Feinstein's Bumpfire Ban Bill

OK... I'm convinced.

I think bump-fire stock are a gimmick, but on principle I now think an attempted ban would be a bad thing.... For the repurcussions...

Again I say, good luck against this
 
The Colorado magazine ban was no doubt a total waste, from the standpoint of any positive influence on crime. But the political benefits may have won legislators more support. Universal background checks evidently have interfered with gun purchases by prohibited persons.
Click to expand...

A lot of political votes are about assuring you win a primary challenge or are not challenged. While I fully support gun rights I cannot recall a recent election where gun right concerns were the deciding factor in how I voted and only one where they even were a consideration.

My guess is, without getting too political in nature, that those who push for gun regulation use it as a "look at what I have been trying to do" with the base if they are challenged in primaries but don't ever actually expect to see it on the floor of the house or Senate in a form that is actually going to become law (see past repeal votes of the "affordable" care act). They can go back to their base and say "look what I have been trying" and then ignore it for the most part in a general election.
 
I cannot recall a recent election where gun right concerns were the deciding factor in how I voted and only one where they even were a consideration.
Click to expand...

For years now gun rights have been a huge factor as to how I vote . Not so much as to if you are pro gun I'm voting for you . Rather if you're anti gun you will never get my vote .
 
Colorado Redneck
Universal background checks evidently have interfered with gun purchases by prohibited persons.
Click to expand...

Maybe. But while the "debate" raged, I looked up a Colorado state statistic that measured gun crimes committed by felons. The latest stats (back then) were from 2011, but the number was minuscule compared to the "40% unreported" annual person-to-person sales that antis claim goes on. Something like a dozen or a couple dozen. Of course, when I sent this info to my local rep and asked why we needed more gov't intrusion and expenses designed to combat a .0001% problem,,,,,He said: wait for it with me.... yeah, keep waiting with me.
 
The question still remains, why are politicians so determined to pass more gun laws that any reasonable person can see are not going to stop the deranged person from committing another mass shooting ? It is a possibility that the final goal of the anti gun politicians is to disarm the public entirely. Is banning the bump fire stock going to stop the next mass shooting ? The NYSA was passed in the middle of the night with no in put from anyone other than the politicians that wanted it passed.
 
I am not going to "die on the hill" in regards to bump stocks or cranks or things that are designed as range toys to attempt to bridge a gap between semi-auto and full auto.
Click to expand...
Understood, and if we the people did "wind up on the hill" this could very well be the starting cause/factor to be on the hill, down the slippery road that may get paved because of it.
 
Understood, and if we the people did "wind up on the hill" this could very will be the starting cause/factor to be on the hill, down the slippery road that may get paved because of it.
Click to expand...

If there was a starting point to the slippery slope we are LONG past it and on the slide downward.

We are not even discussing if the NFA is valid right now. We are discussing if the bump fire stock belonged on it with full auto weapons.
 
It's the Republicans' turn...

Since the thread specifically about the topic was locked down, I'd like to mention that a very similar bill has been filed in the House by Republican Carlos Curbelo of Florida.

As with DiFi's bill, this one broadly bans any modifications that increase the rate of fire of a semi-auto firearm, without clearly defining what those modifications might be. :eek:

This has been met by a flurry of criticism from Breitbart.com, the Military Arms Channel on YouTube, and others.

According to Rep. Curbelo's Congressional webpage, the bill is (or was originally...!) cosponsored by:

Republicans

Carlos Curbelo (FL-26)
Peter King (NY-2)
Leonard Lance (NJ-7)
Patrick Meehan (PA-7)
Ed Royce (CA-39)
Chris Smith (NJ-4)
Erik Paulsen (MN-3)
Ryan Costello (PA-6)
Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (FL-27)
Charlie Dent (PA-15)

Democrats

Seth Moulton (MA-6)
Jared Polis (CO-2)
Robin Kelly (IL-2)
Jacky Rosen (NV-3)
Beto O’Rourke (TX-16)
Matt Cartwright (PA-17)
Tulsi Gabbard (HI-2)
Ruben Kihuen (NV-4)
John Delaney (MD-6)
Gene Green (TX-29)
 
Last edited:
WaPo op-ed on gun control - https://www.washingtonpost.com/blog...ong-about-gun-control/?utm_term=.622f560de256

Surprising for them but they have had some reasonable pieces lately.

We also need to be honest about the purpose of the Second Amendment. More precisely, that it does not exist for “hunting” or “recreation” but as a sort of insurance policy against tyrannical government; the ultimate fail-safe, if you will, for the people to defend their natural rights. On that note, we should ask our left-leaning friends — who habitually decry the government’s past slaughter of Native Americans, protest state brutality against people of color and swear Donald Trump is instituting a Fourth Reich — why they would be willing to let Trump’s government diminish their only means of self-defense.
Now how about that Chuck, Nancy, etc.? There have been similar 'progressive' and African-American/Civil Rights analysis of the 2nd Amend. They don't usually penetrate to the gun banner hierarchy.
 
I am not going to "die on the hill" in regards to bump stocks or cranks or things that are designed as range toys to attempt to bridge a gap between semi-auto and full auto.
Click to expand...

Which just means you'll end up dying on some other hill alone in the future since the people who might have fought with you are being defeated in detail while you dilly-dally.

And of course, while this bill is sold as "banning bumpstocks", in reality the vague language means almost any internal operating part of a semi-automatic rifle and half the aftermarket parts for ARs fall within the scope of this bill.

Luckily, we won't face that problem at this moment since they are going to 100% add amendments to this that will make even the Fudds stand and fight. They can barely contain themselves on what else they should go for besides bump stocks.
 
I would fight this bill on the vague wording - I think I have been up front on that.

But I would not fight the intent of this bill. Its bad timing and is fighting over something that is already "gone" in that fully automatic is already on the NFA list. Ideally the battle for full gun rights is a battle to restore the rights lost to the NFA but that is not the battle we are discussing today or in a position to fight.

This is one of those tactical retreats that must be made. Make sure the bill is as well defined and narrow in scope as possible to avoid giving broad authority to the executive branch and move on. All that fighting to save bump-stocks does is help save what is, at most, a range toy with virtually no real use. Regardless we ultimately lose the fight. Why waste political capital fighting it?
 
All that fighting to save bump-stocks does is help save what is, at most, a range toy with virtually no real use.
Click to expand...

No, fighting to save the bump stock is not about saving a toy, it's about stopping the madness proposed by Feinstein, Kaine, Curbelo, etc. and all those who signed on with them. Let this bill through, more will be right on its heals.
 
No, fighting to save the bump stock is not about saving a toy, it's about stopping the madness proposed by Feinstein, Kaine, Curbelo, etc. and all those who signed on with them. Let this bill through, more will be right on its heals.
Click to expand...

Then fight the fight you can win and make the best of the defeats. Let this bill through by opposing it in any form and losing and you grant an incredible amount of power to future administrations due to the vagueness of the language. Work to get language that is livable.

This is not the beginning of a slippery slope. That long since passed with the NFA. Right now it is about winning the battles that we can win and hoping to prevent those we cannot. This battle is here and will ultimately be lost. The key now is to make the loss as minimal as possible.
 
This is one of those tactical retreats that must be made.
Click to expand...

Historically, in ancient combat, most casualties were inflicted on retreating enemies. Once the retreat started, the line broke, and once the line broke, it became a rout.

And that fact that the opening move is a retreat when we have the House, Senate and White House is quite frustrating. If LaPierre pulls off Cannae, I'll happily eat my words.
 
I think the enormous proliferation of semi auto rifles is a direct result of the last ban, and other attempts to ban them. This will exponentially increase the number of firearms in the US.
Only my views, not based on any factual knowledge.
 
I think the enormous proliferation of semi auto rifles is a direct result of the last ban, and other attempts to ban them. This will exponentially increase the number of firearms in the US.
Only my views, not based on any factual knowledge.
Click to expand...

Interesting thought.

A month ago I looked at my collection and thought I was a dope for having too much. Am I now a dope for having too little?
 
I pretty much have satisfied my AR sweet tooth, no potential ban could make me buy another.
I would like some lowers for my spare uppers, but I have no urge to buy any.

I may have overstated a future rush, as many people are probably in the same position as me. The final AR holdouts will probably buy one now, but probably not exponential growth, lol
 
Lohman446 said:
Then fight the fight you can win and make the best of the defeats. Let this bill through by opposing it in any form and losing and you grant an incredible amount of power to future administrations due to the vagueness of the language. Work to get language that is livable.

This is not the beginning of a slippery slope. That long since passed with the NFA. Right now it is about winning the battles that we can win and hoping to prevent those we cannot. This battle is here and will ultimately be lost. The key now is to make the loss as minimal as possible.
Click to expand...
Surrender guarantee's defeat.

I don't buy the logic that if we just go with the flow it won't hurt as bad.

I'll fight them here, and If we loose I'll get back up and fight them 5 paces down the hill.

Im not giving them anything.. They gotta take it.
Just do me the kindness of not grabbing your pom pom's for any bill's.. If you don't wanna fight just sit this one out.

Last thing we need is some puppet "gun owners" legitimizing the crap they're gonna try to shove thru.
 
Surrender guarantee's defeat.

I don't buy the logic that if we just go with the flow it won't hurt as bad.

I'll fight them here, and If we loose I'll get back up and fight them 5 paces down the hill.

Im not giving them anything.. They gotta take it.
Click to expand...

They have made us this way. Why? Because it's never enough. It will never end. if modern sporting rifles were banned, they would move on to handguns. Then probably all semi-auto rifles. Then any other repeater outside of bolt action or possibly pump. And at some point there in , registration, limits on ammo quantities and procurement and more.

First of all, you shouldn't have to compromise on a right. Second, they have offered nothing in return so it isn't actually a compromise. Gun rights have done all the giving with no take.

Hypothetically, if we KNEW gun rights infringement would all end if just bump stocks went away, I would conceded....but it won't. History proves this.

So, I am not even willing to discuss it unless it is accompanied by an offer including suppressors being like any other barrel device, federally granted national concealed carry, and a federal ban on states or municipalities enacting more strict gun laws
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top