US Department of Justice introduces proposal to ban bump stocks - Polidicks

[QUOTE]The US Department of Justice has submitted a regulation that would ban so-called bump stocks, a type of gun modification that increases the rate of fire for semi-automatic rifles. The proposal, submitted on Saturday, comes after President Donald Trump announced last month that he was in favour of the ban following a mass shooting in Florida.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE]"President Trump is absolutely committed to ensuring the safety and security of every American and he has directed us to propose a regulation addressing bump stocks," Attorney General Jeff Sessions said in[URL="https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/department-justice-submits-notice-proposed-regulation-banning-bump-stocks"] a statement[/URL]. "To that end, the Department of Justice has submitted to the Office of Management and Budget a notice of a proposed regulation to clarify that the National Firearms and Gun Control Act defines "machine gun" to include bump stock type devices," he added.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE]Saturday's proposal would classify bump stocks as part of a "machine gun", making it illegal to buy or sell them. The proposal must still be approved by the Office of Management and Budget before it is published and subject to a commentary period. It does not, however, require approval from Congress, where it may have faced opposition due the pro-gun ownership lobby's power. [/QUOTE] [URL="https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2018/03/department-justice-introduces-proposal-ban-bump-stocks-180310160813889.html"]A[/URL][URL="https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2018/03/department-justice-introduces-proposal-ban-bump-stocks-180310160813889.html"]l-Jazeera[/URL]

Dodging the legislative process and trying to sneakily ban something with nearly no oversight and editing laws as they see fit? Jesus this is an abuse of power. This is wrong on so many levels. [editline]11th March 2018[/editline] The ATF already gave their two cents and said that it doesn't fit the legal definition of a machine gun. This is extremely frightening, as we don't know the wording, and it can be just arbitrarily passed regardless of the comments they will receive.

Fuck off with the “regulation” bullshit. Either rewrite/amend the NFA the right way or STFU. You don’t get to arbitrarily make new laws without congressional approval. Edit: I’m referring to the DOJ to fuck off, not the OP in case I wasn’t clear enough. Hang on while I update this post to reflect article bias. [QUOTE]Under US law, machine guns are officially banned. However, semi-automatic rifles like the AR-15 are legal because of their lower rate of fire.[/QUOTE] LOL this article is off to a great start. The manufacture and transfer of new machine guns made after 1986 is banned for civilians. Existing machine guns are just heavily regulated. [QUOTE]The bill did not outright ban the sales of AR-15 style assault rifles, which are often used in mass shootings...[/QUOTE] It’s not an assault rifle you half wit; and AR 15s are used far more often for legitimate purposes which don’t involve gunning down innocents. [QUOTE]Gun control advocates have long called for such a ban, but so far have not had any success.[/QUOTE] Probably because they don’t do shit to prevent mass shootings or gun crime anywhere it has already been tried.

[quote]a type of gun modification that increases the rate of fire for semi-automatic rifles[/quote] That's not how it works. I hope the regulator has a better understanding than every journalist who isn't writing for a firearms magazine. Would be a shame if they "accidentally" banned a plethora of other things in the process due to a "misunderstanding".

[QUOTE=SKEEA;53192647]Dodging the legislative process and trying to sneakily ban something with nearly no oversight and editing laws as they see fit? Jesus this is an abuse of power. This is wrong on so many levels. [editline]11th March 2018[/editline] The ATF already gave their two cents and said that it doesn't fit the legal definition of a machine gun. This is extremely frightening, as we don't know the wording, and it can be just arbitrarily passed regardless of the comments they will receive.[/QUOTE] You know things have gone stupid when fucking Iraqveteran8888 predictions become reality.

[QUOTE=AlbertWesker;53192713]You know things have gone stupid when fucking Iraqveteran8888 predictions become reality.[/QUOTE] What did he predict? I've only seen a couple videos from his channel but I've seen his name come up a few times.

[QUOTE=AlbertWesker;53192713]You know things have gone stupid when fucking Iraqveteran8888 predictions become reality.[/QUOTE] No kidding. And I thought they were being a titch dramatic.

well unless bump stock is code for video games this isn't going to solve all violence forever /s

I'm not very smart when it comes to guns but I dont see how a bump stock serves any purpose other than to bypass the restrictive full-auto gun laws [video=youtube;K2IOZ-5Nk5k]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K2IOZ-5Nk5k&t=0s&list=WL&index=6[/video] why would anyone be okay with this being sold? I know you can use a stick and a belt loop to similar effect but knowing these things are being sold feels creepy to my uneducated-on-guns brain.

[QUOTE=meppers;53192768]I'm not very smart when it comes to guns but I dont see how a bump stock serves any purpose other than to bypass the restrictive full-auto gun laws why would anyone be okay with this being sold? I know you can use a stick and a belt loop to similar effect but knowing these things are being sold feels creepy to my uneducated-on-guns brain.[/QUOTE] Bump stocks are indeed meant to simulate full auto fire. Why would I be ok with it, why not? The ban serves no useful purpose other than feel good. As you're say, "knowing these things are being sold feels creepy to my uneducated-on-guns brain." The bump stock only gained attention due to once incident where the use of it probably resulted in fewer deaths. When someone uses a bump stock their accuracy goes way down. Even with real full auto firearms accuracy suffers. The biggest problem a lot of people have is that they're trying to phrase the new regulations/laws/etc to be anything that increases the rate of fire of the gun. Replace the trigger group and the gun fires 1 millisecond bit faster, congratulations, you are a felon. Lighten the trigger spring, you are a felon. Etc. Ultimately, in the case, the problem a lot of people have is because they're trying to get around congress by making laws via regulation. Our government was designed with the three branches having power split between them for a reason. The executive should not have legislative powers.

[QUOTE=Mr. Someguy;53192715]What did he predict? I've only seen a couple videos from his channel but I've seen his name come up a few times.[/QUOTE] Keep in mind that the channel has a pretty hardline stance so things that Eric and Chad say should be taken with a grain of salt, but in a nutshell one video they had a guy who worked with the ATF explaining the process of how the ATF is looking at the rulings and definition of what constitutes a machine gun. He said the ATF went through all the laws and determined that bumpfire stocks do not constitute the manufacture of a machine gun. The guy also went on to explain that politicians are trying to pressure the agency into making an arbitrary ruling or “regulation” that would reinterpret/redefine the law, but for whatever reason, the ATF is convinced they don’t have the authority to do so. (Holy shit that’s a first) Now it looks like they’re just harassing the DOJ to do it instead because they didn’t get the answer they were looking for. Here’s the video in question. Again it’s probably better to tune out Eric and Chad and just listen to what the expert is saying. [media]http://youtube.com/watch?v=jOUfD1lynxY[/media]

[QUOTE=Kigen;53192784]Bump stocks are indeed meant to simulate full auto fire. Why would I be ok with it, why not? The ban serves no useful purpose other than feel good. As your say, "knowing these things are being sold feels creepy to my uneducated-on-guns brain." The bump stock only gained attention due to once incident where the use of it probably resulted in fewer deaths. [B]When someone uses a bump stock their accuracy goes way down[/B]. Even with real full auto firearms accuracy suffers. The biggest problem a lot of people have is that they're trying to phrase the new regulations/laws/etc to be anything that increases the rate of fire of the gun. Replace the trigger group and the gun fires 1 millisecond bit faster, congratulations, you are a felon. Lighten the trigger spring, you are a felon. Etc. Ultimately, in the case, the problem a lot of people have is because they're trying to get around congress by making laws via regulation. Our government was designed with the three branches having power split between them for a reason. The executive should not have legislative powers.[/QUOTE] didn't know that, thank.

Like I said in another thread, Trump may be going for this option because it doesn't step on the toes of many gun owners because bump stocks are a niche item considered by many to be a "range toy", but it also makes it look like he is doing something about mass shootings. If it really is as simple as the DoJ handing down marching orders to ATF who can suddenly enforce new regulations unilaterally I'd be wondering why Obama never took advantage of it.

[QUOTE=Kigen;53192784] The bump stock only gained attention due to once incident where the use of it probably resulted in fewer deaths. [/QUOTE] People keep saying this but it's just completely inaccurate. You aren't going to be precision-aiming your shots into a crowd that large at that distance, the ability to just spray while they were all clumped together undeniably resulted in more casualties.

[QUOTE=phygon;53192883]People keep saying this but it's just completely inaccurate. You aren't going to be precision-aiming your shots into a crowd that large at that distance, the ability to just spray while they were all clumped together undeniably resulted in more casualties.[/QUOTE] I don't really think it's possible to say bump stocks do or don't produce more casualties. At the very least you'd have to concede that they are only effective in specific situations, like when you have a high ground advantage while shooting into a literal crowd of people at a concert.

[QUOTE=Raidyr;53192890]I don't really think it's possible to say bump stocks do or don't produce more casualties. At the very least you'd have to concede that they are only effective in specific situations, like when you have a high ground advantage while shooting into a literal crowd of people at a concert.[/QUOTE] Absolutely. I was talking specifically about the Vegas shooter, who was doing exactly that.

I don't think that bump stocks are like, terribly dangerous or anything, I just think that banning them isn't the worst idea because at best they turn weapons into 'toys'. [editline]s[/editline] my merge [editline]11th March 2018[/editline] [QUOTE=ilikecorn;53192896]I mean, an AR-15 with a 24 inch barrel can reach out and touch someone at 500 meters, accurately. Especially with half decent optics on board. Which would have been a nightmare, had the vegas shooter decided to place his shots accurately, as opposed to spray and pray. Because you'd have a lot less injured, and a lot more dead. He would have probably had more time to act too, since people wouldn't recognize it as "machine gun fire".[/QUOTE] As far as I know, the Vegas shooter wasn't exactly trained military. Other than being a pretty serious distance away, the shooter was also firing from an angle that you can't exactly practice shooting from easily.

[QUOTE=Raidyr;53192874]Like I said in another thread, Trump may be going for this option because it doesn't step on the toes of many gun owners because bump stocks are a niche item considered by many to be a "range toy", but it also makes it look like he is doing something about mass shootings. If it really is as simple as the DoJ handing down marching orders to ATF who can suddenly enforce new regulations unilaterally I'd be wondering why Obama never took advantage of it.[/QUOTE] Can you imagine how right wing media would have blown up over that?