Posted on 08/23/2021 4:56:52 AM PDT by MtnClimber
The government's decades-long mission to terrify the public from owning firearms is the most dangerous delusion forced on the American people.
SNIP
At the end of July, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives sent a letter to Rare Breed Trigger notifying the Florida company that the ATF had classified its FRT-15 trigger, a drop-in trigger for an AR-15 rifle that speeds up the rate of fire, as a machine gun under the National Firearms Act and demanding that the company cease all sales. Rare Breed is fighting the ATF's action, but that hasn't reduced the federal agency's power to turn law-abiding gun-makers and gun-owners into criminals overnight through bureaucratic decree.
When certain words are not useful to the political left's agenda, the meanings of those words are simply changed to fit the agenda. In the left's war against personal ownership of firearms, the ATF empowered itself with the barely checked authority to redefine what a "machine gun" is. By fiat, unelected cubicle kings have deemed a trigger a "machine gun." A pistol is a machine and a gun, too. How long before the ATF decides that new wordplay epiphanies empower it to criminalize the Second Amendment more broadly?
Of all the mass delusions that have been perpetrated upon the American people, the government's decades-long mission to terrify the public from owning firearms is the most dangerous. Because control ultimately depends upon the threat of force, no person can be free when government alone is armed.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
I think that oppressive governments are the most deadly threat to the human population today. Why don’t they focus on that? Oh, because they ARE the oppressors.
You have hundreds of people that are justifying their budget and manpower, their purpose in life, by “infringement” of a constitutional right.
The ATF is one agency that should be done away with. Unprofessional (the master minds behind Waco and Ruby Ridge) , unconstitutional, it's a redundant organization whose entire purpose in life should be borne by the local PD, Sheriff, or FBI.
“At the end of July, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives sent a letter to Rare Breed Trigger notifying the Florida company that the ATF had classified its FRT-15 trigger, a drop-in trigger for an AR-15 rifle that speeds up the rate of fire, as a machine gun under the National Firearms Act and demanding that the company cease all sales.”
And who set the precedent for this with an unconstitutional bump stock ban?
Again, the wrong hill to die on. Looking at the manufacturers own video on their own website, it’s clear this particular trigger is just a work-around to get full auto functionality.
Trying to ‘word-parse’ it away Bill-Clinton-style doesn’t change that fact.
The long-standing federal definition of 'full-auto' or "machine gun" is essentially, 'more than one shot fired with each individual pull of the trigger'. Bump stocks are therefore NOT machine guns, and neither are binary triggers (& FWIW, I own neither). Does the Rare Breed Trigger fire more than one shot per trigger pull - or not?
If the federal government wishes to ban "full auto functionality" (whatever that is) rather than "machine guns", the federal government should pass a new law, not ignore and/or magically reinterpret existing law...
And they are trying to change the legal definition of a receiver by fiat.
I think your point is critical: a law that is "clear" does not promote 'word parsing' by citizens OR bureaucrats. But adding 'rate of fire' could possibly create more confusion, rather than clarify things. Would it be rate of fire as designed, or as tested (with worn parts)? Over what period of time (2 seconds? 5 seconds?), with what magazine, what ammunition, and in a machine rest or hand-held (if the latter, by whom)? At what temperature (above or below freezing?) would the test be conducted, and at what humidity levels (at or below 100%)? How would the firearm be lubed, and with what? Any number of factors could influence rate of fire; in comparison, the existing standard (essentially 'one shot per pull of trigger') seems more simple, and reasonably clear - even though it has obviously caused some difficulties for law enforcement & the judicial system...
They have what seems to be a well-credentialed person that disagrees with you.
larrytown - you are the one who is word-parsing. What I mean is that the Second Amendment is really clear.
Parse this: “..., the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”
Wasn’t talking about the Second Amendment.
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.