Looks like the bumpstock ban is about to become real

[ditcherman]

I wonder how it would compare to a binary trigger / bump stock combo.

Does that even work? I was under the impression that the timing was tricky enough with a regular trigger.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

The Government Says It Is Not Coming For Your Guns, But It Is Coming For Your Bump Stocks

t the direction of the Trump Administration, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF), re-classified bump stocks as machine guns, making them illegal under the National Firearms Act (NFA). That reversed the ATF’s Obama-era decision not to regulate the devices.

If the courts uphold the rule, anyone who owns a bump stock must destroy it or turn it in to an ATF office by March 26, 2019.

The ban does not grandfather-in anyone or provide for compensation for the devices, which typically cost $150-300, but can run as high $500. That marks this ruling as a completely new way of regulating guns and a scary development for many gun owners.

...

“It’s basically going to be the honor system,” said Michael Bouchard, the ATF’s former assistant director for field operations.

...

The ATF declined to comment on the ban, instead directing anyone with questions to the bureau’s bump stock fact sheet.

The page includes instructions on how to destroy bump stocks and where owners can turn them in.

To turn them in, owners must find the nearest ATF office. Local law enforcement stations won’t suffice.

 

[T.Lex]

I haven't seen anything on an injunction. Quick google search reveals its been requested, but not yet granted.

So, the clock still ticks.

 

[HoughMade]

Without a grandfather clause and now under Heller, I think they have a real 5th Am. takings problem.

First, Plaintiffs who own assault weapons contend that the AWCA violates the takings clause of the Fifth Amendment because it reduces the value of those weapons. It is well-established, however, that a government may enact regulations pursuant to its broad powers to promote the general welfare that diminish the value of private property, yet do not constitute a taking requiring compensation, so long as a reasonable use of the regulated property exists… Here, plaintiffs who owned assault weapons prior to the enactment of the AWCA are protected by a grandfather clause that permits them to use the weapons in a number of reasonable ways so long as they register them with the state.

Silveira v. Lockyer, 312 F.3d 1052, 1092 (9th Cir. 2002), as amended (Jan. 27, 2003).

One is left to conclude that if the regulation allows for no reasonable use and with no grandfather clause, it is a taking without just compensation and, therefore, unconstitutional.

It would seem, OBVIOUSLY so....one wonders.....

 

[T.Lex]

At this point, I have no idea how it'll play out.

It would be cool if they could fast-track this and get it linked with that other NFA case that's going up. Not the same issues, but there's an analytical overlap.

 

[Dosproduction]

Anyone have new news on this? There's only about a month left before more rights are gone.

 

[worddoer]

Without a grandfather clause and now under Heller, I think they have a real 5th Am. takings problem.


Silveira v. Lockyer, 312 F.3d 1052, 1092 (9th Cir. 2002), as amended (Jan. 27, 2003).

One is left to conclude that if the regulation allows for no reasonable use and with no grandfather clause, it is a taking without just compensation and, therefore, unconstitutional.

It would seem, OBVIOUSLY so....one wonders.....

That supposes that our current government at all it's different levels is concerned about constitutionality. It seems to me that in recent times, constitutionality is considered a nuisance, not a founding principal of liberty.

 

[HoughMade]

That supposes that our current government at all it's different levels is concerned about constitutionality. It seems to me that in recent times, constitutionality is considered a nuisance, not a founding principal of liberty.

Um...I quoted a case from the 9th Cir. that cited U.S. Supreme Court cases. Last time I checked, those courts are part of the government.

 

[indykid]

I guess if they violate one amendment to the constitution, they might as well violate two or more. In this case, they prove that two wrongs don't make a right, and in fact these two wrongs violate our rights.

 

[worddoer]

Um...I quoted a case from the 9th Cir. that cited U.S. Supreme Court cases. Last time I checked, those courts are part of the government.

Admittedly, there are small remnants left who may understand this principal. However, it is a sad day when the only course left to us is to use the courts to litigate against the rest of the very same government. Especially considering there have been times in the past when our own government ignores or outright disobeys its own court rulings.

I will admit, as the years go by, I think I am becoming jaded about the future of this republic. It seems to me that the majority of the population now cares more about safe personal comfort than risky uncomfortable liberty. Just because the courts rules in our favor does not mean the government has to abide by it. The government should abide by it, but it doesn't have to. I mean, if they refuse, what can we do about it in the short term? I know...elections, being involved locally, and hollering at your political critter and all that...but that will all take months to years to work.

It is so sad that we are in this place as a nation.

 

[NyleRN]

Um...I quoted a case from the 9th Cir. that cited U.S. Supreme Court cases. Last time I checked, those courts are part of the government.

Noted counsel. But since that same case Heller, I believe, stated that common use firearms cannot be banned. So how's that working out in NY, CA, MA, MD, NJ, CO, and soon to be WA and IL? Simple, courts don't care and the AG isn't going to hold governors accountable that sign these unconstitutional laws. Basically there's no rule of law anymore

 

[cbhausen]

It seems like every time you turn on the news Trump is getting slapped down by a court. Hopefully the same will be true of the bump stock ban he initiated.

Trump may have been the only viable choice for conservatives in the last presidential election but sometimes he looks like an ultralight pilot trying to fly a 777.

 

[BigRed]

At this point, I have no idea how it'll play out.

It would be cool if they could fast-track this and get it linked with that other NFA case that's going up. Not the same issues, but there's an analytical overlap.

It would be cool if these gun banners would just go straight to Hell.

 

[Beowulf]

It seems like every time you turn on the news Trump is getting slapped down by a court. Hopefully the same will be true of the bump stock ban he initiated.

Trump may have been the only viable choice for conservatives in the last presidential election but sometimes he looks like an ultralight pilot trying to fly a 777.

Sometimes? Well, only on days that end in 'y'.

 

[GGF]

It would be cool if these gun banners would just go straight to Hell.

My feelings exactly.

 

[Kutnupe14]

It seems like every time you turn on the news Trump is getting slapped down by a court. Hopefully the same will be true of the bump stock ban he initiated.

Trump may have been the only viable choice for conservatives in the last presidential election but sometimes he looks like an ultralight pilot trying to fly a 777.

I doubt it. There were enough people on the left that weren't too keen on Clinton, that another viable GOP candidate could have beaten her also.

 

[cbhausen]

Hearing set for March 6:

https://gunowners.org/alert22119/

PLEASE everyone, TAKE ACTION by filling out the contact form and sharing GOA's post on social media. GOA makes this Betty Crocker simple from their website.

 

[d.kaufman]

Hearing set for March 6:

https://gunowners.org/alert22119/

PLEASE everyone, TAKE ACTION by filling out the contact form and sharing GOA's post on social media. GOA makes this Betty Crocker simple from their website.

Done. Thanks for the link

 

[buckstopshere]

Hearing set for March 6:

https://gunowners.org/alert22119/

PLEASE everyone, TAKE ACTION by filling out the contact form and sharing GOA's post on social media. GOA makes this Betty Crocker simple from their website.

o7

done

 

[cbhausen]

Even if you don’t care about bump stocks and think they are just silly novelties, it’s important to oppose this ban based a new definition of a “machine gun”. Remember, according to BATFE, anything that can be easily converted to machine gun can also theoretically be banned. It’s a lot easier for BATFE to ban AR-15‘s than to ban rubber bands or belt loops. The future of semi automatic firearm ownership in this country is truly at stake.

At this point GOA is asking .gov to move the deadline back three months to allow the case to be heard in court. Even with the hearing date being moved forward to March 6, that only leaves three weeks until the current deadline. Those who may have destroyed or turned in their bump stocks already are SOL but those who are hanging on waiting for an injunction will feel the pressure of needing to destroy them as the date approaches.

These items were purchased legally and the government is not offering restitution for the financial loss incurred by those who wish not to become felons overnight. This is highly unjust and needs judicial intervention. Please make your voice heard or they could be coming for your AR-15 next.