Tag Archives: Bump-Fire

Bumping off… REALITY

I had occasion to review the status of the coming bump-fire stock rule today.

The basic lie about how bump-fire stocks operate is still there, naturally.

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).

But the real fun part is down in “Anticipated Costs and Benefits.”

It is anticipated that the rule will cost $129,222,483 million in the first year (the year with the highest costs).

“$129,222,483 million”

$129,222,483… MILLION.

$129,222,483,000,000

ONE HUNDRED-TWENTY-NINE TRILLION, TWO HUNDRED-TWENTY-TWO BILLION, FOUR HUNDRED-EIGHTY-THREE MILLION EFFING DOLLARS.

Come “12/00/2018” these idiots are going to break the bank.

Perhaps the feds should look into the “anticipated costs” of hiring a proofreader.


Carl is an unpaid TZP volunteer. If you found this post useful, please consider dropping something in his tip jar. He could really use the money, what with truck repairs and recurring bills. And the rabbits need feed. Truck insurance, lest I be forced to sell it. Click here to donate via PayPal.
(More Tip Jar Options)

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinteresttumblrmail

Interesting. WSJ contact about bump-fire stocks.

I just received an email purportedly from the Wall Street Journal’s James V. Grimaldi. It appears to be mailing list, not really to me specifically; it isn’t as if the WSJ knows me from Adam.

But the topic is the ATF’s Notice of Proposed Rule-Making on “Bump-Stock Type Devices.” It wants me to take a survey and verify contact information for possible interview.

Being the suspicious type, I did check email headers for routing, and a few other things. It appears to be legit.

The survey specifically quotes a comment I submitted; it seems they’re going through all 193,000 comments and trying to contact folks.

And…

Yep. I just got another email on a different account. Because I also submitted a comment on behalf of The Zelman Partisans.

Anyone else getting these emailed survey requests?

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinteresttumblrmail

A Foregone Conclusion

As predicted, our pro-RKBA president — who would never put our rights under siege — is going ahead with the bump-fire ban. As urged by the NRA.

That is despite 193,297 comments, of which 85% opposed the rule.

Mostly based on physical reality.

So why is something this blatantly wrong — morally, constitutionally, and physically — going ahead?

“Why” is easy. 1) It’s the perfect lead-in for a complete ban on semiautomatic firearms. 2) Progressive Democrats and police-statist Republicans think they can get away with it.

The “how” do they think they can do this, how did a yammering pack of ignorami come to screech for it, is trickier.

Propagandizing media prostitutes, feeding utter garbage — lies, fake statistics, misdirection –to the masses.

Case in point: a Reuters article about Trump announcing the eminent rule fiat.

U.S. President Donald Trump said on Monday his administration is just a few weeks away from finalizing a regulation that would ban so-called bump stocks, devices that allow semi-automatic weapons to fire like machine guns.

They led with a lie: “fire like machine guns.” Which they don’t. It can sound like a machine gun, but the operation is pure semi-auto. And they know it.

Because I told them.

A year ago in Las Vegas, gunman Stephen Paddock used bump stocks on 12 of his weapons in a mass shooting that killed 58 people and wounded hundreds.

I called them on that claim, as well. No official report — and oddly, not even any unofficial leak which I’ve found — states what firearms were used by the shooter, with the sole exception of the revolver he used on himself. No ballistics data tying rounds fired to any specific weapon have been released to the public.

I told Reuters to provide a source, or retract the claim.

While machine guns are outlawed in the United States, bump stocks
are not.

While machine guns manufactured after May 1986 are outlawed in the United States, bump stocks are not.

Yeah, I called them on that bit of stupidity, which seems to be one of the secret-squirrel-official talking points being pushed recently. Reuters did fix that one.

One outa three ain’t… good.

The media magically made gimmicky training wheels into the weapon of choice of mass murderers everywhere… in an alternate reality.

In this reality, someone involved in the Vegas investigation told reporters that at least one of the shooter’s weapons was an illegal full auto conversion, in addition to the bump-fire stocked rifles.

Which would go far in explaining why bipods would be mounted on “bump-stocked” guns, when that would prevent them being bump-fired.

Within three days, bump-fire stocks became the designated boogeyman. Full-auto dropped from the narrative. Dropped. Never mentioned again, not even to say the person “misspoke.”

And that would far in explaining why the ATF — the official arbiters -gag- all things allowed and/or regulated in the firearms world… was not allowed to examine the shooter’s weapons. Admitting that the scumbag somehow broke existing laws to use real machineguns, and that the silly bump-fire stocked weapons were only emergency backup, would diddle the official OMG-ban-bump-stocks (and lead in for a semiauto ban) bipartisan line.

Trump gives a 2-3 week time frame for his new infringement. By the formal process, it could be as much as 90 days. But it is coming. What now?

Hard to say until we see the exact form of the rule. It sounds like bump-fire stocks will be — as expected — declared to be machineguns, which makes them illegal as they were manufactured after May ’86.

But Trump has been known to exaggerate -roll eyes- so maybe they’ll get classed with short-barrel rifles and shotguns; pay your money, keep your stock.

All I can recommend at this point is that you consider… compliance. The more malicious the better.

For instance, if the stocks are banned, and have to be turned in or destroyed, one might assume obsessive-compulsive bureaucrats will have a way to document that. Probably forms. Everyone might want to order a few… for every 200 stocks you “have.” Don’t forget spare forms in case you make a typo.

As for the stocks themselves? Just remember what a bump-fire stock really is. And every foot-long piece of PVC pipe that will fit over a buffer tube is a bump-fire stock. Dear Bog, my local Lowe’s has thousands of stocks.


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. Click here to donate via PayPal.
(More Tip Jar Options)

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinteresttumblrmail

“Due Jun 27 2018, at 11:59 PM ET”

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.

paypal_btn_donateCC_LG


Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinteresttumblrmail

Bump-Fire Rule: If you have not commented, do so

The Brady Campaign to Protect Violent Criminals plans some late comment period “ballot stuffing.” If comments mean anything — which I doubt, or this would not have been proposed — you should make sure your thoughts are known.

Pro-gun voices dominate in debate over Trump’s bump-stock ban
Of the more than 17,000 public comments received so far by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), a review by Reuters of 4,200 turned up only 10 favoring the bump stock ban. Almost all the rest criticized the proposal as heavy-handed, unnecessary or unconstitutional.
[…]
“We are rallying our members and we will be putting in a whole additional series of comments,” said Avery Gardiner, co-president of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, a Washington-based group dedicated to reducing gun deaths.

“The numbers will shift,” Gardiner said.

99.762 against, with logical, legal, and constitutional reasoning. 0.238% in favor, with… feelz. Therefore it will be implemented, is my guess.

It won’t help when the gun controllers start their commenting campaign. Expect to see a lot of last minute identically-worded rants about machineguns, probably from bots.


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.

paypal_btn_donateCC_LG



Ed. note: This commentary appeared first in TZP’s weekly email alert. If you would like to be among the first to see new commentary (as well as to get notice of new polls and recaps of recent posts), please sign up for our alert list. (See sidebar or, if you’re on a mobile device, scroll down). Be sure to respond when you receive your activation email!

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinteresttumblrmail

Trump: Never?

So Trump spoke to the NRAAM…

“Your second amendment rights … will never, ever be under siege as long as I am president.

Please note that the NRA leadership has supported all these (except raising age limits to 21), too. LaPierre and Cox still seem to be there, so don’t tell me about the new Board.

“Never.” I wonder…


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.

paypal_btn_donateCC_LG


Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinteresttumblrmail

Welcome to the party, pal

Gun Owners of America finally notices the semiauto problem with bump-fire bans, and the crowd — finally — goes wild.

Let me tell you about a little-known pro-RKBA group. While GOA ignored this until a couple of weeks ago (when I started getting fundraising emails mentioning bump-fire stocks), and the National Restrictions Rifle Association actively pushed for it, The Zelman Partisans has been trying to warn you.

For months.

  • The Zelman Partisans Statement on Proposed Legislation to Ban “Bump-Fire Stocks” and other accessories. (October 5, 2017)
    Basically this Constitution-shredding Senator wants to redefine “machine gun” by how fast you can make something fire, rather than being designed to fire automatically as long as the trigger is depressed. Apparently Jerry Miculek is going to be outlawed.
  • Training Wheels (October 25, 2017)
    That is incorrect. An automatic weapon — a machinegun — is designed to fire multiple rounds per trigger operation. Bump-fire stocks in no way affect that operation/rounds relationship. If you put a bump-fire stock on a semiautomatic rifle, you still individually operate the trigger for each round fired. Bump-fire stocks don’t make the weapon fire faster. The theoretical rate of fire of the rifle is determined by the physics of the internal parts.
  • The fix is in: proposed rulemaking on bump-fire
    Instead of looking at mechanical function, and simple physics, in this document the ATF has adopted the media and gun controller definition of “if it’s fast, it must be a machinegun.” The intent is preordained regardless of comments.
  • Commenting Now Open: Application of the Definition of Machinegun to “Bump Fire” Stocks and Other Similar Devices. (December 29, 2017)
    Considering bump-fire stocks, and other accessories, to be machineguns would not simply regulate a physical device. It effectively outlaws the bump-fire TECHNIQUE, and even pulling the trigger faster than some arbitrary threshold.
  • That’ll be our first one-term president in a while (February 20, 2018)
    I wish I could be surprised, but even before Trump began to look like a serious candidate– well before he got the R nomination — I warned that his new-found verbal respect for RKBA was belied by a long anti-RKBA history.
  • “Stroke of the pen, law of the land. Kinda cool.”* (February 26, 2018)
    “Machinegun” is defined in statutory law. Short form: a firearm that fires more than one round per trigger operation.If that can be changed by executive order, instead of congressional legislation, then everything is a machinegun waiting for the pen-stroke.What can he — would he — do with that pen?
  • Screw Physical Reality (March 10, 2018)
    If words having meaning, this is impossible without making every semiautomatic firearm an NFA item. Please note that this redefines machinegun without offering any grace period or grandfathering for existing gear.
  • Bump-fire Banned (March 23, 2018)
    And yes; The Zelman Partisans opposes this. Accepting this is in no way a compromise. We did not get reciprocal carry. We did get a dangerous Fix NICS. And this isn’t a merely bump-fire ban; it’s effectively a ban on semiautomatic firearms (and if you think Feinstein, Schumer et al aren’t aware of that, you weren’t paying attention): parts is parts.
  • Bumping Off the Truth (March 25, 2018)
    As noted on Friday, President Trump and AG Sessions announced a coming ban of bump-fire stocks (“bump-stock-type devices,” as the rule notice so eloquently puts it); no grandfathering, get rid of it or go to prison for possession of an unregistered NFA item.
  • Theoretically Speaking (March 28, 2018)
    In every case, bump-fire stocks (and trigger cranks and “Multi-burst Trigger Activators”) are bad merely because they assist the shooter in approaching the firearm’s inherent theoretical maximum rate of fire. The semiautomatic rate of fire is the problem.Take away the bump-fire stock, crank, or multi-burp shoulder thingy, and the evil — to the gun ban bunnies — rate of fire remains.
    Does anyone reading this honestly doubt that establishing the precedent of the theoretical rate of fire being the problem is exactly what they want?
  • “Bump-Stock-Type Devices” (sic) Commenting Now Open (March 29, 2018)
    The NPRM falsely states: “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. Hence, a semiautomatic firearm to which a bump-stock-type device is attached is able to produce automatic fire with a single pull of the trigger.”
  • Bump Stocks Matter: Banning Semiautomatic Firearms (April 2, 2018)
    If this were a move to specifically ban bump-fire stocks or trigger cranks on product safety grounds (unstable, inaccurate, etc.) you’d see a lot less opposition to it. But if you read the language of the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking [NPRM] (and every submitted bill I’ve tracked down so far), that isn’t what is being addressed. It is clearly and explicitly a “problem” of “rate of fire,” in that these devices — training wheels — assist the shooter in merely approaching the semiautomatic firearm’s theoretical rate of fire. (In the case of bump-fire, by using recoil to let the trigger reset, for the next manual operation.)

That’s a partial listing. You can find more.

You know what else “increases” the rate of fire? The breechloading Ferguson Rifle. Pre-measured paper cartridges. Revolvers. Bolt/lever action rifles with magazines. Slicked bolts and polished trigger groups. New springs.

Anything that improves the action.

Might I suggest joining the one pro-RKBA group that has consistently warned of, and opposed, these bans other others ignored, under-stated, or even supported them?



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.

paypal_btn_donateCC_LG


Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinteresttumblrmail

They could start by firing LaPierre

(I originally posted this on my personal site, but it bears repeating; and TZP gets more traffic than I do.)

NRA Launches Drive to Add 100,000 Members in 100 Days
Fox News reports that NRA media relations manager Jason J. Brown said, “The NRA’s strength is in our dedicated and politically savvy members. Over the next 100 days we hope to welcome 100,000 new freedom-loving Americans to our ranks. The threat to our Second Amendment has never been greater.”

Seriously. Fire Wayne LaPierre. Chris Cox, too.

Then repudiate ERPOs and bump-fire bans. Apologize for opposing constitutional carry, for helping draft “assault weapons” bans, and endorsing obviously anti-human/civil rights politicians. Hell, apologize for supporting NFA ’34, GCA ’68, FOPA ’86, et cetera (it’s a long list).

And I’ll at least think about maybe joining.

Not until.


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.

paypal_btn_donateCC_LG


Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinteresttumblrmail

Poll: Do you care about bump-fire?

Recently, I’ve put a fair amount of my time into tracking bump-fire bans, new rulemaking and legislation alike. I’ve noticed thatrelatively few people seem to be speaking about the subject, and the majority of those who bring it up at all indicate that bump-fire stocks (and trigger cranks, etc.) aren’t worth bothering with.

Obviously, I disagree with that assessment.

Web site traffic analysis also indicates that bump-fire is a low-interst topic.

What do you think? Am I wasting my time and yours? This a two-parter; two separate, but related, polls.

 

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinteresttumblrmail