will.

[Bailey Guns]

Donation made to GOA. And I used PayPal. Something satisfying about that.

[WETWRKS]

Figured this was coming. The Atkins stocks were banned rather hastily by the Bureau of Agents Trampling Freedom Everywhere not long after they hit the market too. Not sure if folks were compensated for those or not.

Actually...the Akins agreement may be the key in all of this. The ATF made a legal agreement that the owners of the Akins would be legal if they removed the spring from the Akins. Now they are going back on that legal agreement

[Bailey Guns]

If Hillary was president no one would care about bump stocks because everything else would be too fucked up.

[Bailey Guns]

I don't think that's accurate at all. Many, many people on here bitch constantly about both republicans and democrats not being gun friendly.

When the original thread came up about the proposed ban I wrote this:


Why? Why try to explain anything using fact and logic? It doesn't matter and it hasn't mattered for a long time. I (and many like me) no longer have a voice because I believe in the wrong things. It's as simple as that. I've called my elected representatives (and plenty that I didn't help to elect), I've emailed them and I've written letters. I get the same damn canned response every single time with words changed here and there to fit the subject. I've voted for those who tell me they believe much like I do. I've encouraged others to do the same. It's been a waste of time, effort and energy.

Engaging in intelligent conversation using fact and logic no longer matters. Emotion matters. That's the only thing these asshats listen to. The more emotion the better.

I've been engaged politically since Carter was president and I was old enough to vote. And where has that gotten me? No where. Just high blood pressure and more frustration and heartache with what my once proud country has become.

If you're not a loudmouthed, ignorant fucking snowflake these days no one wants to hear anything you have to say. Especially if you sound like you're a right wing, gun-loving, bible-clinging, mid-American, deplorable that doesn't think the way the communists and socialist in the media and most of the government do.

I'm beginning to sympathize with those who say the time to talk is over.

And many others express similar sentiments.

The one thing I will say and will stick to:

On balance, republicans are far less concerned with additional restrictions on guns than democrats are.

[Eargesplitten]

It's quite the opposite (although, undoubtedly, a lot of other stuff would be f'ed up)

Yet, Gun owners would be foaming at the mouth rabid, lighting torches and marching the streets if she so much as tried to ban so much as the tiniest part of a firearm, period.

But if Trump does it?

Or if Reagan does it?

Or if GWB does it?

*crickets*

Ironically, "womens" and "gay" and "immigration" rights would likely also be much depressed under Hillary, simply because those people wouldn't be foaming at the mouth.

The ironic thing about Americans is they only REALLY care about their issues if the opposing political party brings it up.

See also 1986 NFA Ban...

Ronald Reagan is the patron saint of small government and individual rights, though. He would never pass any gun control laws. Next you'll tell me he was what set California on the path to become what it is now!

[roberth]

Ronald Reagan is the patron saint of small government and individual rights, though. He would never pass any gun control laws. Next you'll tell me he was what set California on the path to become what it is now!

Reagan passed the 1986 GCA.

https://www.atf.gov/rules-and-regulations/national-firearms-act


Firearm Owners’ Protection Act
In 1986, this Act amended the NFA definition of “silencer” by adding combinations of parts for silencers and any part intended for use in the assembly or fabrication of a silencer. The Act also amended the GCA to prohibit the transfer or possession of machineguns. Exceptions were made for transfers of machineguns to, or possession of machineguns by, government agencies, and those lawfully possessed before the effective date of the prohibition, May 19, 1986.

[Great-Kazoo]

Ronald Reagan is the patron saint of small government and individual rights, though. He would never pass any gun control laws. Next you'll tell me he was what set California on the path to become what it is now!

You left off the sarcasm smiley face. Or were you actually serious?

[TFOGGER]

I see a whole lot of"will not comply" and "frankly DGAFF" coming in response to this...

[Eargesplitten]

You left off the sarcasm smiley face. Or were you actually serious?

I thought it came through without the sarcasm face, my bad.

[roberth]

How does the ATF intent to enforce this executive order?

I see it as unenforceable as the CO mag limit nonsense.

[Justin]

Is there an actual link to the proposed ban?

You know, so I can read the actual text of the actual document instead of having to take the word of CNN as gospel?

[Irving]

Post #7

[Justin]

The Department disagrees that other firearms or devices, such as rifles, shotguns, and binary triggers, will be reclassified as machineguns under this rule.

- Page 83

[Bailey Guns]

Wait... The ATF "disagrees that other firearms or devices, such as rifles, shotguns, and binary triggers, will be reclassified as machineguns under this rule". Is that anything like the way they disagreed for years that bump-stocks will be reclassified as machine guns? Seriously? We're supposed to buy into that bullshit?

[Bailey Guns]

Stalin would be very proud of a lot of our alphabet agencies.

[Rucker61]

Wait... The ATF "disagrees that other firearms or devices, such as rifles, shotguns, and binary triggers, will be reclassified as machineguns under this rule". Is that anything like the way they disagreed for years that bump-stocks will be reclassified as machine guns? Seriously? We're supposed to buy into that bullshit?

My first thought, too. If they can't ban rubber bands, maybe they'll have to ban semiautomatic rifles.

[Justin]

Adam Kraut has filed a lawsuit.

Feel free to donate to support it here:

https://secure.anedot.com/firearms-policy-foundation/bumpstock_legal_action?sc=bump_stock_ban

[Bailey Guns]

How does the ATF intent to enforce this executive order?

I see it as unenforceable as the CO mag limit nonsense.

I don't think so. The CO mag limit law puts a pretty difficult burden of proof on the state to prove your magazines are illegally possessed...you acquired them after the law went into effect. There's really no way to prove that for most magazines assuming the guns they were made for were around prior to the law taking affect.

With this, it's an outright ban. Obviously (or maybe not so obviously), they aren't gonna go door-to-door searching for bump stocks. But the mere fact you have the stock will be illegal. It won't matter when it was made, etc...it's just illegal. Period. That's a pretty easy standard to meet. Bump stocks are illegal to possess. roberth was found in possession of a bump stock. BAM! Pretty easy burden of proof.

Now, having said that, I don't think the ATF is gonna go out on a national scale search looking for bump stocks. But it gives them additional ammo to fire at you in the event you pop up on their radar.

I foresee something like: Mr & Mrs Jones get into a domestic. Cops are called. Mrs Jones says Mr Jones owns a shit-ton of guns. One thing leads to another and Mr Jones is hauled off to jail. Cops ask Mrs Jones if they can look thru Mr Jones' gun stuff, she willingly agrees, and they find banned bump stock.

It's my understanding violating the ban will be a felony. Even if the domestic doesn't stick now you're looking at a federal felony.

[hollohas]

I was surprised when this ban didn't get more pushback when it was first proposed. After the win a couple years ago, everyone on our side kinda sat back and relaxed. All the while more and more states passed some of the strictest anti-gun laws we've seen. CA, WA and others. Colorado will next year. But the Pro 2A population remains quiet and happy. Prices went down, ammo is plentiful, all is good. But it's not. The anti's are gaining ground just much more quietly now.

[Great-Kazoo]

? They also don't really serve the purpose the 2A is intended for, they'd be garbage in a practical application.

Where have i heard that before?

[Sixgun]

I think the bumpski’s are pretty stupid but damn don’t F with my bianary’s or Gisselle?s. I truly hope that Colorado won’t be Pu$$y like New Jersey.
I’m not liking the next wave of Blue in Colorado. I don?t even have my MP5 yet. BS.
Btw, donated to the cause.

[Firehaus]

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20181219/b7cf383ce00c39b610222aa85b4df2ad.jpghttps://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20181219/03dc074baf038eb3303e44dbbf90f3da.jpghttps://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20181219/3564ec34aeda3fc811c3251fc16eb2f5.jpghttps://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20181219/167a67b80895dfa9e8b421fa29878299.jpghttps://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20181219/0d9d71d3d6a4d409b31c3f534daf0a92.jpg


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Justin]

I was surprised when this ban didn't get more pushback when it was first proposed. After the win a couple years ago, everyone on our side kinda sat back and relaxed. All the while more and more states passed some of the strictest anti-gun laws we've seen. CA, WA and others. Colorado will next year. But the Pro 2A population remains quiet and happy. Prices went down, ammo is plentiful, all is good. But it's not. The anti's are gaining ground just much more quietly now.

Bloomberg has been quietly dumping tremendous amounts of money into readily won state level fights for a few years now.

[roberth]

I don't think so. The CO mag limit law puts a pretty difficult burden of proof on the state to prove your magazines are illegally possessed...you acquired them after the law went into effect. There's really no way to prove that for most magazines assuming the guns they were made for were around prior to the law taking affect.

With this, it's an outright ban. Obviously (or maybe not so obviously), they aren't gonna go door-to-door searching for bump stocks. But the mere fact you have the stock will be illegal. It won't matter when it was made, etc...it's just illegal. Period. That's a pretty easy standard to meet. Bump stocks are illegal to possess. roberth was found in possession of a bump stock. BAM! Pretty easy burden of proof.

Now, having said that, I don't think the ATF is gonna go out on a national scale search looking for bump stocks. But it gives them additional ammo to fire at you in the event you pop up on their radar.

I foresee something like: Mr & Mrs Jones get into a domestic. Cops are called. Mrs Jones says Mr Jones owns a shit-ton of guns. One thing leads to another and Mr Jones is hauled off to jail. Cops ask Mrs Jones if they can look thru Mr Jones' gun stuff, she willingly agrees, and they find banned bump stock.

It's my understanding violating the ban will be a felony. Even if the domestic doesn't stick now you're looking at a federal felony.

Thank you.

[Rucker61]

Bloomberg has been quietly dumping tremendous amounts of money into readily won state level fights for a few years now.

Almost worked in Nevada; failed in Maine.

[Rucker61]

Bailey is 100% on point. Of course many people won't comply (we don't condone any lawbreaking here, of course). Problem is, this is federal criminal law number 10,001 (or probably, 15,001, since 10k is a 1990's estimate). Of those, at least 5-10 felonies can be applied to just about anyone. Now lets add this too, and call it a NFA violation, so that we can threaten 10 years of jail time and a 250,000 fine.

Now, lets say your under investigation for a low level federal crime. I don't have a real suggestion here, so IDK, maybe your ex-wife bonked up some paperwork, but they accuse you. You know you could win at trial, you've got witnesses, evidence, they don't have shit. Push comes to shove, they can file charging documents with 10-15 felonies alleged, you'll never be able to afford counsel, and you are FORCED to accept whatever plea they offer regardless of if your innocent or guilty. Or, your only other door is just to fucking eat a bullet.

Welcome to the federal government.

RIP Adam Swartz and all those like him, for they are many.

I recommend the trash bin for any bump stocks. They are what, $70? They also don't really serve the purpose the 2A is intended for, they'd be garbage in a practical application.

What would happen if they found a bunch of rubber bads wrapped around an AR-15?

[BushMasterBoy]

The forum is a trick to get us on a .gov list of potential adversaries.

[MattR]

Reading the rule it said there was almost 2:1 in support of the ban VS against it. It goes to show 1 of 2 things, the gun crowds really aren't any good at staying together and organizing, the left is much better. Or 2, they made up these numbers because they were doing what they wanted anyways. Reading the whole 150something pages really is interesting how they argue the points for and against and cite cases examples. I'm not really sure that a case in the 1880s of a farmer VS the state is revant here but they do. All I really kept thinking while reading it was how much did this cost? How many people and hours were spent on this? Hundreds of thousands at least I'm sure. At this point I'm pretty confident in saying Trump is as if not more corrupt than the rest of them.


I guess my signature is super offensive nowadays too.

[emiller35]

don?t F with my bianary?s or Gisselle?s.

Only a matter of time before they come after these and pistol ?braces?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Justin]

Reading the rule it said there was almost 2:1 in support of the ban VS against it. It goes to show 1 of 2 things, the gun crowds really aren't any good at staying together and organizing, the left is much better. Or 2, they made up these numbers because they were doing what they wanted anyways. Reading the whole 150something pages really is interesting how they argue the points for and against and cite cases examples. I'm not really sure that a case in the 1880s of a farmer VS the state is revant here but they do. All I really kept thinking while reading it was how much did this cost? How many people and hours were spent on this? Hundreds of thousands at least I'm sure. At this point I'm pretty confident in saying Trump is as if not more corrupt than the rest of them.


I guess my signature is super offensive nowadays too.

Most comments were against a ban until there was a concerted effort in lefty media outlets like Salon and Vox and on social media to signal boost the issue to lefties and get them to submit comments.

[Martinjmpr]

Do I need to spell it out?
The risk attached to a $70 piece of fun plastic isn't, by any means, worth the risk. Keeping them will not offer any benefit; not even fun, as you will cease all use of them. So why keep it?

Merica'? Okay, whelp, like Bailey said, you're tying a noose and making it available to any enemy you make in life from now on, however temporarily, including potentially, your spouse, your children. And nope, keeping it isn't going to keep the gov'a'mint in check either. It's a bump stock. They should hand them out like candy along with beta-c mags, everyone would be safer (including the gov't.)

I get the "not one step back" mentality but when it comes to bump stocks the question we need to ask is: Is this the hill we want to die on?

A wise commander chooses when and where to fight. He doesn't fight on ground where he can't win.

When you're fighting a numerically superior enemy you can't allow yourself to get sucked into every little skirmish and bled dry. You have to preserve your fighting capacity for the battles that matter.


Only a matter of time before they come after these and pistol ?braces?

I guess if someone uses a "pistol brace" in a mass shooting they might but even then, how does the "pistol brace" allow a shooter to fire more rounds?

The whole bump stock issue is based on a very specific set of circumstances that are not applicable to most other gun accessories. A bump stock is specifically designed to allow the shooter to fire more rounds like a machine gun. To be honest, I'm a little surprised the BATF didn't clamp down on things like that during the 80's when they first came out, but likely they didn't because nobody used them in a horrific crime.

I actually had one of the crank-type devices back in the mid 1980's, I think it was called the BMF Activator. I only used it once on my Mini-14 as ammo was too expensive to waste like that.

Bottom line, no the sky is not falling.

[Bailey Guns]

I think some of you guys are missing the bigger picture that's not related to guns or bump sticks. This sets a huge precedent for personal property seizure without due process.

[Martinjmpr]

I think some of you guys are missing the bigger picture that's not related to guns or bump sticks. This sets a huge precedent for personal property seizure without due process.


Well, sorta. You mean without compensation, but it isn't the first time it's happened.

Seizure without due process has happened historically quite often and still happens today, despite US Supreme Court rulings like Fuentes v. Shevin, 407 U.S. 67 (1972) (pretrial civil seizure is not constitutional) or CO Supreme Court Rulings like Metro National Bank v. District Court (a court that fails to duly issue an order for a show cause (hearing) upon property seizure acts without jurisdiction). This doesn't set a precedence any more than the magazine ban, the Atkins ban, every other firearm ban out there where compensation hasn't been paid.(or due process occurring, or even legislation in many cases). So it's not new at all in those regards.

What this does set a precedence for is overreach of the kings, err I mean, executive branch into legislation. The illusions of our country are slowly breaking down, the checks and balances are being transparently false to more and more people. Trump says "Ban it!" and everyone asks "How high?". If checks and balances worked, even the GOP legislators, cabinet, and departments would have publicly came out and said "Go fuck yourself."

Foxtrot beat me to it. This doesn't set any sort of "precedent", that precedent was set a long, long time ago and is well established in American law.

EDITED TO ADD: It's not just guns either. In my lifetime there was a period of time it was illegal to own physical gold. Illegal as in a FELONY to own more than a certain amount of gold coin or bullion. That law didn't end until 1974 when I was in Junior high.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_Order_6102

[TFOGGER]

What does this mean for people that have clearance letters from ATF regarding bump stocks(stating that they were legal)? If this invalidates those letters, then pretty much anything and everything is subject to ban by regulatory fiat.


ETA: I don't own a bump stock, nor would I wish to, as I see them as a foolish waste of ammunition. I do, however, support the continued right to own them. And machine guns, and suppressors, and short barrelled rifles/shotguns. The entire NFA was a farce, based on a false narrative, propagated by those in power to help consolidate that power.

[Fentonite]

Any predictions as to what this could mean for legal owners of pre-‘86 machine guns? I could see the left screaming that “nobody needs a full-auto machine gun!”. Is anyone concerned that legally obtained, tax-stamped MGs could simply be made illegal? I’d love to have one, but I’m not sure the risk to expense ratio is worth it.

[Martinjmpr]

Any predictions as to what this could mean for legal owners of pre-‘86 machine guns? I could see the left screaming that “nobody needs a full-auto machine gun!”. Is anyone concerned that legally obtained, tax-stamped MGs could simply be made illegal? I’d love to have one, but I’m not sure the risk to expense ratio is worth it.

Until someone uses a legally owned machine gun in a mass shooting, I'd say any change at the Federal level is unlikely. Don't class 3 applications still require the CLEO of the county to sign off though? I could see those getting tightened up.

Nobody knew what a "bump stock" was before the Las Vegas shooting, and nobody cared. Most gun-haters don't know a damn thing about guns in general, much less specifics like class III or NFA laws, nor do they care. These kinds of devices only come to their attention when there is a spectacular incident.

[WETWRKS]

Until someone uses a legally owned machine gun in a mass shooting, I'd say any change at the Federal level is unlikely. Don't class 3 applications still require the CLEO of the county to sign off though? I could see those getting tightened up.

Nobody knew what a "bump stock" was before the Las Vegas shooting, and nobody cared. Most gun-haters don't know a damn thing about guns in general, much less specifics like class III or NFA laws, nor do they care. These kinds of devices only come to their attention when there is a spectacular incident.

You no longer need Cleo sign off. You are required to notify the Cleo that you intend to buy or build but you no longer need their approval.

[Bitter Clinger]

Not a mass shooting but didn't those assholes in California use FA guns in that bank robbery back in the 90's?

[Martinjmpr]

Not a mass shooting but didn't those assholes in California use FA guns in that bank robbery back in the 90's?

Pretty sure they were either illegally obtained or at the very least illegally modified.

[Irving]

Not a mass shooting but didn't those assholes in California use FA guns in that bank robbery back in the 90's?

That's the robbery that the movie HEAT was based on right?

[Rooskibar03]

Boy if I had one that was attached to a rifle for the last 3 years and never actually fired it I would be tempted to do so now before I'm a criminal for doing so.

[Great-Kazoo]

That's the robbery that the movie HEAT was based on right?

No

[Bailey Guns]

Foxtrot beat me to it. This doesn't set any sort of "precedent", that precedent was set a long, long time ago and is well established in American law.

Yeah, I was posting on my phone from work and didn't get to finish my comments...which have pretty well been covered now. I hate it when work actually interrupts me at work.

[Gman]

That's the robbery that the movie HEAT was based on right?
Heat hit theaters in 1995. The North Hollywood Shootout was in 1997.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Hollywood_shootout

[kidicarus13]

A case if life imitating "art".

[Joe_K]

```First, they came for the machine guns, and I did not speak out?because they said only gangsters used machine guns.

Then they came for the short-barreled shotguns, and I did not speak out?because they said only bootleggers used short-barreled shotguns.

Then they came for the imported guns with "no sporting purpose", and I did not speak out?because they said only assassins used imported guns with no sporting purpose.

Then they came for the silencers, and I did not speak out?because they said only hitmen used silencers.

Then they came for the assault-style weapons, and I did not speak out?because they said only potential school shooters wanted assault-style weapons.

Then they came for the high-capacity magazines, and I did not speak out?because they said only mass murderers needed high-capacity magazines.

Then they came for the 3D-printed guns, and I did not speak out?because they said only right-wing nutjobs would 3D-print a gun.

Then they came for the bump stocks, and I did not speak out?because they said only rednecks used bump stocks.

Then they came for the ammunition, and I did not speak out?because they said only paranoid preppers wanted more than a box or two of ammo.

Then they came for me?and they had machine guns.```


For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus.
‭‭1 Timothy‬ ‭2:5‬ ‭

[ben4372]

```First, they came for the machine guns, and I did not speak out?because they said only gangsters used machine guns.

Then they came for the short-barreled shotguns, and I did not speak out?because they said only bootleggers used short-barreled shotguns.

Then they came for the imported guns with "no sporting purpose", and I did not speak out?because they said only assassins used imported guns with no sporting purpose.

Then they came for the silencers, and I did not speak out?because they said only hitmen used silencers.

Then they came for the assault-style weapons, and I did not speak out?because they said only potential school shooters wanted assault-style weapons.

Then they came for the high-capacity magazines, and I did not speak out?because they said only mass murderers needed high-capacity magazines.

Then they came for the 3D-printed guns, and I did not speak out?because they said only right-wing nutjobs would 3D-print a gun.

Then they came for the bump stocks, and I did not speak out?because they said only rednecks used bump stocks.

Then they came for the ammunition, and I did not speak out?because they said only paranoid preppers wanted more than a box or two of ammo.

Then they came for me?and they had machine guns.```


For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus.
‭‭1 Timothy‬ ‭2:5‬ ‭

Brilliant!

[Gman]

```First, they came for the machine guns, and I did not speak out?because they said only gangsters used machine guns.

Then they came for the short-barreled shotguns, and I did not speak out?because they said only bootleggers used short-barreled shotguns.

Then they came for the imported guns with "no sporting purpose", and I did not speak out?because they said only assassins used imported guns with no sporting purpose.

Then they came for the silencers, and I did not speak out?because they said only hitmen used silencers.

Then they came for the assault-style weapons, and I did not speak out?because they said only potential school shooters wanted assault-style weapons.

Then they came for the high-capacity magazines, and I did not speak out?because they said only mass murderers needed high-capacity magazines.

Then they came for the 3D-printed guns, and I did not speak out?because they said only right-wing nutjobs would 3D-print a gun.

Then they came for the bump stocks, and I did not speak out?because they said only rednecks used bump stocks.

Then they came for the ammunition, and I did not speak out?because they said only paranoid preppers wanted more than a box or two of ammo.

Then they came for me?and they had machine guns.```


For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus.
‭‭1 Timothy‬ ‭2:5‬ ‭

Nice twist on The Hangman.


http://youtu.be/BRDq7aneXnk

[iego]

Then they came for me...

-John

[Ridge]

A case if life imitating "art".

They really were inspired by HEAT to commit their crimes, which used illegally converted firearms during the federal AWB.

Apparently they didn't sit through to the end of the movie.

[Great-Kazoo]

They really were inspired by HEAT to commit their crimes, which used illegally converted firearms during the federal AWB.

Apparently they didn't sit through to the end of the movie.

Or use FNC's and Galil's

[Ridge]

Or use FNC's and Galil's

But definitely not a Steyr TMP

https://i.imgur.com/XzEZ6Eil.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/4rMhzIhl.jpg

[CS1983]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ulHQPpOa_Vk

Here's the thing, the definition they (the donkeycrats) supply still does not affect bumpstocks per their own definition. It does not operate on a single function of the trigger, simply. To say otherwise is literally to redefine the mechanical reality, which is absurd.

[MrPrena]

But definitely not a Steyr TMP

https://i.imgur.com/XzEZ6Eil.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/4rMhzIhl.jpg

He .... now my favorite 90s bad guy action stunt man.

[Bailey Guns]

I've got a serious crush on AK... Yowsa!

[Gman]

Here's the thing, the definition they (the donkeycrats) supply still does not affect bumpstocks per their own definition. It does not operate on a single function of the trigger, simply. To say otherwise is literally to redefine the mechanical reality, which is absurd.
Have you met our government? Logic and reality has nothing to do with it.

[Ridge]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ulHQPpOa_Vk

Here's the thing, the definition they (the donkeycrats) supply still does not affect bumpstocks per their own definition. It does not operate on a single function of the trigger, simply. To say otherwise is literally to redefine the mechanical reality, which is absurd.

What do the Dems have to do with this? This is all on the order of Trump.

[CS1983]

Bureaucrat = burrocrats = donkeycrats.

They're all a bunch of asses, in other words.

[Ridge]

Ah, okay.

[Jer]

What do the Dems have to do with this? This is all on the order of Trump.

The mental gymnastics some do to blame "them" is astounding.

[MrPrena]

Bureaucrat = burrocrats = donkeycrats.

They're all a bunch of asses, in other words.

I am going to borrow this when I volunteer for citizenship pledging or ceremony places.

I still have "!VIVA BUSH!" decal from volunteering at citizen pledge/ceremony places around 2003*

It is best place to recruit new republican. Sadly dumbocrat booth were about 4-5x busier. :(


* state of CA.

[Bailey Guns]

What do the Dems have to do with this? This is all on the order of Trump.

Yes. Trump was all for this and pushed for it. The NRA is partially to blame for saying the ATF needed to "review" the rules surrounding bump stocks. But to ask what democrats have to do with a bump stock ban just shows you weren't paying attention. Democrats have been all over this and were the first to start calling for the ban on bump stocks. But it isn't accurate to say it's all on democrats, either.

ETA: Democrats have been screaming for a legislative ban on bump stocks. Their argument is an administrative ban can be overturned easily. Ironically, they're right. I'm hopeful this ATF/Trump ban doesn't hold up to judicial review. Everything about it is wrong.

[CS1983]

The mental gymnastics some do to blame "them" is astounding.

Did you not read what I wrote?

Allow me to further clarify: Every republican, democrat, independent, and "libertarian" working for the government as a government employee, writing regulation, "law", etc., are ALL asses.

[Jer]

Did you not read what I wrote?

Allow me to further clarify: Every republican, democrat, independent, and "libertarian" working for the government as a government employee, writing regulation, "law", etc., are ALL asses.

I did and I was agreeing with you. Just another voice of solidarity since sometimes it seems like the sane people are few and far between.

[Gman]

Hey, don't be throwing around that "sane people" label. [werdo]

[Coffee]

[CS1983]

I did and I was agreeing with you. Just another voice of solidarity since sometimes it seems like the sane people are few and far between.

Apologies, I misunderstood your phrasing.

#highCapacityHighFive

[Gman]

I ran across this today:

http://youtu.be/grgfKJT4Z48

[Rooskibar03]

I ran across this today:

http://youtu.be/grgfKJT4Z48

Kinda funny I had similar experience when I tried using mine. Its hard to break habits of trigger control and just let it slap. Never got hang of it, haven't touched it since.

[Skip]

Miculek is a walking bumpstock and should be banned IMHO.

For the children.

[Justin]

Except for the large number of them in the wild, I would like to believe that this change in regulation won't end up being used as further justification.

In a lot of ways, it reminds me of ban on open bolt guns back in the 1980s. Not saying I'm a fan, but on the other hand, that reg hasn't been used as justification for further infringements, and would seem to be a reasonable historical case comparable to the bump stock reg.

[WETWRKS]

Except for the large number of them in the wild, I would like to believe that this change in regulation won't end up being used as further justification.

In a lot of ways, it reminds me of ban on open bolt guns back in the 1980s. Not saying I'm a fan, but on the other hand, that reg hasn't been used as justification for further infringements, and would seem to be a reasonable historical case comparable to the bump stock reg.

Big difference...the open bolt guns were grandfathered

[Eric P]

Try again ATF

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

[buffalobo]

Try again ATF

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

The bump stock ban was developed at the behest of President Trump.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

[RblDiver]

Ninth circuit: No right to carry outside your home.
Sixth circuit: Bump stocks aren't machine guns.

I find it amusing that you can flip 9 to a 6, and these two circuits are giving "flipped" decisions vis a vie gun rights!