Posted on 03/10/2018 12:47:25 PM PST by Simon Green
Will probably see new mfg semi autos required to use a double action trigger/hammer lower. Auto-feed the next round, but not cock the hammer. Then require full trigger pull to move the hammer from rest to cock to fire. Wait for it, there will be a new definition from semi-auto to just auto-load.
If this regulation is actually implemented, then probably yes. See here Drop In Auto Sears (DIAS)
Here is the problem
In my “meat life”, I have to deal with alphabet soup agencies all the time. One thing that I had to learn rather painfully is that an administrative finding IS NOT law, and DOES NOT protect you from persecution. Even if the SAME compliance office and officer wrote BOTH.
The ruling on bump stocks was an administrative finding, using just the reasons you stated. However, prior to that finding bump stocks and such tricks were viewed as “Creating a machine gun”. Unfortunately, that means that the law did not change, the understanding and enforcement of it did. So while in the late 90’s you could be arrested for having a shoestring in your gun locker, now all of a sudden you can have a much more obvious means of making a gun fire rapidly that is ok. A felony yesterday is now OK, without any change in law or court ruling.
When this administrative ruling came out, my gun club had a meeting about it. We have in our ranks lawyers and current and former members of various .gov agencies (nothing fancy, local FDA and the like). They all stated that we should not risk our club over an administrative ruling, and we banned rapid fire devices and tricks like the bump stock (and the old rubber band trick). Why? The history of enforcement was that such things were considered “making a fully automatic weapon”, and while one letter said it wasn’t, we DID NOT want to be involved in a test case. We are a small club that now has development on two sides. Not a good situation in purple Iowa.
In my professional life, I had an EPA agent send me a letter, notarized, for an action. We were stuck and pretty much had to do such action. A few years down the road, the political climate changed and we were brought up on enforcement actions for that same activity. When the agent testified, in court, that “Yes, I did say it was ok for Red to do X”, the judge ruled, as they have so often, that the administrative letter did not mean it was legal. My company had to pay a fine, and face legal consequences, for doing something our EPA agent not only said was OK, but suggested we do to mitigate a further complication.
Heck, there are people in jail right now for doing what someone in the IRS said was OK!
What does this mean? It means that when you play stupid games you win stupid prizes. If you don’t have an action signed by a court of law, it can be overturned by the stroke of a pen. Heck, even if you do have a judge say it is ok, it can be overturned by the next higher court. Like or not (and believe me I do not like it), bump stocks were and are jailbait. Just like the AR pistols that are all the rage right now, someone can decide they are “Short barreled rifles” at the stroke of a pen suddenly you are in legal trouble.
Never, ever, trust an administrative ruling. I don’t like this, but it was a likely outcome. Part of me wonders if this wasn’t a way to create “instant felons” and seize some guns.
“A rifle with a bump stock is a machine gun. The machinery is crude but it fires as long as the trigger is pulled. The weapon is therefore automatic.”
Sorry, a bumpfire stock makes a rifle a Single Shot firearm. One pull of the trigger = One shot fired.
“They’ll need to ban belt loops too.”
...and rubber binders... string,...thumbs... fingers, elbows...freedom....
Bump fire stocks allow a semi auto AR 15 to function as low cyclic rate machine gun without violating the legal and technical definition of a machine gun which is a weapon capable of firing multiple rounds with a single trigger pull
Based on the legal definition of a machine gun, the BATF administrative letter classifying bump stocks as a legal accessory to a semi auto rifle is correct and 100% consistent with the law restricting machine guns passed by Congress
Trumps attempts at an administrative solution are a blessing because they shut down Poorly conceived, do something legislation in Congress
The DOJ rule proposal now goes through the proper OMB public posting and public feedback and comment period . There will no doubt be many comments pointing out that bump fire stocks meet the legal definition of a legal semi auto
The process will take about 4 months during which time emotions will cool off and the DOJ will conclude that their rule change is not lawful and the banning of bump fire stocks
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.