Point number 1: the gun Community do not create a problem here.
You are absolutely correct as it applies to this incident. However, this incident focused the spotlight on these devices. A lot of people are now researching them. Some of that research includes videos posted on Youtube showing people gleefully demonstrating these devices proving that an AR equipped with a bump stock is capable of being fired in a manner that looks an awful lot like automatic gunfire. I sure as heck wouldn't want to be on the receiving end of that rate of fire. Such antics are not good optics for the pro-gun crowd, in my opinion. Can you mimic this behavior with a thumb and a belt loop? Apparently, but that technique results in far less accuracy than the bump stocks. So the fact remains that bump stocks are nothing more than an obvious path for mimicking fully automatic rates of fire while simultaneously avoiding the NFA process.
Point number 2: many of our gun control laws are seen by most of us has either unjust or infringing
I get that. But we lost that argument back in 1934. The chances of repealing the NFA has about as much chance of passage as a repeal of the 2nd Amendment so I choose to accept that reality and move on.
Bump Stocks....
... are perfectly legal under the terms of the National Firearms Act as interpreted by the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms. And they have said as much. This is not skirting the law, this is following the law.
They operate by manipulating the trigger once for each round that goes off and that is not a machine gun under federal law and the batf will tell you that all day long.
Once again, you are "technically" correct. If the provisions of the NFA don't cover these devices then I'm okay with Congress passing a Bill that will cover them. As a child reaching the age where I would be allowed to venture away from our house on foot my dad taught me the proper way to cross the street. I remember commenting to him that "pedestrians had the right of way". Dad's response sticks with me today, "son, you could be right...but dead right". Another way of stating that is just because something comes in your size doesn't mean you should wear it. In my opinion, bump stocks are a clear attempt to allow a shooter to shoot a firearm at a nearly indistinguishable rate of fire as a fully automatic weapon while simultaneously avoiding the NFA process.
80% Receivers.....
Haven't got anybody into trouble that I know of, with the minor exception of some people who were a little bit too casual about the rules governing being a manufacturer.
Well there was the guy down in Georgia last week that was caught with two ARs that had been built on 80% receivers illegally converted to fire in full auto mode. Did "A" have anything to do with "B"? Probably not but using 80% receivers that never went through a NICS check added another layer of anonymity for this law breaker. Again, while perfectly legal (under current law) the majority of the country (in my opinion) would ask why this is allowable. I'm not sure I understand why the creation of a firearm needs to be completely masked.
Sig braces....
Which mostly went to show that even after several years of futzing around the ATF eventually decided they're just no big deal.
Of all of the provisions of the NFA I disagree with the rules governing overall length of rifles the most. However, the law is the law. I've been to a lot of gun ranges and have never seen anyone using a Sig brace while that brace was strapped to their arm. My opinion remains that the majority of the people who buy these devices are using them to skirt the NFA process.
As for grazing in the middle of the herd, while I always try to drink upstream from the herd, I pride myself on arriving at my own conclusions by applying critical thought after listening to all sides. I realize my opinions won't be popular here but they are equally valid as those opinions opposing mine. And I think it is important to express all opinions in debates like these.
