• ODT Gun Show & Swap Meet - May 4, 2024! - Click here for info

Status of Bump Stocks

Has the binary trigger been outlawed too? Haven’t heard much about them.
No. They limited the wording of this rule change to pretty much just the bump fire style stocks, but there's already companies saying they have a bump style devices that don't meet the definition of the new rule change so it's gonna be interesting to see if they get ATF approval or not.
 
So I gave this some more thought during my morning BM, and this is what plopped out...

Here is an analogy, to make clear my thought process on this bump stock fiasco.

My opinion on this is that bump stocks, given the NFA regulations around full auto weapons, should never have been approved for sale to begin with. There, I said it. Now, I *WANT* products like this to be sold, because I don't think that there SHOULD be an NFA. But while the NFA is the law of the land, it is what it is.

Being that the product CLEARLY was an attempt to get around that law and achieve largely the same result, I don't think it should have been on the market.

It's like this... Let's say you look at your pay stub one day, and see that there is a substantial raise. It puts your salary beyond the max that the company allows for your role... but it's there. So you figure, if they are gonna pay it, it "must be ok", and so you enjoy that bump in pay even though on some part of your brain, you question whether it is truly legit. But you decide that as long as they keep giving it to you, you might as well spend it.

And then one day something happens, and it puts salaries on the radar, front and center, of Accounting. They do an audit and realize they made an error, something that really should not have been approved, somehow was, and so they decide to reduce your salary to where it was supposed to be all along.

Do you get mad, demand that they give you back the salary that you sorta know wasn't really accurate to begin with? Or do you just say, "Well, I got higher pay than I was supposed to for awhile, so I will just consider myself lucky during that time and call it a day"...

It's an analogy, a means to convey a CONCEPT here, so don't waste time trying to deploy the usual logical fallacies to find some point to contend so that you can "win the internet"...

We all know that bump stocks were intended to thwart the NFA restrictions on full auto. And as such, the BATF should never have approved it for sale to begin with, and we would not be mad that Trump signed an OE, etc... This ball started rolling because a product was approved, in error, IMHO.

Next will be braces. We all know that won't last forever. So long as there is an NFA and restrictions on SBR's and crap like that, we know that we are on borrowed time as far as building braced pistols. 99.99% of the people here, reading this, buying or building AR or AK, Scorpion, etc... "pistols", are build non-NFA SBR's. They are shouldering and shooting them as rifles. And the braces, despite whatever disclaimer they had to put on the paperwork to get approved, are intended for that purpose. Let's not lie to ourselves.

We were granted a reprieve when the BATF said to go ahead and shoulder them, but that's not gonna last forever. At some point they are gonna look at the numbers and go... Hmmm, do we really have 19 million one armed or severely injured AR15 owners that require braces to shoot one handed?

We know it's a loophole, and we use it as such. And BECAUSE it is a loophole, we should be realistic enough to know that at some point, just like any other loophole that lets us skirt the law, there is a good chance they will close it down.

I don't WANT that to happen, I think people should be able to own whatever they want, but so long as we have NFA and other laws on the books, that's the reality here. Get our legislators to scale back the NFA. Get SBR's and suppressors off the list, etc... Then all of this fiasco, goes away.
 
I've always said the ATF screwed the pooch on the initial bump-stock ruling.

There was never any doubt that the Slide-Fire was meant to simulate 'full auto' rates of fire. However the justification in the ATF request was that this would allow disabled vets to use their semi-autos while hunting and sport shooting.

All the ATF had to do was tell SF that to be approved they would need to put a cam or latch on it so pulling forward on the stock would only result in a single shot being fired until the system was 'reset' by pulling it towards the rear or something.

That certainly would have solved the problem then and there, and been much more consistent with their past rulemaking as well.
 
So I gave this some more thought during my morning BM, and this is what plopped out...

Here is an analogy, to make clear my thought process on this bump stock fiasco.

My opinion on this is that bump stocks, given the NFA regulations around full auto weapons, should never have been approved for sale to begin with. There, I said it. Now, I *WANT* products like this to be sold, because I don't think that there SHOULD be an NFA. But while the NFA is the law of the land, it is what it is.

Being that the product CLEARLY was an attempt to get around that law and achieve largely the same result, I don't think it should have been on the market.

It's like this... Let's say you look at your pay stub one day, and see that there is a substantial raise. It puts your salary beyond the max that the company allows for your role... but it's there. So you figure, if they are gonna pay it, it "must be ok", and so you enjoy that bump in pay even though on some part of your brain, you question whether it is truly legit. But you decide that as long as they keep giving it to you, you might as well spend it.

And then one day something happens, and it puts salaries on the radar, front and center, of Accounting. They do an audit and realize they made an error, something that really should not have been approved, somehow was, and so they decide to reduce your salary to where it was supposed to be all along.

Do you get mad, demand that they give you back the salary that you sorta know wasn't really accurate to begin with? Or do you just say, "Well, I got higher pay than I was supposed to for awhile, so I will just consider myself lucky during that time and call it a day"...

It's an analogy, a means to convey a CONCEPT here, so don't waste time trying to deploy the usual logical fallacies to find some point to contend so that you can "win the internet"...

We all know that bump stocks were intended to thwart the NFA restrictions on full auto. And as such, the BATF should never have approved it for sale to begin with, and we would not be mad that Trump signed an OE, etc... This ball started rolling because a product was approved, in error, IMHO.

Next will be braces. We all know that won't last forever. So long as there is an NFA and restrictions on SBR's and crap like that, we know that we are on borrowed time as far as building braced pistols. 99.99% of the people here, reading this, buying or building AR or AK, Scorpion, etc... "pistols", are build non-NFA SBR's. They are shouldering and shooting them as rifles. And the braces, despite whatever disclaimer they had to put on the paperwork to get approved, are intended for that purpose. Let's not lie to ourselves.

We were granted a reprieve when the BATF said to go ahead and shoulder them, but that's not gonna last forever. At some point they are gonna look at the numbers and go... Hmmm, do we really have 19 million one armed or severely injured AR15 owners that require braces to shoot one handed?

We know it's a loophole, and we use it as such. And BECAUSE it is a loophole, we should be realistic enough to know that at some point, just like any other loophole that lets us skirt the law, there is a good chance they will close it down.

I don't WANT that to happen, I think people should be able to own whatever they want, but so long as we have NFA and other laws on the books, that's the reality here. Get our legislators to scale back the NFA. Get SBR's and suppressors off the list, etc... Then all of this fiasco, goes away.

I see your point but Im not convinced by what you're saying.

Whats the point of having written law? I get that bump stocks are a loophole and they make guns fire similarly to machine guns but what about binary triggers? I mean they work way better and more efficiently than stupid bump stocks, but they are still legal. What does this executive action prove to us as gun owners? It proves to me that Trump and his office disregarded and said **** it to the written statutes that our country has followed for the past 80+ years, the NFA.

Ok, Trump you wanna ban bump stocks. Great! But do it the right ****ing way, not some bull**** executive order that leaves the door open for future dems to dig deeper with their executive privilege and ban more stuff.

Yes bump stocks were on the slippery slope since the get go but defending the way they were banned or saying it was understandable because of the nature of this product is bowing down to a government overreach
 
This thread in a nutshell
1554042618834.jpg
 
To all you people who say that while today it's just "bump stocks" that get banned by ATF's administrative rulings, TOMORROW it could be all semi-autos (the slippery slope argument):

Don't you realize that bump fire stocks are a new invention? They're only 10-15 years old, and most normal (casual) gun owners didn't even realize they existed until the Las Vegas massacre in 2017. Bump stocks weren't talked about in Guns & Ammo magazine, or The American Rifleman, or more tactical magazines intended for survivalists and cops and mercenaries. Bump stocks were and always have been what the law calls an "outlier" -- an extreme example on the very fringes of some group or classification.

Congress intended NOT to have semi-auto guns classified as machineguns in the NFA. Congress knew damned well what semi-auto guns were. They'd been on the market for at least 40 years at that point, and they were getting more and more popular every decade from the early 1900's onward. Congress knew that all you had to do was pull the trigger fast to make a semi-auto gun fire fast. How in the world can you say ATF is going to ban semi-autos by reclassifying them as machine guns when Congress could have done that but chose NOT to, and created the best wording they knew of at the time to draw a line between unrestricted semi-autos and tightly restricted full autos?

The "slippery slope" of ATF reinterpretation of key NFA terms might apply to binary triggers, which were also unknown to Congress, and even gun experts, back in the 1930s. That could happen, one day. But not all semi-autos, with normal triggers.
 
Back
Top Bottom