Trump administration to announce final bump stock ban

And, I'm just going to go ahead and stick my finger in it now. Anybody that thinks these should be banned, has no business, not only on this forum, but calling themselves an American. Tell me why I can not own a firearm that is select fire? Why? What have I done to have that ban levied against me? Why must I be taxed for a rifle that's a couple of inches shorter than another? Why should and item, that only reduces, not "silence" the sound of a muzzle blast be regulated and taxed? Why must some have ammunition sent to a FFL dealer? Why am I considered committing a crime when I have a magazine that holds 11 rounds? If I want to dump 30 rounds of ammo in 3 seconds as to opposed to 10, is it any of your business? Tell me how banning an item that was blamed for, and I call bulls@#t on that, a mass shooting, will do anything to stem crime? It wont. All this will do, is make me a felon. I will not comply. So, NSA, copy and past my statement in your little file and ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ.
 
Another way to say this is "Trump Administration ready to enact more gun control than his predecessor."

Good thing the GOP used their complete control of government wisely to pass the Hearing Protection Act, repeal Obamacare, reduce the deficit, get us out of nonsensical entanglements in the Middle East, build a wall, and restore the limited government as prescribed by the Constitution of the United States.

Oh wait......right, the last 5 elections or so have just been too important and too critical and too consequential for doing anything like that.
 
Last edited:
I get so tired of hearing Chuck Schumer and others say this or that the President does will create a "constitutional crisis." With that said, executive redefinition of terms defined clearly in law should spark outrage and action by the Legislative Branch. I bet we hear not a peep from Schumer or Pelosi on this, though.
 
cubrock said:
I get so tired of hearing Chuck Schumer and others say this or that the President does will create a "constitutional crisis." With that said, executive redefinition of terms defined clearly in law should spark outrage and action by the Legislative Branch. I bet we hear not a peep from Schumer or Pelosi on this, though.
Click to expand...

No, you won't hear from them because they support common-sense gun control.
 
Chuckman said:
No, you won't hear from them because they support common-sense gun control.
Click to expand...

Even if it means swallowing executive overreach. But, let the President actually do something they don't like that is his duty constitutionally and, all of a sudden, CONSTITUTIONAL CRISIS!
 
Last edited:
I expect it to happen, it will be challenged in court, much money will be wasted, we’ll have a legislative solution when the D’s decide they want it.

Maybe not very American of me, but I’d support a bump-stock ban amendment to the hearing protection act.
 
JimB said:
I expect it to happen, it will be challenged in court, much money will be wasted, we’ll have a legislative solution when the D’s decide they want it.

Maybe not very American of me, but I’d support a bump-stock ban amendment to the hearing protection act.
Click to expand...

I recommend adopting a "not a single inch" stance with regards to your natural and unalienable Rights.
 
JimB said:
I expect it to happen, it will be challenged in court, much money will be wasted, we’ll have a legislative solution when the D’s decide they want it.

Maybe not very American of me, but I’d support a bump-stock ban amendment to the hearing protection act.
Click to expand...

Tell me exactly what would be gained by banning an item the so few people actually use? Tell me exactly why I should not be "allowed" to own and use one.
 
Does this mean we won’t have belt loops on our jeans? That’s how I first learn about bump firing ...

In all seriousness, the bump stocks will be ban (or outside shot at NFA’d for a DD $5 stamp???). Think about it in that most Americans don’t even understand the difference between an assault weapon and modern sporting rifle ... full auto and semiauto ... “high power” 5.56 and hunting ammo like “normal” .30-06 ... or most other technical firearm topics. This is a “deal” type thing meant to make the general population feel warm and fuzzy.

DO NOT ROAST ME THIS IS AN OBSERVATION ONLY NOT A SUGGESTION ...
If politicians really understood the real workings, statistics and such of firearms and crime related to them they’d being going after handgun first and foremost with an all out effort. They have the statistics on deaths relative to types of firearms but would rather fight to go after the headliners than the dull statistical leaders.

Also if they would just realize ... ENFORCE WHAT LAWS ARE ON THE BOOKS (even just “felon in possession of a firearm” and “use of a firearm in ____” and not plea bargain them away plus leave law abiding gun owners alone and crime would drop significantly. Our idea of Common Sense Gun Laws is about holding the person committing the crime responsible while theirs us holding the gun itself responsible. As with all here I know my guns have never acted alone to do anything wrong ... it takes a criminal behind the trigger.
 
Oh, another tax for me to use an inanimate item to exercise my 2A rights???? So when that warm and fuzzy feeling wears off, what's next? And, correct me if I'm wrong, but ain't murdering someone already against the law? If you rob someone, don't you do the time for the actual action of robbery, not what weapon was used?
 
Last edited:
grungewehr39 said:
If you rob someone, don't you do the time for the actual action of robbery, not what weapon was used?
Click to expand...
Actually at one time there was a state statute that if you use a firearm during a robbery it was mandatory 7 years ... SC I think still has it and it’s 10 years but I am not sure. Anyway the defense attorney and DA would plea bargain away from the crime with mandatory time to a lesser and the criminal would not get near that sentence AND then be up for parole even sooner.

Even worse, half the time a repeat offender is picked up again they have a firearm so the Possession of a Firearm by a Felon is right there for a slam dunk but it is the first charged dropped in the plea deal. The DA’s drop more firearms charges for criminals but scream for more laws that actually don’t affect true criminals but turn average citizen into criminals that the DA then puts the screws to because that firearms violation is the only thing they have to convict on ... like say a person who has a pistol in his car but not I plain sight so it’s a “concealed weapon” and now if there’s no CHP the driver is now a criminal with no crime other than a gun not being in plain sight.
 
grungewehr39 said:
Tell me exactly what would be gained by banning an item the so few people actually use? Tell me exactly why I should not be "allowed" to own and use one.
Click to expand...

All it does is makes ignorant people feel better.

You should not be allowed to own one because ignorant people want to feel better, and ignorant people are very much in the majority.

Clearly it’s all just stupid feel-good stuff. It may also not be implemented in a way that is legal and it’ll get cast aside. Then the D’s get to decide it they care enough to try to pass gun control legislation, and if they do if they care enough to include these accessories. Don’t forget that we already had a ban based in part on having a bayonet lug, so I don’t have any expectation that legislative ignorance is going to dissipate over the next few election cycles.
 
SPM said:
I recommend adopting a "not a single inch" stance with regards to your natural and unalienable Rights.
Click to expand...
Of course, and I would agree if I thought it would make any difference at all, but it will not. The reason is tyranny.

You are in the minority, and the majority has decided to impose its will on you even though they have no legal basis for doing so. They are already well across that line into criminal behavior, and no amount of protest by the minority will cause them to go back. It’s tyranny, it’s mob rule, it’s fear mongering, but at the end of the day it is what it is and any reversals will be small and hard-fought.
 
Chuckman said:
No, you won't hear from them because they support common-sense gun control.
Click to expand...

Feinstein has already said this will face lawsuits and probably not work. Not because she’s against it though. She wants Congress to do it. But also probably knows they are too spineless to get it done. When it comes down to it, they really don’t take on much that’s controversial. Might hurt their job prospects. Which is why they have been leaning on the executive and judicial branches to do it.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
JimB said:
Of course, and I would agree if I thought it would make any difference at all, but it will not. The reason is tyranny.

You are in the minority, and the majority has decided to impose its will on you even though they have no legal basis for doing so. They are already well across that line into criminal behavior, and no amount of protest by the minority will cause them to go back. It’s tyranny, it’s mob rule, it’s fear mongering, but at the end of the day it is what it is and any reversals will be small and hard-fought.
Click to expand...

It is Tyranny. As it is throughout the scope of human history.

And it is in times such as these that Free People stand against, beyond outright disobedience and hostility if necessary, rather than shrink from the burden of Liberty maintained.

It is times like these - when Liberty comes at a price - that determines whether we live as Free Men or slaves. It really does.

And every Man and every Woman is born out of a personal choice to be Free or submit to the yoke of despotism.

So choose.

But understand - it's much easier to choose the path of Liberty now while the cost is relatively light, and you've time.to make it a conviction such that it remains the same when the cost becomes significant.
 
Last edited:
SPM said:
But understand - it's much easier to choose the path of Liberty now while the cost is relatively light, and you've time.to make it a conviction such that it remains the same when the cost becomes significant.
Click to expand...
People, at least most, need a reason to take such action and that reason needs to be something that makes them uncomfortable. Until enough people are uncomfortable, there won't be action. Eventually, something will happen that will upset the balance. We're likely getting closer to sooner rather than later in terms of that eventually.

As I said in another thread, there are four criteria that need to be met for humans to turn violent. Probably most of this forum meets three of them. The fourth, unmet one, being worth the consequences. Until such time as there is a sufficient, critical mass and society changing event, that status quo will remain.
 
CZfool68 said:
So we'll have increased restrictions of our rights, Obamacare and no wall. I'd say things are going really well. ;)
Click to expand...
At the risk of offending, if they aren’t going about as you expected then you are indeed a fool, and not just CZfool.

I do think that @noway2 is right, the juice is not yet worth the squeeze.
 
Heh. I've been posting relentlessly about the demographic war that is being waged in all countries founded by western Europeans. But a useless piece of plastic is the molehill some want to die on. :confused:

Others have described how this will likely turn out - ultimately it will be up to Congress to pass legislation banning bump stocks, and they can probably get it done if the bill isn't laden with other bans that people will understand better (how many gun owners even know what a bump stock is or that it can be replicated with belt loops, rubber bands, etc.) and will more vigorously oppose.

Demographics is destiny in a democracy, and any democracy (even a constitutional republic) can be subverted.
 
Last edited:
47055523_301312063848261_4316933609882648576_n.jpg
 
There is a chance it backfires; do we know which court the EO would end up in?

(probably a stupid / naive question)
 
Last edited:
I see no wall coming. A restriction on rate of fire...because everything is a bump stock after all, so you can't just ban those things that just look like a stock. Trump 2020 is looking less and less appealing to me.
 
I cant believe people are still talking about that dang wall...

I am thankful for the economy we have currently, and it does seem like he has a role in that.
I like, to a point, him standing up for America...though I wish it were a bit more tactful.
But stuff like this is ridiculous.
 
HMP said:
I cant believe people are still talking about that dang wall...
Click to expand...
Really???
Thousands attempting to storm our border;
- waving flags of the countries they want to leave
- pelt border guards with rocks.
- More than 60 percent are carrying: respiratory infections, tuberculosis, HIV-AIDS, lice, chicken pox, and hepatitis.
- Somali's included
They're expecting free; healthcare, welfare, hospitalization, education, etc.
Not embracing our culture, language, laws

Trump, where's my damned wall?

I understand many want a better life, I want that for them as well, I can't afford to house, feed and medicate the world.
An estimated gathering in @ 15K very poor people at once to storm our border sure seems odd in countries where cell phone service and interwebs are spotty at best.
 
Last edited:
HMP said:
I cant believe people are still talking about that dang wall...

I am thankful for the economy we have currently, and it does seem like he has a role in that.
I like, to a point, him standing up for America...though I wish it were a bit more tactful.
But stuff like this is ridiculous.
Click to expand...

The Fed and monetary policy have played more of a role than Trump for the economy. But eventually math matters. It just depends when they want to start the party. My guess is before the next election so they can blame it all on Trump. Stocks have already showed some increased volatility and risk. The smooth ride is going to end.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SPM
CZfool68 said:
The Fed and monetary policy have played more of a role than Trump for the economy. But eventually math matters. It just depends when they want to start the party. My guess is before the next election so they can blame it all on Trump. Stocks have already showed some increased volatility and risk. The smooth ride is going to end.
Click to expand...

The tariffs are already starting to hit Americans in the pocketbook - and now they're losing their jobs.
 
"No" is a word politicians are unaccustomed to hearing, especially when it is directed their way from the citizenry...

Time they were reacquainted.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom