*TAKE ACTION* ATF bump stock comment period open.

[Hodgie]

I don't really think the ATF needs an explanation of the operation of a device that they have already thoroughly examined, saw how it operates, and determined that it does not fit the legal definition of "machine gun".

It's crap and they know it. I would bet my bank account they want nothing to do with this however it's what Sessions told them to do on behalf of the President.

I see this ending up in court.

[coppery]

edited comment submitted

By the ATF's own research, and testing, Bump Stocks do not convert semi-auto firearms into full auto firearms. They simply give a mechanical advantage to the user to bump fire the firearm to fire faster. Bump firing can already be done to the same effect, that a Bump Stock helps to facilitate, without using any tools. The appeal of these sort of products is that they do not require much practice, which to individuals who wish to have fun at the range, is very appealing. Regulating such a device, or the action of bump firing, requires a definition of what the rate of fire is when firing a semi-auto firearm. Semi-auto firearms do not have a rate of fire because by definition a semi-auto firearms rate of fire is as fast as an individual can manipulate the trigger. Some individuals are more than capable of firing faster than a bump stock can facilitate. Bump Stocks still require that the trigger be pulled each time a shot is to be fired. It is still a semi-auto action.

There is no rational sense in regulating these devices, or the action of bump firing, as such a decision regulates an action more than it does a device. Bump Stocks have only been used in one crime, to ill effect, and are used daily for recreational purposes where no crime is being committed. It simply is not right to regulate them, and regardless, that power lies with Congress to pass such a regulation into law, not with a government agency to make a decision, when it's own findings do not consider the device to be, or convert a firearm into a machine gun.

Bump firing let alone Bump Stocks do not increase the rate of fire of a semi-auto firearm. There is no rate of fire standard for a semi-auto, because by definition there can't be one. If the firearm does not operate as a machine gun with a single trigger pull resulting in multiple rounds being fired, the firearm is semi-auto, regardless of any mechanical advantage, and therefor legal by every definition, which only Congress has the authority to define. The bump firing, and bump stocks still require that the trigger be pulled each time a shot goes off.

Do not regulate.

Thank you.

[JoeFish32]

Finally, it is reasonable to conclude, based on these interpretations, that the term “machinegun” includes a device that allows a semiautomatic firearm to shoot more than one shot with a single pull of the trigger by harnessing the recoil energy of the semiautomatic firearm to which it is affixed so that the trigger resets and continues firing without additional physical manipulation of the trigger by the shooter. When a shooter who has affixed a bump-stock-type device to a semiautomatic firearm pulls the trigger, that movement initiates a firing sequence that produces more than one shot. And that firing sequence is “automatic” because the device harnesses the firearm's recoil energy in a continuous back-and-forth cycle that allows the shooter to attain continuous firing after a single pull of the trigger, so long as the trigger finger remains stationary on the device's ledge (as designed). Accordingly, these devices are included under the definition of machinegun and, therefore, come within the purview of the NFA.

I wonder if they had personnel attempt to manipulate a "bump stock type device equipped" firearm one handed based on this "reasoning".

Obviously this reinterpretation is a huge stretch to begin with but there are numerous contradictions throughout the text that make it hard to believe anyone put actual effort into this.

[jthrelf]

What the hell, I wrote up a nice comment and then got an error saying the comment period has closed. Guess I'll try again later.

[wanneroo]

A great article detailing the reasons this should be fought for those pondering their comments and what to write:

https://www.americanthinker.com/arti...mp_stocks.html

[Spirit of 76]

Face 10 Years In Prison If You Don’t Surrender Your Bump Stock in 90 Days
by S.H. BLANNELBERRY on MARCH 28, 2018

https://www.gunsamerica.com/blog/10-...comment-178280

[Spirit of 76]

In a truly free natural rights environment, there would be no NFA, no GCA, nor any other infringement!!

[Spirit of 76]

Regulating Your Rights Away Banning Bump Stock-Like Devices -- Jeff Sessions = Man of Action

Investigating HRC, U1, Clinton Foundation, CGI, IRS/Lois Lerner, Fast and Furious, Obama FISA Violations -- Jeff Sessions = Sleepy Sessions

[Bang]

Trump has said he will do away with bump stocks himself..a la Pen and Phone Obummer-style.

Trump-appointed Jeff Sessions favors Australian-type confiscation and destruction.

The NRA in the past has been accused of not giving one inch. Inches matter. They become feet, yards, acres and miles...of tricks to accomplish the unspoken.

[wanneroo]

Trump has said he will do away with bump stocks himself..a la Pen and Phone Obummer-style.

Trump-appointed Jeff Sessions favors Australian-type confiscation and destruction.

The NRA in the past has been accused of not giving one inch. Inches matter. They become feet, yards, acres and miles...of tricks to accomplish the unspoken.

The NRA is foolishly throwing us under the bus right now with this, LaPierre just said the other day they are standing tough on the 2nd but not on the bumpstocks, yet is content to let this unconstitutional rule slide through seemingly not realizing how exposed we will all be in years to come.