Skip to comments.DoJ Rules That Bump Fire Stocks Are Now Machine Guns, Fall Under NFA Regulation
Posted on 11/15/2018 8:06:39 AM PST by Simon Green
The Department of Justice is issuing a rulemaking that would interpret the statutory definition of machine gun in the National Firearms Act of 1934 and Gun Control Act of 1968 to clarify whether certain devices, commonly known as bump-fire stocks, fall within that definition.
Thats the intro (or abstract) to the DoJs newly issued public rule following their re-examination of the classification of bump fire stocks. This, of course, was done after last years Las Vegas Mandalay Bay shooting in which 58 people were killed and hundreds more were injured. That was the only crime in which a bump fire stock had ever been used.
The ATF had issued an approval letter to SlideFire for their bump fire stock back in 2010 that read, in part:
The stock has no automatically functioning mechanical parts or springs and performs no automatic mechanical function when installed. Accordingly, we find that the bump-stock is a firearm part and is not regulated as a firearm under Gun Control Act or the National Firearms Act.
That was, of course, the correct ruling under the law as written.
In February, however, President Trump directed Justice to take another look at them, a move that was supported at the time by the NRA. He apparently wanted the ATF to look deeply into the emanations and penumbras of the law to see if, just maybe, there was a way to look at bump fire stocks in a whole new way.
Well, take another look they have, and to the surprise of no one now that were past the midterms, the DoJ has now classified bump fire stocks as NFA-regulated items, the legal equivalent of a machine gun.
This rule is intended to clarify that the statutory definition of machinegun includes certain devices (i.e., bump-stock-type devices) that, when affixed to a firearm, allow that firearm to fire automatically with a single function of the trigger, such that they are subject to regulation under the National Firearms Act (NFA) and the Gun Control Act (GCA). The rule will amend 27 CFR 447.11, 478.11, and 479.11 to clarify that bump-stock-type devices are machineguns as defined by the NFA and GCA because such devices allow a shooter of a semiautomatic firearm to initiate a continuous firing cycle with a single pull of the trigger. Specifically, these devices convert an otherwise semiautomatic firearm into a machinegun by functioning as a self-acting or self-regulating mechanism that harnesses the recoil energy of the semiautomatic firearm in a manner that allows the trigger to reset and continue firing without additional physical manipulation of the trigger by the shooter.
You can read the full rule here.
Theres only one problem. As stated above,
such devices allow a shooter of a semiautomatic firearm to initiate a continuous firing cycle with a single pull of the trigger.
Thats demonstrably false. As anyone whos used one can tell you, a bump fire stock slides back and forth, allowing the shooter to pull the trigger faster. But the rifle still fires only one round per trigger pull. It may simulate rapid fire approximating what a fully automatic weapon does, but its still semi-automatic.
That, of course, was the basis for the ATFs original approval eight years ago. But the law and the facts apparently arent in play when there are larger, political considerations.
From the rules costs and benefits section:
This rule provides significant non-quantifiable benefits to public safety. Among other things, it clarifies that a bump-stock-type device is a machinegun and limits access to them; prevents usage of bump-stock-type devices for criminal purposes; reduces casualties in mass shootings, such as the Las Vegas shooting; and helps protect first responders by preventing shooters from using a device that allows them to shoot a semiautomatic firearm automatically.
Just how the DoJ plans to handle the millions of unregistered bump fire stocks that are already owned by the public isnt clear.
So far, theres no word from the administration as to when they intend to begin the notice and comment process on the proposed reclassification of rubber bands as machine guns, but well keep you informed.
Better outlaw those evil rubber bands, too.
Since when does the DOJ issue definitions of NFA? That has been the authority of the AFT, a branch of the Treasury department.
Many of the AR-15s displayed by the Clark County Sheriff had bi-pods on them. Wouldn’t this negate the advantage of a “bump fire stock?” The weapon could not “recoil” sufficiently to re-charge it, I wouldn’t think. But I’ve never owned a bump stock.
He is gone, or didnt you get the memo???
No delegated power for the NFA. It’s all just progressive lawlessness.
Department of Justice issued ...
Cowardly bureaucrats. Just like the leftist editorial boards. I want names; they are pubic servants after all. If we had the names, we could at least complain to our elected representatives, sign petitions etc.
Oh, I’ll just leave the tying error.
Rubber bands are far superior to bump-stocks.
Idiocy aside, I note that the ruling says “When attached to a firearm”.
So, it is legal when not attached.
This is more of that idiotic stuff, like the ATF claiming that a wrist-brace for a pistol AR is legal, but the second you SHOULDER it, it becomes an SBR.
Read the description - it is FALSE.
While using a bump stock, the fire arm remains semi-automatic. To fire a round, it still requires that the trigger be manually operated.
Time for a lawsuit - which 2nd amendment group is going to file? I kind of doubt that it will be the NRA.
Technically true I guess
“Better outlaw those evil rubber bands, too.”
Are shoe strings in or out today? They have been all over the BATFE map in the past.
“President Trump has now implemented more gun control in his first two years than Obama did in eight”
He didn’t...Sessions did.
Whatever you do, DO NOT tell them about belt loops!
Read where you can achieve the same thing with bungee cords.
Thanks. You’ve just given the feds the justification to arrest anyone they want if that person is in possession of a rubber band. And I don’t make that statement lightly. Stupider things have happened.
I understand the ignorance of the general public as it pertains to guns, automatics, etc. I mention this because I'm sure a huge portion of the population shares my sentiment. They ( and I ) think this is no big deal.
The perception of these twice-monthly mass shootings is becoming a problem. Facts won't matter. It's becoming an issue, and I suspect will become more of an elective issue for conservatives. DJT seems to be on the verge of tweaking gun laws to stem the blowback. So, imho, this and tweaks to enforcement, and mental health evaluations are pre-emptive and perhaps helpful 1st steps.
Please advise why I'm misguided, and then evaluate if your argument will hold up against the anti-gunners out there.
Trump did no such thing, and you damn well know it.
Next thing you know the sons of bitches will re-classify revolvers as NFA.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.