Trump urges ban on 'bump stocks,' other gun modifiers

[n0rlf]

1 hour ago, Dolomite_supafly said:

The problem is not those with mental conditions. We have always had crazy people. Problem is they are convincing normal people that their life sucks but a little pill will fix it. And when they start taking those pills they do crazy things.

Normal? Define it? If they need a pill to feel better it can be argued they do indeed have a mental issue can it not? Maybe to a much lesser degree than others though.

Ultimately we need a way to discover how bad the mental issue is and does it rise to the level where removing their rights to a gun are involved. 

I think we need to start looking at gun control from that aspect rather than another worthless law that will help nothing. Just my opinion but more laws have not helped to this point. Again, define insanity?

[gregintenn]

8 hours ago, Erik88 said:

The anti-gun crowd on Reddit is already criticizing Trump for not doing enough . Poor guy is getting hit from both sides! 

What about this do you find funny?

[Wingshooter]

Trump is holding a listening session with students, parents and teachers now. Frustrating listening to some of these people calling for ARs to be banned

[GlockSpock]

19 minutes ago, n0rlf said:

Normal? Define it? If they need a pill to feel better it can be argued they do indeed have a mental issue can it not? Maybe to a much lesser degree than others though.

Ultimately we need a way to discover how bad the mental issue is and does it rise to the level where removing their rights to a gun are involved. 

I think we need to start looking at gun control from that aspect rather than another worthless law that will help nothing. Just my opinion but more laws have not helped to this point. Again, define insanity?

Life can be/is tough. Society essentially says that everyone deserves to be happy, treated the same (fairly), and have an easy going life. If for any reason you are not happy (depressed), treated different (because of a personality difference, etc), or just don't win at life in general, then society pushes that there is a pill to make you "right". That's my opinion.

[n0rlf]

8 minutes ago, CZ9MM said:

Life can be/is tough. Society essentially says that everyone deserves to be happy, treated the same (fairly), and have an easy going life. If for any reason you are not happy (depressed), treated different (because of a personality difference, etc), or just don't win at life in general, then society pushes that there is a pill to make you "right". That's my opinion.

Hence participatation trophies! One would think as a society we would learn. Well "We" waited too long to puish back against the ideas that were clearly not working! Now I am afraid it is getting to a tipping point. Again accelerating what is sure to turn out badly for this once great country.

[DaveTN]

1 hour ago, Wingshooter said:

Trump is holding a listening session with students, parents and teachers now. Frustrating listening to some of these people calling for ARs to be banned

Exactly, Trump is listening. We (pro gun folks) can cross our arms, and refuse all discussions; but that won’t work. Kids and parents across the country are looking at what they can do to keep from getting shot to death. If the problem is not guns, but nuts with guns, then we need to step up and have discussions about what can be done.

If it turns into a bunch of gun owners trying to protect bump stocks, and other obvious violations of the intent of the law, and trying to protect the gun rights of the mentally ill; I know how it will end.

Both sides on this debate have people on the fringes that aren’t intelligent enough to have these conversations. We can’t let them steer the ship.

[Omega]

31 minutes ago, DaveTN said:

Exactly, Trump is listening. We (pro gun folks) can cross our arms, and refuse all discussions; but that won’t work. Kids and parents across the country are looking at what they can do to keep from getting shot to death. If the problem is not guns, but nuts with guns, then we need to step up and have discussions about what can be done.

If it turns into a bunch of gun owners trying to protect bump stocks, and other obvious violations of the intent of the law, and trying to protect the gun rights of the mentally ill; I know how it will end.

Both sides on this debate have people on the fringes that aren’t intelligent enough to have these conversations. We can’t let them steer the ship.

Yea, I think another piece of the cake can be sacrificed  How about we start talks about upping the age cell phones (a privilege) can be purchased, and to get a drivers licence, (yup, a privilege as well)?  We lose more young people to distracted driving due to cell phones than we do to shootings!

[Wingshooter]

Trump ended the discussion by saying they are going to look at age of purchase, background checks and mental heath. I agree that gun owners (NRA) needs to be proactive in finding a solution and one that does NOT include the 2A. We guard and protect everything, and I think the discussion should include securing the schools. A crazy should not have access to just waltz on in and kill kids with a gun, knife, truck or any other tool.

Edited February 22, 2018 by Wingshooter

[i1afli]

21 hours ago, SWCUMBERLAND said:

 ... a rule banning all devices that turn legal weapons into machine-guns,” Trump said in a memo.

Hopefully the “out” is that they will conclude that a bump stock does not turn a legal weapon into a machine gun...it still requires a pull of the trigger for each shot fired. This would also go a long way towards educating the public in the difference between semi-auto and full auto...although the media would ignore it. 

[DaveTN]

Most of the public understands the difference between a semi and full auto. A Bump stock violates the intent of the law. It’s going to be banned. I just hope those in the discussion on our side keep the language so it doesn’t impact other triggers that don’t violate the intent of the law.

[battleop]

I'm surprised that bump stocks have flown this long under the radar.   While they technically do not make a gun full auto it's close enough that I've always thought someone would eventually do something that brought attention to them.   Well that finally happened in Las Vegas.  

It's kind of like the guys at the gun show that sell the "adaptor" to capture all of that cleaning solvent in an oil filter.   They look cool but I just know that eventually someone is going to do something stupid with one and put it on the radar.

[Worriedman]

3 hours ago, DaveTN said:

Most of the public understands the difference between a semi and full auto. A Bump stock violates the intent of the law. It’s going to be banned. I just hope those in the discussion on our side keep the language so it doesn’t impact other triggers that don’t violate the intent of the law.

Most MAY understand the difference in semi and fully automatic, but I don't think it matters any more, the AR stands for assault rifle in the new speak lexicon, and that is what is going to be difficult to overcome. I hear the young guys at work saying "Don't see why you need a 30 round banana clip to hunt with, all these types of guns are meant to do is kill people."  These are rich kids who pay $10,000.00 a year to duck hunt, they don't get the similarity of an AR and their Benelli SBII, or that the real intent is ban all guns, more especially semi auto pistols.

 

[GlockSpock]

3 hours ago, DaveTN said:

Most of the public understands the difference between a semi and full auto. A Bump stock violates the intent of the law. It’s going to be banned. I just hope those in the discussion on our side keep the language so it doesn’t impact other triggers that don’t violate the intent of the law.

I agree with a lot of what you say, but I disagree that "most" of the public understands the difference. A lot of them do. A lot of them don't. There is a vast group of people that think any AR-15 is a "machine-gun" because that's what the movies show. Coupled with movie portrayals is media misinformation. Referring to AR-15's but showing pictures of AK-47's while referring to all of them as "automatic weapons", there are a lot of people that simply do not care enough to be correctly educated and are quite wrong. I've heard countless coworkers repeat a long list of incorrect things regarding firearms as a whole. We live in TN, one of the overall better states to live regarding firearms. Consider that ~15% of the US population lives in the states of New York and California alone. Both of these states are overall quite anti-gun. If people in TN can get simple/common facts about firearms wrong in a state that generally is very open to firearms themselves, consider how misinformed the populations of those anti-gun states are.

I've had a coworker try and argue with me that quite a few of the shootings (within the last five years) were done with fully automatic weapons, including San Bernidino.

Also, I'd like to politely disagree with you over bump stocks. While I agree that admittedly they violate the intent/spirit of the law, the very plainly (and I think you have to admit) do not violate the letter of the law. 1 round fired per pull/function of the trigger = not a machine-gun. Up until at least recently the ATF definitely agreed with that regarding bump-stocks. My hope is that they come forward and uphold that opinion, and then state that it is up to Congress to change the law if they want. If they change law to ban them, I'm ok with that general process, because then at least we have the opportunity to pressure Congress not to. In my opinion it is very underhanded to reinterpret law to ban them.

Also, couldn't it be argued that the NFA as a whole violates the intent/spirit of the Constitution?

[peejman]

2 hours ago, CZ9MM said:

agree with a lot of what you say, but I disagree that "most" of the public understands the difference. A lot of them do. A lot of them don't. There is a vast group of people that think any AR-15 is a "machine-gun" because that's what the movies show. Coupled with movie portrayals is media misinformation. Referring to AR-15's but showing pictures of AK-47's while referring to all of them as "automatic weapons", there are a lot of people that simply do not care enough to be correctly educated and are quite wrong

It's magazines vs clips. Gun people know the difference, most people don't. 

 

2 hours ago, CZ9MM said:

Also, I'd like to politely disagree with you over bump stocks. While I agree that admittedly they violate the intent/spirit of the law, the very plainly (and I think you have to admit) do not violate the letter of the law. 1

But I expect they'll revise it to cover "and anything else that violates he spirit of the law". 

[GlockSpock]

22 minutes ago, peejman said:

It's magazines vs clips. Gun people know the difference, most people don't. 

 

But I expect they'll revise it to cover "and anything else that violates he spirit of the law". 

And if they do it by promoting legislation to do so, then at least they've done it "the right way". We gun-owners are a very large group, but let us not forget that there is also a very large (very, very vocal) group the opposes anything to do with a firearm. They are contacting their representatives as well. 

It's the "reinterpretation" that bothers me.

[DaveTN]

3 hours ago, CZ9MM said:

I agree with a lot of what you say, but I disagree that "most" of the public understands the difference. A lot of them do. A lot of them don't. There is a vast group of people that think any AR-15 is a "machine-gun" because that's what the movies show. Coupled with movie portrayals is media misinformation. Referring to AR-15's but showing pictures of AK-47's while referring to all of them as "automatic weapons", there are a lot of people that simply do not care enough to be correctly educated and are quite wrong. I've heard countless coworkers repeat a long list of incorrect things regarding firearms as a whole. We live in TN, one of the overall better states to live regarding firearms. Consider that ~15% of the US population lives in the states of New York and California alone. Both of these states are overall quite anti-gun. If people in TN can get simple/common facts about firearms wrong in a state that generally is very open to firearms themselves, consider how misinformed the populations of those anti-gun states are.

I've had a coworker try and argue with me that quite a few of the shootings (within the last five years) were done with fully automatic weapons, including San Bernidino.

Also, I'd like to politely disagree with you over bump stocks. While I agree that admittedly they violate the intent/spirit of the law, the very plainly (and I think you have to admit) do not violate the letter of the law. 1 round fired per pull/function of the trigger = not a machine-gun. Up until at least recently the ATF definitely agreed with that regarding bump-stocks. My hope is that they come forward and uphold that opinion, and then state that it is up to Congress to change the law if they want. If they change law to ban them, I'm ok with that general process, because then at least we have the opportunity to pressure Congress not to. In my opinion it is very underhanded to reinterpret law to ban them.

Also, couldn't it be argued that the NFA as a whole violates the intent/spirit of the Constitution?

 

48 minutes ago, CZ9MM said:

And if they do it by promoting legislation to do so, then at least they've done it "the right way". We gun-owners are a very large group, but let us not forget that there is also a very large (very, very vocal) group the opposes anything to do with a firearm. They are contacting their representatives as well. 

It's the "reinterpretation" that bothers me.

Sure Tennessee is more gun friendly than some other states; but our state still violates the 2nd amendment.

Absolutely the NFA violates the Constitution; that’s a given.

I also don’t give a rip what some ATF agent’s opinion is on bump stocks. I don’t want an ATF agent making law any more than I want an FBI agent doing it. That’s up to the legislature and the courts. The legislature is going to step in and fix a decision that some half witted ATF agent should have never been allowed to make in the first place.

My point is that Trump is talking with the victims that want answers about what is going to happen. He has to look them in the eye, so do we. We will do what we can without giving up our gun rights.

[Defender]

On 2/20/2018 at 4:35 PM, Oh Shoot said:

Ban on bump stocks is an admission that it is indeed "the gun" that is the problem.  The left will simply use this as logical admission from that right  that guns which fire "fast" should be banned.

- OS

I agree with you.  I have zero interest in a bump stock personally, what with the costs of ammo, lately, but its a step in the wrong direction.  Once you start down that road, its hard to keep from going full steam ahead...

[DaveTN]

1 hour ago, JAlexanderMSgt said:

I agree with you.  I have zero interest in a bump stock personally, what with the costs of ammo, lately, but its a step in the wrong direction.  Once you start down that road, its hard to keep from going full steam ahead...

No it’s not; quite the opposite. Rational people are trying to come up with plans that will keeps folks safer while not infringing on the 2nd amendment any more than they already are. Bumps stocks are a clear violation of the intent of the ban on automatic weapons. More people would probably be alive today if the shooter in Vegas hadn’t had access to them. For common sense gun owners to think if we agree that bump stocks violate the intent of the law, and agree with banning them we will somehow be rolled over by the anti-gun folks is ridiculous.

As far as the age thing goes, I was 17 when I joined the military during Vietnam. I was old enough to join the military, carry small arms and be responsible while being around Ballistic Nuclear Weapons; but not responsible enough to buy a beer. So I’m probably not the best person to ask. But I believe if you are old enough to make the decision to protect your country with your life; you are old enough to vote, drink, and buy a gun. I do understand though that the military can take a very immature individual and turn them into a responsible adult in a very short period of time.

If we can’t attempt to make changes with Trump in the White House and the Republicans having control of the house; then it’s only a matter of time until we lose it all. But we can’t fix anything if we want gun owners to stand united in support of bump stocks (Not that it will happen). Let’s deal with the mental health issue, let’s deals with nut cases openly making violent threats, let’s get the medical community to tell us if half the kids in school really need to be drugged.

[Garufa]

20 minutes ago, DaveTN said:

As far as the age thing goes, I was 17 when I joined the military during Vietnam. I was old enough to join the military, carry small arms and be responsible while being around Ballistic Nuclear Weapons; but not responsible enough to buy a beer. So I’m probably not the best person to ask. But I believe if you are old enough to make the decision to protect your country with your life; you are old enough to vote, drink, and buy a gun. I do understand though that the military can take a very immature individual and turn them into a responsible adult in a very short period of time.

During the same era didn’t most states also lower the drinking age to 18, along with the right to vote?  Not only because of 18 enough to vote but 18 enough to fight?

The drinking thing didn’t work out too well, now all states are 21.  The primary reason being lack of maturity of those imbibing and the danger they proved to themselves and other.

It’s a tricky situation.  The military needs 18 year olds.  They are very impressionable and far easier to train than 20+ year olds, IMO.  But consistently, that age group shows a serious lack of maturity, with or without discipline, the latter being just far less trustworthy in some ways.

Edited February 23, 2018 by Garufa

[Defender]

30 minutes ago, DaveTN said:

No it’s not; quite the opposite. Rational people are trying to come up with plans that will keeps folks safer while not infringing on the 2nd amendment any more than they already are. Bumps stocks are a clear violation of the intent of the ban on automatic weapons. More people would probably be alive today if the shooter in VeMore people would probably be alive today if the shooter in Vegas hadn’t had access to themgas hadn’t had access to them. For common sense gun owners to think if we agree that bump stocks violate the intent of the law, and agree with banning them we will somehow be rolled over by the anti-gun folks is ridiculous.

As far as the age thing goes, I was 17 when I joined the military during Vietnam. I was old enough to join the military, carry small arms and be responsible while being around Ballistic Nuclear Weapons; but not responsible enough to buy a beer. So I’m probably not the best person to ask. But I believe if you are old enough to make the decision to protect your country with your life; you are old enough to vote, drink, and buy a gun. I do understand though that the military can take a very immature individual and turn them into a responsible adult in a very short period of time.

If we can’t attempt to make changes with Trump in the White House and the Republicans having control of the house; then it’s only a matter of time until we lose it all. But we can’t fix anything if we want gun owners to stand united in support of bump stocks (Not that it will happen). Let’s deal with the mental health issue, let’s deals with nut cases openly making violent threats, let’s get the medical community to tell us if half the kids in school really need to be drugged.

Hate to get into an argument over bumpstocks, when I don’t even want one...and although I obviously disagree with you, I’ll refrain from calling your opinion ‘ridiculous’, but I feel fairly certain that the atf could have easily prohibited bumpstocks, yet did not.  Also your point (More people would probably be alive today if the shooter in Vegas hadn’t had access to them) suggests that volume is the issue, not the murdering.  So maybe we should have restricted the idiots to knives, that would cut down on the numbers significantly.    If there were such a thing as a handbook for gun control, there would be a chapter entitled, Small Steps, and how hey lead to big steps.

[DaveTN]

18 minutes ago, Garufa said:

During the same era didn’t most states also lower the drinking age to 18, along with the right to vote?  Not only because of 18 enough to vote but 18 enough to fight?

The drinking thing didn’t work out too well, now all states are 21.  The primary reason being lack of maturity of those imbibing and the danger they proved to themselves and other.

It’s a tricky situation.  The military needs 18 year olds.  They are very impressionable and far easier to train than 20+ year olds, IMO.  But consistently, that age group shows a serious lack of maturity, with or without discipline, the latter being just far less trustworthy in some ways.

You are correct, but I don’t know why it didn’t work. I worked traffic for three years when I started on the PD and I would say I arrested far more 30-40 year old drunks than I did youngsters.

[DaveTN]

12 minutes ago, JAlexanderMSgt said:

Hate to get into an argument over bumpstocks, when I don’t even want one...and although I obviously disagree with you, I’ll refrain from calling your opinion ‘ridiculous’, but I feel fairly certain that the atf could have easily prohibited bumpstocks, yet did not.  Also your point (More people would probably be alive today if the shooter in Vegas hadn’t had access to them) suggests that volume is the issue, not the murdering.  So maybe we should have restricted the idiots to knives, that would cut down on the numbers significantly.    If there were such a thing as a handbook for gun control, there would be a chapter entitled, Small Steps, and how hey lead to big steps.

Okay I should have used some other word besides ridiculous; I just couldn’t think one at the time, Sorry.

The facts tell us that the Vegas shooter stopped shooting and killed himself while he still had plenty of ammo and functioning weapons. But we don’t know why. My own theory is that he thought the cops were coming through the door; but that’s just a WAG. Had he not been able to fire nearly as many rounds in that initial salvo before people started taking cover; I think it’s safe to say fewer people would be dead.

Most everyone that heard it said “That’s machine gun fire!”. It may not have been a machine gun by the letter of the law, but it certainly was a machine gun. And the intent of the law was violated. So we fix that. We owe it to the public to fix that.

[GlockSpock]

Okay I should have used some other word besides ridiculous; I just couldn’t think one at the time, Sorry.
The facts tell us that the Vegas shooter stopped shooting and killed himself while he still had plenty of ammo and functioning weapons. But we don’t know why. My own theory is that he thought the cops were coming through the door; but that’s just a WAG. Had he not been able to fire nearly as many rounds in that initial salvo before people started taking cover; I think it’s safe to say fewer people would be dead.
Most everyone that heard it said “That’s machine gun fire!”. It may not have been a machine gun by the letter of the law, but it certainly was a machine gun. And the intent of the law was violated. So we fix that. We owe it to the public to fix that.

Ok. So if it is up to the law to protect us, what happens after we ban bump stocks and then someone pulls the trigger really really fast? Do those lives in that scenario not count as being “owed”?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[gregintenn]

2 hours ago, DaveTN said:

No it’s not; quite the opposite. Rational people are trying to come up with plans that will keeps folks safer while not infringing on the 2nd amendment any more than they already are. Bumps stocks are a clear violation of the intent of the ban on automatic weapons. More people would probably be alive today if the shooter in Vegas hadn’t had access to them. For common sense gun owners to think if we agree that bump stocks violate the intent of the law, and agree with banning them we will somehow be rolled over by the anti-gun folks is ridiculous.

As far as the age thing goes, I was 17 when I joined the military during Vietnam. I was old enough to join the military, carry small arms and be responsible while being around Ballistic Nuclear Weapons; but not responsible enough to buy a beer. So I’m probably not the best person to ask. But I believe if you are old enough to make the decision to protect your country with your life; you are old enough to vote, drink, and buy a gun. I do understand though that the military can take a very immature individual and turn them into a responsible adult in a very short period of time.

If we can’t attempt to make changes with Trump in the White House and the Republicans having control of the house; then it’s only a matter of time until we lose it all. But we can’t fix anything if we want gun owners to stand united in support of bump stocks (Not that it will happen). Let’s deal with the mental health issue, let’s deals with nut cases openly making violent threats, let’s get the medical community to tell us if half the kids in school really need to be drugged.

The BATFE wrote an opinion in direct opposition of yours.

I'd rather have a shake weight than a bumpstock for my own use, but this proposed ban is just one more step in the direction of banning all guns.

Just a wild guess here, but don't be surprised to see a shooting in the not too distant future where the shooter has an ar15 pistol with a brace.

You eat an elephant one bite at a time.

It is against the law to kill people. I've not heard that mentioned one time since the shooting.

Edited February 23, 2018 by gregintenn

[Someotherguy]

It is quite clear to me now, that we(2nd amendment gun rights supporters) are to the republican party as african americans are to the democratic party...Every election cycle, the left promises the moon to the AA's, and then after the votes are cast, they throw them under the bus...The right preaches support of the 2nd A to get the votes, and then when things get difficult, under the bus wheels we go also..I'm going to start building my collection of AR's from here on out, I've had my fill of this ####..

This isn't some 4D chess move crap, we just got tossed under the bus wheels by Trump...

Crow is on the menu at Someotherguy's house this week..