The comment period for the ATF's proposed rule change reclassifying bumpstocks as machine guns ends in 6 days at midnight on June 27th. How much longer after that before we know if they're actually going to go through with this ridiculousness?
The ATF's proposed rule change: >The term “machine gun” includes bump-stock-type devices, i.e., devices that allow a semiautomatic firearm to shoot more than one shot with a single pull of the trigger by harnessing the recoil energy of the semiautomatic firearm to which it is affixed so that the trigger resets and continues firing without additional physical manipulation of the trigger by the shooter.
>devices that allow a semiautomatic firearm to shoot more than one shot with a single pull of the trigger by harnessing the recoil energy of the semiautomatic firearm ban assault belt loops
Andrew Baker
> the trigger resets and continues firing without additional physical manipulation of the trigger by the shooter. If it requires no additional physical manipulation by the shooter than how does a shooter stop bump firing without emptying the magazine?
Thomas Bennett
>than how does a shooter stop bump firing without emptying the magazine? Either by removing their finger from the trigger the same way as you would do with an actual machine gun (under this new ATF ruling if it goes through), or by ceasing to repeatedly actuate the trigger by pushing the gun forward (under the old ATF ruling).
Easton Flores
STOP FINDING LOOPHOLES IN THIS THREAD, OP IS ATF TRYING TO MAKE HIS RULING LOOPHOLEPROOF
Luke Diaz
Is it possible to bumpfire a double action revolver? I've seen beginners accidentally get multiple shots off with .500 S&W revolvers, but can you reliably bumpfire anything smaller than that? I know S&W offers revolvers so light that they warn you about using ammunition with bullets over a certain weight since the recoil can cause them to move forward out of the casing and jam up the gun.
Isaiah Scott
>How much longer after that before we know if they're actually going to go through with this ridiculousness? I don't see it taking much longer than the time the comment period took for them to make a decision. It'll probably be a few months at most.
Jonathan Russell
>How much longer after that before we know if they're actually going to go through with this ridiculousness? It's for show. They legally can't do this. They're going to get sued immediately if they even try.
Daniel Reyes
>Trumps ATF classifies bumpstocks as MGs >Jow Forums still bitches about Obama coming for your guns and how Trump is the most 2A President ever
Paying 2:1, place your bets.
Carter Carter
They couldn't legally do a lot of things, but they did.
Benjamin Brown
No, the ATF gets its ass handed to it in courtrooms on the regular.
Grayson Roberts
As fucktarded as this is, at least they didn't go with the "rate increasing device" language that could make a trigger job an MG
Parker Baker
No, instead they're redefining devices that assist in doing something that's already possible with a stock gun as machine guns. I can't wait to LARP as a cowboy a few years down the line when the ATF expands this ruling to all semi autos and possibly even double action revolvers and single trigger double barrel shotguns.
Ian Fisher
Doesnt that prove my point?
Henry Campbell
No? How does it? They can't legally do things, so they get shut down in court. That supports my point.
John Kelly
>Bumpfire devices are easy to manufacture, be they shoelaces or wood planks with dowels so anyone wanting to use them illegally can't really be prevented from doing so >Bumpfire can be done without assistance to my knowledge so whether these devices actually allow a weapon to do anything more than they could alone is debatable >Bumpfire doesn't really use a single pull of the trigger to my knowledge except for specific variants with a second "trigger" that is pulled whereas the first trigger goes back to its default position with every shot >Bumpfire is a quick way to waste your ammo inaccurately, its actual usefulness is debatable This whole thing is just dumb overreaction.
Anthony Nelson
These anti-american niggers who are the asylum patients of the warden's quarters are fucking retarded. We're entitled to own machine guns, not have bump stocks banned. OH MY GOD 500+RPM!!!! It should BE THAT WAY Are you gonna cut jerry miculek's fingers off? Are you gonna ban belt loops? I'm not letting my fucking country become some cucked UK shithole where everyone is a yellow eyed transfaggot pedosexual spidernigger, fucking queers. 15 years tops? There's gonna be some WMD precursors in the mix.
Justin Torres
>ignoring that Obama tried to pass a 2nd assault weapons ban but with no expiration
Henry Gray
I always thought bump stocks were retarded and were just going to be used as an excuse to take more of our rights away. I don't think they should be banned. I just knew they were going to be the catalyst for the next round of 2nd amendment violating restrictions.
Joshua Powell
Lol ATF suck a chode. Will not comply
Nicholas Price
cant wait to see bumb stock blue prints for all platforms.
>what are 3d-printers!
Jack Allen
We need to end the ATF, and we could do it very easily. If 500-1000 Anons publicly made machine guns, the ATF couldn't do anything about it. This isn't the 90's, they have no backing like they did and the political environment will allow us to overturn any action they could do.
The FBI is about to have a REALLY bad time this year.
Jackson Young
>We need to end the ATF No, we need to end federal gun control. I do NOT want to deal with the IRS or the FBI.
Joshua Stewart
Ban assault holding the rifle loosely
Jack Watson
Anyone else get the idea that this forum is filled to the brim with various 3 letter agency trolls these days. I'm pretty sure the DEA and local police are well-equipped enough to handle 500-1000 guys. The ATF is one of those organizations that has a ton of guys, a lot of power, and likely not that much to do most of the time. They'd love for people to try that.
Until this government is dead or in it's very last days, they'll have plenty of power. And I suspect the latest play in 2nd Amendment restriction is converting the youth through the school system to support gun bans. They've realized time and time again, that the public, at large, still believes in liberty, at least where firearms are considered. They realize they probably won't get a full ban (but they'll likely get many restrictions in blue states) in this generation (millenials) so they must start with the next. The ones currently in public school.
Thomas Reyes
old revolver trick shooting book says yes. don't have it here with me but basically thumb of support hand cocks hammer as revolver returns from recoil. the book is old AF and features some truly insane trick shooting so i wouldn't be surprised if it was nearly impossible
Adam Murphy
Decision has already been made. Rest is just for show.
>VERTICAL FOREGRIP ON PISTOL, DOGGO, GLOWING XD XD Yeah, pointing out retard memes sure is boot licking
Carson Ortiz
The reason these things are memes are because they actually fucking happen, user. (Minus CIA niggers glowing in the dark). Yes, the ATF as well as other law enforcement have shot dogs who were just doing their jobs as dogs. People have gotten felony charges for foregrips on pistols, and the ATF is incredibly unreasonable when it comes to changing their policies on the fly.
Nathaniel Cox
>This whole thing is just dumb overreaction.
Welcome to legislation
Nolan Stewart
Those aren't memes they actually fucking happen you retard
Luke Sanchez
When are we gonna restrict the ATFs overreach? They were already deemed unconstitutional by the Supreme Court with the original NFA. So what did they do? They fucking rewrote it and redifined what a machine gun was to get into the loopholes. The whole reason for banning machine guns in the first place was to curb gang violence because even back then. The dems were fucking retarded when it came to logic and reason.
Fuck the president, fuck Congress. This has and always will be a topic that only the people and the Supreme Court can fix.
Feel free to post proof that cia/atfniggers are starting threads like this one, which was the initial claim. Until then: >OAL, DOGGO DOGGO, SHARKFIN ON A KRINK HEHE DOGGO XD
Mason Lewis
Hey ATF, do you guys laugh at our memes?
Also if they want to regulate bump-stocks so bad just do what they did to suppressors
Brandon Moore
>They were already deemed unconstitutional by the Supreme Court with the original NFA wat
That language makes no sense. "Without additional physical manipulation of the trigger by the shooter" is just plain incorrect. Your finger is still pushing against the trigger for each shot. That is why it's possible to bump fire without the use of a bump stock.
That didn't have anything to do with how the NFA regulated guns though, just requiring people who couldn't legally own guns to incriminate themselves by registering guns they couldn't legally own.
Ethan Wright
>I'm pretty sure the DEA and local police are well-equipped enough to handle 500-1000 guys Local police would be slaughtered by 500-1000 people, and they'd have to get more than just the DEA. Look at the Bundy standoff: there were hundreds of armed militiamen there and the Bundys ultimately won the standoff with only one casualty on their side. And if they went full Waco on the Bundy militias the public backlash alone would result in mass civil unrest not counting the bloodbath that would go on.
Christopher Martinez
Protip: A lot of the Bundy ranch guys are behind bars now. The feds just arrested them after they went home. Ever wonder why McNiggerator no longer posts here?
Oliver Perez
what retarded shit did they do that they got found?
Joseph Flores
>reclassification still happens no matter how many comments are against it because the bump stock reclassification is a purely political move to make it look like the republicans are "doing something"
>tfw there was already a comment period earlier this year and sense most were pro-second amendment they are just doing it all over again. Pretty fucking demoralizing for us to be honest
Just stock up on lowers and mags guys, your kids or future kids will need them if they get into the shooting community.
Sure, but how long until they actually announce it and we end up having to deal with the consequences?
Lincoln Clark
I would trade bunpstocks for reopening the registry. An actual compromise where both sides get something. NRA would kill any legislation like that immediately though.
Jaxson Barnes
Irrelavent to the thread but that is a great image. Very cute.
>6 days at midnight on June 27th >only 4 days left now
Nolan Martinez
>ATF has now determined, based on its interpretation of the relevant statutory language, that these bump-stock-type devices, which harness recoil energy in conjunction with the shooter's maintenance of pressure, turn legal semiautomatic firearms into machineguns. Specifically, ATF has determined that these devices initiate an “automatic[]” firing cycle sequence “by a single function of the trigger” because the device is the primary impetus for a firing sequence that fires more than one shot with a single pull of the trigger. 26 U.S.C. 5845(b). ATF's classifications of bump-stock-devices between 2008 and 2017 did not include extensive legal analysis of these terms in concluding that the bump-stock-type devices at issue were not “machineguns.” The statutory definition of machinegun includes bump-stock-type devices—irrespective of whether the devices harness recoil energy using a mechanism like an internal spring or in conjunction with the shooter's maintenance of pressure—because these devices enable a semiautomatic firearm to fire “automatically more than one shot, without manual reloading, by a single function of the trigger.” Id. This proposed rule is the appropriate mechanism for ATF to set forth its analysis for its changed assessment. See Motor Vehicle Mfrs. Ass'n v. State Farm Mut. Auto Ins. Co., 463 U.S. 29, 57 (1983).
tl:dr what we said before does not matter because we didn't interpret it hard enough
>automatically more than one shot, without manual reloading, by a single function of the trigger
Guess that means all semi auto will be banned.
Michael Rogers
I though the ruling wasn't until 4 days from now?
Brayden Kelly
>McNiggerator He ain't behind bars, he's just...busy. chain gang is working him hard
Jason Ross
THIS. This is what's at stake. A bump stock does not utilize a "single" function of the trigger. Each time the gun fires a bullet, the trigger was pulled. A bumpstock simply makes it easier to perform MULTIPLE functions of the trigger. It is NOT a single function, however, as anyone with one knows.
They are crafting the language specifically to target all semiautos.
the way they worded it sounds like >in the wake of the vegas shooting >we had to look at it because trump said they were bad >we decided they are auto weapons, since bump stocks did not exist during the AWB, but thats what we were aiming to do with the AWB >if bump stocks had been around, they would have fallen under the AWB
Jose Hill
The ruling is about whether they're actually going to put their new definition into effect. Did you pay any attention to the FCC ending net neutrality recently? It was a similarly drawn out process that finally ended this month despite the vote being last December and the comment period starting last April and ending last August.
Cooper Price
>own bumpstock >live in Washington State What do? Just keep it locked up and never use it? Risk the felony?
I've seen girls limp wristing large revolvers do that. I was told that lack of recoil mitigation causes the hammer to ride back some and then fall forward on the next round.
>tfw watching girl at an indoor range almost blow her brains out and put a hole in the ceiling
Jose Moore
No one will come to defend them if they can't.
Jaxson Russell
>specifically to target all semiautos. As others have pointed out in the thread, it's so broad that it could actually affect double action revolvers.
Justin Scott
>devices that allow a semiautomatic firearm to shoot more than one shot with a single pull of the trigger Those are already illegal, and bump stocks do not fall under that definition.