Sen. Feinstein introducing bill to ban bump stocks after Vegas shooting.....

Feinstein isn't wasting time.....an immediate bill to ban bump stocks. But that wont apply to US Agencies and departments. What say ye about that?



Sen. Dianne Feinstein, a longtime advocate of stricter gun control measures, introduced a bill Wednesday that would ban the sale and possession of bump-stock equipment and other devices that essentially turn a semiautomatic weapon into an automatic one.

The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) told reporters Tuesday that multiple bump stocks were found in the hotel room used by the shooter, who opened fire during the Route 91 Harvest Music Festival on Sunday, killing 58 people and injuring over 500 others.

According to a copy of the bill text provided to ABC, it would go into effect 180 days after its passage.

“It shall be unlawful for any person to import, sell, manufacture, transfer or possess, in or affecting interstate or foreign commerce, a trigger crank, a bump-fire device or any part, combination of parts, component, device, attachment or accessory that is designed or functions to accelerate the rate of fire of a semiautomatic rifle but not convert the semiautomatic rifle into a machine gun,” the bill states.

The ban would not apply to sales or possession of the devices by U.S. agencies or departments......snip~

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/sen-...-bill-ban-bump-stocks-vegas/story?id=50276506

 

Uh oh.....there goes a Repub all in for the ban. Then there is Susan Collins for the Senate.


Texas Republican sees 'no reason' for bump stocks, open to ban.....

Rep. Bill Flores, a popular Texas conservative serving in his fourth term in the House, is the first congressional Republican to endorse the idea of a ban on bump stocks.

Bump stocks, which are capable of converting semiautomatic firearms into fully automatic weapons, have become a topic of hot debate this week after a modified bump stock rifle was found in the hotel room from which gunman Stephen Paddock launched Sunday's attack in Las Vegas, killing 58 people and injuring hundreds more.

Flores’ spokesman confirmed the congressman’s position, first reported by The Hill today.

Senate Majority Whip John Cornyn, the senior Republican senator from Texas, also told reporters today that the bump stock issue is worth examining, and that he spoke with Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, about holding a hearing.

Several other Senate Republicans also signaled their desire for a hearing on bump stocks.

Sens. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., Jeff Flake, R-Ariz., and John Thune, R-S.D., also indicated they'd be open to hearings on the issue......snip~

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/texas-republican-sees-reason-bump-stocks-open-ban/story?id=50287541

 

Other than making a gun fire rounds faster, what practical purpose does a bump stock serve? It doesn't benefit a hunter. It doesn't benefit protection. So why have them at all? Shooting my rifle is fun enough without a bump stock.

 

I do not see a bill to ban bump stocks getting passed. Any Republican who even starts to think about becoming a traitor to the cause of the current day NRA will be warned and will back down. The Politburo of our current NRA will not allow it because it will be construed as a step on the slippery slope of attacking the 2nd amendment.

I may be wrong but I do not think do since I am virtually never wrong!LOL,

 

I agree that a bump stock is not of practical use for hunting. I also do not understand why anyone would want a semi-auto for hunting. If you cannot hit a deer with one shot you should not be hunting. If you missed on your first shot you will have a tough time hitting on your second unless you are very very good at holding your gun level but if you are that good you should not have missed on your first shot.

You know where a semi auto is fun it's for a. . 22 and shooting chipmunks, squirrels, or some real small varmits. But not challenging.

If you live on a ranch or very rural farm then I can see that you may feel safer with a bump stock. I will stick with a .40 pistol for home defense but I live in a suburb so I would not want to inadvertently hurt the neighbors accross the street with rifle or carbine distance.

 

While I personally have no use for a 'bump' stock I hate to see the government get involved and ban them. Perhaps regulate this item just as currently done with full auto weapons and silencers as a middle ground...

 

Ignorant-assed rednecks...

NRA opposes ban on gear used in Vegas massacre
Tue, Oct 10, 2017 - The powerful US gun lobby, the National Rifle Association (NRA), on Sunday said it would oppose an outright ban on bump-stock devices that the killer in the Las Vegas massacre of 58 people used to turn rifles into automatic weapons and strafe a crowd with bursts of sustained gunfire.

 

Bump stocks are terrible for aim, but your thoughts on semi auto rifles is ignorant.

 

You have every right to be wrong be youbarecindeed very good at it.

 

After the clear devastation this device was a accessory to, who wouldn't be for this to keep another Cegas from happening, unless Lord forbid the same massacre occurs at Ozzifest or Rock On The Range, then we will be debating this AGAIN.

Now is a time for action. I support this bill.

 

Ban 'em.

 

Sure, but not on the issue of opposing semi-auto rifles. There are multiple reasons to own a semi-auto rifle. There is only 1 irrational reason to ban them.

 

While this bill sounds reasonable, and I don't think most people are against banning the sale, this still sets a dangerously slippery slope.

Essentially what you're going to have is another federal possession law, only this time it will ban a nebulously defined device. I guarantee you someone's going to be charged with "possession" just because they had some rubber bands and an instruction manual downloaded on their computer about how to use those rubber bands to modify the weapon.

Or police will just be able to conveniently claim they "found a device that looks like it could function as a bump stock". You know how DUIs work? Police can arrest anyone just because, in their personal judgement, it looked like the driver might be under the influence of something. Never mind whatever medical condition the driver may have. Or possibly the person was jolted by a car crash that just happened and that's why they're so out of it. Well, now this is going to take that same logic and apply it to when police conduct a search of someone's home or business.

It might not seem obvious but bills like these bring us one step closer to a police state.

Not just that, but these type of laws are going to be used as a backdoor attempt to criminalize regular guns. All those regular guns will be turned into illegal guns if there's even one modifying illegal device found (or supposedly found) in any place that could be connected to the alleged owner. It's all in the definitions, and this myriad different laws all work together, so once they define something as one thing numerous other laws will implicitly come into play.

Come maybe 10 years down the line, they'll take these laws and start reinterpreting them in ways people don't imagine right now. And no one will care.
This has already been happening.

It sounds like a simple proposed bill, but all the implications it is going to have, especially in some particular cases, are going to be complex.

 

There is no way to negotiate with democrats regarding gun control, or anything else for that matter. Diane Feinstein is not a sports shooter or hunter. I don't know if she has ever fired a gun. She is uninformed about semi auto rifles and what bump firing actually is.

The bump stock itself does not convert a semi auto rifle into a machine gun. It is merely way to bump fire a rifle from the shoulder rather than bumping the stock with your non trigger finger hand, usually from the hip. Bump stocks are a novelty. They can be fun and they can assist certain people with disabilities.

Should they be regulated more? Maybe. Should all semi auto "black rifles" be banned? No. Should suppressors be non regulated? Yes. Of these 3 gun issues, most democrats would ban them all if they could. There is no middle ground. Give a democrat an inch and they will take a yard. Once pro gun advocates give in to one gun control issue, democrats will try for another, and another. Since there can be no middle ground, we oppose all.

If ATF wants to reevaluate the bump stock, most pro gun advocates won't lobby against restriction. When an uninformed over the hill anti gun democrat senator introduces a gun control bill, it will be opposed and probably will not pass.

 

They don't need a bill.....ATF can re-determine the device. Automatics are illegal anyways.

At least Feinstein admitted yesterday that there is no gun laws on the books, that could have prevented the Vegas Shooting.

 

However they go about taking them out of ciculation ... they should. Bump stocks are toys in the hands of responsible owners, and truly dangerous in the wrong hands. I whole heartedly support the 2nd, but what sportsman, marksman, collector, or hunter needs one of these?

 

Disagreed on self-defense. Agreed on hunting....unless it's wild hogs.

 

When we start down a path of defining Constitutional rights by "need" we set up a bad precedent.

 

I get the "slippery slope" ... really. But the 1st federal gun legislation, passed in 1934 (I think) banned unlicensed ownership of full auto weapons. That 80 yr. old laws slope hasn't proved very slippery, IMO. The ATF making the decision might not be a great idea, but regulating AFTERMARKET mods that increase the rate of fire isn't an infringement I'm personally opposed to. Citizens would still be free to apply for FFL's and collect full auto weapons, so I don't think it qualifies as a "ban" on hight rate of fire weapons.

 

machine guns have never been illegal in the USA on a Federal level. They are heavily regulated, but not illegal at all. Prior to 1934, machine guns were not regulated any differently than any other firearm. You could quite literally order a machine gun from a mail order catalog… and people did, including some prohibition era gangsters.
the United States drafted the National Firearms Act which passed in 1934. The National Firearms Act did not ban machine guns, but it made them very difficult to afford for most people. To buy a machine gun under the 1934 NFA, an individual needs to submit the following (the procedure remains unchanged even today):

• Pay a tax of $200, which in 1934 was worth over $3,500
• Fill out a lengthy application to register your gun with the federal government
• Submit photographs
• Submit passport photos
• Get your chief law enforcement official to sign your application
• Wait for the results of your background check to come back

A violation of the national firearms act results in a felony punishable by up to 10 years in federal prison, a $100,000 fine, and forfeiture of the individual’s right to own or possess firearms in the future.

The next big piece of legislation pertinent to machine guns occurred in 1968 with the Gun Control Act. The Gun Control Act established that imported firearms that had “no sporting purpose” were not able to be sold to civilians. Machine guns as a whole were determined to have no sporting purpose, and thus any MG imported after ’68 are able to be owned only by dealers, military, and police agencies.

The last piece of machine gun legislation is to many the coup de grace. In 1986 the Firearm Owners Protection Act was intended to prevent the federal government from creating a registry of gun owners. At the last minute, William Hughes added an amendment that called for the banning of machine guns.

There are three types of machine guns that determine the gun’s legal status:

Transferable: Guns registered prior to May 19th, 1986 that are able to be owned by everyone. There are only 182,619 transferable machine guns according to the ATF.

• Pre-Samples: Machine guns imported after 1968 but before May 19th, 1986. The 1968 GCA established that machine guns with no sporting purposes could not be sold to civilians. Dealers can however buy them and keep them after they give up their licenses. As a general rule, pre-samples cost about half that of a transferable.

• Post-Samples: Machine guns made after the May 19th, 1986 cutoff date. These are only for dealers, manufacturers, military, and police. A manufacturer who pays $500 a year is permitted by the federal government to manufacture these. A dealer (who is not a manufacturer) may acquire these if a police agency provides a “demo letter”. A demo letter is simply a letter from a PD asking you to acquire a sample gun for them to test and evaluate for potential purchase.

​

As a result of the closed registry, we cannot get new machine guns. We simply trade the ones that have been out there for years.

This is the full and current extent of Federal law regarding NFA weapons. As with any firearm regulation, States have the right to impose regulations that are more stringent than that of Federal Regulations. NFA registered machine guns may be legal in one state but not another. The majority of states do allow NFA registered weapons, including machine guns.

​

 

Two wrongs don't make a right. Same goes for three wrongs, four wrongs, etc.

 

It's a start. It's impressive how it takes these people about 10 seconds to go from horrendous national tragedy to coming after my and everybody else's guns.

 

Utter nonsense. No one is coming after your guns. A bump stock is not a gun. It's an accessory.

 

I'd personally rather this issue not be a rallying point for Dems in 2018. I'd also prefer a GOP congress to draft a law to specifically address, a specific mod, rather than have Dems address the issue in the future. I opposed the Brady bill because it was too broad, and definitely infringed. The issue of these mods won't simply disappear, and the consequences in 2018 might be that Dems find themselves in a position to pass their own gun control laws.

 

All the show-offs expounding stuff that will accomplish nothing for the people.