Dude.....
Sarcasm most definitely intended.
Dude.....
I wouldn't worry about this particular move by Trump. The ATF has already stated they have no authority to regulate bump stocks, just as the NRA knew they would when they asked to have ATF look at it.
Sarcasm most definitely intended.
Yep. Machine gun has a codified definition that an alphabet agency can now potentially change on a whim. And, the Crown can seize something you own legally without payment.I pretty much saw this day coming when the NRA pretty much threw them under the bus. I don't have much use for bumpstocks, but I certainly don't like the precedent this sets, even if it doesn't get settled by the federal government.
Its a "bone' if you are a dog or a Hush Puppy if you are a kid. The drumbeat to ban guns is getting louder and while I pray and don't think Trump will fold, he is tossing a bone to the anti's.https://www.redstate.com/absentee/2018/02/20/breaking-trump-directs-sessions-ban-bump-stocks/
No one in his administration pointed out to him that bump stocks had nothing to do with the Parkland murders. It seems like they're tossing out bump stocks as a sop to the whining teenagers that are being marshaled by the "resistance". I'm disappointed.
Yes, and if there's anything the ATF loves to do more, it's changing rules and definitions.
Thanks NRA!
Huh?
ATF issued an RFC in the Federal Register last month to ban bump stocks. The results were by end of month and Trump just greenlighted DOJ to make it happen. This is pretty much a done deal. The only question is how far are they going to reach, binary triggers too?
The RFC you mention is the 100,000 comments that haven’t been reviewed yet.
I just checked the Federal Register (updates daily) and nothing has been done.
Realize that in fed speak, a Rule is a regulation and has to follow a slow, tortuous process and analysis. Add to that, Trump has directed the cut 2 to get 1 rule. So, to be proposed for comment, the agency has to identify which 2 will be cut to get the one new.
Now, the analysis part is where rules die. There’s a cost-benefit analysis that has to be completed. Generally speaking, for a rule to be approved, the cost-benefit analysis has to be in favor of the government.
To understand this move, you have to understand the process.
It was 36,000.
Lots of folks didn't think ATF 41F was going to happen either. I was the only one in the industry right the entire time. This one is a little different, as it is being requested by the White House, not NFATCA.
Ah, gotcha. We’re thinking of different NPRMs.
For me it’s more about what I want them to NOT do.What, exactly, do you want the NRA to do? Be specific.
Huh?
ATF issued an RFC in the Federal Register last month to ban bump stocks. The results were by end of month and Trump just greenlighted DOJ to make it happen. This is pretty much a done deal. The only question is how far are they going to reach, binary triggers too?
Even if the NRA is using 4D chess...
I’m really not happy about the selling out.
So how long do you give it for such an action to take place?