That’s when commenting closes on the ATF’s Notice of Proposed Rule-Making on Bump-Stock Type Devices.
Recently, the victim disarmers have been flooding the system with pro-ban comments. I’m sure the ATF will use that to justify rationalize implementing the rule, despite the fact that it is based on multiple lies, and claims a criminal use of bump-fire stocks which the Mandalay Bay shooting investigators have refused to confirm. (That’s critical because, before the investigators stopped talking, they early on stated that at least one rifle converted to fully-automatic fire had been found in the killer’s suite in addition to the bump-fire stocked rifles.)
I’ve gone into the many problems of the NPRM already, so I won’t rehash it all. The TL;DR is:
- They lie and say “BSTDs” allow continuous fire with a “single pull of the trigger.”
- If bump-fire stocks convert a semiautomatic firearm into a machine gun, then any firearm that can readily accept a stock can be “readily” converted into a machine gun; under current rules, any firearm which can be readily converted is a machine gun.
- It redefines “machine gun” by theoretical rate of fire, rather than mechanical action. Any firearm which can be fired arbitrarily “fast” becomes a machine gun.
- “Machine gun” is defined in legislation. The ATF lacks authority to arbitrarily expand the definition to new devices.
- The ATF lacks constitutional authority to exist.
This rule will be implemented; that seemed clear from the beginning. Reality matters not. Now, the point of commenting is just to makes sure they understand that we understand and are watching.
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 recurring bills.