45Doll 5,873 Posted February 20, 2018 So he has rolled on this one. I wonder what's next? Multiple stories besides this one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
raz-0 1,259 Posted February 20, 2018 Yup, saw that. Most optimistic possibility is that it is worded well so that it isn't a bureaucratic open end. Shockingly, of all the wording I have seen the NJ bill on the issue has perhaps the least problematic wording with "devices that simulate fully automatic fire". You could narrow it even more by going for something like "a device that permits multiple shots to be fired without repositioning of the trigger finger". That wouldn't even touch binary triggers. It was inevitable the folks playing chicken with the BATFE would eventually fail to dodge. 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Smokin .50 1,907 Posted February 20, 2018 It's also politics & pick yer battles. He did this to shut-up the RINO pansies that need to feel good. He has more legislation to move, so now he can point to this & say he "did something". I knew it was going to happen. Anybody with half a brain & gray hair had at least an inkling. I trust my gut just like Leroy Jethro Gibbs, lol! As you wring yer hands & cry over the "bump", keep in mind Hildebeast would have done a LOT worse than this... 2 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
raz-0 1,259 Posted February 20, 2018 21 minutes ago, Smokin .50 said: It's also politics & pick yer battles. He did this to shut-up the RINO pansies that need to feel good. He has more legislation to move, so now he can point to this & say he "did something". I knew it was going to happen. Anybody with half a brain & gray hair had at least an inkling. I trust my gut just like Leroy Jethro Gibbs, lol! As you wring yer hands & cry over the "bump", keep in mind Hildebeast would have done a LOT worse than this... We'll see. if he gets shitty advice, it could be bad. I mean can you tell me what the normal rate of fire is on a semi-automatic firearm? The dude is deficit spending like a mad man. if he pisses off gun owners enough, he kills that block. He aint getting back in with just the religious loons. His opposition is going to be motivated, splitting your base is going to be troublesome. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
T Bill 649 Posted February 21, 2018 He's picking battles. I agree with Smokin '50. If he is not careful midterms could be a disaster and then he's a 2 year lame duck. 2 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Smokin .50 1,907 Posted February 21, 2018 1 hour ago, raz-0 said: We'll see. if he gets shitty advice, it could be bad. I mean can you tell me what the normal rate of fire is on a semi-automatic firearm? The dude is deficit spending like a mad man. if he pisses off gun owners enough, he kills that block. He aint getting back in with just the religious loons. His opposition is going to be motivated, splitting your base is going to be troublesome. Totally correct^^^! Hopefully he's playing his cards close to the vest. His team did a great job playing the Electoral College vote w/ tv buys that went into other states that he won. Let's hope just because we don't know what the game is, that we still enjoy the net-net outcome. Remember the politics surrounding HR 38 & "the bump"? Well, HR 38 cleared the house didn't it? This could merely be the second shoe to drop. Keep in mind it's not a law, just an EO, which he himself can rescind after National Reciprocity becomes signed LAW.... I put NOTHING past the realm of possibility, and I continue to hope for the best! 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
WP22 1,558 Posted February 21, 2018 The ability that some here have to rationalize eating a shit sandwich never fails to amaze me. Strike that. It doesn't amaze me at all; I expect it. This is why the left always wins; even when losing, they always win. When did the left give in just a little on immigration? On the wall? On Daca? on voter ID? On e-verify? On tax cuts? On Obamacare? On anything Trump ran on? "But it could be worse with Hillary". Got news for you. Hilary lost; she ain't the president. The senate is not controlled by the democrats; neither is the house. There's no reason to give. Don't blame the rinos; blame yourself for voting for them; for allowing them to be rinos. Do you see any DINO's? And why not? Learn from the dems. The politicians only fear one thing; losing the job. Put that fear in them. We do nothing but give. I'm way past middle age and grey hair abounds and I'm tired of giving. 3 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ray Ray 3,566 Posted February 21, 2018 Bump stocks for national CCW? 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
1LtCAP 4,262 Posted February 21, 2018 lets hope he doesn't pick the battle of reinstating the 04 ban. http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2018/02/20/white-house-on-assault-weapons-ban-we-havent-closed-doors-on-any-front/ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zeke 5,504 Posted February 21, 2018 1 minute ago, Ray Ray said: Bump stocks for national CCW? It ain’t dead till January ‘19 sumtin Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Smokin .50 1,907 Posted February 21, 2018 4 minutes ago, WP22 said: The ability that some here have to rationalize eating a shit sandwich never fails to amaze me. Strike that. It doesn't amaze me at all; I expect it. This is why the left always wins; even when losing, they always win. When did the left give in just a little on immigration? On the wall? On Daca? on voter ID? On e-verify? On tax cuts? On Obamacare? On anything Trump ran on? "But it could be worse with Hillary". Got news for you. Hilary lost; she ain't the president. The senate is not controlled by the democrats; neither is the house. There's no reason to give. Don't blame the rinos; blame yourself for voting for them; for allowing them to be rinos. Do you see any DINO's? And why not? Learn from the dems. The politicians only fear one thing; losing the job. Put that fear in them. We do nothing but give. I'm way past middle age and grey hair abounds and I'm tired of giving. ^^^Dude, I'm NOT the enemy! For the record, I don't like shit sammiches either, I just have to either learn to live with them (cause I only vote ONCE in each election) or I can retreat to Canada like a draft dodger. Since I'm a realist I understand how the world works. I don't always enjoy it, but I understand it... 2 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
voyager9 3,434 Posted February 21, 2018 21 minutes ago, WP22 said: The ability that some here have to rationalize eating a shit sandwich never fails to amaze me. Strike that. It doesn't amaze me at all; I expect it. This is why the left always wins; even when losing, they always win. When did the left give in just a little on immigration? On the wall? On Daca? on voter ID? On e-verify? On tax cuts? On Obamacare? On anything Trump ran on? "But it could be worse with Hillary". Got news for you. Hilary lost; she ain't the president. The senate is not controlled by the democrats; neither is the house. There's no reason to give. Don't blame the rinos; blame yourself for voting for them; for allowing them to be rinos. Do you see any DINO's? And why not? Learn from the dems. The politicians only fear one thing; losing the job. Put that fear in them. We do nothing but give. I'm way past middle age and grey hair abounds and I'm tired of giving. As opposed to what? Stomping your feet and yelling NO, No, NO, to your computer monitor? From what I can tell that’s not working out much better. 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
WP22 1,558 Posted February 21, 2018 The problem is that every time we give in just a little some on our side will just give up. I mean, who wants to fight for a retreating side? Better yet, who want to fight for a side that being routed? And when they come for all the marbles, and you know better than me, they will, there will be nobody left to fight. That's my worry. At some point we need to take a stand. 4 minutes ago, voyager9 said: As opposed to what? Stomping your feet and yelling NO, No, NO, to your computer monitor? From what I can tell that’s not working out much better. I'll take my beatings standing up. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
voyager9 3,434 Posted February 21, 2018 https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/presidential-memorandum-application-definition-machinegun-bump-fire-stocks-similar-devices/ After the deadly mass murder in Las Vegas, Nevada, on October 1, 2017, I asked my Administration to fully review how the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives regulates bump fire stocks and similar devices. Although the Obama Administration repeatedly concluded that particular bump stock type devices were lawful to purchase and possess, I sought further clarification of the law restricting fully automatic machineguns. Accordingly, following established legal protocols, the Department of Justice started the process of promulgating a Federal regulation interpreting the definition of “machinegun” under Federal law to clarify whether certain bump stock type devices should be illegal. The Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking was published in the Federal Register on December 26, 2017. Public comment concluded on January 25, 2018, with the Department of Justice receiving over 100,000 comments. Today, I am directing the Department of Justice to dedicate all available resources to complete the review of the comments received, and, as expeditiously as possible, to propose for notice and comment a rule banning all devices that turn legal weapons into machineguns. Although I desire swift and decisive action, I remain committed to the rule of law and to the procedures the law prescribes. Doing this the right way will ensure that the resulting regulation is workable and effective and leaves no loopholes for criminals to exploit. I would ask that you keep me regularly apprised of your progress. You are authorized and directed to publish this memorandum in the Federal Register. Based on the wording it sounds like he’s telling the ATF to look at it again, but not changing the definition of anything. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnnyB 4,322 Posted February 21, 2018 5 hours ago, Smokin .50 said: It's also politics & pick yer battles. He did this to shut-up the RINO pansies that need to feel good. He has more legislation to move, so now he can point to this & say he "did something". I knew it was going to happen. Anybody with half a brain & gray hair had at least an inkling. I trust my gut just like Leroy Jethro Gibbs, lol! As you wring yer hands & cry over the "bump", keep in mind Hildebeast would have done a LOT worse than this... Thank you for helping make my point as well! I would give your post 100 likes if I could! I feel as you do and was compared to a Fudd for my opinion! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
maintenanceguy 510 Posted February 21, 2018 I don't like it and I wish he had just kept his mouth shut but... He directed the AG to propose rules making it illegal to own things that convert "regular" firearms to automatic firearms. Those things are already illegal and bump stocks aren't one of those things - unless somebody changes the definitions in the existing law. I'm not sure that can be done without an act of congress. So far, there have been several unexpected twists in this presidency where some move that seemed like a bad idea at first ended up being the right move. I'm cautiously optimistic that this isn't what it seems. 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jackandjill 683 Posted February 21, 2018 My problem is with him giving something unilaterally. As a business man (that he is), he should have tied it with something, like DACA with wall. Either each side gets something or nobody gets nothing. He should have tied any "compromise" with a National CCW. Or tie with repeal of the real problem - Gun Free Zones. Or pick something ridiculous (still right thing to do) as calling Death Penalty for anyone shooting up schools. Giving something unilaterally is the shitty thing to do. 2 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnnyB 4,322 Posted February 21, 2018 Just now, jackandjill said: My problem is with him giving something unilaterally. As a business man (that he is), he should have tied it with something, like DACA with wall. Either each side gets something or nobody gets nothing. He should have tied any "compromise" with a National CCW. Or tie with repeal of the real problem - Gun Free Zones. I think Trump realizes our 2A rights are currently under the worst premeditated attack in history! He sees and is responding wisely to what the blind among us do not see or simply refuse to recognize! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jackandjill 683 Posted February 21, 2018 21 minutes ago, JohnnyB said: I think Trump realizes our 2A rights are currently under the worst premeditated attack in history! He sees and is responding wisely to what the blind among us do not see or simply refuse to recognize! Still hoping that to be case. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
capt14k 2,052 Posted February 21, 2018 I think you guys are making excuses for Trump, and it is going to hurt even more when you finally realize that you have been had. I've always said Trump wasn't my first choice, but I got fully behind him when he was my only choice. I even started to buy into that he was different. First the budget and now this shows Trump is just another one of them. It is disappointing but there were other signs as well. Including the bombing of Syria and our continued involvement in Syria. Hopefully I am wrong, but I am afraid I am not. If Trump was any truly any different, Hillary would have been charged. 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
capt14k 2,052 Posted February 21, 2018 Bump stocks for national CCW?That's what many said the plan was. Now our supposed side is making offers with nothing in return. Plan also called for Fix NICS to be tied to National Reprococity. That's out the window because the Dems won't pass them together. So instead of blaming the Dems for preventing stronger background checks, let's just give it to them. Brilliant move. Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Scorpio64 5,147 Posted February 21, 2018 Why are bump stocks so popular? What is the appeal of a bump stock. If your answer is anything other than it makes an AR fire like a full auto , the answer is wrong. While a bump stock may be legal because it technically does not make a firearm full auto by the strictest definition of full auto. A definition which is drawn on the mechanics of the fire control group. The fact of the matter is this; Bump stocks are intended to reproduce the mechanical properties of a full auto fire control group. It's not for a better grip, it's not to reduce recoil, it's not to enhance accuracy. It's one and only purpose in life is to turn a semi-auto rifle into a full auto rifle by means of a mechanism other than the fire control group.. You don't have to like it, but those are the facts. Up until Vegas, bump stocks were a novelty. They look like they'd be a lot of fun but they are not a critical component, not OEM so to speak. We have a lot of strong 2A supporters here, and I am most definitely one of them. We have bigger fish to fry, like a second AWB, magazine limits and CCW. If we have to throw the daffodils a bone to distract them while we get the steak, I'm good with that. Trump is going to regulate bump stocks, not ban them. Even if they get put on the NFA list as a tax stamp item, it's not like you can legally use one in NJ anyway. As a NJ resident, it's pointless to obsess over bump stocks when there are more important and troubling things coming down the pike that will have a far greater impact on 2A in New Jersey. 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Persona non grata 113 Posted February 21, 2018 I don't give a damn about bump stocks. If they're banned or regulated via a law, so be it. My issue is HOW they want to go about banning them. A regulation from an unelected and unaccountable bureaucracy is not how this should be done. It sets precedent and opens too many doors for the next administration to ban whatever they want through executive Fiat. This will end badly. 2 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
HBecwithFn7 296 Posted February 21, 2018 1 hour ago, Persona non grata said: I don't give a damn about bump stocks. If they're banned or regulated via a law, so be it. My issue is HOW they want to go about banning them. A regulation from an unelected and unaccountable bureaucracy is not how this should be done. It sets precedent and opens too many doors for the next administration to ban whatever they want through executive Fiat. This will end badly. The main concern is just "giving in" in general... and especially, without a counter concession (like national reciprocity, etc.). You give the antis one inch, they'll want a mile, the next day.... and 2 miles the next day thereafter, and 4 miles the following day, etc. etc. until they have everything they want. We cannot give one inch... not one. 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
capt14k 2,052 Posted February 21, 2018 The main concern is just "giving in" in general... and especially, without a counter concession (like national reciprocity, etc.). You give the antis one inch, they'll want a mile, the next day.... and 2 miles the next day thereafter, and 4 miles the following day, etc. etc. until they have everything they want. We cannot give one inch... not one. Exactly. Mr. Art of the Deal is negotiating against himself, or is he?Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
1LtCAP 4,262 Posted February 21, 2018 really? you guys are joking, right? who gives a dam if they ban em, right? 'cause yaknow? they'd NEVAH use that as a precedent to ban other things, now would they? 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bhunted 887 Posted February 21, 2018 First of all. To me, a simple solution to make the anti feel good. Add them to the NFA list. Let's realize that there are states where you can get full auto legally. We cannot here... This way if they really want them, let them go through the process of getting stamp. Chances are that way, they'd say screw it and buy a full auto. Yes/No? Now I know you want to eliminate the NFA entirely. But we got bigger fish to fry...... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bhunted 887 Posted February 21, 2018 .If they can get a mile out of my inch, God Bless them... [emoji23]Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
45Doll 5,873 Posted February 21, 2018 "And just a few moments ago, I signed a memorandum directing the attorney general to propose regulations to ban all devices that turn legal weapons into machine guns." Now I wonder what the interpretation of those words might be with the current fluid state of our language. And, if he means the ATF should be the one making new 'regulations', they do not have the statutory authority. Only Congress could do that. That's why they didn't do it under Obama. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites