Tag: bump stocks

Ask Mr. Know-It-All

Most Americans Can’t Answer These Simple Gun Law Questions [More]

Including, evidently, the author:

12. Question: Bump stocks are frequently in the news. Are they legal? Answer: No. While bump stocks are still found in the wild, they have been federally banned since 2018. The popularity of this weapon enhancement enables a semiautomatic rifle to fire rapidly, and its use has been under a microscope after being used in several mass shootings in recent years.

Yeah, what’s this?

And “several”? Source? Y0u’re sure?

I typically don’t link to these MSN slide shows because they’re basically bait to get you to click on a dozen pages when all the content really calls for is one. That, and I found other “answers” less than correct and complete.

[Via Dan Gifford]

ATF Up to Old Tricks in Denying Attorney Fees on Bump Stock Case

If you want to fight for your rights against the unlimited power and treasure of the state, you’re on your own. That’s “the reasonableness of the government’s position.” [More]

We’re about to find out how different the new administration is from the old one when it comes to citizens being forced to fight for their rights.

Stiffed on the Bill

The Gun Owners of America were denied in their efforts to collect a $400,000 attorney fee in their successful work in challenging ATF’s bumpstock case. [More]

When writing an update on my case, I made a mistake on the title of my piece that is misleading. The judge’s order, as the text of the article states, was that “the plaintiffs shall file any motion for attorney’s fees.”

I signed a declaration for that last week to allow for the attorneys to submit their claim. We’ll now see if the ATF/DOJ under Trump still intends to fight gun owners tooth and nail.

[Via Jess]

Fighting Fire with Slide Fire

Today, Gun Owners of America announced its support for a lawsuit brought forth by Slide Fire Solutions against the U.S. government, which challenges the 2018 ban and unconstitutional confiscation of bump stocks under the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment. [More]

If any others want to come forward and file complaints, I’ll attest to this, with signatures to prove who I met with:

I asked if anyone else had come to reclaim their property and was told I was the only one, that others had forfeited theirs, and that one business that had made stocks wrote the loss off on taxes.

[Via Jess]

The More the Merrier

Welcome to the party, pals!

[Via Jess]

Prohibitionists Gonna Prohibit

To amend sections 2923.13 and 2923.14 and to enact section 2923.133 of the Revised Code to prohibit certain conduct regarding trigger cranks, bumpfire devices, and other items that accelerate a semi-automatic firearm’s rate of fire but do not convert it into an automatic firearm. [More]

I didn’t just get mine back to surrender it to these two @$$holes.

Come and take it.

[Via Jess]

And If You Act Now…

The ATF has begun the embarrassing process of returning bump stocks to their original owners after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the agency wrongfully determined they were machineguns, but only if the owners act within 90 days. The ATF sent letters titled “Notice of Opportunity to Request Return of Bump Stock(s) in ATF Custody” last week. They include an address in Washington, D.C. and an email that the former owners can contact to arrange for the return of their property. Once the requests are processed, the letter states, “you will be contacted by someone from the local ATF field office to arrange retrieval of your bump stock(s).” [More]

Just a few days ago agents I spoke with told me they were forfeited.

Left hand/right hand?

[Via Jess]

Back in Stock

ATF Returns Bump Stock After Five Years [More]

Glad to see more noticing. I do have one as yet unsatisfied concern with an assumption:

Oh, I get the rationale for doing it that way. Congress was in the process of passing a much more restrictive measure and a lot of Republicans were signing on in the wake of Las Vegas. This minimized the damage.

As I said in my piece:

Prove that’s what [Trump] did. Show us the contemporaneous evidence that was always his intent, and he could predict the outcome, so it was OK to put so many at risk without their knowledge or consent.

I’m not going to make excuses for the inexcusable.

[Via Herschel]

Related

Supreme Court Decision Forces ATF To Return Bump Stock After 5 Years! [Watch]

[Via Jess]

ATF Returns Bump Stock to Rightful Owner After Five-Year Legal Struggle

This is a small but concrete example that we still have at our disposal the remarkable system bequeathed to us by the Founders and that we can still use the courts to our advantage, as frustratingly drawn out as that process can be. We won’t be able to do that anymore if apathy and cynicism turn into a self-fulfilling prophecy that cedes the power to appoint the federal judiciary to the Democrats, who will then be able to have the Bruen opinion reversed and any citizen disarmament edict they pass upheld. [More]

As long as we can still score wins by peaceable means you can’t legitimately say voting is useless. Don’t let a self-fulfilling prophecy make this the election that changes that.

Setting Precedent

Specifically, I’m going to explain how the legal theories they are advancing before the United States Supreme Court in the VanDerStok case dealing with quote unquote ghost guns, which are unserialized firearms and gun gun parts. how theATF’s position with the Biden/Harris Administrations arguments are exactly that they’re setting the precedent for declaring that AR-15s are machine guns and can be banned because they cannot be added to the NFA register… [Watch]

Exactly what some of us have been arguing the bump stock ban opened the door for, which makes it curious that he’s one of the ones arguing — without contemporaneous documentation — that Trump’s ban was a brilliant 3D chess move.

[Via Jess]

Anybody Smell Gas…?

Strategic Retreats for Long-Term Gains:
Smith compared the temporary concessions in the gun rights battle to strategic retreats in warfare. For instance, the controversial bump stock ban by Trump was a tactical move to prevent a broader legislative redefinition of machine guns, which could have had far-reaching negative consequences for gun owners. [More]

Prove that’s what he did. Show us the contemporaneous evidence he was giving a master class in 3D chess, that was always his intent, and he could predict the outcome so it was OK to put so many at risk without their knowledge or consent.

As for “gunfluencer” Rittenhouse…

The Wrong Way

The Supreme Court struck the ban down, making it clear that if you wanted to ban bumpstocks you had to do it the right way, which is the way the Constitution outlines, which is actually passing a bill through Congress and having it signed into law by the president. [Watch]

Wrong:

“Left unsaid is where Congress derives such authority in the first place, as the power to regulate and ban arms is nowhere delegated to it in the Constitution. The only clear mandate is ‘the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.’ By any branch of government.”

Change my mind. Show the section and clause.

I expect our would-be leaders to know this stuff.

Trust Busters

TRUTH ABOUT BUMPSTOCKS MEDIA COVERAGE … But it’s presented in a news article for general population consumption, thus gaining credibility from those who trust the honest transmission of information based on the publication’s reputation. [More]

At this point, anyone who trusts USA Today/Gannet Publications and the DSM for any of that basically wants to be a manipulated idiot.

Anybody Want to Buy a Bridge?

Who Is Really To Blame For The ATF Bump Stock Ban Rule? [More]

Donald Trump and the NRA.

There’s a totally fabricated after the fact face-save ploy that it was really brilliant 3D chess designed to save us meme that’s suddenly circulating is utterly without corroborating evidence.

You don’t gamble with someone else’s stakes.

Get back to me when you have memos and emails from the decision makers proving me wrong and I’ll apologize.

Verified by MonsterInsights