Oct 12, 2017 BATF letter saying Bump socks isn't a machine gun

[Ricochet]

But then they gave them an instruction manual on how to ban them, and encouraged them to do so.

True.
But Id love to see they wrangle the wording for the proposed ban.
All these triggers do is make your finger operate the trigger faster.
Just seems like that's something almost impossible to legislate.
But hey, Im sure the antigun crowd will give it their best.

[tacticalreload]

True.
But Id love to see they wrangle the wording for the proposed ban.
All these triggers do is make your finger operate the trigger faster.
Just seems like that's something almost impossible to legislate.
But hey, Im sure the antigun crowd will give it their best.

There is NOTHING that is impossible to legislate when politicians try hard enough... it just means that the end result is that much more vague and shitty.

[Bang]

Looks like Massachusetts has it figured out. 18 months to life.

I am assuming the 18 months will be for possession of, or attempt to obtain, a bump fire type stock after a certain date, and life will attach to homicide(s) committed with one.

Irony may be noted by inference that murdering with a bump stock equipped gun is worse than murdering by other means. I suppose life will be reserved for multiple deaths. Not to be outdone, Ohio and Illinois are reportedly working up similar formulas to save its citizens from harm.

There is a common thread running through social oppression under which we have all come to be subjected. Fun and enjoyment are not valid reasons for owning and using anything.

[c45man]

There is NOTHING that is impossible to legislate when politicians try hard enough... it just means that the end result is that much more vague and shitty.

There is not enough politicians that will try that hard to come to a common ground. Each has their own agenda with varying degrees of restrictions that would go far beyond the bump fire devices. The gun control issue has been a poison pill for the democrats dating back to the 1968 gun control act. Under Obama, it was a democrat controlled senate that failed to get the required 60 votes to pass universal gun registration that the administration thought would be a slam dunk being they removed legislation regarding the banning of AR15/AK47 platforms along with magazine capacity restrictions. Who could forget the looks on the faces of Obama and little Joey the morning after their stinging defeat.

[tacticalreload]

There is not enough politicians that will try that hard to come to a common ground. Each has their own agenda with varying degrees of restrictions that would go far beyond the bump fire devices. The gun control issue has been a poison pill for the democrats dating back to the 1968 gun control act. Under Obama, it was a democrat controlled senate that failed to get the required 60 votes to pass universal gun registration that the administration thought would be a slam dunk being they removed legislation regarding the banning of AR15/AK47 platforms along with magazine capacity restrictions. Who could forget the looks on the faces of Obama and little Joey the morning after their stinging defeat.

I get that and I certainly don't agree. However, mass complacency is what fostered an environment where a bipartisan-supported, Republican-introduced bill like HR 3999 could gain the kind of traction that it has. I'm just as guilty of sitting back and saying "never going to happen" as the next guy is, but that's when you get blind-sided. During the Obama years, it seemed like we were all unified and on guard. Now most of the people are just sitting back and waiting for a bunch of pro-gun legislation like it was a done deal and the NRA is putting out stupid shit statements like they did and a dozen supposedly pro-gun Republicans are cosponsoring a horrifically worded gun control bill... and we're suddenly all scratching our heads, asking where our non-NFA suppressors are and why we don't have national reciprocity yet.

[c45man]

I get that and I certainly don't agree. However, mass complacency is what fostered an environment where a bipartisan-supported, Republican-introduced bill like HR 3999 could gain the kind of traction that it has. I'm just as guilty of sitting back and saying "never going to happen" as the next guy is, but that's when you get blind-sided. During the Obama years, it seemed like we were all unified and on guard. Now most of the people are just sitting back and waiting for a bunch of pro-gun legislation like it was a done deal and the NRA is putting out stupid shit statements like they did and a dozen supposedly pro-gun Republicans are cosponsoring a horrifically worded gun control bill... and we're suddenly all scratching our heads, asking where our non-NFA suppressors are and why we don't have national reciprocity yet.

Your right tactical, but do not think we are the only side of the issue with problems. Firearm ownership has become mainstream in the last number of years, which despite the rhetoric, the politicians are quietly considering the potential consequences for their actions. The antis have not been able to "strike while the fire is hot." There is so much going on today in controversies and issues that the Vegas incident in taking more of a back seat. Tax Reform, the CA fires, the justice department looking more closely at the Hillary uranium deal with the Russians are and will take more of a center stage.

The antis/democrats do not control the agenda of the Congress. The holiday break is about 6 weeks away and they (the antis) better get something on the legislative agenda quickly. Consider Columbine. There was a long period of time between the incident and the taking of the votes. This during a time when the senate was controlled by the democrats. If I was an anti, I would be disgusted with my breed in the senate for dragging their feet regarding that issue. Again, their was such a fury of gun control legislation being talked about, but no consistent language in their proposals as to what and what was not going to be included. In the end, they could not even get a truly watered down version through a legislative body they controlled.

Pro gun advocates don't get overly involved until the legislative vote schedule is affirmed. Then there is a crap storm from all types of communications that hit the congress from our side. I have seen this trend during many administrations and legislative assaults attempted on our second amendment rights. And this during a time when gun ownership was not near what it is today.

[OF&U]

Look carefully at the letterhead. Looks like an Obama era lobbying group.

https://www.atfassociation.org/


The ATF Association (ATFA) was established in 2007. Its purpose is to bring together former and current ATF colleagues for fellowship and friendship, assist with post-ATF career planning and development, and to provide support in a time of need. In honor of the many ATF employees that have died or sustained serious injuries in fulfilling the ATF mission, the Association is committed to the support of members of the ATF Family who have experienced severe trauma or financial need and to keep the memory of those who have made the ultimate sacrifice forever in our consciousness.

Members of the Association include Special Agents, Industry Operations Inspectors and Investigators, Explosive Enforcement Officers, Chemists, Scientists, Attorneys and other personnel who supported the ATF mission.

This does reveal the underlying threat of what the left wants to do. As the letter says, now, the definition of a machine gun is purely mechanical. What they want to do is shift the definition of "too evil" to be a rate of fire. That will be the irreversible step over the cliffs edge onto the slippery slope which will allow them to ban ALL firearms.

Today, the arbritrary evil number will be 400 rounds per minute. People will still get killed, so let's make a new law declaring 120 RPM to be too evil. Pretty much anyone can do that with pretty much any semiauto, or even a revolver. People will still get killed when only muzzleloaders exist, so 2 RPM will still be too evil. Never underestimate their true intentions, they will never stop until either they ban them all, or WE stop them.

[Justin///M]

Look carefully at the letterhead. Looks like an Obama era lobbying group.

https://www.atfassociation.org/


The ATF Association (ATFA) was established in 2007. Its purpose is to bring together former and current ATF colleagues for fellowship and friendship, assist with post-ATF career planning and development, and to provide support in a time of need. In honor of the many ATF employees that have died or sustained serious injuries in fulfilling the ATF mission, the Association is committed to the support of members of the ATF Family who have experienced severe trauma or financial need and to keep the memory of those who have made the ultimate sacrifice forever in our consciousness.

Members of the Association include Special Agents, Industry Operations Inspectors and Investigators, Explosive Enforcement Officers, Chemists, Scientists, Attorneys and other personnel who supported the ATF mission.

This does reveal the underlying threat of what the left wants to do. As the letter says, now, the definition of a machine gun is purely mechanical. What they want to do is shift the definition of "too evil" to be a rate of fire. That will be the irreversible step over the cliffs edge onto the slippery slope which will allow them to ban ALL firearms.

Today, the arbritrary evil number will be 400 rounds per minute. People will still get killed, so let's make a new law declaring 120 RPM to be too evil. Pretty much anyone can do that with pretty much any semiauto, or even a revolver. People will still get killed when only muzzleloaders exist, so 2 RPM will still be too evil. Never underestimate their true intentions, they will never stop until either they ban them all, or WE stop them.

Nice catch. I think you're right.

[JenniferG]

I get that and I certainly don't agree. However, mass complacency is what fostered an environment where a bipartisan-supported, Republican-introduced bill like HR 3999 could gain the kind of traction that it has. I'm just as guilty of sitting back and saying "never going to happen" as the next guy is, but that's when you get blind-sided. During the Obama years, it seemed like we were all unified and on guard. Now most of the people are just sitting back and waiting for a bunch of pro-gun legislation like it was a done deal and the NRA is putting out stupid shit statements like they did and a dozen supposedly pro-gun Republicans are cosponsoring a horrifically worded gun control bill... and we're suddenly all scratching our heads, asking where our non-NFA suppressors are and why we don't have national reciprocity yet.

I guess some are really embarrassed. The NRA knew that the ATF couldn't regulate these devices and made them throw the ball over to Congress where little action is likely to occur. It's a shame that there are those in the community that complain and complain but really have no idea what they are complaining about. Keyboard commandos are just that and that's good enough for me. As long as it keeps them from becoming actual spokespersons or someone important they should get their face paint on and give that key board all hell.

[tacticalreload]

I guess some are really embarrassed. The NRA knew that the ATF couldn't regulate these devices and made them throw the ball over to Congress where little action is likely to occur. It's a shame that there are those in the community that complain and complain but really have no idea what they are complaining about. Keyboard commandos are just that and that's good enough for me. As long as it keeps them from becoming actual spokespersons or someone important they should get their face paint on and give that key board all hell.

Aye... some should be embarrassed. I, for one, certainly am not embarrassed of my current opinion of the NRA's statement. You keep swooping in to comment passive-aggressively about things that I say by vaguely referring to "some people". If you want to call me out as ignorant, do it directly. You're an NRA apologist, and anyone who does not hold them accountable for the missteps that they make get the NRA that they deserve. You'd have to be blind to not see the damage that was done mere moments after the NRA released their statement... NEVER UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES do I want a gun-rights lobbying organization to utter the words "should be subject to additional regulations". I don't care one iota about what kind of complicated political games you or anyone else think they were playing behind the scenes. Marion Hammer's statement made it clear... the NRA doesn't consider full auto firearms as a cause they care about, and they flat out WANT the ATF to make some kind of bureaucratic judgment call with yet another highly dangerous "determination letter" to kill off things that supposedly "skirt the NFA".

So initially when the statement came out, the apologists said that the NRA was just trying to keep it out of the hands of congress by pointing toward the NRA. Now that Congress has taken action, you're suggesting that they were throwing it to the ATF who would then through it to Congress? What exactly are you saying that they did that was beneficial then? First of all, I have yet to see anywhere where there is proof that the ATF has "thrown the ball over to Congress". As OF&U points out above, this isn't an official ATF determination letter. It's some private club of former ATF agents, attorneys, and seemingly anyone else who feels like joining and paying the fee. Plus this "letter" was drafted AFTER HR 3999 was introduced. Therefore, not only does it have nothing to do with the actual ATF, but it had no effect on the introduction of HR 3999 (by a REPUBLICAN who received an endorsement and A rating from the NRA, which I was able to look up on the NRA website because I am currently and have been a member for over TWO DECADES).

If you're cool with that, fine. We don't all have to agree about where we draw the line. However, I happen to draw mine in the side of not giving an inch... not now, not ever. As such, I do not feel good about donating money to organizations that do not represent my personal feelings. If you're good with it because you think that the ends justify the means (even if (1) the means is damaging and (2) there is no proof that the NRA has had anything to do with positively affecting the flow of these occurrences), then by all means keep supporting them. However, your demeaning and insulting attitude toward good folks who are passionately of the belief that "shall not be infringed" is the driving paradigm behind all their pro-gun stances by implying that they are somehow too stupid to understand the way the world really works or that they are too committed or doctrinaire to their cause... well, quite frankly I just can't support that kind of opinion. In this case, you and James Yeager share the same opinion, and that tells me all I need to know about what side of the argument I want to be on.