Jump to content

ATF to Review Bump Stocks


mauserme

Recommended Posts

And so t begins:

 

https://www.ammoland.com/2017/12/application-definition-machinegun-bump-fire-stocks-similar-device/#axzz51x8z398n

 

 

 

Application for Definition of Machinegun to Bump Fire Stocks and Similar Device

Ammoland Inc. Posted on December 21, 2017 by AmmoLand Editor Duncan Johnson

 

U.S.A. -(Ammoland.com)- The following unpublished document was posted in the Federal Register, December 21, 2017, Document Number 2017-27717 for Public Inspection as a Proposed Rule:

 

Summary: The Department of Justice anticipates issuing a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) that would interpret the statutory definition of machinegun in the National Firearms Act of 1934 and Gun Control Act of 1968 to clarify whether certain devices, commonly known as bump fire stocks, fall within that definition. Before doing so, the Department and ATF need to gather information and comments from the public and industry regarding the nature and scope of the market for these devices.

 

Dates: Written comments must be postmarked and electronic comments must be submitted on or before 30 DAYS AFTER PUBLICATION IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER. Commenters should be aware that the electronic Federal Docket Management System will not accept comments after Midnight Eastern Standard Time on the last day of the comment period.

 

Addresses: You may submit comments, identified by docket number (2017R-22), by any of the following methods:

 

Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov

 

Fax: (202) 648-9741

 

Mail:

 

Vivian Chu

 

Mailstop 6N-518

 

Office of Regulatory Affairs, Enforcement Programs and Services

 

Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives

 

99 New York Ave. NE

 

Washington D.C. 20226

 

ATTN: 2017R-22

 

For Further Information Contact: If you have additional comments, particularly with respect to the estimated public burden or associated response time, have suggestions, need a copy of the proposed information collection instrument with instructions, or desire any other additional information, please contact:

 

Vivian Chu

 

Office of Regulatory Affairs, Enforcement Programs Services

 

Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives

 

U.S. Department of Justice

 

99 New York Ave, NE

 

Washington D.C. 20226

 

Telephone: (202) 648-7070

...

 

See addtional information at link.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It will be interesting to see how it turns out. All I can think is the Akin Accelerator case where they reruled.

 

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

 

The one part I can see them making a ruling on is any moving part on a gun that contacts your finger.

 

This was a pretty important decision despite the stupidity of the device.

http://www.guns.com/2017/07/28/autoglove-its-a-glove-that-makes-your-gun-simulate-full-auto-video/

 

The ATF ruled that even if it was your finger pulling the trigger if some other mechanical device was moving your finger on the trigger its a machine gun.

 

So what would be the difference between recoil and an electric motor moving your finger?

 

Again, this gray area highlights the stupidity of outlawing full auto. Just let people pay the $200 and let them have their fun. Classify these stupid bump stocks as machine guns and open up the registry again. The Hughes Ammendment was such a swarmy sneaky thing, why can't it get repealed under the same circumstances.

 

I would love to see the ATF reinterpret the Hughes Ammendment, reruled bumpfire stocks as machine guns, but give a 1 year grace period where you could pay $200 and register whatever as a machine gun. From shoe strings to auto sears.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Need people to post comments. They have to read and process everyone of them.

 

https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=ATF_FRDOC_0001-0035

 

Do not copy and paste or use predefined forms, they will filter comments that are nearly identical.

 

Include responses to the questions that pertain to you.

 

Include how bump stocks do not meet the definition of machinegun as defined in 5845( b ), violation of 5th amendment for loss of property without "just compensation".

 

The hope is the more comments they receive the longer they will be delayed.

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...