Looks like the bumpstock ban is about to become real

[d.kaufman]

Washington state offering $150 to residents to turn in their bumpstocks....im sure on the taxpayers dime of course.

https://komonews.com/news/local/was...-in-exchange-for-turning-in-rifle-bump-stocks

 

[cbhausen]

Erich Pratt stated in GOA's recap of their day in court, judges usually render decisions in about a week in cases like this...

No ruling yet and the Christchurch, NZ attack has happened in the meantime. I'm sitting here hoping the judge is penning a harshly-worded rebuke of ATF. Time grows short. I believe the appeal of the DC case upholding the ban (Guedes, et al. vs. BATFE, et al.) is later this week with the 26th looming.

Other than these two cases, does anyone know of any other ways the ban's effective date might be extended? Any other litigation pending with a possible injunction by the 26th?

 

[seedubs1]

Erich Pratt stated in GOA's recap of their day in court, judges usually render decisions in about a week in cases like this...

No ruling yet and the Christchurch, NZ attack has happened in the meantime. I'm sitting here hoping the judge is penning a harshly-worded rebuke of ATF. Time grows short. I believe the appeal of the DC case upholding the ban (Guedes, et al. vs. BATFE, et al.) is later this week with the 26th looming.

Other than these two cases, does anyone know of any other ways the ban's effective date might be extended? Any other litigation pending with a possible injunction by the 26th?

Have not been hearing anything good. I think it’s happening.

 

[Mongo59]

Have not been hearing anything good. I think it’s happening.

This demonstrates the same wisdom as having some idiot willfully driving 120mph down a highway, hitting a guardrail and getting killed. So we remove all the guardrails...

 

[T.Lex]

It is uncommon, but not unheard of, for the injunction/stay to issue at the "last minute." Technically, it can also issue after the effective date, once they start trying to take them or arrest people for having them.

In terms of the litigation, that deadline is kinda written in clay.

 

[Mongo59]

How many illegal uses of a bump stock have we had since the first?

 

[ArcadiaGP]

A federal judge denied a challenge to Trump’s bump stock ban, which is set to take effect March 26.

 

[T.Lex]

I'm feeling worse and worse for people who have bumpstocks. This isn't going well.

 

[HoughMade]

I'm feeling worse and worse for people who have bumpstocks. This isn't going well.

At the preliminary injunction stage, this does not surprise me. I get the legal issues....but they are hardly the only issues the judges will look at, most especially at the preliminary injunction stage.

When the litigation on the merits (dueling MSJs) occurs, there is a better chance.

 

[T.Lex]

At the preliminary injunction stage, this does not surprise me. I get the legal issues....but they are hardly the only issues the judges will look at, most especially at the preliminary injunction stage.

When the litigation on the merits (dueling MSJs) occurs, there is a better chance.

Maybe.

I mean, technically in the absence of a stay, the federales can start enforcing. So that will suck for those involved.

In terms of MSJs, part of the federal PI assessment (if I remember/understand correctly) is the likelihood of success on the merits. Indeed, not all the evidence is presented right now, but the denial of the PI suggests that the court is at least skeptical of the merits.

I've gotta believe the appellate court(s) involved will issue a stay.

Otherwise, if there's an enforcement action before the resolution of the litigation, that will at least present a more concrete reason to enjoin/stay further enforcement.

I think.

 

[HoughMade]

Maybe.

I mean, technically in the absence of a stay, the federales can start enforcing. So that will suck for those involved.

In terms of MSJs, part of the federal PI assessment (if I remember/understand correctly) is the likelihood of success on the merits. Indeed, not all the evidence is presented right now, but the denial of the PI suggests that the court is at least skeptical of the merits.

I've gotta believe the appellate court(s) involved will issue a stay.

Otherwise, if there's an enforcement action before the resolution of the litigation, that will at least present a more concrete reason to enjoin/stay further enforcement.

I think.

I agree with your assessment.

I, however, cannot leave my cynicism behind.

 

[T.Lex]

I find it better to have one's cynicism out front, where one can keep an eye on it.

 

[AmmoManAaron]

This is not a machinegun. Regardless of what any gov't agency says and regardless of what any court says - it just isn't. I don't see how any informed, rational, and objective person or entity can conclude otherwise; even the BATFE concluded TWICE that they are not machineguns. The agencies and courts might want bumpstocks to be illegal, and Congress might be able to pass a law making them illegal, but that is all very different than them actually being machineguns. The credibility of our nation's legal system is on the line and over 500,000 bumpstock owners are watching.

 

[T.Lex]

This is not a machinegun.

Well, the ATF gets to decide that as part of the agency rulemaking process. (Basically.)

 

[ArcadiaGP]

The credibility of our nation's legal system is on the line and over 500,000 bumpstock owners are watching.

Unfortunately, semantics and reality aren't always important when it comes to creating laws. Fighting nonsense legislation often requires sympathy... which we will receive little to none on this subject.

The common person views it as a loophole toy, and really doesn't care. Also don't have the weight of the NRA behind us on this one... and we do have the weight of our own side against us.

Bumpstocks are doomed.

 

[AmmoManAaron]

Well, the ATF gets to decide that as part of the agency rulemaking process. (Basically.)

And here we are at the crux of the lawsuits. Can the BATFE (or any agency) go through a rulemaking process and create a rule that directly contravenes the language of existing criminal statute?

I say it cannot. Commonsense says it cannot. The courts may say that an agency can (Chevron-type ruling which basically says the Republic is dead-er). What is the point of the legislative branch if an agency can?

 

[T.Lex]

And here we are at the crux of the lawsuits. Can the BATFE (or any agency) go through a rulemaking process and create a rule that directly contravenes the language of existing criminal statute?

I say it cannot. Commonsense says it cannot. The courts may say that an agency can (Chevron-type ruling which basically says the Republic is dead-er). What is the point of the legislative branch if an agency can?

Common sense in the definition of a "machine gun" probably won't help the bumpstock owners.

Most "normal" people would say that if you hold the gun and pull the trigger and bullets keep coming out of the barrel, that's a machine gun. Should we refer to the youtube videos of people using bumpstocks to shoot really fast?

Auto sears, select fire, full auto, those things are for gun people. Normal people are going to watch the videos and say that's a machine gun.

Heck, most Americans probably think every AR and AK is a machine gun.

 

[AmmoManAaron]

Unfortunately, semantics and reality aren't always important when it comes to creating laws. Fighting nonsense legislation often requires sympathy... which we will receive little to none on this subject.

The common person views it as a loophole toy, and really doesn't care. Also don't have the weight of the NRA behind us on this one... and we do have the weight of our own side against us.

Bumpstocks are doomed.

Sadly, I can't find anything to disagree with in this post. I think the Republic is doomed and not just for this case/reason...more like a whole bunch of similar reasons/instances. This will just be the instance that drives home the point for a significant portion of gun owners. People rely on courts of right wrongs and to objectively and rationally enforce the laws of the land...if the courts can't/won't do that and gov't agencies can rewrite criminal statute at will...do we have a functional Republic anymore?

 

[AmmoManAaron]

Most "normal" people would say that if you hold the gun and pull the trigger and bullets keep coming out of the barrel, that's a machine gun. Should we refer to the youtube videos of people using bumpstocks to shoot really fast?

Auto sears, select fire, full auto, those things are for gun people. Normal people are going to watch the videos and say that's a machine gun.

Except that is not what happens. I refer you to the gif below. It's really no different than Jerry M. firing his revolver at the super speeds he is capable of. We are heading down a dangerous road where how fast you can fire your gun determines if your gun is a machinegun. Lighter trigger springs or shorter trigger reset helping you shoot your revolver super fast like Jerry does? Machinegun!

ETA: And the courts should NOT think or be like "normal" people. Most "normal" people are not all that informed, rational, or objective. And most people don't have any commonsense either.

 

[AmmoManAaron]

Huh. Unrelated to my discussions with you guys...an interesting thing I just discovered is that there are some "fake news" graphics out on the net that are purposely mischaracterizing how a bumpstock works. #3 is completely and utterly false. There are NO springs in a bumpstock and there are NO springs utilized in it's operation. Knowledge is power folks.