NRA Supports Restrictions on Bump-Fire Stocks

[AustinN4]

Really? That's how they protect our rights?

Sorry, but they punted on first down on this issue...

 

[London]

NRA also said review not ban


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

They also said they support further regulations, which is at least a partial ban.

 

[Ole Cowboy]

NRA also said review not ban


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

They know that, I posted it and so did others, but they have chosen to fight it...WONDER why??????

We are gonna lose this fight and here is why:


1) Almost no one knows what a Bump stock etc is and even Judge Andrew Napolitano wrote in his column that he opposed it because it converts SA to FA, well he is wrong, but the problem is the Fake news, Dims in Congress etc etc etc have been spewing its is just a work around to achieve FA (yes we know it does not). But the general public who barely knows a real gun from a calk gun and they are being told because of the Bump Stock he was able to kill more and wound more due to the "auto fire".

OK, sure its al BS, but the FA train has left the station folks and you can bet that the people (even those who support the RKBA) are now opposed to the device

2) Every one knows that FA is banned and has been since '34...BECAUSE of the St Valentines Day Massacre!

3) Bump stock does not affect my 2nd Amend rights

 

[SidewaysTA]

Really? That's how they protect our rights?

Sorry, but they punted on first down on this issue...

Hell they didn't even punt it. They pretty much took a knee.

 

[benenglish]

Please note the SAF initially supported Manchin/Toomey.

Yeah, but.

Manchin/Toomey had some good stuff in it. If universal background checks get passed (ever), then it's incumbent on the 2A community to insist we get something in return. The SAF saw that we were getting something in return and reached a controversial position on the bill. That's not nearly as bad as the way the NRA has occasionally done stupid things.

No organization is perfect or always reasons perfectly. I've spoken at length with Mr. Gottlieb and I'm willing to cut him some slack. The SAF is, on balance, a good organization. I'm a lifer with them and will continue to support them.

 

[Southpaw]

. In the NRA's own statement they said devices that allow rifle to function as full auto should be more regulated so does that include the eco trigger if so then how far of a stretch to lightened triggers or aftermarket triggers as a whole make no mistake any regulations passed will be used to beat us over the head because we might misuse them.

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk

Then according to current federal definition the bump stock would not fit that category, no?

 

[Maverick44]

Was going to renew my NRA membership after the shooting. Now they can go **** themselves. I'm joining the GOA.

 

[randomthought]

It is my belief they where referring to new regulations on such items

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk

 

[randomthought]

Then according to current federal definition the bump stock would not fit that category, no?

The bump stock is not currently regulated bc it does not physically alter the trigger in to full auto you still pull the trigger for one round fired. By instituting regulations it would be almost impossible to say where the line would end, you could argue that a light trigger could be bounced to replicate full auto so a set poundage to not allow one to do that.

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk

 

[busykngt]

Was going to renew my NRA membership after the shooting. Now they can go **** themselves. I'm joining the GOA.

That’s pretty much my sentiment - I’ve been a GOA member for the past four years. Initially a one year membership, then I did a three year renewal. I am now filling out and getting ready to send in a Lifetime membership to GOA.
Haven’t sent NRA any of my hard earned cash since the last time they waffled and folded on staunchly supporting a 2A cause.

 

[Southpaw]

It is my belief they where referring to new regulations on such items

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk

I don't read it that way. I'm reading as the ATF needs to look at it based on current federal definitions.

In order for a bump stock to be considered under the current definitions it would need "to shoot,........., automatically more than one shot, without manual reloading. It does not.

. Machine gun. 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 machine gun, and any combination of parts from which a machine gun can be assembled if such parts are in the possession or under the control of a person. .

 

[Southpaw]

The bump stock is not currently regulated bc it does not physically alter the trigger in to full auto you still pull the trigger for one round fired. By instituting regulations it would be almost impossible to say where the line would end, you could argue that a light trigger could be bounced to replicate full auto so a set poundage to not allow one to do that.

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk

Exactly, hence the reason the NRA is taking this route. Without altering the current legal definition, there is no way the ATF can regulate it without an act of Congress. That's why these were not regulated to begin with because they could not do it with the current definition of what is and what isn't . It will force Congress not to simply ban this or that, but to change the definition of what a machine gun and semi auto gun is. When they do that it will be obvious what such bills are attempting to do i.e. ban all semi automatics firearms across the board. I'm a sceptic, but I have faith that a such a ban is not going to go over at this time.

 

[avvidclif]

M

I could have been behind the NRA much more if they fought and it became inevitable that bump stock were to be banned and then they came out with that statement. It's just that they didn't seem to waste time getting this out. Now certainly, I wouldn't buy a bump stock, I don't see a need, and I know that the NRA didn't actually say they should be banned, but coming out so fast with that statement looked weak, caving in to pressure and I'm not wanting to budge. We need to fight before giving any ground, if not, there won't be any ground to stand on.

Maybe they are just more in touch with the way the political winds are blowing in DC at this moment and are trying to stay ahead of the curve.

 

[busykngt]

Under “current” definitions.... don’t think anyone disagrees there. “Current” is the keyword. That’s about to change.... assuming Feinstein’s bill doesn’t become law first and beat the BATFE to the punch (in which case, their actions become moot).

 

[randomthought]

I would not put it past the ATF to claim the the bump stock and other similar devices are banned due to this the NRA opened a can of worms by insinuating more regulations maybe necessary “The NRA believes that devices designed to allow semi-automatic rifles to function like fully-automatic rifles should be subject to additional regulations,” Wayne LaPierre and Chris Cox, the group’s two leading figures, said in a joint statement. Since these items only are only applicable to semi auto rifles are we talking making an auto safety we must disengage after every shot how do you regulate a semi auto rifles fire rate you can bump fire a ar15 with a rubber band

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk

 

[busykngt]

Green tip ammo was about to be made illegal by the BATFE - it didn’t take an act of Congress for this to *almost* happen. In fact, it wasn’t until enough folks began writing their Congressman to complain and they started asking questions, that BATFE backed off their “redefinition” of what constituted “sporting use” for that type of ammunition. How soon we forget...

 

[Southpaw]

Under “current” definitions.... don’t think anyone disagrees there. “Current” is the keyword. That’s about to change.... assuming Feinstein’s bill doesn’t become law first and beat the BATFE to the punch (in which case, their actions become moot).

I don't think so. I believe without redefining what exactly is a semi auto and full auto (MG) bills such as Frankenstein's, even if by some chance it passed, won't pass judicial muster.

 

[ZX9RCAM]

2) Every one knows that FA is banned and has been since '34...BECAUSE of the St Valentines Day Massacre!

What does this mean?

 

[Southpaw]

“The NRA believes that devices designed to allow semi-automatic rifles to function like fully-automatic rifles should be subject to additional regulations,” Wayne LaPierre and Chris Cox, the group’s two leading figures, said in a joint statement.

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk

Correct, it says devices not this particular device. The NRA doesn't believe the bump stock is a device that allows semi-automatic rifles to function like fully-automatic rifles according current terms. They are expecting ATF to come to the same conclusion, however they are not going to come out and say that directly when they can use the ATF decision for political cover later on.

 

[easy rider]

M

Maybe they are just more in touch with the way the political winds are blowing in DC at this moment and are trying to stay ahead of the curve.

You mean like, kowtowing?