Jump to content
308AR.com Community
  • Visit Aero Precision
  • Visit Brownells
  • Visit EuroOptic
  • Visit Site
  • Visit Beachin Tactical
  • Visit Rainier Arms
  • Visit Ballistic Advantage
  • Visit Palmetto State Armory
  • Visit Cabelas
  • Visit Sportsmans Guide
98Z5V

It's done. New "Machinegun" Definition

Recommended Posts

It's not done yet! This is the beginning of a court battle and the law is on our side. Most legal scholars think this regulation will be stopped with an injunction, drug out for years in court, then overturned. Help fight it here;

https://secure.anedot.com/firearms-policy-foundation/bumpstock_legal_action?sc=bumpstock_legal

Get this, a quote from our enemy confirms the legal standing of such a regulation;

After the review was announced, Feinstein said, “current law does not allow the agency to ban or regulate bump-fire stocks” and said Congress needed to act.

This is also just the beginning of another public comment period, good luck finding where to leave comments with a google search! I have yet to find a link that gives the actual instructions for commenting but have seen numerous references to the final 90 day comment period;

https://www.cnn.com/2018/03/23/politics/trump-bump-stocks/index.html

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2018/03/23/doj-proposes-new-ban-bump-stocks-mimic-machine-guns/454638002/

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/3/23/17057856/trump-bump-stocks-guns-florida-shooting

http://wtvr.com/2018/03/23/trump-moves-closer-to-banning-bump-fire-stocks/

 

Here is a quote from the AG;

"Since the day he took office, President Trump has had no higher priority than the safety of each and every American," Sessions said in a statement. "That is why today the Department of Justice is publishing for public comment a proposed rule-making that would define 'machinegun' to include bump stock-type devices under federal law—effectively banning them. After the senseless attack in Las Vegas, this proposed rule is a critical step in our effort to reduce the threat of gun violence that is in keeping with the Constitution and the laws passed by Congress. I look forward to working with the president's School Safety Commission to identify other ways to keep our country and our children safe, and I thank the President for his courageous leadership on this issue."

This isn't over brothers, this is just the pivotal point in the battle, time to grit our teeth and and attack into the ambush! Here is the link for the federal registry, maybe someone smarter than me can find this proposed regulation here, and where to comment!

https://www.federalregister.gov/

Edited by jtallen83
grammar spelling

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gonna be honest here. I cant be mad at any politicians who back a bumpstock ban when so many "pro gun" people back it. Even on this forum, which is unusually woke, there are people who have implied support for it. The collateral damage that comes along with any bumpstock ban, no matter how carefully worded, is unavoidable. Wish everyone would see that before they spout off online about "bumpstocks are stoopid hurdur"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That was my exact concern about all this bumpstock fuss - it could potentially result in the

term "machinegun" being re-defined, this has to be prevented at all costs or it will be disastrous

for the 2nd Ammendment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, jtallen83 said:

Here is the link for the federal registry, maybe someone smarter than me can find this proposed regulation here, and where to comment!

https://www.federalregister.gov/

Here is a more direct link to the proposal.  It gives email, fax and snail-mail instructions on how to respond. 

https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2017/12/26/2017-27898/application-of-the-definition-of-machinegun-to-bump-fire-stocks-and-other-similar-devices

You may submit comments, identified by docket number (2017R-22), by any of the following methods:

  • Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
  • Fax: (202) 648-9741.
  • Mail: Vivian Chu, Mailstop 6N-518, Office of Regulatory Affairs, Enforcement Programs and Services, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives, 99 New York Ave. NE, Washington DC 20226. ATTN: 2017R-22.

Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency name and docket number for this advance notice of proposed rulemaking (ANRPM). All comments received will be posted without change to the Federal eRulemaking portal, http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided. For detailed instructions on submitting comments and additional information on the rulemaking process, see the “Public Participation” section of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep, that is a link to the earlier comment period, the ATF took comments before they submitted this current regulation change. Somewhere there is a place to comment on this latest rule wording but it is being very well hidden. I'm hoping some of the anti 2A will start putting it out to their people so we can find it. I have literally spent hours looking for information on where to comment but just keeping getting articles quoting the ag about the final comment stage.......

I keep hoping Trump 3D chess, he knows that it will be tied up in court, the ag can assign an idiot to represent the government, the government loses and he can blame it on the court. Fingers crossed but I still keep range cards updated...........

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It may be that it has not been placed on the roster yet? Government does work slowly.

Interestingly I did see a regulation proposal to eliminate the "national television audience reach cap" This caps the size of the TV audience that can be reached by an entity at 39% of the TV viewers. Looks like the establishment is trying to further consolidate their propaganda machine.....

https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=FCC-2018-0034-0001

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, unforgiven said:

Cap doesn't matter if they all sing the same song or Am I not seeing it right.

True but the harmony is more effective when they all have the same conductor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...