Quantcast

bumpstock ban process

Discussion in 'Legal' started by DeepSouth, Dec 19, 2018.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Hunter86004

    Hunter86004 Member

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2018
    Messages:
    131
    Location:
    Flagstaff, Az
    M855 projectiles do not fit under the definition of armor piercing because they do not have a core constructed ENTIRELY of iron or steel. There is a lead slug behind the steel penetrator, which excludes it from being AP and makes it handgun legal. Had ATF not backed away and used the 'sporting purposes' excuse, I would like to know what their "sound legal reasoning" would have been since only Congress and the president's signature can change a statute. Same thing with bump stocks which do not fit the statutory definition of a machinegun.
     
    10mm Mike and Sebastian like this.
  2. CLP

    CLP member

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2010
    Messages:
    1,397

    Lol. That pretty much sums up the Cold War too.
     
  3. SC45-70

    SC45-70 Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2013
    Messages:
    211
    Location:
    Minnesota
    When the ATF can change the definitions of words and reverse their rulings to serve a political agenda, none of their rulings mean squat and nothing will be safe.
    SC45-70
     
    Styx, mdauben, 10mm Mike and 7 others like this.
  4. Hunter86004

    Hunter86004 Member

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2018
    Messages:
    131
    Location:
    Flagstaff, Az
    That's where the courts come into play.
     
  5. CapnMac

    CapnMac Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2009
    Messages:
    9,444
    Location:
    DFW (formerly Brazos County), Texas
    Which is very complicated. The only evidence for bumpstocks at LV is pure hearsay. All of the links go back to each other, the media references itself on the topic. A number of reports conflate potential arms charges with arms present (further obfuscated with the whole "illegal ammunition manufacturing" side show).

    We have zilch from LV Metro or any of the alphabet agencies on what was on scene, what was recovered, what was tested for being fired. And LVM is generally a good agency, not given to pumping out bilgewater.

    So, all linkage of bumpstocks to LV is all political, not factual--not until facts are actually ever produced.
     
    Texas10mm likes this.
  6. Tommygunn

    Tommygunn Member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2006
    Messages:
    6,903
    Location:
    Morgan County, Alabama
    Having heard the audio of the gunfire that accompanied the Mandalay Bay video, I think it's self-evident that bumpstocks were used. I've not heard ANY evidence of full auto weapons. My brother-in-law is a ex Pathfinder Ranger, U. S. Army, who has been in about two dozen operations and has been up against full auto AK-47 armed enemy combatants. He's heard those recordings and said it sounded like AKs to him.
    I do not subscribe to conspiracy theories. The Mandalay incident was handled in a ham handed way that has obfuscated a lot of what hapoened, that's true .... but I also do believe in Occam's Razor, and that suggests the simplest explanation is the deceased shooter used the weapons at hand and that the bumpstock equipped weapons played a big role.
     
    psyopspec and Sebastian like this.
  7. 4D5

    4D5 Member

    Joined:
    May 21, 2004
    Messages:
    272
    Location:
    Nevada, Carson Valley
    This official act of banning bump-fire stocks is wrong in a number of ways and is at the heart unconstitutional.
    I am hopeful that this unjust action will be challenged and struck down.

    For one, the bump-fire stock has, for all intents and purposes, been classified the same as a machine gun. However, the immanent piece of plastic is incapable of firing ammunition. Furthermore, it is incapable of firing more than one round of ammunition with one pull of the trigger.

    The ruling is quoted as saying;

    The rule concludes that bump-fire stocks, "slide-fire" devices, and devices with certain similar characteristics all fall within the prohibition on machine guns by allowing a "shooter of a semiautomatic firearm to initiate a continuous firing cycle with a single pull of the trigger," and therefore, they are illegal under federal law.

    In no way does this characterization meet the definition of a machine gun. In fact it adds new definitions to that of existing machine gun terminology. However for gun hating zealots it is but a small leap to rationalize why it should be so.

    Furthermore, with this ruling the “people” have now lost the protection of the 5th amendment. If individuals are required to either destroy or surrender property to the “government” without due process and compensation, then the 5th amendment has just been abrogated. There has been no due process of law, just an edict issued by big brother.

    The 5th amendment in part says;

    ...nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law…

    With this precedent now made law (not by congress), what’s to stop the next infringement on yet another one of the bill of rights. We as a county are headed down a slippery slope and big brother is at the top and pushing hard.

    And here in Nevada, with this ruling, Sissylack and his hordes will be emboldened and will decimate Nevada gun owners rights in the coming future.

    I am saddened to see what this once great nation is becoming. Me, my brother, father, FIL, grandfather, uncles and many friends have served in our military; swearing to support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic. I am hopeful that the tree of liberty will not have to pruned.
     
    Ravenworks likes this.
  8. Sebastian

    Sebastian Member

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2018
    Messages:
    146
    I've watched the videos multiple times and it seemed apparent to me that you could hear the cyclic rate speed up and slow down which is indicative of a bumpstock. They can sound distinctly different than a true FA which will maintain the cyclic rate and then as more lead is thrown slow down but remain fairly constant...while with a bumpfire you might hear the cyclic rate increase or decrease which has a direct relation to the forward pressure used on the rifle.
     
    psyopspec likes this.
  9. Sistema1927

    Sistema1927 Member

    Joined:
    May 21, 2004
    Messages:
    7,067
    Location:
    "Land of (dis)Enchantment"
    Let's assume that bump stocks were used in Las Vegas. Bad people do bad things all the time.

    That, however, is not a reason to suspend Constitutional protections, make law by regulation, nor redefine an item improperly.
     
    Dewey 68, 10mm Mike, <*(((>< and 6 others like this.
  10. DeepSouth

    DeepSouth Member

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2009
    Messages:
    3,726
    Location:
    Heart of Dixie
    I finally got around to seeing if the GOA (Gun Owners of America) had finally filed the suit they promised and indeed they did, on 12/26/18.
    For those interested this is the link to the filing.
    https://gunowners.org/images//GOA_COMPLAINT-.pdf
     
    pdsmith505 likes this.
  11. pdsmith505

    pdsmith505 Member

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2013
    Messages:
    723
    Reading through it, there are several interesting statements such as this one that point to exhibits.
    The FPC's page for their lawsuit includes the exhibits, but I can't find them anywhere for the GOA's lawsuit.
     
  12. DeepSouth

    DeepSouth Member

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2009
    Messages:
    3,726
    Location:
    Heart of Dixie
    Good catch, I still haven’t had time read the GOA suit. On the topic of interesting exhibits. Jerry Miculek might want to be insuring his trigger finger, as it is part of exhibit 3 & 4 of the FPC suit. They may be coming for him with shears!
     
  13. F-111 John

    F-111 John Member

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2011
    Messages:
    1,072
    Location:
    Holt, MI
    The Firearms Policy Coalition has also filed suit, and their initial argument is that the rulemaking process was not followed when acting AG Matthew G. Whitaker signed the final rule.

    They argue that acting AG Whitaker was improperly designated as acting AG, and therefore does not have the authority to sign the final rule.

    https://globenewswire.com/news-rele...me-Court-Attorneys-Goldstein-Russell-P-C.html

    FPC, which owns a “bump-stock” device, seeks a preliminary injunction, a permanent injunction, and declaratory relief preventing Matthew G. Whitaker from exercising any authority as Acting Attorney General, and preventing from going into effect the ATF’s Final Rule on “Bump-Stock-Type Devices” (Docket No. ATF-2017R-22).

    The case and motion argue that Acting Attorney General Mathew Whitaker, who President Trump placed into the role after the resignation of then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions, has no authority to issue the rule because the President failed to adhere to the Constitution’s Appointments Clause and federal laws regarding succession and vacancies in the office.
    FPC therefore has sidestepped the entire argument on whether bump stocks are or are not machine guns.
     
  14. boom boom
    • Contributing Member

    boom boom Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2007
    Messages:
    4,777
    Location:
    GA
  15. DeepSouth

    DeepSouth Member

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2009
    Messages:
    3,726
    Location:
    Heart of Dixie
    I have no idea what the legal implications may, or may not be, but some of you might. I suspect it’s much ado about nothing, hopefully I’m wrong.

    I should also note this seems to have as much, maybe more, to do with the Atkins Accelerator as a bump stock.


    Read more: https://www.ammoland.com/2019/02/fo...ts-machinegun-ruling-political/#ixzz5fQ9YgsBv



    Also the court has scheduled a hearing next Tuesday for oral arguments on the motion for a preliminary injunction in that case. I’ve been told the GOA is hoping to hear back from their injunction by the end of the month.
     
    Last edited: Feb 13, 2019
  16. Texas10mm

    Texas10mm member

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2018
    Messages:
    3,684
    Location:
    Not DFW
    This is my not shocked face. There are way too many people who have power over our lives who don't answer to anyone.
     
    10mm Mike and P5 Guy like this.
  17. Elkins45

    Elkins45 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2009
    Messages:
    5,593
    Location:
    Northern KY
    I've been wondering about this. I think I will start a separate thread because it's not quite the same question.
     
  18. pdsmith505

    pdsmith505 Member

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2013
    Messages:
    723
    boom boom likes this.
  19. AlexanderA
    • Contributing Member

    AlexanderA Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2011
    Messages:
    7,495
    Location:
    Virginia
    All that this did was deny preliminary injunctive relief. As to the one substantive issue in the case, here's the money quote from the opinion:

    "As for the Takings Clause challenge, the plaintiffs have not shown that preliminary injunctive relief rather than future compensation is appropriate."

    Therefore, the main issue here is still unresolved.

    As for this particular case, the judge's opinion was quite thorough and workmanlike and is unlikely to be reversed on appeal.
     
  20. GEM

    GEM Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2004
    Messages:
    8,536
    Location:
    WNY
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/nati...e-rules/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.789c278d1b14

    Thank you, Donald for making a proactive effort to weaken the 2nd Amend. So all who thought Donald was the gun messiah - guess again. Don't tell me that Kavanaugh is the gun messiah. That is an empirical question as to when some gun cases actually are taken up and decided by SCOTUS. We have the NYC case. Hopefully, we get a clear cut decision without the Scalia (he was a god, Blasphemy) rhetoric that is used against the RKBA in so many state and lower Federal court rulings.

    The precedent is clearly there for an administrative gun ban if the administration changes (Executive Order - build the wall, ban the guns, free marshmallows for all!). Nancy has clearly stated it is a possibility.

    After the expiration of the Federal AWB and the spread of shall issue carrry (but leaving out major states), it's not been a clear road to increasing the RKBA implementation. It is clear that GOP elite have no interest in such as they just want to keep the threats around for fund raising based on defense and not improving the situation.

    Rant off.
     
  21. Telekinesis

    Telekinesis Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2011
    Messages:
    1,759
    Location:
    Birmingham, Alabama
    How would someone show that compensation is not appropriate (or less appropriate than injunctive relief)? The ATF's midrange estimate is a $32 million cost for implementing this rule (presumably including the value of the individual bumpstocks that are lost by individuals). Is it not enough to show that an injunction costs nothing but moving forward and then reverting to current status costs somewhere around $30 million?

    Do any of the lawsuits have a manufacturer as a plantif? The best argument I could see for injunctive vs compensatory relief would be "our business will fail and we won't be able to restart the business if the ruling is later reverted".
     
  22. AlexanderA
    • Contributing Member

    AlexanderA Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2011
    Messages:
    7,495
    Location:
    Virginia
    The judge rejected these arguments. Read the opinion.

    Once the ban takes effect, the (former) bump stock owners could file a class action against the U.S. government for monetary compensation, based on the Takings Clause. They would have to submit proof of what they had paid for their bump stocks, and proof that they had in fact destroyed or surrendered the bump stocks. The government would argue that this is a "public safety prohibition" or an "exercise of police power" and not a "taking for public use." Most likely, the government would prevail:

    https://scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3833&context=lcp
    https://scholarlycommons.law.hofstra.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1911&context=hl
     
  23. DeepSouth

    DeepSouth Member

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2009
    Messages:
    3,726
    Location:
    Heart of Dixie
    Well their is still hope for the GOA sought injunction, this was the FPC injunction, if I understood correctly.
     
  24. jmorris

    jmorris Member

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2005
    Messages:
    16,447
    I can’t say I know a single person that thought that.

    Doesn’t take a rocket scientist to understand another Clinton wouldn’t have been any better though. Much less 2 more liberal, legislate from the bench, SCOTUS Justice’s.

    You are 100% correct in that the GOP absolutely loves to kick the can down the road to keep “energized” voters. When they sell “us” out, it’s a tough pill to swallow for sure. The current POTUS isn’t the first self proclaimed “pro gun” POTUS to erode the 2nd Amendment though.
     
  25. DeepSouth

    DeepSouth Member

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2009
    Messages:
    3,726
    Location:
    Heart of Dixie
    Got this in a email from FPC today.

     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice