ATF’s Proposal to Regulate Bump Fire Stocks as Machine Guns

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

Glocktogo

Sharpshooter
Supporting Member
Special Hen Supporter
Joined
Jan 12, 2007
Messages
29,492
Reaction score
15,886
Location
Collinsville
IMO, any attempt by BATFE to define bumpstocks as or within the classification of MG's is an executive branch overreach and should rightly be struck down in federal court. IF the U.S. .gov wants to ban these stocks, then they must have the legislature pass a bill and have it signed by POTUS.

I also notice on Page 9 pf the document that BATFE has the intent to restrict comments to 23 specifically listed questions, which is something they cannot do. But when has that ever stopped them from doing anything, right? :(

None of the 23 points include the fact that the reason BATFE has always classified bump stocks as NOT being a MG, is because they had to comply with the actual law and legal definition, which is listed on their own webpage.

26 U.S.C. § 5845(b)

For the purposes of the National Firearms Act the term Machinegun means:

  • Any weapon which shoots, is designed to shoot, or can be readily restored to shoot, automatically more than one shot without manual reloading, by a single function of the trigger
  • The frame or receiver of any such weapon
  • Any part designed and intended solely and exclusively or combination of parts designed and intended for use in converting a weapon into a machinegun, or
  • Any combination of parts from which a machinegun can be assembled if such parts are in the possession or under the control of a person.

They can pretend all they want, but bumpstocks, belt loops and Jerry Miculek's trigger finger can all mimic the cyclic rate of a MG, but they cannot make any firearm an actual MG as defined by law. BATFE doesn't have the authority to write or rewrite U.S. law. It really is that simple. :(
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom