Skip to comments.HR 3999 - unintended consequences [vanity]
Posted on 10/12/2017 1:01:40 PM PDT by ctdonath2
I see this having a huge unintended consequence: the creation of "factory high-rate semi-autos", rifles that _come_ with bump stocks, gatling cranks, other creative mechanical solutions capable of out-of-box pushing the physical limits of how fast a semi-auto can be "fired". The buyer can then either remove the annoying high-rate device and use it normally, or just enjoy the popularization of a new exciting category of firearm.
They haven't even had the first vote on it, and already we're cooking up workarounds and marketing methods.
Paging Henry Bowman....please pick up the white courtesy phone.
I think the focus on how fast a gun can fire as a vector of regulating it is a very dangerous angle. At some point, does the Ctrl-Left set a specific rate of fire and outlaw the production or ownership of any gun that fires faster than that limit?
There seems to be a lot more vanity posts lately than I recall in years past. Whats with that?
OP - Loose lips.....
I WANT this out there - before the bill becomes law and we spend the next 10 years screwing around with it, rather than focusing on the real issue of restoring “shall not be infringed”. Let’s get HR3999 and any of its ilk aborted ASAP.
And I rarely do vanity posts.
ATF needs to deal with this by regulation. It is way to important to leave to Congress.
BTW I never thought I would recommend that the ATF do something other than disband.
So I could have an M-14 but not an Uzi.
Yes, amazing that we have a regulatory body, not specifically authorized by the Constitution, that is in charge of regulating something that the Bill of Rights says shall not be regulated.
Actually this bill may be a good thing if it gets faster development of high rate-of-fire weapon into responsible American hands. This the Militia arming itself now. If we arm fast enough perhaps CW2 won’t happen.
Thing is, BATFE can’t deal with it. They’ve ruled themselves into a corner which they can’t get out of without legislation.
They ruled bump stocks are legal, NOT machinegun parts in any way. So, there are a LOT of them out there now - legally.
If ruling is reversed, they have to contend they’re machinegun parts (under some ruling/law or other), and now every single bump stock is illegal under 922(o) - there is no way to “amnesty” them (like retroactively declaring Street Sweepers as Destructive Devices - file your paperwork, waive the tax, done) because law flatly forbids any made after 1986.
I don’t see how the BATFE can “deal with this by regulation”. Either bump-stock semi-autos are legal, or they’re _seriously_ illegal machineguns. I mean really seriously illegal in ways the gov’t can’t back away from. This would go straight to the Supreme Court, get 922(o) overturned (yay!), and suddenly the whole “bump stock” controversy (originating from a single incident) turns into a flood of new cheap machineguns (via NFA Form 4 + $200 tax). While _I_ like that result, the sociopolitical fallout would be enormous.
I agree that they painted themselves into a corner. They have overruled themselves on several occasions - granted never of this magnitude or gravity. The NRA is not going to fight HR3999 very hard if at all - at least that is the reports. Semi-auto’s are an endangered species.
One person is suggesting that they make a ruling similar to the Sig Stock one that defines the scope so that you can use it to such a narrow field that it is not legal to use in any manner.
I am for NOT doing anything and have told my Congresscritters and the NRA exactly that. The shooter’s acts were already illegal and banning bump stocks will not stop a murderous rampage. But, the foolish human need to “do something” will unfortunately prevail.
Given the recoil of an M-14 or its civilian brother, the M1-A, it’s effective cyclic rate of fire will always be a lot less than an Uzi’s.
The little 9mm bolt has a lot shorter stroke.
Everything is relative.
When I shot Expert with an M-14 many long years ago, I noticed that, due to the recoil, I had to recover my sight picture each time I fired a round. Recoil problem also made the M-14 nearly useless on full auto, unless the soldier really wanted to shoot a lot of holes in the sky.
As an aside, my Kindle’s auto spell somehow interpreted a,misspelled “recoil”as “bacterium.” Please don’t ask how; I haven’t the faintest idea.
It is a bill introduced. It has had no hearings and is definitely not on any vote calendar
Nuke it from orbit, just to be sure.
Who knows, I’m guessing not much is going to come out of this. Lots of talk and bluster, and then it’ll go away. The only thing this shooting will have done, is to have delayed the Hearing Protection Act for a year or so. Annoying enough as it is.
On a side note, when you vanity, make sure you give a brief description of stuff, especially if it’s in the title. What does HR3999 say/do; Federal? State? Which state? - not everyone will know already what you’re talking about.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.