# Feedback to ATF about Bump Stocks



## RedLion (Sep 23, 2015)

I received the following email alert from GOA (do not get the same from the NRA) regarding Bump Stocks and giving the ATF feedback asap.

Not as long as it looks but a worthy read about the consequences of sitting idle and how to give the ATF feedback. Get off your duffers and give them a piece of your mind! :tango_face_wink:



> There is now less than two weeks left to comment on ATF's proposed regulations ban on bump stocks and semi-autos.
> 
> For starters, the proposed regulations would ban bump stocks outright -- and turn gun owners who fail to comply as instant felons.
> 
> ...


Link to GOA cut and paste response if you choose to use that.....

https://www.gunowners.org/take-action-tell-the-atf-to-not-regulate-bump-stocks.htm?src=alert061218

Link to ATF to give your feedback.....

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


----------



## Kauboy (May 12, 2014)

Done!



> I am wholly and completely opposed to any ban or limitation on "bump stocks".
> As I understand the current musings about a potential ban, such action would be invoked by defining a "bump stock" as a "machine gun" as regulated under the NFA.
> However, to do so would be ignorant at best, and unabashedly dishonest at worst. The reason is, a "machine gun" has been defined as being capable of firing more than one round with ONE pull of the trigger. When a "bump stock" is used, the gun fires only ONE round for each ONE pull of the trigger. The firearm is still functioning exactly like all other semi-automatic firearms. One trigger pull, one round. The "bump" allowed by a "bump stock" only manipulates the firearm to allow a faster follow-up trigger pull.
> This misconstruing of repeated trigger pull speed somehow equating to the definition of a "machine gun" is erroneous and dangerous. The error was described above. No more than ONE round is fired when the trigger is pulled. By legal definition, this CANNOT be considered the function of a "machine gun".
> ...


But why didn't I get this alert?
I signed up with GOA the same day I joined the NRA.
What kinda special list are you on, Red?


----------



## Denton (Sep 18, 2012)

"The notion of a federal agency in any way restricting our God-given right to keep and bear arms would be repugnant to the founding fathers and is a violation of the 2nd amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Obviously, I am against banning the "bump stock" or any other weapon or accouterment to any weapon."

I'm sure they don't care about my opinion, but the submit button was hit.


----------



## sideKahr (Oct 15, 2014)

Thanks, RedLion, I didn't get that notification either.

"Dear Sir:

I am opposed to the banning of 'bump stocks'. I have seen the same action performed with a rubber band, or with a hand braced inside a trouser belt. Banning bump stocks is a useless additional law to the already burdensome thousands of gun laws in existence. Enough is enough.

Thank you for your time."


----------



## Camel923 (Aug 13, 2014)

From a pure shal not be infringed point of view I should be able to buy a machine gun, LAW or stinger over the counter at wall mart. Small arms that your typical modern milita or regular infantry company may require for the battlefield. That was part of the original pirpose of the amendment.


----------



## sideKahr (Oct 15, 2014)

To anyone who intends to comment to the ATF, feel free to use this. I forgot to mention it in my comment:

"The ATF should stop putting more gun laws on the books, and start thinking about removing some. Start with the disrespectfully long waiting period for obtaining sound suppressors. A 'silencer' doesn't silence a gun report, and it is not a dangerous weapon."


----------



## MikeTango (Apr 13, 2018)

The other day I watched a news segment about a new scam. The particular scam isn’t important but several of the techniques the scammers used are interesting and relevant; The scammers were able to divert or block emails from specific recipients. They were also able to divert or block phone calls and delete voice mail. 

If the left were to obtain a list of our email addresses from this message board, they could block emails from organizations such as the NRA, GOA, USCCA, etc.. And who knows what else they could do...

Stay alert, be vigilant, anything is possible!




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## SGT E (Feb 25, 2015)

Did this a while back...both companies that make bump stocks shut down a couple weeks ago.


----------



## Chipper (Dec 22, 2012)

Two words, 3D printer. 

Aren't guns already illegal in Chicago. But look at all the shootings, just sayin.


----------



## RedLion (Sep 23, 2015)

SGT E said:


> Did this a while back...both companies that make bump stocks shut down a couple weeks ago.


Yep, but at least one of them is suing the ATF/Feg Govt.


----------



## RedLion (Sep 23, 2015)

Kauboy said:


> Done!
> 
> But why didn't I get this alert?
> I signed up with GOA the same day I joined the NRA.
> What kinda special list are you on, Red?


I am certainly nobody special. I do respond to GOA email requests fairly often, so maybe that marks you?


----------



## RedLion (Sep 23, 2015)

> 923-Page Opposition to ATF "Bump-Stock" Ban Filed


923-Page Opposition to ATF ?Bump-Stock? Ban Filed - The Gun Feed


----------



## RedLion (Sep 23, 2015)

> Trump's proposed bump stock ban draws 97,000 comments weighing gun rights against fears of violence


https://www.dallasnews.com/news/politics/2018/06/28/nearly-90000-comment-bump-stock-ban


----------



## RJAMES (Dec 23, 2016)

i submitted comments in support of any device that increases the rate of fire for a semi auto to e made illegal months ago and encouraged everyone I know to do the same.


----------



## Coastie dad (Jan 2, 2016)

I wouldn't have expected any less of you...


----------



## RedLion (Sep 23, 2015)

It looks like the commie feds are looking to pull the trigger on banning bump stocks.



> It appears that the Department of Justice is about to ban bump stocks. I say about to because the Final Action is slated for the imaginary date of 12/00/2018. The new rule:
> 
> This rule is intended to clarify that the statutory definition of machinegun includes certain devices (i.e., bump-stock-type devices) that, when affixed to a firearm, allow that firearm to fire automatically with a single function of the trigger, such that they are subject to regulation under the National Firearms Act (NFA) and the Gun Control Act (GCA). The rule will amend 27 CFR 447.11, 478.11, and 479.11 to clarify that bump-stock-type devices are machineguns as defined by the NFA and GCA because such devices allow a shooter of a semiautomatic firearm to initiate a continuous firing cycle with a single pull of the trigger. Specifically, these devices convert an otherwise semiautomatic firearm into a machinegun by functioning as a self-acting or self-regulating mechanism that harnesses the recoil energy of the semiautomatic firearm in a manner that allows the trigger to reset and continue firing without additional physical manipulation of the trigger by the shooter.


SayUncle » And like that, thousands of people are felons


----------



## Kauboy (May 12, 2014)

RedLion said:


> It looks like the commie feds are looking to pull the trigger on banning bump stocks.
> 
> SayUncle » And like that, thousands of people are felons


The fact that they are adding "regulatory" language to their interpretation of the law is not much at issue, constitutionally speaking. They also aren't writing law. While the idea may fly in the face of the constitution's "ex-post facto" stipulation, that stipulation is only written to explicitly apply to "law"

Now... the fact that they are claiming authority to actually CHANGE THE LANGUAGE OF THE DEFINITION OF MACHINEGUN.... that is a YUGE no no. That steps beyond regulatory clarification, and seeks to alter literal written law. Only congress may change the language of a definition congress wrote.
Thankfully, by doing this, they seal their fate. This will NEVER pass constitutional muster. Any court worth its salt will slap this down.

Maybe that was the plan all along... 

"Look folks, we tried. Congress wasn't going to do it, and now our other method has been ruled unconstitutional. What more can we do? Sorry, bump stock are still legal."

Trump has been accused of playing 3-dimensional chess before, but if he planned something like that, he's certifiably ingeniously insane.
Maybe that's too much credit.


----------

