If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership The benefits pay for the membership many times over.
Be sure to enter the NES/MFS May Giveaway ***Canik METE SFX***
And yes let the flaming begin. First post I asked folks to be gently, now I fully expect to get smashed. And I'll say, I in no way compare detachable mags with bump stocks...One can safely shoot their weapon very will with the latter...The Texans (I never shot one because I couldn't) tell me that the former is so counter intuitive to accurate shooting that they just don't consider it safe, even on a range (and they had some big ones!).
Which is probably why Trump and GOP will sacrifice bump stocks to make it look like they are doing "something". Not a ton of gun owners are going to give two sh!+s, except for the hard core Constitutionalists, who on principal alone would be right, but in reality probably won't get the support.
I do have plenty of video contradicting your friends’ assertions. However, idiots of all shapes and sizes are incapable of keeping a simple handgun on the berm at any number of distances. Does that mean the rest of us who can shouldn’t be allowed to shoot handguns?
Not even worth articulating a response past that. Suffice it to say you and your Texan friends are wrong.
I don't give a shit about bumpstocks. I do give a shit about aftermarket triggers, adjustable gas systems, varying weights of buffers, you know, all the things that appear to "increase the rate of fire", like a bumpstock.
Couldn't agree more! All things that are vital to accurate shooting. Which while I agree it's a slippery slope, we need to hope that President Trump is smart enough to understand the different between a match grade trigger and a bump stock. Good luck taking my Mark III with the amazing Volquartsen trigger and other enhancements that make it an amazingly accurate firearm! That said, everything you mention, is about increased accuracy, which in my opinion is increased safety.
Bottom line, isn't the entire idea of being a responsible gun owner at a minimum shooting it safely and accurately? I have no use for accessories that make a firearm less accurate (safe) and fully advocate those that do.
Don't be so short sighted. Don't be such a Tory.
He might be baiting the left like he did during the DACA meeting. Get them to show their complete intentions.
QFT.We have a long standing precedent on states ignoring Fed laws, like weed and illegals, why not get your local politicians to make a sanctuary county for bumpstocks or NFA. I am not trolling, fully serial. Get LE on board with this shit, they swore the oath to constitution too. It won't happen in MA, it may NH, why not set the tone for the rest of the country? NH is a f***ing shining beacon of freedom, you guys want to talk to your local dudes?
I think that this approach is much more manageable. You can probably talk to entire NH town in one day since cows don't vote. Get on the same page, say Constitution is the law of the land, f*** this commie noise. Are you with me?
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Department of Justice formally submitted a regulation on Saturday to ban “bump stocks,” a modification to high-capacity rifles that lets them fire like an automatic weapon.
Trump signed a memorandum in February directing the department to make the regulatory change...
The move does not require congressional approval, allowing the administration to side-step what could have been insurmountable pressure...
I would bet anything that any new gun laws will include national CCW reciprocity!!!
Honestly I'm waiting to see how this plays out.
He's got an end game here and I doubt it's gun control. Re-election isn't even his end game. Doing what's right for America has been his end game all along.
1. Nothing is going to happen.. he is just saying something to shut everyone up
Much wailing and gnashing of teeth over nothing. You guys know the Prez doesn't write law, right? Take a deep breath FFS.
He might be baiting the left.
Anyone have a link to the actual language? Am curious about the legal justification and mechanism they're trying to use to implement said ban, and whether current owners are grandfathered.Justice Department files regulation to ban 'bump stocks'
Bad precedent here. Non-legislative and nothing in return like FOPA/Hughes Amendment.
Anyone have a link to the actual language? Am curious about the legal justification and mechanism they're trying to use to implement said ban, and whether current owners are grandfathered.
Bad move on Trump's part. He should have at least left this in Congress's court, better yet off the table altogether. IMNSHO he never was the perfect candidate, coming from big business, but still better than Hitlery. He's still on the positive side of the ledger to me, but noticeably less so. We'll see what happens come 2020.
While I’m also curious, in the end, it doesn’t change the fact no matter what excuse they use, they have no lawful authority to do so and it’s blatantly unconstitutional. Only congress has authority to pass laws (and regulations are clearly such) and not even they have authority to pass laws restricting people from keeping or bearing arms.
All true, but it appears to be a done deal, at least in term of proposed regulation, so I'm trying to see what the next steps might be, focusing on solutions rather than just the problem. Can it be fought via public comment/review? Might Congress overrule? Can/will it be challenged in court?While I’m also curious, in the end, it doesn’t change the fact no matter what excuse they use, they have no lawful authority to do so and it’s blatantly unconstitutional. Only congress has authority to pass laws (and regulations are clearly such) and not even they have authority to pass laws restricting people from keeping or bearing arms.
All true, but it appears to be a done deal, at least in term of proposed regulation, so I'm trying to see what the next steps might be, focusing on solutions rather than just the problem. Can it be fought via public comment/review? Might Congress overrule? Can/will it be challenged in court?
All true, but it appears to be a done deal, at least in term of proposed regulation, so I'm trying to see what the next steps might be, focusing on solutions rather than just the problem. Can it be fought via public comment/review? Might Congress overrule? Can/will it be challenged in court?
All true, but it appears to be a done deal, at least in term of proposed regulation, so I'm trying to see what the next steps might be, focusing on solutions rather than just the problem. Can it be fought via public comment/review? Might Congress overrule? Can/will it be challenged in court?
The regulation would amend the definition of machine guns in the National Firearms and Gun Control Act to include bump stock-type devices, Mr. Sessions said. The Justice Department said the regulation must undergo review by the federal Office of Management and Budget before it can take effect.
The move comes in the wake of the mass shooting last month at a Florida high school that left 17 people dead. Bump stocks became part of the national conversation over gun control for the first time last year, when the devices were found among the weapons used in the Las Vegas shooting that killed 58 people Oct. 1.
The president has shown interest in a number of other possible changes, including raising the age to buy some guns, which the National Rifle Association opposes, and creating incentives for some school employees to carry weapons, which is opposed by several gun-control advocacy groups.
Mr. Trump foreshadowed the bump stock regulation at a Cabinet meeting Thursday morning. “Bump stocks are just about finished, from the standpoint of getting the legal work done,” Mr. Trump said.
Since when does the DOJ have the ability to modify the US Code?
No need for anyone to answer. It’s rhetoric.
26 U.S. Code § 5845 - Definitions
(b) Machinegun
The term “machinegun” means any weapon which shoots, is designed to shoot, or can be readily restored to shoot, automatically more than one shot, without manual reloading, by a single function of the trigger. The term shall also include the frame or receiver of any such weapon, any part designed and intended solely and exclusively, or combination of parts designed and intended, for use in converting a weapon into a machinegun, and any combination of parts from which a machinegun can be assembled if such parts are in the possession or under the control of a person.