[Updated] Bump-fire Rule: “Comments Not Accepted”

ADDED 2: jim notes in comments that the proposed rule can now be found HERE.

That’s nice. Except…

Scroll down. New docket number. Comment count is zero.

Related Dockets: None
Related RINs: None
Related Documents: None

That means this is not tied to the previous notice with existing comments, and those hundreds of comments that were made before are GONE.

Inquiries to the ATF, DOJ, Federal Register, and various congresscritters have gone unanswered. An automated response from the ATF reads, “It is the goal of FIPB to respond to requests from firearms industry members and the general public within 120 days of receipt.”

Nice trick. If comments aren’t going your way, kill the proposal, reissue it without telling anyone, and do over until you get the results you want to justify violating human/civil rights.

I have two comment receipts now, so I can check if the first is permanently evaporated, or if they’ll… restore it.

Original post (and update) follows:

Something is up with the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on “Bump-Stock Type Devices.” I was there earlier this morning checking on comment totals: 941.

I thought of something else I wanted to see again a few minutes ago. I found this.

“Comments Not Accepted”

So I cleared cache/cookies/history/et al and attempted a new comment.

“Document ATF_FRDOC_0001-0036 is no longer open for comment.”

That was supposed to be open for 90 days, until June 29, 2018.

Very odd. Anyone know what’s going on?

Added: I also did a search on the comments submitted before it was closed (remember: there had been at least 941):

Inquiries have been made to DOJ and the Federal Register. No responses yet.

Carl is an unpaid TZP volunteer. If you found this post useful, please consider dropping something in his tip jar. He could use the money, what with truck repairs and bills.



9 thoughts on “[Updated] Bump-fire Rule: “Comments Not Accepted””

  1. You may submit comments, identified by docket number ATF 2017R-22, by any of the following methods:

    Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the directions for submitting comments.
    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.

    1. Thanks for that, Jim.
      The link works, and I shamelessly used part of Carl Bussjaeger’s refutation of mechanical concept that “it’s a machine gun”.
      It’s not, and if this passes it’s one more step toward banning any semi-auto firearm.

  2. Roger that, too many games or too many secrets (remember that movie?). I hope people are waking up to the fact dems and repubs are the same animal. Stock up with everything you can get. Never again….

  3. I just had flashbacks of Richard Nixon. Yes, I am old enough to remember him talking on the television.
    What I remember is him saying ” The American people have a right to know if their president is a crook. Well, I am not a crook.” Shortly, he resigned his office, because he was found to be a crook. And he knew that if he stayed he would be impeached. Based on his covering up the burglary into Watergate hotel, not for actually doing the burglary or even ordering it, but just trying to hide it.
    So I think that I can agree with pretty much all that have spoken here that this is a crooked deal, that once the BATFE’s saw the way that the comments were running, they simply did away with them and started over. And that it will happen again, until they get the results that they want. The Dems and the Repubs are one and the same, and that it is prudent to stock up, no matter what the political climate is.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *