Bump Stock Producer Slapped With Lawsuit Over Vegas Shooting

"Perhaps that’s what they’ve done lately (i.e. the last 20-30 years), but it doesn’t account for completely giving up the ghost in 1934 and 1968"

Ok, I wasn't alive in 1934 and was just a kid in 1968. Let's please move forward to the modern day. They have only agreed to look at regulating these things. I agree it will do nothing. I had never even heard of bump stocks before all of this, but I know of a number of ways to convert a semi to fully without using a bump stock. It's stupid to blame an inanimate object. If God forbid someone in this country decides to drive a u-haul into a crowd and kills a bunch of them, I can see Feinstein wanting to ban u-hauls.

The situation is very fluid right now. I would only say, be patient, give the NRA and our side a chance and lets see what plays out. If they come out with a bill banning bumps stocks for instance but also puts the national reciprocity agreement in there that would be a win. None of us know what's going to happen, lets sit back and see what happens and give the NRA a chance. They get ripped on enough by the other side, we need to support them. They were supporting President Trump long before many other organizations.

“Ok, I wasn’t alive in 1934 and was just a kid in 1968.”

Ditto. But I know the history...and the NRA REALLY screwed up in both cases. Maybe they have learned their lesson, maybe not.

“Let’s please move forward to the modern day. They have only agreed to look at regulating these things. I agree it will do nothing. I had never even heard of bump stocks before all of this, but I know of a number of ways to convert a semi to fully without using a bump stock. It’s stupid to blame an inanimate object. If God forbid someone in this country decides to drive a u-haul into a crowd and kills a bunch of them, I can see Feinstein wanting to ban u-hauls.”

By agreeing to look at regulation, they already lost. That is just Negotiations 101. Of course, the press/media came right out and said, “The NRA agreed to ban bump stocks, let’s get moving and do it.” Not accurate, but certainly expected - and a big loser for the NRA, the 2nd Amendment and our nation.

I knew what bump stocks were, but don’t have one and probably never will (even without regulation). But whether I have one or want one someday is rather besides the point - we gun folks need to stick together on EVERY issue, no matter how seemingly trivial, because the game the other side is playing is “divide and conquer.” The previously succeeded in separating the “Fudds” from the “Black Rifle” people...and we got the AWB in 1994. We need to follow Franklin’s advice: “Either we all hang together, or surely we will all hang separately.”

And, of course, it IS stupid to blame an inanimate object for ANYTHING. We agree on that 100%. That is why I am so certain that Liberalism is a mental disorder - the vast majority of them are anti-gun, and all who are blame guns and not criminals (or stupid people who cause accidents).

“The situation is very fluid right now. I would only say, be patient, give the NRA and our side a chance and lets see what plays out. If they come out with a bill banning bumps stocks for instance but also puts the national reciprocity agreement in there that would be a win. None of us know what’s going to happen, lets sit back and see what happens and give the NRA a chance. They get ripped on enough by the other side, we need to support them. They were supporting President Trump long before many other organizations.”

I find it hard to be patient with an organization that purports to stand for my rights, when right away it is giving things away. Haven’t we done MORE than enough of that over the years (hence my referencing of 1934 and 1968)? The other side NEVER, NEVER, NEVER compromises with us...they demand 100, then act as if it is a “compromise” to settle for 40 after a hard fight, but we lose 40 - time after time after time. Wouldn’t it have been better for them to say something like:

“We will consider looking at bump-fire stocks ONLY if the issues of national concealed carry reciprocity and taking suppressor permanently off of the NFA list are also discussed, and we will sign off on no deal that doesn’t include both of them.”

See, THAT is negotiating. It is NOT negotiating to say, “Here, take this, and now leave us alone, please.”

I will give them credit for supporting Trump from the beginning. Of course, what other choice did they have? Was Hillary EVER going to give the NRA anything it wanted? But, nonetheless, they did it - so they get credit from me.

But they need to learn how to negotiate from Trump - up til now, they’ve been on a par with Neville Chamberlain.

Another thing about the 1934 and 1968 gun ban bills, the NRA-ILA has only been around for a little more than 40 years. That is their political arm. I'm not sure how much the NRA was even involved with politics before then. Let's remember, it originally started out as an organization to promote the shooting sports because former Civil War Generals felt that their northern forces quit frankly sucked in marksmanship. I can't swear by this but I thought I had read once that after the 1968 gun ban bill (put in because of uproar over the political assignations of 1968), this was the impetus for the NRA to be involved more in politics and the start to create the NRA-ILA.

"we gun folks need to stick together on EVERY issue, no matter how seemingly trivial, because the game the other side is playing is “divide and conquer."

I completely agree with you. I think the NRA does also because I have read many articles in my NRA magazines over the years on just this topic. I know it must sound like I'm a shill for the NRA, but I feel so strongly about what they do and how they have protected us all these years. They have been the bulwark for all of us and our second amendment rights. I daresay that if it wasn't for them and their work over the years with Democrats and Republicans our second amendment rights would be seriously eroded if not eliminated.

The only time I ever got mad with them was when they got that special carveout for the campaign finance reform bill in order not to speak out against it. They said it was a first amendment issue and did not restrict their rights. They eventually got on board in killing the bill but they were cajoled (rightfully so) into doing it.

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.