Bumpfire stock comment period

[RobertH]

i can't remember if i read any posts on here about the ATF opening up a comment period for bump stocks.  basically the ATF is trying to decide if they should declare them machine guns.

Comment period ends in 7 days.  i'm working on my comment now.  it'll be short and to the point.

is the NFOA submitting a comment?

link to Federal Register: https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2017/12/26/2017-27898/application-of-the-definition-of-machinegun-to-bump-fire-stocks-and-other-similar-devices#open-comment

[Dan W]

This is much worse than most think...very long video but the consequences of apathy in this case may well be the end of semi auto firearms ownership in our lifetimes.

Please don't ignore this threat

[JAK]

There is a revised proposed rule out dealing with Bump Stocks that the ATF has issued.

https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2018/03/29/2018-06292/bump-stock-type-devices

After having read it there is more then just bump stocks at risk, the way that it is written it can apply to almost any firearm. 

It changes the definition of a “machinegun” to include devices that allows semiautomatic firearms to shoot more than one shot with a single pull of the trigger by harnessing the recoil energy of the semiautomatic firearm to which it is affixed so that the trigger resets and continues firing without additional physical manipulation of the trigger by the shooter.

Also if by making a simple change in the definition items that have been legally sold for almost 10 years can be outlawed, what is to prevent another change in definition to outlaw anything else.

There are also no provisions for compensation for having to turn in / destroy the outlawed items. 

The previous proposed rule that was issued in January was a draft of some sort and all of the comments to it were summarized and dismissed in this one.

Highly recommend that everyone take the time to comment on it and to write your representatives about your opinion on this.

John K

 

[whatsit]

I just left a comment. A couple notes:
You must include the docket number in your comment.
You should not paste a template / form letter into your comment. The ATF can group all of those comments together and respond once. That means your form-letter response will only count as one comment against the proposal along with anyone else that used the same form letter.

That said, I tried to touch on some of the things I've read along with some things I thought of as I read the proposal (yes, I actually read the whole thing  ). DO NOT USE MY COMMENT AS YOUR OWN. Maybe just use my comment along with others as a launch pad for your own comment:

Docket #: ATF 2017R-22

I oppose the reclassification of "bump stocks" as machine guns. Here's why:

1) The misuse of any device by a criminal does not make that device different in any way. The ATF examined bump stocks and found that they did not convert a firearm to an automatic firearm. The intentional misuse of the device does not change that.
2) A single round is discharged from the firearm with a single trigger pull. A "bump stock" only allows a user to pull the trigger easier / faster. It does not change the way the firearm works.
3) Bump-firing a firearm does not require any additional hardware. It is simple enough to bump-fire a firearm without the use of a "bump stock," so this reclassification will do nothing to stop a criminal that wants to kill people by bump-firing a firearm.
4) Using a "bump stock" does not make the gun fire "automatically." In fact, I have personally seen demonstrations in which it was more difficult to get the gun to fire multiple times with a "bump stock" installed because the entire firearm must be pulled forward to activate the trigger; instead of a finger-activated trigger pull.
5) There are practiced shooters that can pull a trigger as fast or faster than a "bump stock" can reliably allow a user to sustain a rate of fire.
6) From the proposal: The relevant statutory question is whether a particular device causes a firearm to “shoot * * * automatically more than one shot, without manual reloading, by a single function of the trigger.”
All semi-automatic firearms allow the user to shoot more than one shot without reloading. After firing a round, another round is loaded from the magazine -- that's how a semi-auto firearm works. A bump stock does not change that and certainly does not cause that to happen.
7) There are thousands of people that own these "bump stock" devices. If this reclassification goes through, there is no provision for these people to keep their personal property and could be prosecuted for something they purchased legally.

Thank you for your attention. Reclassifying these "bump stock" devices should not be approved.

[eelstrebor1]

Comment period ended back in January? Other links say the comment period runs thru June 2018.

[RobertH]

There's a new one. The last one was different and was collecting info from manufacturers, dealers and consumers.

Did you want the new link?

[eelstrebor1]

There's a new one. The last one was different and was collecting info from manufacturers, dealers and consumers.

Did you want the new link?

I believe this is the right one? https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2018/03/29/2018-06292/bump-stock-type-devices

[RobertH]

Correct. Hit it and spread the word!

[eelstrebor1]

I'm willing to bet that the ATF has already made its decision and they're just going through the motions making us think that our comments matter.

[RobertH]

I'm willing to bet that the ATF has already made its decision and they're just going through the motions making us think that our comments matter.

Could be true, but, if the ATF blatantly disregards our input, it's an easy legal challenge.

Also, maybe with our input they won't ban them.