Bump fire stock ban atf trump
Bump stock outfitted AR.

By Rachel Malone

Last night I read the RW Arms press release describing how they will be turning in 60,000 bumpstocks to be shredded and recycled under the supervision of ATF agents in order to avoid a potential 10-year imprisonment and $250,000 fine per violation.

I felt like I got sucker-punched.

This is horrible. And this is what modern gun confiscation looks like. Let me break down for you what has happened:

1. The President signs an executive order directing a government agency to re-define an item (notwithstanding that that agency has consistently upheld another definition repeatedly for years).

2. The agency writes a new rule re-defining that item to be included in a group of banned items.

3. Anyone currently legally owning that item who has not turned it in to the federal government (without receiving any compensation) will be committing a federal felony offense.

That rule re-defining bump fire stocks as machine guns goes into effect today.

This is what modern gun confiscation looks like.

Maybe you don’t own a bump stock. Maybe it’s easy for you to say “They shouldn’t give them up — I’d never give up my guns!” Or, maybe it’s easy for you to say “Oh, but nobody REALLY NEEDS that — this isn’t a big deal.”

Let me boil this down for you.

When (not if — but when) you are banned from owning or using the firearm, ammunition, or accessory that you do own, you’ll be faced with a choice that probably will boil down to one of these two basic options:

1. Don’t give it up. Do the “Come And Take It” and “Line In The Sand” and “Don’t Tread On Me” and “From My Cold Dead Hands” thing — and maybe go to federal prison for a decade or more. Maybe get shot. Maybe watch your family get shot, too.

2. Give it up. Decide that your life and your family’s lives aren’t worth risking just so you can hold onto your safety tools [guns]. And when you give it up, you’ll be giving up the tool that was up as a last line of defense against a tyrannical government.

What choice would you make?

Do you see how vile this choice is?

How hard will you fight NOW to push back against every despicable reach toward gun control — big or small — so we retain our liberties? So we don’t have to make that choice?

Every bit of push-back matters. We fight — some battles we win, some we don’t, but this fight is about standing up for our liberties.

And what we see happening right now…this is what gun confiscation looks like, and it makes me sick.

Rachel Malone is the Texas Director of Gun Owners of America.

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

90 COMMENTS

      • So then that would be 10-12 million gone. Stolen. By Presidential fiat. This should wake up a few people to the tyranny we live under that most refuse to even notice.
        And if not, they’ll wake up about the time planes and cars and food are banned by bureaucratic command. No more cars allowed. No more burgers, No more flights. Turn ’em all in or go to jail and/or die. They will wake up, after it’s too late.
        Gotta please the socialists somehow. Appease, Appease, Appease. Keep expecting mercy from the merciless. I don’t, but the sleeping sheeple sure do.

        • It is way past time that we all collectively woke up and stopped acting so stupid. There is a Rule of Law in America with the Constitution (and its amendments) at the apex and Article I, Section 9(3) says the following: “No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed.”

          Ex post facto law – An ex post facto law is a law that retroactively changes the legal consequences (or status) of actions that were committed, or relationships that existed, before the enactment of the law. – In other words, if was NOT illegal when you bought it or when you committed the act then they can not charge you with the new law after the fact.

          But in addition, and more to the point, the Constitution is a compact (a contract or agreement) and like in any legal contract when a contract is amended the amendment has the greater force as the provisions and conditions expressed in the amendment “SUPERSEDE” the provisions and conditions in the original document. Thus the Second Amendment overrides everything that came before it and until and unless there is another amendment that addresses the provisions of the Second Amendment, “the Right of the people to keep and bear arms Shall Not be infringed” remains as the supreme law of the land. – Also please note the words used… The word SHALL is a commandment word in law which has the effect of compelling and binding one to the action being expressed… and in this case it is the government that is being bound.

          As a simple historical reference for an example; Remember that when they banned alcohol with the 18th Amendment and then later found it to be a big mistake, they could not undo the mistake of Prohibition with an act of Congress or with a simple presidential executive order because Prohibition was now the law of the land. It took the passage of the 21st Amendment to finally put an end to the era of Prohibition.

          Challenge what they do in a legal argument using the rule of law and the supreme law of the land and you will find that they have no lawful defense for their actions.

    • They’ve already started. Amazon refuses to stock books dealing with certain racial issues and “that which must not be mentioned, anything that questions the “official account” of ”holocaustianity”. The purges have already started…

      • They’ve also been caught going into ebooks and making edits after sale and purchase. When bans and burns draw too much attention just literally re-write the parts you don’t like and let Whispersync do the heavy lifting all while people say “see, that book isn’t banned.”

        For over 50 years people have been letting totalitarianism crawl all over them and I imagine it will just continue so because most people want to be coddled slaves. Life is just easier that way.

        • Hear that! Dont accept it, but we do what we can do as individuals to try to change it. Isnt the internet wonderful?!

        • Shire-Man, you said, “They’ve also been caught going into ebooks and making edits after sale and purchase. When bans and burns draw too much attention just literally re-write the parts you don’t like and let Whispersync do the heavy lifting all while people say “see, that book isn’t banned.”

          LOL, as an author, I can tell you that making edits after the book is published is not done for some sinister, nefarious purpose. It’s done to correct typos and other mistakes that were caught after publication.
          FYI, every full-length book every published has errors in it (I challenge you to find a first edition book that doesn’t)!

          The fact that the post-publication corrections may also update e-books that you’ve already bought is not a bug, it’s a valuable feature! However, it’s a feature that doesn’t always work, so far too often, the ebooks will continue to contain the uncorrected errors. With Kindle books, I’ve found that the reader has to actively re-download the book to get the corrections, and even then, they might be stuck with the original, uncorrected version. It’s a real struggle for authors to get Kindle books updated with the corrected version, trust me, and unless Amazon has improved their system, you’re far more likely as a reader to be stuck with the original, errors and all, than to have corrections “pushed” down to your Kindle reader automatically.

      • The Liberals and the Left have never supported the Bill Of Rights. Their definition of support are things they like: Flag burning. KKK marches thru black and jewish neighborhoods while carrying guns. But no guns for blacks or anyone else. Pornography and using the american flag as a diaper. As was done by Larry Flynt. That’s their definition of supporting the 1st amendment. Not the rights of christians. Or anyone else they don’t like.

  3. Kinda reminiscent of 1930’s Germany, after the civilian arms, what’s next, the books?

    • Hitler didn’t ban gun ownership for most German citizens, only the Jews and gypsies.

      Hitler was a Christian who said in Mein Kampf he was doing the Lords work to rid the earth of Jews, Hitler’s first treaty was with the Catholic Church.

      And bump stocks are clearly designed to circumvent current federal law, anyone who thinks they should be eligible for a private ownership to produce a functional full auto weapon is playing directly into the hands of the anti-gunners.

      People of the gun should’ve gotten out in front of this and spoke out against the useless bump stocks right after Las Vegas, but instead like whiny children they want their zombie killing lethal toys.

      • Hitler was an atheist. Might have been raised a Christian, but he was a full blown atheist and socialist by adulthood.

        • Thank you, I was going to say the same. And just because one belongs to an organization that claims to be “Christian” does not mean that the leaders or people coming every Sunday even believe in the entire line of virgin birth, death and resurrection, incarnate Creator and salvation through faith alone in Jesus Christ- obviously where the word “Christian” comes from…

      • Take civics courses, read the Federalist Papers, the Declaration of Independence, and most of all the U.S. Constitution, you mindless rube. MSNBC, and CNN aren’t on this website.

      • There are a lot of folks that claim to be doing things in the name of Christianity. That doesn’t mean they’re Christians. Their works always gives away who they really serve.

  4. Bump stocks are hardly the problem. Anyone with half a brain knows there true and intended purpose. Bump stocks minimumize recoil, that is it. What is next, recoil pads and houge grips. Hello “Think McFly” !!

    • Recoil, what recoil? I’ve never used a bump stock because I can float the trigger without one. Recoil with 5.56 isn’t a problem though. A good muzzle device can tame the round better I would bet. Not like it needs much taming to begin with. People need to stop making excuses of why it’s ok to own something. The only reason that matters is because it’s a right and nothing less. All this conceding will do is add fuel to the fire for the government to take the next step.

      • “All this conceding will do is add fuel to the fire for the government to take the next step.”

        And WHEN (not if) they take the next step, and a person chooses to fight as an individual, well, that just proves that all gun owners are nuts. Whatever freedoms are left will we swept away for all.

        I can’t find the link, but recently there was a red flag death for a guy who would not comply.

    • Nanny states try to ban anything. Flash hiders, muzzle “breaks” (NY tried that one), gun-mounted lasers-aiming devices (Chicago), adjustable stocks, the list goes on.

      If it’s scary looking, it needs to be banned.

  5. Once again kids…if you trust politicians(like Trump) or the NRA to do your bidding you’re a DOPE. But what praytell does GOA actually DO?!? Besides take $…

    • That’s all any of them do is take money and yet people are so filled with fear and won’t draw that line in the sand they just keep forking it over. Only to have a slow painful death of a right. I say stop paying and just say come and take them and make sure those chicken shit politicians are in the stack when they line up to come in the door. I personally would have a whole lot of hurt waiting for them.

      • I agree completely. Unfortunately, over many decades, I haven’t seen the People of Liberty galvanized enough to do it. There have been times when they were close but they didn’t strike when the iron was hot. They kept waiting for martial law, door-to-door, or something. Eventually, division set in, leadership spun off and narrowly focused the group. The end results were dwindled numbers and ineffective groups.

        Similarly, groups of the last decade that I’ve been involved with started off with high energy and participation. Eventually, they focused exclusively on the republican party and then Trump, cult of personality. Instead of remaining focused on liberty and looking past the differences of their members, they cut their own throats. I do not dislike Trump and I agree that he was the best choice when time for voting came around and that the republicans are less harmful to liberty in the shorter term. However, to drill down to such exacting dogma and to drag their heels for so long meant that they lost the greater membership. They lost sight of the objective; restoration and preservation of individual liberty.

        ** And no, I would only vote leftist/democrat if I wanted the frog to boil fast enough to make it jump. That is something myself and many others considered and continue to consider. However, NONE of those involved when the groups were strong and focused on liberty were democrat/leftists. They would have been welcomed as long as they fought diligently in the cause of liberty but, it turned out that real leftists weren’t interested in individual freedoms (go figure).

        • Agreed. Personally I never considered the boiling frog analogy but maybe that’s what it will take. Instead of this slow death just crank up the fire and see where the frog lands. It can really only go one of two ways. People will realize that their individual freedom is worth it and stand against the machine, or kneel and submit betraying those that would fight.

        • “Instead of this slow death just crank up the fire and see where the frog lands. It can really only go one of two ways.”

          That’s exactly the thinking of some of us. People might hate me for stating it, but it’s unfortunate that AOC is too young to run for president. Her idiocy might just boil the frog enough.

          There is another, more global side to causing the frog to boil faster. Imagine the military and technological might of the United States (along with the petro-dollar) in the hands of a full-on socialist/communist regime. That would be a disaster for humanity on a global scale. Never before has humanity seen a time when governments possessed such military might and the technical ability to track virtually every person on the planet. That’s dangerous. That’s the potential for absolute tyranny on the grandest scale every witnessed. IMHO, it’s better to jack the heat to full tilt. Either the frog will jump or the assets of the most powerful nation on Earth will be destroyed before the tyrants get their hands fully on it.

        • “People might hate me for stating it, but it’s unfortunate that AOC is too young to run for president. Her idiocy might just boil the frog enough.”

          Over the 50 years I’ve been actively engaged in the 2nd Amendment defense I have never seen an increase in anyone’s standing by willingly acquiessing or actually hoping (or helping) those who would trample us gain power in an effort to “wake up the rest”. Insanity!

          As cynical as many are around this site, I believe the end result would be abject tyranny and a bunch of rag-tag gomers meeting secretly in a basement out in the boonies once in a while, drinking Old Mill and whining to each other whike worshipping an old rusty bump stock or SKS that was still being kept by someone. They’d probably even pass it around between meetings for safe-keeping…

          Long-term survival of the Second Amendment is for all concerned gun owners, including the crazies to finally wake up, act somewhat civilized and seek out other people not in our camp to bring them into the shooting/gun-owning fraternity. At our nation’s founding a high percentage of Americans kept firearms for protection and supplementation of their food supply- the same has not existed in generations. For the most part as far as many suburban Americans are concerned, there is little actual need for a firearm, especially when the government that taxes us spends a fair amount of those tax dollars trying to take away out liberties.

          The average person now has to find a reason to own a gun today and I submit that done correctly, the primary interest at first is the fun factor. Shooting is fun, and rolling a can around with a 10-22 or other semiauto is a blast. (Pun intended) So is running a mag through your Glock or AR. Accuracy or practicality be damned, it’s just cool. Get your friends and colleagues shooting- at your expense. Now. If they have never shot they have no idea of the enjoyment plinking can bring. Once they are introduced they can then, perhaps, form a link to the primary original intent for one to have the firearm in this nation. Those who have not owned guns nor experienced the act of shooting for enjoyment will never come on board with us. There’s just no reason. It’s up to us to promote our activity first to hook them, then bring them into the philosophy. Hoping for some Leftist to win just to “show everyone else” is crazy.

    • On this they’ve been a part of the appeals process, to no avail. I wonder though, yesterday when the DC circuit granted a stay and said that the membership for the Firearms Policy Foundation were covered by that, why wasn’t GOA, NRA shouting from the rooftops to get people into that camp. They were accepting $1 donations to become a member, which would then temporarily cover you.

  6. You’re exactly right, Rachel. Nothing like a half million freshly minted felons to make the gun grabbers giddy with joy.

  7. It is a Hobson’s choice for sure…submit to the government in the short term to preserve your liberty; but by doing so, you are ceding your liberty to the government.

  8. It is a violation of your 5th amendment, they need to reimburse the price you paid as per the 5th amendment.

  9. What are they doing while they have distracted us with this. Whatever you fear the government is doing, I assure you that they are doing much worse. -30-

  11. Well, honestly, no one ever said freedom would be free. Or fighting for it would be easy, or without significant risk.

    People throughout the world and throughout history have had to fight, kill, and die for their rights and their well being. Unfortunately this time is rapidly approaching us, here, and now. Without getting too corny or dramatic, the point is postulated pretty well by the speech in “Braveheart”, although it’s not a historically accurate movie, the question asked is one that resonates throughout history.

    The question is, are you going to submit, to live confortably for now, or kill others and die, for what is right. Against a superior enemy, none the less. It’s not a unique or new question. And so we enter the next question, will we, will Americans, fight for their rights? Or, will we “beg for scraps from Longshanks table,” and die of old age anyway, and when we do die, regret that we did not fight when we were younger.

    Personally I can see it going either way. Many scream molon labe, and others whine about Americans being too fat to resist. Sometimes people have ways of surprising you, and sometimes people collectively give up. I guess we’ll see.

    • Yes, in the past the dedicated humans always fought to make life better for their descendants, perhaps more so than only for themselves. I don’t see a lot of this any longer- we’ve become very selfish in many of our pursuits.

  12. The rich will always have legal machine guns. No rapid fire guns of the poor. But Obama did make sure that police departments all over the country did get free select fire weapons. They didn’t have to pay for those guns out of their local budgets.

    “FL Billionaire Collects Machine Guns But Doesn’t Want You to Have Guns”

    https://www.ammoland.com/2018/03/fl-billionaire-collects-machine-guns-doesnt-want-guns/#axzz5jDwiB0rR

    “How One Man Got Rich Selling Machine Guns”

    https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2018-04-05/how-one-man-got-rich-buying-and-selling-machine-guns-in-america

    Bump Stock $175
    Machine Gun $8000 and up

    • BTW
      If you don’t believe firearms should be inexpensive then you really don’t support the second amendment. There are many in the gun community who are flat out anti-new technology. You want new things? You will never see them.
      I miss you on the Polite Society podcast Rachel. (sad)

      Introducing the Recoil Rail
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rk9Q30SMPwU

  13. The fundamental flaw in our system is that we’ve allowed a massive Kafkaesque bureaucratic infrastructure into our federal government. Suppose RWA sues and wins a massive settlement. Who pays? The taxpayers that’s who. No government bureaucrat will go to jail, lose his job or be made to pay a financial penalty for violating the rights of American citizens. And both parties support the bureaucracy, so there’s no chance of anyone paying a political price for it.

      • Well letting the hippies teach our kids wasn’t our first mistake. This bureaucratization process has been going on for over a century.

        BTW, I’m a little disappointed not to see a red squiggly line under ‘bureaucratization’. I thought I had just made up that word.

        • I don’t disagree. However, I think that’s just one part of the nature of the beast that the commies exploited. Now, it’s a runaway reaction; a raging forest fire. It requires no more energy in to run it. All that’s needed is for those liberty loving individuals to do nothing and it will burn the free society to the ground… all on its own momentum.

  14. This is why the 2A is actually a myth. Look, you can, in most states, defend yourself from a person bent on doing you harm. But, what if that person has a badge..? In general (let me state it again: IN GENERAL) when the “state” moves against you (for ANY reason) your death is the eventual outcome in EVERY situation where you refuse to submit and they fail to subdue you. You will, eventually die of “high velocity lead poisoning” in a no-knock, or in front of a gov. sniper’s reticle; perhaps even when they blame YOU for setting fire to your own “compound”……(4/19/93 style)…..
    And who will stand with you? who will pledge their lives, fortunes and sacred honor.??? Who, and how many will risk their farm or home because your’e is being taken? who will risk their lives and families because YOU are being disarmed.? Is your name “Bundy”.? No,? then I think the answer would be NONE for most, and precious few for the truly lucky. And you will, in all likelihood, DIE along with anyone who stands with you. Are you ready to die? Are you ready to watch friends, family, and innocent people die.? Because it will happen, And this whole nation is brainwashed to lament the loss, not of you and your’s but, rather, any and all who fallen to your fire only because they hold a badge, a gun, or government title; all because they were “just doing their jobs” to “feed their families” and now “their” children have been robbed of “their” fathers…
    And that is the way it is. and that is the way it will continue to be. Cowards begetting cowards. The arrogant boot of the state “treading” on the neck of the submissive patriot. The revolution was not ignited due to the five who died on the streets in the Boston Massacre; nor the outrage of the Tea Tax, the Stamp Act or the numerous other inconveniences that they were made to suffer. Nor because if those hanged here and their because of their refusal to submit (treason).. It happened because people were witness “enough” offences, enough hangings, enough executions, enough property burned, taken, or destroyed, Enough DEATH. Not one, or two. Nor just here, or there; but enough and right in front of them; their neighbors, friends, families. Only when they had seen enough did they have enough. And even then, when the “men were men” how many actually took up arms for liberty. ? Some say just 3%…..?….
    So the question is: do you comply and and submit to remain a “good” and “law abiding” subject Will you continue to look upon those that come for you and your property as anything more than ARMED THIEVES ready to kill for their whims of their own masters.? Do you hold out false hope that things may eventually fall in your favor thanks to the “law” that they, themselves control, execute and pervert.? NO..? then are you ready to be one if the ones who is first to fall on the snow streets of Boston and later Lexington Green.? Ate you willing to add your spilled blood to what would have to become a choking, drowning wave that would, eventually, sicken the lesser inclined countrymen to action that”may” lead to restoration.? Are you willing to have your name forgotten so that others ma come to enjoy the liberty denied you,? Are you willing to die.? Ate you willing to die on your feet..? That is the real question. Because, if not, then the 2A is all just a show, and you don’t deserve it’s protections. Are you “really” willing to die for your freedoms,? I am…!
    Everyone dreams of firing the finale shots at Yorktown. Few, if any wish to lay bleeding at Concord Bridge……….

    • Some were willing to die and have died doing the bidding for those that attempt to destroy freedom. I don’t think there is any doubt if those some choose to stand against that tyranny they would hesitate for a second. Death is certain there is no escape. How you greet death I believe is what’s important. Do we cowar and try to hide from it only to succumb anyway, or do we live a life without regret and greet death with an open door when it comes knocking? What does being remembered mean, famous or infamous, anyway? Looking back at my family history my Great Grandmother was cousins with Jessie and Frank James. Outlaws are what they are remembered for. But why? Because they they were willing to fight for what they believed at the time. Thomas Jefferson said it best. The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants, that is it’s natural manure. Another is Roosevelt’s Man in the arena speech. “It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds; who knows great enthusiasms, the great devotions; who spends himself in a worthy cause; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat.”

    • This is my criticism of the people who go on about how the Constitution’s text doesn’t matter because it’s just listing ‘natural rights.’ Your only natural right is one which you have the power to take for yourself. It’s not much of a right if your attempt to express it ends quickly with you locked in prison or killed.

      It is possible that the government could do something so onerous that it would foment something like a rebellion, although I suspect it would be more like a handful of Ruby Ridges and Wacos (still bad). More likely, it will be like this. Pass a law. Those that fail to comply simply do that; they don’t follow the law. They are picked off randomly or not but not in groups or at the same time.

  15. Can’t wait for the rebellion to start,,, that’s when you’ll find out who you’re friends & patriots are…

    • “Can’t wait for the rebellion to start,,, that’s when you’ll find out who you’re friends & patriots are…”

      Well, then- what’s stopping you? Grab your guns and get in the streets! Lead on! Start your little rebellion. I think you’ll be sorry who your cell mates turn out to be, however.

      You can’t wait??? This kind of drivel on what is really “social media” is exactly what scares the average suburbanite into thinking we need “Red Flag Laws” to protect them. If that thinking is the best we can come up with we deserve to be enslaved.

  16. First. I don’t think bump stocks should be illegal on the federal, or state level. Second, is it protected under the second amendment? Not sure. After all, it’s an accessory. Not a weapon. Third, in my opinion, it’s novelty to be sold in Wal-Mart. Along with Halloween masks. You want an automatic weapon. Buy one. According to current ATFE rules. Do I like that? No. But, it is what it is. Of course, once again, full auto weapons hold no fascination for me. Carried one all of my adult life because I was issued one. Over rated. Despite Hollywood.

    • Imagine where we would be if the men who started, fought, and won the Revolutionary War had said we don’t like it but it is what it is? Is that a valid argument, it is what it is? Or is that conceding defeat on knees asking for mercy? Just as well bow your head put your hands outs and beg for your soup and bread.

      • Iraqvet2003, first thanks for your service. MOS 11B1P myself. My reference to “it is what it is” was related to full auto weapons and Miller vs. U.S. as I said, I don’t like it; but if you feel strongly why don’t you take it to SCOTUS? Maybe you can do better than Miller.

        • Miller was about interstate transportation short barreled shotguns, not automatic weapons.
          Miller didn’t have any representation at the SCOTUS case.

          Read a little before you quote something that doesn’t apply.

          Even Wikipedia.

          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Miller

          “…Defendants Miller and Layton filed a demurrer challenging the relevant section of the National Firearms Act as an unconstitutional violation of the Second Amendment. District Court Judge Heartsill Ragon accepted the claim and dismissed the indictment, stating, “The court is of the opinion that this section is invalid in that it violates the Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, U.S.C.A., providing, ‘A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.'” Judge Ragon provided no further explanation of his reasons.
          In reality, Ragon was in favor of the gun control law and ruled the law unconstitutional because he knew that Miller, who was a known bank robber and had just testified against the rest of his gang in court, would have to go into hiding as soon as he was released. He knew that Miller would not pay a lawyer to argue the case at the Supreme Court and would simply disappear. Therefore, the government’s appeal to the Supreme Court would be a sure win because Miller and his attorney would not even be present at the argument.[2] [3]
          On March 30, 1939, the Supreme Court heard the case. Attorneys for the United States argued four points:
          The NFA is intended as a revenue-collecting measure and therefore within the authority of the Department of the Treasury.
          The defendants transported the shotgun from Oklahoma to Arkansas, and therefore used it in interstate commerce.
          The Second Amendment protects only the ownership of military-type weapons appropriate for use in an organized militia.
          The “double barrel 12-gauge Stevens shotgun having a barrel less than 18 inches in length, bearing identification number 76230″ was never used in any militia organization.
          Neither the defendants nor their legal counsel appeared at the Supreme Court. A lack of financial support and procedural irregularities prevented counsel from traveling.[4] Miller was found shot to death in April, before the decision was rendered.[5] …”

  18. I would hope that RW files a massive tax loss for lost inventory. They might not get compensated directly, but should have enough carryover to not pay taxes for years. After all, these weren’t seized illegal property – they were turned in while still legal.

  19. The underlying issue of the bump stock ban is rate of fire. If you can fire more than x number of rounds per minute, your firearm is a machine gun. How many rounds per minute are permissible, 60? 50? 30? 20? How long will it be before some drooling moron in the media asserts, “you do not need to be able to fire 10 rounds per minute to hunt deer”? I can just picture some bug-eyed, horse faced member of the US House of Representatives calling for mandating “smart guns” with an electronic timer that prevents firing more than 3 rounds per minute. After all, we do need to “invent new technology that hasn’t even been invented yet”. The danger of the Trump bump stock ban is in the precedent it sets.

    • So does that mean that the fingers of people like Jerry Miculek are illegal. Granted he may not be as fast as a machine gun but he can certainly give one a run for its money. In all seriousness though saying you can’t fire so many rounds in a minute with an assisting device is almost as asinine as saying you can’t fire a certain number of rounds with your finger.

    • People have been warning about this “mission creep” ever since Trump opened his fat mouth about it. I TOLD YA’ SO, just doesn’t quite say it.

    • A machine gun already has a definition that has been in place for over 100 years. It is not defined by how many rounds come out the gun per minute, it is defined by how many rounds come out the gun per pull of the trigger. One pull equals one shot leaving the weapon is not a machine gun. One pull equals more than one shot leaving the weapon is a machine gun.

      This arbitrary new ruling going against the bump stock is what the ATF has already ruled as a part, not a machine gun. Then back tracking to say it is now a machine gun, which it is not by the definition of a machine gun and the ATF’s own statement. Since they are banning a previously legal part, they need to reimburse every owner the cost of the part as per our own Constitution in the fifth amendment.

      The 1789 written amendment approved by congress. Notice the last line. By the way I roughly figure it, the US government needs to pay out a total of just under $1 billion to individuals who own a bump stock.

      “No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.”

    • We can’t talk about that option because that will get you SWAT’d.

      Modern Americans are not much different than Australians and New Zealanders. They are very law abiding and peaceful.

  22. Personally, I never got into the bump stock thing. Figured my finger works fine. So my personal dog in this fight is not bumpstocks themselves. It’s the process that was followed: buy your bumpstock legally, then we’ll change the rules and make you a felon for owning the bumpstock you legally purchased. And here I thought this constitutional republic took a dim view of ex post facto laws and regulations. Hmmm…

  24. While I hate to see a crack in our armor, I see no useful use for a bump stock. Even freedom has limits before becoming license. Having said that, I didn’t want one, so am not inconvenienced, while several friends say they do have one. But the key here is that this is a government “taking without compensation”, and no one seems to want to fight that fight. Also, it is the result of a LAW CHANGE, so if you bought one legally before the change under THEN EXISTING LAW, you should be compensated. We can only hope someone or group will challenge this on that basis. While we likely would lose any NEW PURCHASES after the effective date, at least those who properly bought an item legally before the change did nothing illegal up until the government changed its mind. A good lawyer could make a case from this, and you know bump stocks will appear on the black market from other countries and perhaps our own. Just don’t get caught with it, or even with luck, you are looking at an expensive legal fight and possibly prison time. Such is life, sadly. And y’all are right: the fight against semi-auto guns is not over yet…..

  25. Proposed 25 September 1789
    Ratified 15 December 1791

    No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

    Bill of Rights
    Trials and Takings

  26. Proposed 25 September 1789
    Ratified 15 December 1791

    In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.

    Bill of Rights
    Speedy Trial

  27. Proposed 25 September 1789
    Ratified 15 December 1791

    In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.

    Bill of Rights
    Trial by Jury

  28. Proposed 25 September 1789
    Ratified 15 December 1791

    Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

    Bill of Rights
    Cruel and Unusual

  29. Proposed 25 September 1789
    Ratified 15 December 1791

    The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

    Bill of Rights
    Unenumerated Rights

  30. Proposed 25 September 1789
    Ratified 15 December 1791

    The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

    Bill of Rights
    Delegated Powers

  31. Proposed 13 June 1866
    Ratified 9 July 1868

    1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

    2. Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice-President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State.

    3. No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.

    4. The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void.

    5. The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.

    Adaption of the 14th
    Due Process

  32. When groups of somebody tries to tell that this Amendments DON’T mean what they say, or that there WRONG…You KNOW you have a serious problem with YOUR Government!!!!

  33. I can’t help but notice that I don’t hear as much about how this is a brilliant 3D chess game being played by Trump to somehow neuter the AFT and NFA.

  34. Hmm – and this guy who clearly lied to me, who does not stand behind the constitution / our 2nd amendment REALLY believed he will get people voting for him again??

    He lost my vote, trust and support – just like the useless NRA.

  35. If this illegal redefining what constitutes a machine gun is upheld, then the Government can define ALL semi-auto firearms as a “machine gun”. Why? Because now they can be “readily converted.”
    Hoping saner minds prevail in Court to see that new definition makes no sense at all. Trigger is repeatedly manipulated by the shooter’s finger, just with assistance. And if you practice,you can do by yourself,no bump stock needed. go to 30 seconds in the video. one shot, then 99 in just about 6 seconds.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g62m7yOhgRY

  36. When trumps bump stock ban started is the time my support for him ended.

    trump also claimed that when it comes to gun owners you seize the guns first and due process later, that didn’t help either.

    GOA is still trying to stop the ban but their efforts is failing

Comments are closed.