Posted on 10/05/2017 11:34:15 AM PDT by DCBryan1
The powerful National Rifle Association on Thursday backed "additional regulations" on devices that boost semi-automatic weapons' firing rates, like the tools used by the shooter in the Las Vegas massacre.
In a statement, the influential gun rights group's Wayne LaPierre and Chris Cox urged the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives to review the legality of so-called bump stocks. They stopped short of pushing Congress to pass a bill banning or regulating the devices.
Still, the NRA's support for more regulation of bump stocks could give Republican lawmakers more breathing room to pass a bill regulating them.
The statement came as bipartisan momentum for regulating the devices built on Capitol Hill.
Asked about the growing momentum for a ban on bump stocks, White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders said the president is "open to having that conversation," but stressed that Trump is "a strong supporter of the Second Amendment," and that any discussion of gun laws is premature.
(Excerpt) Read more at cnbc.com ...
I don’t dismiss your thoughts completely. I get your point. I don’t think it plays out in a good way.
Isn’t this how incrementalism works? We give up this here, something else next week, another thing next month, and a few more things next year...
Petty soon, the Left arrives at the point they always wanted.
We gain NOTHING.
Maybe we should just criminalize murder.
oh... wait......
Isn’t this how incrementalism works? We give up this here, something else next week, another thing next month, and a few more things next year...
Petty soon, the Left arrives at the point they always wanted.
We gain NOTHING.
I think the NRA is planning to trade this "bump stock" ban for approval of suppressor legalization, just as soon as the furor dies down in a few months.
Liberals will be gaining something stupid and worthless, and we will be gaining something of real actual value.
But I think we will have to see how this pans out. The NRA is not stupid. I've known a lot of members, and many of them have good sense and they aren't willing to tolerate an actual infringement of the second amendment.
I don't like the idea of giving anything at all to the left, but until we get control of the broadcasting system, it appears now to be a political necessity to give them something trivial amd stupid.
Hopefully this will placate congress into giving us something that will more than make up for it in a couple of months or so.
And what ramifications does this have for either adjustable stocks or especially recoil reduction devices which we legitimately need?
I shudder to think what would be happening right now if the b*tch had won......
This is a throwaway bone for Congress to pretend they are doing something about the Las Vegas shooter, but passing such a law will have absolutely no effect on the next Las Vegas Shooter.
I’m seeing a lot of information on suppressors lately.
Aren’t they legal to own now? I had gotten that impression from looking around.
Congress was being urged to take up a bill to legalize them.
Aren’t they legal to own now? I had gotten that impression from looking around.
They are not currently legal unless you have a class 3 license. The bill was going to make them legal for everyone.
“So, what is the measure for “firing rate” that would be meaningful?”
The same folks that invented “assault weapons” will define the acceptable “firing rate”.
“Scalise is just one congresscreature.”
Scalise is one of the few good ones, and he is the one who was nearly killed in the previous mass shooting which targeted Republicans legislators.
Okay. Thanks.
I had thought they were illegal until several months ago. I started looking around and it seemed they were available out there.
It wasn’t my intent to purchase one right now, so I didn’t look into that formally.
Anyone who thinks about it for more than 2 seconds. It is none of the government's business if people what to buy these things or not.
IAC, I'll stick with my three 25-year old TacTriggers...They have served me well when called upon.
C.H must be spinning in his grave at this NRA sell-out!
Er, the penalty for murder is pretty high. Dont think Chicago kids are robbing delis with this.
If someone’s gonna crack, they usually go all out.
Not to sound like a liberal weasel, but the founding fathers didn’t know there were gonna be guns that shoot 4 billion rounds a minute!!!
Hard to take out sixty people with a musket :)
I assume most here think this incident is the price you pay for freedom.
I painfully admit that is likely the answer.
Booze on convenience stores shelves and “medications” being sold by pharma are killing a #### of a lot more people than the people using these guns.
They endorsed the idiotic idea from Smith and Wesson too.
Which explains why I don’t support them for the most part.
When their actions align with my goals, great.
But I instances like this their knee jerk rush to infringe is pathetic.
Hey NRA, murder is already illegal!
Instead of banning things that “might” be used in crimes, how about enforcing the laws already in existence!
I really think that the NRA should have done the following:
1) Said, “Let’s wait until all the facts are in before committing to any particular policies.”
2) Said, “Let’s then examine whether the proposed law(s) would have saved any lives.”
3) Said, “Let’s then examine whether the proposed law(s) infringe upon the 2nd Amendment.”
and
4) Said, “Fine, MAYBE we will support this minor infringement on the 2nd Amendment [because that is exactly what a ban on bump stocks will be], but ONLY if we get some other infringement removed. Like, for example, getting suppressors removed from the unconstitutional National Firearms Act of 1934, or getting national reciprocity on Right to Carry legislation.”
This kind of preemptive surrender is why I left the NRA in 2008, after 19 years of belonging, sending money, etc.
Geez, LaPierre, do you REALLY have to live up to your French surname, and be a cheese-eating surrender monkey?
Thankfully, the NRA is open to some common sense.
Banning bump stocks would no more allow the government to seize our guns than enforcing traffic laws would cause the government to seize our cars.
It is an unnecessary and lethal mechanism that has nothing whatsoever to do with our Second Amendment rights.
Restricting the availability of bump stocks, could help deter another mass shooting and I don’t know how anyone in their right mind could oppose this.
I have contacted Rep. Meadows’ office, who appears to be open about this as well and is in my home state of North Carolina. I have urged him to follow through and not just talk about it.
Increase the penalty how? So if you kill someone with a bump-stocked rifle, you get...what? Instead of the death penalty or life in prison (depending on the state), you get more death sentence or more life sentence? Not really sure how that works.
Reminds me of the false whining when Bush ran for president and they complained about the dragging death and how the victims got off lightly with only a death sentence, and how a hate crime law Bush didn't pass would have given the bad guys...what... I don't know. More death?
In non-lethal encounters, I don't care what kind of stock you have or if it's semi or full auto, I would think you'd be in big trouble either way, so... just saying.
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.