Official ATF Notice of Proposed Rulemaking For Bump Stocks - OP Update

Discussion in 'National Laws, Bills and Politics' started by moe mensale, Mar 26, 2018.

  1. moe mensale

    moe mensale Well-Known Member

    5,287
    341
    83
    UPDATE - The NPRM for Bump-Stock-Type Devices was published in the Federal Register today, March 29, 2018. The comment period ends on June 27, 2018. Remember that all comments must reference "Docket Number ATF 2017R-22.

    https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2018/03/29/2018-06292/bump-stock-type-devices

    ATF continues to screw around with us. This is now the correct link and the 35K comments submitted for the original Dec/Jan NPRM have been dismissed. I'll be re-submitting my original comments in addition to a new comment.

    https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=ATF-2018-0002-0001


    **********************************************************

    The anticipated ATF Notice of Proposed Rulemaking for bump stocks hasn't been published in the Federal Register yet but it's available on the Dept of Justice website. I have no comments on it as I haven't read it all yet. It's 55 pages.

    https://www.justice.gov/file/1046006/download
     
    Last edited: Apr 2, 2018
  2. rmodel65

    rmodel65 Yukon Cornelius

    So no adding them to the registry you have to turn them in and might get 99-200$ for them
     

  3. gunsmoker

    gunsmoker Lawyer and Gun Activist

    24,335
    118
    63
    The comment period isn't open yet, but this notice is full of information about what the Trump administration proposes to do (basically the same thing as the Obama administration before it), and why. The BATF goes into a lot of detail about the history of bump stocks, sales over the last 10 years, prices in the past, present, and future, etc. This is like a market analysis report on bump stocks.

    Here's where I think ATF / Trump is right:

    -- Bump stocks are like machineguns (or machinegun conversion kits) by the spirit of the law, even if they don't fit the exact letter of the law as the "single function if the trigger" language was written in 1934. Congress intended to ban automatic fire with that type of high number of rounds-per-minute without banning ordinary and commonly-owned types of guns, which certainly included semi-autos, even back then.

    -- Bump stocks ARE an unusual thing, not commonly owned, not normally associated with sporting or defensive use of firearms in America, and not something that most gun owners in the USA are interested in.

    -- Bump stocks, combined with the easy availability of semi-auto guns that use 30, 50, 90, and even 100+ round magazines or drums REALLY DO MAKE SUCH GUNS ideal for mass-shootings in crowded public places. The Las Vegas / Mandalay Bay massacre showed that to the rest of the world, but anybody who know how guns work can easily see why terrorists and madmen would love to have an AR with a bump stock and some high capacity magazines.


    ** HERE'S WHERE I THINK TRUMP / ATF IS WRONG **

    -- For any gun that has a trigger, as triggers were known and envisioned by Congress in the 1930s, the only acceptable definition of a "machinegun" is the one that Congress itself created. There is no wriggle room to expand it, and no vagueness that a federal agency can clarify through administrative rulemaking. Single function of the trigger means the trigger is pushed rearward with physical force. The trigger is a lever. When the lever is moved from one position to another across its full range of motion, that's a single function of it.

    Therefore, bump fire stocks CANNOT be classified as "machineguns" because the user's finger manually shoves the lever from one position to another each and every time the gun shoots. If the trigger (lever) is not pushed mechanically, the gun will not shoot, and if it is already in a firing sequence, it will stop firing after that one shot when the trigger is released.

    -- The fact that the shooter's finger presses the trigger at a very high rate, faster than the human brain and nerves and muscles can make this movement a voluntary and deliberate motion for each shot, is IMMATERIAL. Congress did not say that "single function of the trigger" means that the human finger muscles must be contracted and then allowed to relax (or reverse direction) in between each shot.


    THEREFORE, ATF lacks the authority to ban bump stocks.
    ATF also lacks authority to ban the Akins Accellerator spring-assisted bump fire stock. The federal courts got that case wrong; the government's executive branch does not have the authority to ban guns based on their rate of fire when a shooter's trigger finger is what shoves the trigger lever back for each and every shot in the series.

    The wrongfulness of the Akins Accellerator case should not be used to justify ATF taking an illegal action now that usurps the power of the legislative branch of government.

    CONCLUSION:
    Congress made the law. The law appears to be outdated in light of new trigger-manipulation systems such as bump-fire or slide-fire stocks. Congress should amend the law to address this new technology, and in doing so Congress, not some un-elected bureaucrats, will either be in tune with the will of the people or they will lose their jobs at the next election. Policy choices about the balancing of interests (such as liberty vs. safety) and respecting Americans' long-held traditions (including gun ownership, and our Second Amendment rights) should come from the legislative branch, with the judicial branch ready to step in if due process is not followed or if constitutional rights are being violated by a particular law. The executive branch does not and should not make public policy choices on purely domestic matters of crime control or regulating interstate commerce. If bump-fire stocks on AR-15's and AK-47's are really a new type of machinegun, let Congress amend the National Firearms Act to cover them.
     
  4. Craftsman

    Craftsman Well-Known Member

    2,548
    89
    48
    They might make a case in that the finger is mechanically assisted (in the reset motion at least) via the bump stop. Imagine a small robotic glove that moved your finger without touching the trigger at a very high rate of fire. Sort of a high-tech gat crank with your finger as the element contacting the trigger. They could make a case that the intent of the law was an unassisted trigger pull is required. The good news is that such a ruling would be VERY narrow and only apply to external trigger assist devices. I actually hope that is the case. I do not want the "speeds up shooting" definition to prevail.
     
  5. xd45packer

    xd45packer Member

    52
    3
    8
    Or they could admit that the 1932 National Firearms Act was unconstitutional and repeal it, you know, like they really ought to.
     
    Phil1979 likes this.
  6. moe mensale

    moe mensale Well-Known Member

    5,287
    341
    83
    I think you mean the 1934 NFA.
     
  7. Mazdarati

    Mazdarati New Member

    14
    5
    3
    From what I have read. They will make bump stocks contraband. No grandfather, No compensation. You will have to destroy them or face arrest. This MUST be fought! If you buy something legally, the Government can not make you a criminal on a legal whim.
     
  8. Mrs_Esterhouse

    Mrs_Esterhouse Swollen Member

    11,007
    239
    63
    [​IMG]
     
  9. xd45packer

    xd45packer Member

    52
    3
    8
    Yeah, that one.
     
  10. moe mensale

    moe mensale Well-Known Member

    5,287
    341
    83
    The NPRM was officially published today in the Federal Register. See the OP for link.
     
  11. Mazdarati

    Mazdarati New Member

    14
    5
    3
  12. Nemo

    Nemo Man of Myth and Legend

    7,678
    152
    63
    Its the govt. They can do anything.

    Nemo
     
  13. a_springfield

    a_springfield Well-Known Member

    3,089
    70
    48
    The very last sentence in section V. Owners are to despose of their stocks that they legally purchased based on the atfs own ruling.

    They obviously don't know how a bump stock works.
    "Instead, bump firing without an assistive device requires the shooter to exert pressure with the trigger finger to re-engage the trigger for each round fired. The bump-stock-type devices described above, however, satisfy the definition."
    Don't you have to keep pressure forward with the off hand for the thing to work
     
  14. gunsmoker

    gunsmoker Lawyer and Gun Activist

    24,335
    118
    63
    the gov't can ban something and declare it contraband without any grandfather clause, although I think this is a more solid proposition when the new new law is statutory made by a legislstive body rather than admin. law created by an agency's rule.

    Consider how many "designer drugs" made to mimic the pharmacology and effects of illegal street drugs were invented by creative drug labs, and how the government responded with new bans on those new substances.
     
  15. Wegahe

    Wegahe NRA Instructor

    1,552
    109
    63
    I can't seem to find the Amendment that protects the right of the people to designer drugs? If you can tell me which one it is so I can compare it to the Second Amendment this would help considerable. then there's that pesky expost facto clause in there somewhere.
     
  16. gunsmoker

    gunsmoker Lawyer and Gun Activist

    24,335
    118
    63
    show me a grandfather clause in the 2A.

    If you cant do that, YOU tell ME what part of the constitution, federal statutory law, caselaw, or common law, says the gov't must let you keep owning stuff that they make illegal.
     
  17. moe mensale

    moe mensale Well-Known Member

    5,287
    341
    83
    "...shall not be infringed."
     
  18. gunsmoker

    gunsmoker Lawyer and Gun Activist

    24,335
    118
    63
    are you really that atupid, or just trolling?
     
  19. moe mensale

    moe mensale Well-Known Member

    5,287
    341
    83


    I just noticed that they're including the 35K+ comments received on the original NPRM in this one.
     
  20. moe mensale

    moe mensale Well-Known Member

    5,287
    341
    83
    What? You're not going to include something about me wanting to kill everything in sight? Troll this.