Jump to content

HB4120 Bump Stock Ban: Rep. Wheeler is Offended


mauserme

Recommended Posts

Much could be said of HB4120 Bump Stock Ban. For now I'll simply reiterate that IllinoisCarry opposes bills banning firearm accessories, including this bill.

We stand ready to fight, if we must.


https://www.ilnews.org/news/state_politics/republican-sponsor-of-ill-bump-stock-ban-supported-by-guns/article_dfe500b4-ca36-11e7-946c-3b5b27a105c7.html#utm_campaign=blox&utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social



 

Republican sponsor of Ill. bump stock ban insulted bill remains in committee



By Greg Bishop | Illinois News Network

ILLINOIS NEWS NETWORK

The Democrat-controlled Illinois legislature passed up an opportunity to approve a bipartisan and gun-rights group-supported bill to ban a controversial firearm add-on, and its unlikely theyll act on anything soon.

In the aftermath of last months Las Vegas mass shooting where the shooter used bump stock devices to accelerate the rate of fire for semiautomatic rifles, killing 58 and injuring hundreds, the Illinois House overwhelmingly voted down a measure from state Rep. Marty Moylan, D-Des Plaines, that would have banned any trigger modification, even modifications opponents said were common for sports shooters.

The chief sponsor of a different measure that would ban only the controversial bump stock devices said its insulting her bill is stuck in a committee controlled by Speaker Michael Madigan.

State Rep. Barbara Wheeler, R-Crystal Lake, told Moylan his bill was an overreach.
...

Illinois State Rifle Association Executive Director Richard Pearson said the reason Democrats failed at getting a simple bump stock ban to pass is they overreached and tried to outlaw much more.
...
Wheelers bill banning only bump stocks never saw the light of day.

Its insulting when something as important as this bump stock [ban] that has bipartisan support, that is supported by the Illinois State Rifle Association, cant even get out of Rules [Committee], she said.

Take a look at House Bill 4120, Wheeler said she told Madigan, D-Chicago, on the House floor following the failure of Moylans bill last month. It has bipartisan support. Were 100 percent committed to pass this bill. He was very open to looking at the bill and unfortunately we didnt see it the second week of veto [session]."
...

State Rep. Stephanie Kifowit, D-Oswego, a cosponsor of Wheelers bill, said shell continue to work on getting the bill passed.

Pearson said even when government has measures in place to keep bad actors from getting firearms, theyve failed to follow through.
...

Pearson also noted a 2012 audit finding in Illinois that showed almost all Illinois counties not reporting potentially ineligible FOID card holders to state police as they were required to by law.

We had to have a conference with county officials to make sure they were passing along the information, Pearson said. The problem we always seem to find here is that the government wants more laws but then the government doesnt use the ones they have or even possibly know about them.

...

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Its insulting when something as important as this bump stock [ban] that has bipartisan support, that is supported by the Illinois State Rifle Association, cant even get out of Rules [Committee], she said."

 

Is this true? Or did they just have the same lame a** nonanswer as the NRA. The answer which politicians and media misunderstood to mean they were in favor of a ban? I. E. If found by the ATF to turn a gun into a machine gun then we support the ban.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Its insulting when something as important as this bump stock [ban] that has bipartisan support, that is supported by the Illinois State Rifle Association, cant even get out of Rules [Committee], she said."

 

Is this true? Or did they just have the same lame a** nonanswer as the NRA. The answer which politicians and media misunderstood to mean they were in favor of a ban? I. E. If found by the ATF to turn a gun into a machine gun then we support the ban.

 

If I remember correctly, NRA wanted ATF to. "Look at bump stocks again...". to decide again if they were still legal or not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Its insulting when something as important as this bump stock [ban] that has bipartisan support, that is supported by the Illinois State Rifle Association, cant even get out of Rules [Committee], she said."

 

Is this true? Or did they just have the same lame a** nonanswer as the NRA. The answer which politicians and media misunderstood to mean they were in favor of a ban? I. E. If found by the ATF to turn a gun into a machine gun then we support the ban.

We would certainly welcome that, but someone would need to talk to the sponsor et al about their commitment to passing it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Its insulting when something as important as this bump stock [ban] that has bipartisan support, that is supported by the Illinois State Rifle Association, cant even get out of Rules [Committee], she said."

 

Is this true? Or did they just have the same lame a** nonanswer as the NRA. The answer which politicians and media misunderstood to mean they were in favor of a ban? I. E. If found by the ATF to turn a gun into a machine gun then we support the ban.

Here's the position the NRA took with a press release on October 5 (emphasis added.) They are asking the ATF ( regulatory agency) to regulate bump stocks if they conflict with federal law. NOT a change in law (no legislation.) NOT a ban. Worst case, bump stocks would be regulated.

 

The NRA position is not confusing. Do you have a source for somebody claiming the NRA is "in favor of a ban?"

================================================

 

NRA's Wayne LaPierre and Chris Cox Issue Joint Statement

THURSDAY, OCTOBER 5, 2017

Fairfax, Va.—The National Rifle Association today issued the following statement:

"In the aftermath of the evil and senseless attack in Las Vegas, the American people are looking for answers as to how future tragedies can be prevented. Unfortunately, the first response from some politicians has been to call for more gun control. Banning guns from law-abiding Americans based on the criminal act of a madman will do nothing to prevent future attacks. This is a fact that has been proven time and again in countries across the world. In Las Vegas, reports indicate that certain devices were used to modify the firearms involved. Despite the fact that the Obama administration approved the sale of bump fire stocks on at least two occasions, the National Rifle Association is calling on the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATFE) to immediately review whether these devices comply with federal law. The NRA believes that devices designed to allow semi-automatic rifles to function like fully-automatic rifles should be subject to additional regulations. In an increasingly dangerous world, the NRA remains focused on our mission: strengthening Americans' Second Amendment freedom to defend themselves, their families and their communities. To that end, on behalf of our five million members across the country, we urge Congress to pass National Right-to-Carry reciprocity, which will allow law-abiding Americans to defend themselves and their families from acts of violence."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Illinois State Rifle Association Executive Director Richard Pearson said the reason Democrats failed at getting a simple bump stock ban to pass is they overreached and tried to outlaw much more."

 

DING DING DING. Winner, winner, Turkey Dinner.

 

Pearson said "even when government has measures in place to keep bad actors from getting firearms, theyve failed to follow through."

On a roll

 

And bring it on home

"Pearson also noted a 2012 audit finding in Illinois that showed almost all Illinois counties not reporting potentially ineligible FOID card holders to state police as they were required to by law.

We had to have a conference with county officials to make sure they were passing along the information, Pearson said. The problem we always seem to find here is that the government wants more laws but then the government doesnt use the ones they have or even possibly know about them."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

"Its insulting when something as important as this bump stock [ban] that has bipartisan support, that is supported by the Illinois State Rifle Association, cant even get out of Rules [Committee], she said."

 

Is this true? Or did they just have the same lame a** nonanswer as the NRA. The answer which politicians and media misunderstood to mean they were in favor of a ban? I. E. If found by the ATF to turn a gun into a machine gun then we support the ban.

If I remember correctly, NRA wanted ATF to. "Look at bump stocks again...". to decide again if they were still legal or not.

One way to regulate it without undue burden would be for congress to add a provision in federal law that permits FFL's to legally use form 4473 if the state in which they are located were to require such a background check for one of these stock. Such a provision would allow an FFL to not be guilty of misusing a form 4473 while trying to follow state law requirements. Additionally those states that do not wish to regulate these stocks at all will not be forced to require background checks for them.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does anyone remember the ATF's fickleness on the Akin Accelerator?

https://www.usconcealedcarry.com/mr-bill-akins-and-the-akins-accelerator/

 

How about pistol braces?

 

Why did they have to add anything about calling on the ATF to re-review and preemptively agreeing with that decision. The NRA knows full well the ATF reviews and re-reviews things with entirely different outcomes.

 

"The NRA believes that devices designed to allow semi-automatic rifles to function like fully-automatic rifles should be subject to additional regulations."

 

Well FOPA with it's Hughes Ammendment is pretty well in place, so "believing" in "additional regulations" = ban.

 

I'm just glad that in a month or two non gun people will have forgotten what a bump stock even is when they are told about the next piece of plastic on a gun they need to fear.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does anyone remember the ATF's fickleness on the Akin Accelerator?

https://www.usconcealedcarry.com/mr-bill-akins-and-the-akins-accelerator/

 

How about pistol braces?

 

Why did they have to add anything about calling on the ATF to re-review and preemptively agreeing with that decision. The NRA knows full well the ATF reviews and re-reviews things with entirely different outcomes.

 

"The NRA believes that devices designed to allow semi-automatic rifles to function like fully-automatic rifles should be subject to additional regulations."

 

Well FOPA with it's Hughes Ammendment is pretty well in place, so "believing" in "additional regulations" = ban.

 

I'm just glad that in a month or two non gun people will have forgotten what a bump stock even is when they are told about the next piece of plastic on a gun they need to fear.

You said "so "believing" in "additional regulations" = ban." That doesn't make sense.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...