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

[Didnotcomply89]

It's a life and death situation. On the face it seems like they are going after bump stocks- but they are going after any device that 'increases the rate of fire' of a semi-automatic. It opens the backdoor for a later anti-gun appointee to institute a blanket gun ban, all thanks to the National Rifle Association.

There's this pesky little thing called the Hughes Act. They can't just change their mind on what makes a firearm a machine gun.

Since WHEN has the government NOT been 'above the law' and done what they please?

IMHO Trump needs to shut this shit down RFN.

The fact that the ATF is doing this is evidence that he was full of shit talking at the last NRA meeting.

and the NRA is one entity behind all this.

Correct.

I just finished listening to MAC chat and I do not think I have ever been this pissed off over so many things at one.

Oh that began for me when Trump's cronies issued a notice against the parent company of Tula.

[Emptymag]

The link is working - I sent my comment.

I did a copy/paste of some of the text on the GOA page (the grey text) that mentions the specific definition of a "machinegun", trigger operation, etc, and then added my own comments to the bottom.

Regarding the attempted regulation of devices that "increase a firearm's rate of fire"...

Federal law says, in part, that a machine gun is a weapon that can fire “automatically more than one shot ... by a single function of the trigger.” The definition includes “...any part designed and intended solely and exclusively ... for use in converting a weapon into a machinegun...” (26 U.S.C. 5845(b))

According to this definition, a “bump stock” does not fall within this definition.

With a “bump stock,” each and every round is discharged as the result of an independent pull of the trigger. So it is simply untrue that the “bump stock” assists the discharge of more than one round “by a single function of the trigger” -- no matter how fast the gun discharges rounds.

One pull, one discharge. This is the classic textbook definition of a SEMI-automatic firearm.

The ATF has already approved "bump stocks" as they do not violate the law, so why are we having to write to tell you what you already know?

The pandora's box that would be opened by changing your stance is frightening at least, and unconstitutional at worst. You would be crating a vague and undefinable "definition" of methods, and simple upgrades that could then be viewed as breaking the law.

I hope you will consider the far reaching impact of the proposed changes and see that none of this is necessary. "Bump stocks" are not a menace to society and no amount of anti-gun political grandstanding changes that fact.

I implore you to stand as Americans, and not against one of the most basic, and important rights afforded to Americans - the right to keep and bear arms.

Sincerely,
Emptymag

[Hodgie]

Since the MAC chat went live last night the number of comments went from well below 4000 to just over 7100 as of now. Just think of all the other large Youtube gun channels and message forums would have pushed this as hard as they could. It would be just like the 300k plus that were sent when the M855 ban was being discussed.

[JoeFish32]

Commented, 71,xxx at the time it posted.

[Hodgie]

Comments end tomorrow 1/25 so get them in while you can.

[Qind]

Come on guys make a stand, this is NOT just about the stocks. Just posted my thoughts on this obvious attempt to further erode our rights for semi autos. Don't sit by and watch it unfold.

[steve_010]

Commented!

[Qtrborecrazy]

Left my comments

[Ricochet]

Talked to my neighbor who is former USMC Infantryman about this.
He wasnt even aware that this was going on.
Said he would leave a comment too.

[flygrimm]

They're close to 72000 comments. When mine finally got posted 2 days ago there were only about 7800 comments. Big jump. I think they are finally catching up after taking a vacation courtesy of congress.

Stuart