Pennsylvania Firearm Owners Association
Page 4 of 8 FirstFirst 12345678 LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 76
  1. #31
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Bala Cynwyd, Pennsylvania
    (Montgomery County)
    Posts
    1,502
    Rep Power
    21474849

    Default Re: ATF asking for public input re bumpfire rules.

    Quote Originally Posted by Williamsmith View Post
    It appears the BATF has already made up their mind as evidenced by the questions they are asking. Are they really so ignorant of how a bump stock operates that they would seriously ask if there is a market for military and law enforcement applications? And are they really asking the public to do their research for them rather than do it themselves? The Agency has already been given the go ahead to interpret the law as Congress created it anyway it wants......which is the real tradegy. I applaud all who take the time to comment. I understand those who don’t. 5hey are going to have to define an unacceptable rate of fire and then start picking apart pieces of plastic and metal to ban for a long time. What a waste of taxpayers money.
    I agree that it seems they have made up their mind. I believe they made up their mind before on M855 though, so it may not yet be inevitable.

    I commented. I don't have a bump stock on any of my rifles, but stand firmly with those who do. I can move my trigger finger pretty darn quickly. Not Jerry Michulek fast, but fast enough. If "we" lose here, my finger may just be the next thing on the ban list.

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    NEPA, Pennsylvania
    (Wyoming County)
    Posts
    2,320
    Rep Power
    21474849

    Default Re: ATF asking for public input re bumpfire rules.

    MAC (Military Arms Channel) is interviewing "former Chief of the Technology Brach at the ATF, Rick Vasquez" on YouTube live feed today at 3pm est. regarding the purposed rule change that we are discussing here.
    "It seems that the Constitution is more or less guidelines than actual rules"
    My feedback: http://forum.pafoa.org/showthread.php?t=305685

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
    (Allegheny County)
    Posts
    33,630
    Rep Power
    21474887

    Default Re: ATF asking for public input re bumpfire rules.

    Quote Originally Posted by ExFlyinguy View Post
    MAC (Military Arms Channel) is interviewing "former Chief of the Technology Brach at the ATF, Rick Vasquez" on YouTube live feed today at 3pm est. regarding the purposed rule change that we are discussing here.

    How does one view that?

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    NEPA, Pennsylvania
    (Wyoming County)
    Posts
    2,320
    Rep Power
    21474849

    Default Re: ATF asking for public input re bumpfire rules.

    Quote Originally Posted by Emptymag View Post
    How does one view that?
    I'll post a link when they go live. Not sure if one needs an account.
    "It seems that the Constitution is more or less guidelines than actual rules"
    My feedback: http://forum.pafoa.org/showthread.php?t=305685

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    NEPA, Pennsylvania
    (Wyoming County)
    Posts
    2,320
    Rep Power
    21474849

    Default Re: ATF taking comments regarding their ability to redefine what is and is not a MG.

    *LIVE NOW*

    If you can't watch it live it should be available later.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IMw0g7m8IVE
    "It seems that the Constitution is more or less guidelines than actual rules"
    My feedback: http://forum.pafoa.org/showthread.php?t=305685

  6. #36
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    On top of a hill, Pennsylvania
    Posts
    9,534
    Rep Power
    21474857

    Default Re: ATF taking comments regarding their ability to redefine what is and is not a MG.

    Thanks for posting it, I’m going to have to tune in after it’s done and uploaded to YouTube.

  7. #37
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    NEPA, Pennsylvania
    (Wyoming County)
    Posts
    2,320
    Rep Power
    21474849

    Default Re: ATF taking comments regarding their ability to redefine what is and is not a MG.

    Aside from MAC & GOA urging comments to the ATF, it escapes me as to why they aren't encouraging messages to Trump. IMHO Trump needs to shut this shit down RFN.

    I just wrote to Trump via the White House contact me page :https://www.whitehouse.gov/contact/

    This is what I wrote fwiw: "Mr. President, You ran on a platform of being pro-gun and 2nd Amendment friendly. Right now the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms (BATF) is considering changing the definition of a machine gun to INCLUDE devices previously deemed as lawful devices that did NOT constitute making a machine gun. This agency does NOT have the authority to legislate, or change the definitions that congress has spelled out via the law. Bump firing a semi-automatic firearm does not require a device. Therefore the ATF is attempting to regulate with the same authority as law, something that's as simple as using a technique.

    I urge you and your Attorney General to put a stop to this immediately. Please don't follow in the foot steps of President Obama. Make the members of Congress take this issue on."
    "It seems that the Constitution is more or less guidelines than actual rules"
    My feedback: http://forum.pafoa.org/showthread.php?t=305685

  8. #38
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    On top of a hill, Pennsylvania
    Posts
    9,534
    Rep Power
    21474857

    Default Re: ATF taking comments regarding their ability to redefine what is and is not a MG.

    Quote Originally Posted by ExFlyinguy View Post
    Aside from MAC & GOA urging comments to the ATF, it escapes me as to why they aren't encouraging messages to Trump. IMHO Trump needs to shut this shit down RFN.

    I just wrote to Trump via the White House contact me page :https://www.whitehouse.gov/contact/

    This is what I wrote fwiw: "Mr. President, You ran on a platform of being pro-gun and 2nd Amendment friendly. Right now the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms (BATF) is considering changing the definition of a machine gun to INCLUDE devices previously deemed as lawful devices that did NOT constitute making a machine gun. This agency does NOT have the authority to legislate, or change the definitions that congress has spelled out via the law. Bump firing a semi-automatic firearm does not require a device. Therefore the ATF is attempting to regulate with the same authority as law, something that's as simple as using a technique.

    I urge you and your Attorney General to put a stop to this immediately. Please don't follow in the foot steps of President Obama. Make the members of Congress take this issue on."

    Do you mind if I use most of what you wrote to do the same?

  9. #39
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    On top of a hill, Pennsylvania
    Posts
    9,534
    Rep Power
    21474857

    Default Re: ATF taking comments regarding their ability to redefine what is and is not a MG.

    The live chat is over but the recording has been posted.


  10. #40
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Next to the Corn
    Posts
    3,833
    Rep Power
    21474853

    Default Re: ATF taking comments regarding their ability to redefine what is and is not a MG.

    I'm watching the MAC video with the former ATF guy. It is not sounding good at all.

    You can write Trump if you want. Frankly I don't think he gives two shits. He will swallow whatever BS the NRA tells him and the NRA is one entity behind all this.

Page 4 of 8 FirstFirst 12345678 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Liberals Redefine The Term Mass Shooting...
    By Jhaydeno in forum National
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: December 5th, 2015, 09:37 AM
  2. Ability to own a fire arm
    By zeroflat24 in forum General
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: October 5th, 2012, 11:11 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •