No, rubber bands can do exactly what a bump stock does. If a bump stock can be banned because it makes a trigger get pulled very quickly, isn't that sufficient to ban rubber bands, too?
From the lawsuit: Ignoring the will of Congress by subverting the Attorney General Succession Act (“AGSA”), 28 U.S.C. § 508, President Donald J. Trump unlawfully appointed Matthew Whitaker as Acting Attorney General, in spite of clear statutory direction that Rod J. Rosenstein as Deputy Attorney General was to assume the duties and responsibilities of Attorney General. As such, Final Rule promulgated and executed by Matthew Whitaker on December 18, 2018 is unlawful and invalid. Further, despite Congress expressly defining the term “machinegun” in the Gun Control Act, 18 U.S.C. § 921, et seq. (“GCA”) and the National Firearms Act, 26 U.S.C. § 5801, et seq. (“NFA”), along with ATF’s prior acknowledgement that a bump stock was not a “machinegun” nor subject to regulation under the GCA and NFA, Defendants have implemented a final rule in an arbitrary and capricious manner which denies Plaintiffs, and those similarly situated, the ability to retain a bump stock, despite reliance on prior determinations made by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (“ATF”). Accordingly, a preliminary injunction is warranted and necessary to prevent ATF from enforcing this new rule during the pendency of this litigation. According to Joshua Prince, one of the attorneys representing the plaintiffs, the ATF lied to gun owners. “The ATF has misled the public about bump-stock devices. Worse, they are actively attempting to make felons out of people who relied on their legal opinions to lawfully acquire and possess devices the government unilaterally, unconstitutionally, and improperly decided to reclassify as ‘machineguns,'" Prince said. "We are optimistic that the court will act swiftly to protect the rights and property of Americans who own these devices, and once the matter has been fully briefed and considered by the court, that the regulation will be struck down permanently.” Gun Owners of America vowed to file a similar lawsuit for an injunction.....snip~ https://townhall.com/tipsheet/bethb...tock-ban-heres-what-you-need-to-know-n2537738 Moreover if the government was to win the case. Then they/Bumpstock owners need to be reimbursed for their property.
Not if one is a gun dealer. Fully automatic weapons aren't illegal—and there are ... https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2017/10/2/1703311/-Fully... It’s not illegal to own a fully automatic weapon, including military grade machine guns. Instead, ownership of these weapons is restricted. Federal law severely limits the ability of anyone … SUMMARY OF STATE AND FEDERAL MACHINE GUN LAWS https://www.cga.ct.gov/2009/rpt/2009-R-0020.htm Under Connecticut law, private citizens may own machine guns, provided the firearms are registered pursuant to federal law and with the Department of Public Safety (DPS). Failure to register a machine gun with DPS is presumed possession for an offensive or aggressive purpose. Transferable Machine Guns - Buying a Transferable ... https://www.brpguns.com/categories/Machineguns/How-to-Buy-a-Machinegun Article: "So You Want to Buy a Transferable Machine Gun..." Yes, You can legally own a machinegun. Unless you live in one of the few states that prohibit machineguns (listed below) or are a convicted felon you can legally own a fully automatic machine gun. Who was that talking like they knew something about Connecticut.
I've already acknowledged that they aren't "illegal", per se. However, let's be honest here. How many full auto rifles are in the hands of legal owners in America? A couple thousand at most? At this point in history, they are basically a novelty, and not something anyone should be wringing their hands over.
Pre 86 (transferables): 175,977 Sales Samples (pre May keepers): 17,020 Restricted 922(o) (posties): 297,667 https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2...eveals-the-number-of-registered-machine-guns/
Then why has the number of post-1986 legally owned machine guns increase by almost 300,000? https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2...eveals-the-number-of-registered-machine-guns/
Regardless of the misinterpretation of yourself, the department of justice, the ATF, and everyone else making false claims on the matter, bump stocks do not transform a semi-automatic firearm, into a fully-automatic firearm. They do nothing to "circumvent" existing federal law, as federal law does nothing to regulate rate of fire and operation, only the method of operation. Nowhere in the law of the united states, is there anything that specifies the legal maximum number of rounds discharged within the course of a minute, that would allow for the determination of which firearms are legal to own, and which are illegal to own. According to established law, the only thing at issue is the method of operation of the firearm, that being multiple rounds discharged with a single pull of the trigger. No bump stock does anything to change this, as it still requires a single pull of the trigger for each and every round of ammunition discharged.
bump stocks were designed and built to circumvent the intent and spirit of the NFA. they facilitate rapid fire without having to actively pull the trigger. they in effect turn semi-auto guns into fully automatic.
All of which means absolutely nothing pertaining to established and existing federal law. https://www.atf.gov/firearms/firear...-firearms-national-firearms-act-definitions-0 26 U.S.C. § 5845(b) For the purposes of the National Firearms Act 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 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, or 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. There was no intent or spirit to the national firearms act. Its does not exist to protect the lives of the public, nor does it exist to facilitate the fighting of crime. Its sole reason for existence is to establish the united states government has the authority to collect a tax fee on the legal ownership of certain specified ownership, not for any other reason. That is ultimately the reason fully-automatic firearms are subject to registration and other limitations; not because they are inherently dangerous, but because they are subjected to special taxes. That is why possession of an unregistered fully-automatic firearm is a crime, because it ultimately deprives the government of that fee.
Untrue, the trigger must be pulled once for each round to be fired whereas with fully the firearm will continue to fire as long as the trigger held back in fire position.
not really. Bump stocks require more than just pulling a trigger to work properly. They require the operator to push and pull on the stock and forearm (not sure which).
Bump stocks exist because of the unconstitutional and stupid Hughes amendment. The Hughes amendment proves-beyond any doubt-what I have been saying for years. Democrats ban guns for reasons other than crime control. There has not been a single case of a private citizen murdering anyone with a legally owned machine gun in over 80 years
The NRA has outed themselves as whores for the Republican party and Donald Trump. They'll never receive another dime from me. Second Amendment supporters should cancel their memberships and let the NRA know the exact reason for their decision. On the other hand, blind GOP loyalists and Trump supporters should probably up their donations to the NRA since they are now nothing more than a quasi-Super-PAC for right wing politics.
