The NRA - with friends like these...

[JAB]

So, let me first state that I really don't have any, great desire to own a bump stock.  However, I do have a great desire that Americans not lose the right to own such devices and I have a great desire that the organization that presents itself as a group that is supposed to be fighting against the loss of such rights not SUGGEST that those rights be taken away.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/10/05/nra-calls-for-atf-review-bump-stocks-new-regulations-after-las-vegas-shooting.html

Quote

“The NRA believes that devices designed to allow semi-automatic rifles to function like fully-automatic rifles should be subject to additional regulations,” the NRA said in a written statement.

Truthfully, I think this is just more political tit for tat.  Legislators, especially ostensibly 'pro-gun' Republican legislators may throw gun owners a bone every once in a while so that the NRA can trumpet a victory.  Then, when it comes time for the NRA to scratch some politicians' backs, they throw those Republicans a bone by suggesting that taking more freedom away from the gun owning public would be a great idea so that when those Republican legislators do so - thereby giving themselves something they can point to in the next election to show that they 'did something' about mass shootings, etc. they won't lose their NRA 'A' rating because the NRA suggested the stripping of those rights in the first place.

I understand the concept of 'picking your battles'.  I also think the NRA rolls over when they should stand and fight, sometimes but understand that this is how they work and that we have to take the good with the bad.  What I don't understand is shooting yourself in the foot and/or asking to be allowed to unconditionally surrender before the battle really even starts.

No, I am not an NRA member.  However, despite all the little things they have done in the past with which I do not agree I was getting ready to bite the bullet and join.  I literally (and by literally I mean literally - some people apparently don't know what the word means these days) looked up how to join the NRA just yesterday and was making plans to do so.  It looks like they just saved me forty bucks.

 

Edited October 5, 2017 by JAB

[Garufa]

I hate to say it but freedom loving 2nd amendment supporters are just going to have to suck this one up and let it go.  The gains, or more properly termed "lack of defeats", the past decade on the federal level have a cost.  Now it's time to pay up.

Don't shoot the messenger, this is just the reality as I see it.  This event is not going away like all those in the past.

[JAB]

12 minutes ago, Garufa said:

I hate to say it but freedom loving 2nd amendment supporters are just going to have to suck this one up and let it go.  The gains, or more properly termed "lack of defeats", the past decade on the federal level have a cost.  Now it's time to pay up.

Don't shoot the messenger, this is just the reality as I see it.  This event is not going away like all those in the past.

Oh, I agree.  Bump stocks are probably gone - or at least access to them without tax stamps, etc.  However, I think our 'advocates' - both in political office and elsewhere - should make it a hard fought loss.  Make the other side expend some political capital to earn that legislation rather than having a group that is supposedly on 'our side' say, "Take our rights, please!"

My concern is that someone, somewhere will correctly point out that bump stocks are only one method which can be used to allow semiauto rifles to fire basically like automatic rifles.  Heck, I seem to recall recently a sort of robot/cyborg glove that someone could wear which would make their trigger finger move quickly enough to fire at auto rates of speed.  For that matter, I have seen videos where Jerry Miculek was firing semiauto pistols at rates close enough to full auto to not make much difference on the receiving end with no mechanical aid, at all.  Making the politicians fight over bump stocks will give them something to chew on until some of the initial shock and outcry dies down.  Not doing so gives too easy a victory to our enemies and allows them to move past the specific bump stock issue too quickly.  Then the idea that, as long as semiauto rifles remain on the market and unregulated, this kind of thing could happen again will take hold (justifiably or not.)  Giving up on bump stocks so quickly also allows them to move on to 'high capacity magazines' without breaking stride.  If bump stocks are going to be sacrificed then the sacrifice should at least mean something.  Wait until giving them up can be presented as 'compromise'.  Make the politicians fight for the bump stocks to appease both sides' desire to be seen as 'doing something' rather than giving up the bump stocks easily so that the antis can quickly move on to, "Ban semiautos."

Edited October 5, 2017 by JAB

[DaveTN]

You either have a right under the 2nd amendment to own a fully automatic weapon or you don’t; it’s that simple.

While bump fires may not violate the letter of the law; they violate the intent of the law.

The intent of the 2nd amendment was allow the people to protect themselves against a tyrannical government should the need arise. You would need automatic weapons if that were to happen.

Do I think the SCOTUS will ever rule that, or ease restrictions? Not after 10/01/2017.

[mikegideon]

25 minutes ago, DaveTN said:

You either have a right under the 2nd amendment to own a fully automatic weapon or you don’t; it’s that simple.

While bump fires may not violate the letter of the law; they violate the intent of the law.

The intent of the 2nd amendment was allow the people to protect themselves against a tyrannical government should the need arise. You would need automatic weapons if that were to happen.

Do I think the SCOTUS will ever rule that, or ease restrictions? Not after 10/01/2017.

It was a game changer in one way. I think they are gone. How much ammo do we need to burn trying to hang onto something that I would never buy in the first place. The NRA didn't come out with their statement because they want to give something up. They have their ears to the rail.

Edited October 5, 2017 by mikegideon

[RED333]

The Right to Keep and Bear Arms is a God giving right, mans laws can not take it away. All this "slipper sloop" started in 1930s with the taking of full auto, all because of a few outlaws killing a few LEO. It is not the "tools" fault, the left will never see it as "users" fault. The next step down that sloop is taking away a gimmick that can make you waste ammo. Hell I can waste ammo with my finger hung on my belt loop. It will be mags again, then the evil black gun thing. Stand for something or fall for anything. No I aint going out to buy a bump stock, I do not even want one. I want full auto back!!! I want the same arms that LEO and Military can get. Yes jet planes, guided missiles everything. I am a good person, tell me why I can not buy them, other than a man thinks I am not good enough. That pisses me off to no end!!!

Edited October 5, 2017 by RED333
Because I can!!!

[shotgunshooter]

Won't renew my membership. Waiting until 2021 and then going to GoA. I'll save my money for a lifetime membership somewhere else. What happened to "Stand and Fight?"

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

[TGO David]

Honestly, guys, I think we're going to be really lucky if we don't see regulation of bump-fire stocks followed by the complete prohibition of full-auto weapons within the next 10 years.  The government might not engage in outright confiscation, but they might easily prohibit any future transfer of them as Class III items and let them "die on the vine" as their owners pass away.  Trusts might protect them for one additional generation of owners past that.

Once the original owners or executors of trusts pass away, they'd be subject to forfeiture or become illegally-possessed items.

I'd love to be wrong about this, but I can easily see where Trump or some other politician cede ground and enact "feel good" legislation to obliterate the already regulated possession of actual assault rifles.

[akdude1]

The NRA has just now Banned the use of Bump Stocks on their own Gun Ranges!

[btq96r]

As soon as I saw that Republican legislators were open to regulating bump fire stocks, I felt they were on a standing 8 count.  Now with the NRA chiming in the direction they did, I think it's only a matter of time and legislative momentum.  That this could happen with a Republican Congress and President Trump in the White House is astonishing to me.

My curiosity on this is why now?  Sandy Hook, Orlando, both brought nothing, and this too would have passed I think.

[Chucktshoes]

How do those bus wheels feel, fellas? I think they're stupid toys, but the folks at Negotiating Rights Away and the Republicans have just thrown ya down there in a nice little knee jerk reaction. 

[Garufa]

27 minutes ago, TGO David said:

Honestly, guys, I think we're going to be really lucky if we don't see regulation of bump-fire stocks followed by the complete prohibition of full-auto weapons within the next 10 years.  The government might not engage in outright confiscation, but they might easily prohibit any future transfer of them as Class III items and let them "die on the vine" as their owners pass away.  Trusts might protect them for one additional generation of owners past that.

Once the original owners or executors of trusts pass away, they'd be subject to forfeiture or become illegally-possessed items.

I'd love to be wrong about this, but I can easily see where Trump or some other politician cede ground and enact "feel good" legislation to obliterate the already regulated possession of actual assault rifles.

This is precisely why Reagan banned the manufacture of new "machine guns" for civilian sales in 1986.  They had no intention of too many still being around 31 years later.

Edited October 6, 2017 by Garufa

[Raoul]

5 minutes ago, Chucktshoes said:

How do those bus wheels feel, fellas? I think they're stupid toys, but the folks at Negotiating Rights Away and the Republicans have just thrown ya down there in a nice little knee jerk reaction. 

And since you started peeing in everybody's Wheaties I'll just add that the Donald probably doesn't give a ratsass about you're 2A rights either.

[Garufa]

1 minute ago, Raoul said:

And since you started peeing in everybody's Wheaties I'll just add that the Donald probably doesn't give a ratsass about you're 2A rights either.

Of everyone one this forum ChuckT understands that the most.  

[MacGyver]

It sure won’t be a good thing when a government built in opposition now feels the need to do something...

I heard two GOP congressmen even blame bumpfire stocks on Obama today.  That’s rich.  

This will be really interesting when it comes to that whole “well regulated militia” thing.  For generations, semiautomatic has meant one press of the trigger yields one bullet firing. Now, we have semiautomatic devices “acting like automatic weapons.” It’s not a far stretch to argue that people can just fire a semiautomatic weapon too quickly.  

You’ll likely see any bam go through the courts - but that’ll bring little comfort with the bureaucratic morass that is the ATF.  

But, pay attention. You’re about to have folks lining up to seem relevant. Healthcare is hard.  Tax reform Is harder.  I expect the GOP will take the easy win here.  The answer isn’t “more real conservatives” either.  Even y’all’s Freedom Caucus guys are lining up to take a swing. 

I’ve been doing some pondering and have some ideas, but I’m afraid we’re too far gone as a nation to accept them.  

[mikegideon]

21 minutes ago, Raoul said:

And since you started peeing in everybody's Wheaties I'll just add that the Donald probably doesn't give a ratsass about you're 2A rights either.

Bump stocks, which have proven to have one, and only one practical use may get regulated. I was surprised when the ATF let them hit the market in the first place. That ain't the end of the second amendment.

Can we get ahold of ourselves here? That is ALL that is gonna come from this. 

[Raoul]

1 minute ago, mikegideon said:

Bump stocks, which have proven to have one, and only one practical use may get regulated. I was surprised when the ATF let them hit the market in the first place. That ain't the end of the second amendment.

Can we get ahold of ourselves here? That is ALL that is gonna come from this. 

I hope you're right, but I'm not widely known as an optimist.

[mikegideon]

2 minutes ago, Raoul said:

I hope you're right, but I'm not widely known as an optimist.

I don't know ####

[btq96r]

4 minutes ago, mikegideon said:

Bump stocks, which have proven to have one, and only one practical use may get regulated. I was surprised when the ATF let them hit the market in the first place. That ain't the end of the second amendment.

Can we get ahold of ourselves here? That is ALL that is gonna come from this. 

Okay, but why even give on this?  A Republican President, a Republican Congress...and all Democrats can do is hold press conferences until they realize it's almost time for the Thanksgiving recess.  Republicans and the NRA are caving on something they don't have to, and can wait out with no real consequences.

[Chucktshoes]

1 hour ago, Raoul said:

And since you started peeing in everybody's Wheaties I'll just add that the Donald probably doesn't give a ratsass about you're 2A rights either.

 

1 hour ago, Garufa said:

Of everyone one this forum ChuckT understands that the most.  

Garufa knows what's what. I totally figured that went without saying. I mean he was a liberal democrat until he decided to run for President. He supported the awb in his books and he WILL flip on the 2A. 

[Bubba Fett]

It's sickening.  If a car is used to kill someone, they blame the driver.  A gun is used to kill someone, they blame the gun.  

This guy had the money and time to buy whatever he wanted.  He'd have just filed the paperwork and bought a full auto if he wanted one.  With no history of crime or mental illness there was no reason he couldn't buy whatever he wanted.  Like so many others before it, no gun law they've proposed in the wake of this tragedy would have actually prevented it.  But we'll give up more of our rights for the illusion of safety because decisions are being made based on emotion instead of facts and reason.

[Scorpion Equalizer]

I don't believe Trump would sign any legislation unless he gets his health care and tax reform bills passed. Trump knows most of his base are pro 2nd Amendment, and I don't think he wants to lose any of his base supporters. This may be where the art of the deal comes into play. He is holding the Ace. If you've seen any of his rallies, he always reminds his audience of how important the 2nd A is to our country.

[Omega]

6 minutes ago, Scorpion Equalizer said:

I don't believe Trump would sign any legislation unless he gets his health care and tax reform bills passed. Trump knows most of his base are pro 2nd Amendment, and I don't think he wants to lose any of his base supporters. This may be where the art of the deal comes into play. He is holding the Ace. If you've seen any of his rallies, he always reminds his audience of how important the 2nd A is to our country.

Problem is many so called 2nd Amendment supporters are folding like a house of cards on this issue, so signing this won't  disenfranchise them.

[Scorpion Equalizer]

1 minute ago, Omega said:

Problem is many so called 2nd Amendment supporters are folding like a house of cards on this issue, so signing this won't  disenfranchise them.

Again, this is where the ACE comes into play, he has the veto power. He might try to make a deal to get his healthcare and tax reform bills passed.

[Omega]

1 minute ago, Scorpion Equalizer said:

Again, this is where the ACE comes into play, he has the veto power. He might try to make a deal to get his healthcare and tax reform bills passed.

You seem to think that these lefties care if this actually passes.  If it passes they win, if Trump vetoes it, they win.  How much political capital is on the line here?