ATF Chief warns ban of bump stocks will lead to other bans

[CoGirl303]

http://www.breitbart.com/big-governm...to-other-bans/

Former ATF Gun Tech Chief Rick Vasquez warns that the ATF’s current push to ban bump stocks will open the door to other bans.

A legislative push to ban bump stocks lost steam within a month of the October 1, 2017, Las Vegas attack. The public simply did not rally behind the gun control campaign. This left the ruling class no option but to take the regulatory route and seek bump stock gun control via ATF edict.

On December 22, 2017, Breitbart News reported that the ATF was formulating a redefinition of “machineguns” so that the term would cover “machineguns” and non-machineguns as well. Gun controllers have to do this because a bump stock does not convert a semiautomatic firearm into a “machinegun.” Rather, it allows a semiautomatic firearm to mimic full-auto fire in short bursts, but does so without converting the firearm’s action or allowing multiple rounds to be fired with a single trigger pull.

Even with a bump stock attached a semiautomatic firearm only shoots one round per trigger pull.

Moreover, under Barack Obama the ATF examined bump stocks and approved them for sale on the grounds that they are accessories, not conversion devices.

The ATF’s former gun tech chief is warning that efforts to redefine “machineguns,” for the the purposes of banning bump stocks, will only lead to more bans. He told the Military Arms Channel, “So ATF’s been directed to write a regulation with the strength of a law.” He said the advance notice copy of the new rule makes clear that the ATF’s new regulation will ban “any device that automatically resets a firearm and enhances the rate of fire.” He added, “That is extremely broad.”

Vasquez observed, “They are trying to target binary triggers, [bump stock] devices, and other devices, but that is such broad language, can I take that to a Gatling gun? …So now you start stretching this [new] definition, and who is going to decide what the [standard] rate of fire is?” In other words, Vasquez is saying a this new ban simply opens the door to “stretching” the language to cover other devices, as the ruling class sees fit.
On January 11, 2018, Breitbart News reported that Gun Owners of America was taking the lead against bump stock gun control and sounding the alarm that the ATF’s bump stock ban would lead to other bans. They reacted to Vasquez’s statements by tweeting:



Vasquez also stressed that there will be no “grandfather clause” with a new ATF bump stock ban. This means individuals who refuse to turn over a bump stocks will immediately become a “prohibited person.”

This doesn't sound good at all. They're going after bump stocks and trigger systems AND seeking to redefine entirely what a machine gun is.

What is a prohibited person? What is that? and how do they know if you have one or not? How do they know it didn't break? Get lost? stolen?

[Eric P]

Time for Trump to end this rule making through executive authority he has over executive branches.

[Wolfshoon]

I'll be more interested when the Current BATFE chief says this, this guy is not in power anymore and this is his rhetoric.

I truly wish the atf would get its hand slapped off for essentially passing law without any say from congress and the president, who is supposed to make the laws of the land. Homeland security at the airports is almost as bad with it's over reach of power.

[pickenup]

It can't get that bad.....can it?

I mean the ATF once ruled that a "SHOESTRING" is a machine gun.
Yes, a 14 inch piece of string, used to lace up your boots or tennies.

[DOC]

They need to open up the machine gun registry.

[Skip]

They need to open up the machine gun registry.

Will we make the same plea when they ban semi-autos?

That's where this is all going. If they can define a non-machine gun as a machine gun there is no end.

But, as I've posted elsewhere, giving people the power to decide dangerous and unusual absent any objective tests (Miller) is a big problem. Even bolt guns could some day be in jeopardy.

Heard the one about guns only being legal for hunting and should be stored at the nearest LE facility? Yup. "We aren't taking your guns."

[CoGirl303]

Heard the one about guns only being legal for hunting and should be stored at the nearest LE facility? Yup. "We aren't taking your guns."

that's exactly what is done in Germany. You can own firearms but not posses any firearms in your home.

They must be stored and kept at a hunting club, hunting lodge or hunting resort and checked out and then returned at the conclusion of the hunt.

It's absurd.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Great-Kazoo]

I'll be more interested when the Current BATFE chief says this, this guy is not in power anymore and this is his rhetoric.

.

Same tactic the left of center uses on a daily basis. Until there is a clear explanation how the chain of command works, And like the immigration debacle. Congress is suppose to make the laws. Every other agency follows, or suppose to follow. Instead they Interpret, according to their own feelings. Not by law, as it is written.

[Gman]

Instead they Interpret, according to their own feelings. Not by law, as it is written.

They also selectively enforce, ignoring some laws completely. This creates other problems that shouldn't exist based on law.

For example, if they enforced our immigration laws and didn't allow illegal immigration, then we wouldn't have to figure out what to do about children of illegal immigrants born in this country.

[Irving]

that's exactly what is done in Germany. You can own firearms but not posses any firearms in your home.

They must be stored and kept at a hunting club, hunting lodge or hunting resort and checked out and then returned at the conclusion of the hunt.

It's absurd.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Then what keeps other countries from immediately invading them?