NRA Supports Ban on Bumpfire Devices

[243winxb]

the NRA decided to ask Pres. Reagan to finally sign it

Purchased an M16 in 1979, so i watched with interest. NRA tried to repeal the ban, for a short time, then machine guns were forgotten.

Still no new ones available for the public.

If there was no NRA, we would all be using bow and arrows by now.

 

[Mitlov]

I am certainly no troll, and I do appreciate all the NRA has done in the past, but I believe that an emotional reaction so quick to surrender to the Left, is the wrong response. It sets a bad precedent. So when the alert figures out that semiautomatic guns can be bump fired without the “bump fire” stocks will theysupport magazine limitations? Could they not have polled their members to assess what WE think about this? Why be so quick to succumb to the Left? My rule of thumb is, that if someone agrees with Nancy Pelosi or Chuck Schumer, they have zero credibility with me. Before we agree to give in to the Left in any way, shape, or form, we need to get something in return! If I cannot honestly and openly criticize the NRA, especially when they are so clearly wrong, then why be a member, unless you think that all of their decisions are spot on?

But that’s exactly what they’re doing. They’re not unilaterally surrendering anything. They’re using this as a bargaining chip to try to get 50-state CHL reciprocity in a one-for-one trade of issues. Do you think we’re ever going to see 50-state CHL reciprocity without trading anything for it?

 

[SKILCZ]

They appear to be trying to make it an ATF issue, which is great because I'm tired of people blaming the NRA for these incidents. They also clearly define it is a decision made under Obama by the ATF.

I'll bet the ATF issues a statement that they're legal. But then Congress may push something through to change that.

The ATF agent on the Vegas investigation already did, at least verbally during one of the press conferences.

 

[Elkins45]

I'll trade my semi-auto magazine fed rifles for a ban on cigarettes, transfats and a reinstatement of alcohol prohibition. Put them all in the same bill. After all, if it's about banning stuff to protect the public lets do it up right!

Oh wait, low-income Democrats are the majority of consumers of those products? Hmmm...

Give up NOTHING without a fight!

 

[Warp]

But that’s exactly what they’re doing. They’re not unilaterally surrendering anything. They’re using this as a bargaining chip to try to get 50-state CHL reciprocity in a one-for-one trade of issues. Do you think we’re ever going to see 50-state CHL reciprocity without trading anything for it?

You're a fool if you think there is any chance of getting 50 state reciprocity because the NRA threw bump fire stocks under the bus with the ATF

 

[AlexanderA]

the NRA threw bump fire stocks under the bus with the ATF

Sending bump-fires to the ATF was a ploy to keep them away from Congress. The NRA is afraid that Congress, in a runaway mode, could do a lot more damage. I'm not an apologist for the NRA, but they're a lot more politically savvy than the average member of this board.

 

[CoalTrain49]

You're a fool if you think there is any chance of getting 50 state reciprocity because the NRA threw bump fire stocks under the bus with the ATF

Well, I wouldn't call him a fool, just overly optimist.

The reciprocity hurdle isn't with the fed, it's with the states. The fed (congress) isn't going to be dictating to the states how they should regulate concealed carry. The fed can't even regulate marijuana in some states. I live in a state where pot is illegal by federal code yet I drive by a pot shop almost everyday. Wa state regulates the pot business like a the liquor stores they deregulated.

Nope, the universal reciprocity pie-in-the-sky dream is alive only in the minds of those that carry. Personally I would like to see it because I've been in 6 states in the last month camping, including CA. and I couldn't CC in about half of those.

 

[Carl N. Brown]

"... a reinstatement of alcohol prohibition ..."
Would that mean that the current BATF could change their name back to their 1920s monicker, the Bureau of Prohibition?
Right now they are the Bureau of Sin Taxes on Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms.

 

[coloradokevin]

You're a fool if you think there is any chance of getting 50 state reciprocity because the NRA threw bump fire stocks under the bus with the ATF

I agree 100%. There's no way we're "getting" anything in exchange for allowing further restrictions on bump stocks. This is a one way street... we give, they take. Stop giving, and don't allow them to take. It has been a long time since the Republicans controlled both houses of congress and the presidency, and I think it's time that they stick to their guns (intentional pun) on the 2nd Amendment issues. No bill can pass on this subject without Republicans going against 2nd Amendment rights.

I'll admit that bump fire was never high on my list of important things to do. I was always mildly intrigued by the concept, but never cared enough to buy a $300 stock to play around with the practicality of the device, especially given the cost of ammo. But, I got in as soon as I heard this shooting used a bump fire stock, knowing what was coming (I've seen enough of these panics to know that they'd be sold out within 24 hours, and they were). I ordered one, just for the novelty of the matter. I'll try it out, see what I think, and probably ultimately sell it for a profit that will buy me a new optic for a rifle I actually want to shoot. If I like it, I'll keep it. Again, not real high on my to-do list.

Regardless, I'll never concede to banning these devices simply because some lunatic used them to do harm. There's a long list of things that need to be banned if that is our rationale for a ban, and guns are only one thing on that list.

 

[CoalTrain49]

I'll try it out, see what I think, and probably ultimately sell it for a profit that will buy me a new optic for a rifle I actually want to shoot. If I like it, I'll keep it. Again, not real high on my to-do list.

How are you going to sell it if they become illegal to own? If they are illegal to own there won't be a legal market for it. Are you betting they will become a title II item and regulated by the ATF? That's a long shot.

 

[MachIVshooter]

Are you betting they will become a title II item and regulated by the ATF? That's a long shot.

Extremely. It would require legislation to amend 26 USC 5845 (b) to include them and then re-opening the registry (fat chance, as there'd be a glut of form 1s, and every SOT out there will add all of their samples to it) or legislation to amend the 26 USC 5845 and create a new category of title II accessories (also very unlikely).

If legislation comes to pass, they'll either become grandfathered to existing owners and non-transferable, or be flat out contraband.

 

[cfullgraf]

This is a one way street... we give, they take. Stop giving, and don't allow them to take.

So, I suppose all the successes in the courts and various legislative bodies that the NRA has had an hand in during the past several years do not count for anything.

Washington runs on negotiations. When they work, good things get accomplished. When they don't, nothing happens or poor legislations get passed or rammed through.

Just look at how much Washington has gotten accomplished since all the splinter factions of Congress got elected that refuse to budge on their main agenda. When something does get passed, it frequently completely ignores what the splinter factions wanted. But, bills frequently get shot down because of the splinter factions being against parts of the bill they do not like thus preventing the good parts of the bill being enacted.

Personally, while I do not care for bump stocks, I also would NOT like to see them restricted by a bill passed by Congress. A bill passed by Congress will be too broadly based and have consequences beyond banning just bump fire stocks. A bill passed by Congress will be virtually impossible to reverse in any reasonable amount of time. Has the NFA of 34 been rescinded?

The NRA may not be perfect, but they have a reasonably successful track record and the fear of the other side. I expect they will support my long term firearm interests.

 

[dbmjr1]

How many of y'all think that the left is going to be satisfied with a ban on bumpfire stocks by the BATFE ? No, . . . , Seriously ?

What about high capacity magazines ? You seriously don't think that they are going to go after Sure-Fire magazines ? 100 round mags ?, 60 round mags ?. What about 30 round magazines ? After all, Bill Ruger himself testified to Congress that 10 rounds is all any citizen needs.
Go ahead. Compromise. Give them something. Then something else. They're reasonable. They love the 2nd as much as you and I.

 

[coloradokevin]

How are you going to sell it if they become illegal to own? If they are illegal to own there won't be a legal market for it. Are you betting they will become a title II item and regulated by the ATF? That's a long shot.

I doubt that. If they are banned I'm guessing they'll become like pre-ban firearms during the AWB years (grandfathered). Even still, there's always some grace period after legislation is enacted before it goes into effect. If the new law is going to make it illegal to own, I can sell before that law goes into effect (because people will still buy it, even if a law that will be active in, say, 6 months says they can't). Again, that's assuming I don't like it and want to sell it.

 

[coloradokevin]

So, I suppose all the successes in the courts and various legislative bodies that the NRA has had an hand in during the past several years do not count for anything.

Washington runs on negotiations. When they work, good things get accomplished. When they don't, nothing happens or poor legislations get passed or rammed through.

Just look at how much Washington has gotten accomplished since all the splinter factions of Congress got elected that refuse to budge on their main agenda. When something does get passed, it frequently completely ignores what the splinter factions wanted. But, bills frequently get shot down because of the splinter factions being against parts of the bill they do not like thus preventing the good parts of the bill being enacted.

Personally, while I do not care for bump stocks, I also would NOT like to see them restricted by a bill passed by Congress. A bill passed by Congress will be too broadly based and have consequences beyond banning just bump fire stocks. A bill passed by Congress will be virtually impossible to reverse in any reasonable amount of time. Has the NFA of 34 been rescinded?

The NRA may not be perfect, but they have a reasonably successful track record and the fear of the other side. I expect they will support my long term firearm interests.

The courts and the legislature are very different bodies within our system of government, and most of our recent wins have come from the courts. We currently have a Republican controlled government (both houses of congress and the presidency). The Republicans are the elected officials who claim to be pro-gun, so there is ZERO need to compromise on this issue right now, unless those Republicans turn on their constituents. The only way ANY national-level anti-gun legislation can become law today is with Republican support. Period. This is an emotional issue, and it will fade long before the next election cycle. Bump stocks weren't a problem in the past, and one lunatic using them for bad purposes doesn't mean that we are suddenly in need of a ban. This is nothing more than a peer-pressure driven argument built around feelings.

Although I wasn't speaking of the NRA in the post you quoted me in above, I still must apologize if I'm not one of those folks who has deluded myself into believing that my rights only exist because the NRA has lobbied for them. My rights exist whether or not the NRA exists. Now, I'm not saying that the NRA is bad, or that I don't think they generally work to advance gun rights. But, I am saying that I don't have to follow them in lock-step on all of their opinions. That aside, since you alluded to the idea, what giant wins has the NRA given us at the legislative level lately? Pretty much nothing on the national level, and on the state level we ended up with universal background checks for person-to-person sales and magazine bans here in my state (laws that were passed under the usual banners of "compromise" and "common sense"). I sincerely think the NRA was dead wrong in 'compromising' with the liberals on this one. And, again, no law could be passed on this issue today without Republican support.

 

[CoalTrain49]

I doubt that. If they are banned I'm guessing they'll become like pre-ban firearms during the AWB years (grandfathered). Even still, there's always some grace period after legislation is enacted before it goes into effect. If the new law is going to make it illegal to own, I can sell before that law goes into effect (because people will still buy it, even if a law that will be active in, say, 6 months says they can't). Again, that's assuming I don't like it and want to sell it.

I think you are correct. They will be banned by congress if anything. ATF (Trump) won't touch it, why should they?

I learned a long time ago not to invest my hard earned money in real estate or firearms. This isn't even a firearm and it's getting some action. What do I know?

 

[coloradokevin]

I think you are correct. They will be banned by congress if anything. ATF (Trump) won't touch it, why should they?

I learned a long time ago not to invest my hard earned money in real estate or firearms. This isn't even a firearm and it's getting some action. What do I know?

Honestly, I wish I'd been brave enough to invest my money in either at several times in my life when I should have! I could have made a quick fortune several times over on purchases of firearms before notable bans, or following notable shootings. I even considered buying a dozen bump stocks, but settled on just one... I figured they'd sell out quickly, but they went about twice as fast as I thought they would. I underestimated the speed of panic in the information age, once again.

Buying a bump stock for me was a total impulse purchase. I don't need it, but I always kinda wanted to try playing with one, even if I doubt I'll use it much. Under anything other than an outright ban it should still retain some value for the foreseeable future, so the novelty of it made me pull the trigger (intentional pun, yet again).

Edited to add:

Ironically enough one of the big reasons I didn't buy ten of these things is that I figured my wife would subsequently beat me to death with one of them. But, just after I posted my last message she said: "you should have bought a bunch of those" after I showed her an open box version currently bidding at $855 on Gunbroker. Sigh. Fortunately that means I get to buy all that I want before then NEXT big ban-ic

 

[Warp]

Sending bump-fires to the ATF was a ploy to keep them away from Congress. The NRA is afraid that Congress, in a runaway mode, could do a lot more damage. I'm not an apologist for the NRA, but they're a lot more politically savvy than the average member of this board.

Maybe somebody should inform the NRA that Republicans are majority in both the House and the Senate.

 

[Warp]

Honestly, I wish I'd been brave enough to invest my money in either at several times in my life when I should have! I could have made a quick fortune several times over on purchases of firearms before notable bans, or following notable shootings. I even considered buying a dozen bump stocks, but settled on just one... I figured they'd sell out quickly, but they went about twice as fast as I thought they would. I underestimated the speed of panic in the information age, once again.

Buying a bump stock for me was a total impulse purchase. I don't need it, but I always kinda wanted to try playing with one, even if I doubt I'll use it much. Under anything other than an outright ban it should still retain some value for the foreseeable future, so the novelty of it made me pull the trigger (intentional pun, yet again).

Edited to add:

Ironically enough one of the big reasons I didn't buy ten of these things is that I figured my wife would subsequently beat me to death with one of them. But, just after I posted my last message she said: "you should have bought a bunch of those" after I showed her an open box version currently bidding at $855 on Gunbroker. Sigh. Fortunately that means I get to buy all that I want before then NEXT big ban-ic

I don't see making a fortune on firearms. For one thing, buying a quantity of firearms to flip for profit is illegal unless you are an FFL. And besides that, even after Sandy Hook, the best you could do was turn a $1,200 rifles into a $3,000 rifle. More or less. That's not really a great deal considering the legal hurdles in dealing with firearms.

Now, magazines, on the other hand, the smart folks traded in magazines. If you timed it just right you could sell them for 10 times what you paid in less than 3 months turn-around, with no FFL requirement or background check requirement and super cheap shipping

 

[JO JO]

Republicans are majority in both the House and the Senate.

and yet they can not get a stinking thing done all they are doing is fighting among themselves, it is sad as they have a rare opportunity to get some stuff done and yet they are tossing each other under the buss, the White House swamp is deep I don't trust it at all I bet that there are Republicans in the shadows that would be anti 2A if lobbyist handed them enough money, seems there are more Republicans bashing and road blocking our President then the other side,
sorry for getting off topic just so much back stabbing in our Politics , many put money in front of our best interest even within their own party

 

[grter]

This is a problem. I don''t need to be a legal wizard to figure out that allowing this bump fire ban to pass is not going to do anything for all state carry. The will be ZERO anything in exchange for agreeing to this. Thinking otherwise is akin to being sold fool's gold.

Why have people turned away from common sense by considering this to be even the least bit legitimate. Mass killings have been carried out using various methods (trucks, gas, bombs etc) and attempting to ban every item that can be misused would seriously hamper our rights, productivity and happiness. THIS BAN AND ANYTHING LIKE IT WOULD ACCOMPLISH ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO STOP FUTURE ATTACKS.

I am a lifetime member of the NRA and I see something very serious happing. Our most valuable gun advocacy organization is being divided from within.

Get it in your head that YOUR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS IS NOT TO BE CONFUSED WITH YOUR RIGHTS TO SUPPORT AND ADVOCATE YOUR POLITICAL PARTY ON NON SECOND AMENDMENT ISSUES.

THE NRAs SUPPORT OF POTENTIALLY DIVISIVE NON SECOND AMENDMENT POLITICAL PARTY PRACTICES COMBINED WITH A LACK OF SUPPORT AND CANDOR (being straight forward and truthful) CONCERNING GUN RIGHTS FOR ALL IS GOING TO HAVE THE POTENTIAL TO GIVE THE ORGANIZATION A SERIOUS BLOW.

It is at times like this where the NRA and every legitimate gun owner needs all the help they can get. Taking note of Donald Trumps tweets on the issue proves or should I say reinforces that expecting divine salvation by virtue of any one political party or elected official to make up for sound common sense, wisdom, and vigilance leaves a wide open gap for loss of personal freedoms.

Now we have to do something we need a way to pool our unique talents together so we can proceed with this having the best guidance to wisely counter this attack on personal liberties that is sure to come.

This law from what very little I have gathered can be very open to a wide variety of ways to interpret it in court cases across the United States.

 

[CoalTrain49]

Now, magazines, on the other hand, the smart folks traded in magazines. If you timed it just right you could sell them for 10 times what you paid in less than 3 months turn-around, with no FFL requirement or background check requirement and super cheap shipping

Even dealers will tell you that firearms aren't their bread and butter. Accessories and ammo is where the profit is.

 

[Deanimator]

The will be ZERO anything in exchange for agreeing to this. Thinking otherwise is akin to being sold fool's gold.

Gun owners won't get anything in exchange better than the Jews got in exchange for getting on the trains without a fight.

When the other side are maximalists, it's all or nothing. Only the time table varies.

 

[Warp]

and yet they can not get a stinking thing done all they are doing is fighting among themselves, it is sad as they have a rare opportunity to get some stuff done and yet they are tossing each other under the buss, the White House swamp is deep I don't trust it at all I bet that there are Republicans in the shadows that would be anti 2A if lobbyist handed them enough money, seems there are more Republicans bashing and road blocking our President then the other side,
sorry for getting off topic just so much back stabbing in our Politics , many put money in front of our best interest even within their own party

Yes, it is a problem.

Gun owners, gun enthusiasts, Second Amendment supporters, you know, US, pretty much live under a Federal gov't that only ever encroaches and infringes and TAKES, more and more, piece by piece, virtually never does anything to the other direction. It's like no matter how red the federal gov't gets, all that happens is nothing, but when it goes the other way, well, it goes the other way. Thank god the federal AWB at least had a sunset clause.

But they won't do that again, I'm sure they learned from that mistake...

 

[JO JO]

But they won't do that again, I'm sure they learned from that mistake...

and that is the scary part, they will keep trying to produce bills into law that will someday really hurt us, I sometimes think the next few generations will not put up a fight to attempt to keep the 2A safe, I mean the collage and younger folks seem to care about electronics " smart phones and gaming" not a huge interest from the young ones, at least I do not see as many younger ones at the range, when I was young I could not wait to go shooting or fishing with dad ,
not sure that same level of interest it there with the up and coming young-ins, so I think 10 to 20 years from now the anti 2A movement may face much less resistance.
I try and take my Son and Daughter and who else "new shooters" shooting as much as I can and even talk about reloading as well ,
I pray my Son will be able to teach his kids to shoot and carry on the tradition for generation's to come