ATF Explains Bump Fire Stock Approval, Won’t Say if It’s Reconsidering Legality of Device

The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) clarified its role in determining bump fire stocks' classification and legality on Friday but wouldn't say whether it planned to revisit the issue.

"ATF does not approve items that are submitted for classification," Mary Markos, an ATF public affairs specialist, told the Washington Free Beacon. "ATF provides guidance to the industry and evaluates and classifies items submitted as either being a firearm, an NFA [National Firearms Act] firearm, or not subject to the jurisdiction of ATF."

Markos said the classification process at the ATF is initiated when a company voluntarily requests guidance from the agency as to what laws their products may be subject to. From there the ATF examines the product and responds to the company with what laws it has determined the product will be subject to. Depending on that classification the product can be subject to a wide range of laws, including no regulation from ATF at all or a full ban on new sales to civilians.

"ATF makes classifications based on the most current laws and regulations at the time of submission and on the results of a physical examination of that specific item," Markos said. "After ATF makes a classification, then the applicable laws and regulations related to the GCA [Gun Control Act] and NFA, if any, apply to the item. Classifications are memorialized via a letter from ATF, which is provided to the requesting individual or entity. These letters are not made public by ATF due to individuals' and/or entities' privacy rights and/or proprietary rights. Classifications are particular to the item submitted for evaluation and do not apply to like items manufactured by a different entity."

In 2010, the Slide Fire company requested the ATF review their bump fire stock. The stock is designed to make the bump fire technique, which helps a shooter pull the trigger on a semi-automatic firearm at a faster rate than with traditional shooting techniques, easier to achieve. The agency determined that the company's stock was only a firearm part and not subject to regulation under the Gun Control Act of 1968 or the National Firearms Act of 1934.

"The stock has no automatically functioning mechanical parts or springs and performs no automatic mechanical function when installed," the ATF's letter stated. "In order to use the installed device, the shooter must apply constant forward pressure with the non-shooting hand and constant rearward pressure with the shooting hand. Accordingly, we find that the ‘bump-stock' is a firearm part and is not regulated as a firearm under the Gun Control Act or the National Firearms Act."

The agency said the classification process is separate from the lawmaking process and only serves to interpret and provide guidance on current law.

"ATF does not approve items that are submitted for classification," Markos said. "ATF provides guidance to the industry and evaluates and classifies items submitted as either being a firearm, an NFA firearm, or not subject to the jurisdiction of ATF. Amendments to existing law or the introduction of new laws can have an impact on a previously submitted item that may cause an item’s classification to change. This later change in classification ensures consistency with the most current law. Additionally, if an item previously classified by ATF is changed or altered, this too can result in the item's classification to change."

Bump fire stocks have come under scrutiny after it was reported the devices were found on some of the firearms used by the Las Vegas shooter. Politicians from both sides of the aisle have called for the devices to be banned. The National Rifle Association, America's largest gun rights organization, has called on the ATF to review its classification of the devices.

"In Las Vegas, reports indicate that certain devices were used to modify the firearms involved. Despite the fact that the Obama administration approved the sale of bump fire stocks on at least two occasions, the National Rifle Association is calling on the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (BATFE) to immediately review whether these devices comply with federal law," Wayne LaPierre and Chris Cox, the group's top leadership, said in a statement. "The NRA believes that devices designed to allow semi-automatic rifles to function like fully-automatic rifles should be subject to additional regulations."

The ATF has reversed themselves in the past on the classification of similar devices designed to help a shooter achieve a higher rate of fire while using a semi-automatic firearm. The agency first advised the makers of the Akins Accelerator that their device was not subject to machine gun regulations but later reversed themselves and determined the device was subject to those regulations.

The ATF did not respond to questions on whether the agency would similarly reconsider its classification of bump fire stocks, however.

One thing that I admire and value about your show is your amazing incisiveness and the vast quantity of your thoughtful and informed analysis and information about a multiplicity of subjects. You are the finest of the mainstream pundit debaters. I think that your program is the best on TV. I NEVER miss it and extol it to all those I know. However, I am EXTREMELY disappointed about much of what has been said of the the bumpfire stock controversy. Much of it sounds has though it was promulgated by the ignorant gun grabbing left.

I am a 2 tour Vietnam infantry combat veteran, and a member of the Illinois National guard for 26 years. I served in a Military police battalion has a platoon sergeant and an operations sergeant. I was a certified Illinois State Police Firearms and Defensive tactics instructor, and a member of Special Reaction and SWAT teams. I have fired hundreds of thousands of rounds through automatic weapons of all types, belt and magazine fed, tripod and shoulder mounted, ranging from .45 caliber M-3 sub machine guns up to M2A1 40 mm twin anti-aircraft guns mounted on an M-42 self propelled anti-aircraft gun.

I am retired and spend one day a month on the rifle range shooting my AR-15 rifles. When this slide fire device was first introduced, the low cost and novelty intrigued me and I purchased one. It was a bit awkward to use at first, but in one afternoon, after a bit of practice I was able to get 90% of any length burst on a man sized target at 75 yards, which is close to the normal engagement ranges for truly effective full auto fire from shoulder mounted weapons. It is not as useful has a true selective fire assault rifle since it requires two hands to employ, but it DOES have some measure of limited tactical utility for anyone who practices with it. I never really considered this item to be a true tactical instrument, but I did appreciate the ingenuity and thought that went into turning “bump fire’ into almost as accurate a technique has I could use with a true select fire assault rifle.

In Las Vegas, this monster had the effective use of plunging frontal, oblique and flanking enfilade fire with a significant beaten zone against an area sized target of 25,000 people. That is what automatic weapons fire is made for. What would normally limit the weapon is the lack of a quick change barrel on an AR-15 when it begins to overheat. That problem was solved by using multiple weapons. In short it was hard for him not to miss.

Experts who have decried the effectiveness of full auto fire from assault rifles and other shoulder fired weapons are largely correct. Semi-auto fire is usually most desired and superior, and includes the advantages of duration of sustained fire to prevent barrel overheating and enhances an ammo expenditure and accuracy standpoint. Auto fire in an assault rifle has the following tactical utility, in the final and close in (100 meters or less) stages of an assault, to gain initial fire superiority, to break contact, particularly has a counter ambush technique, and to support by fire the maneuver tactics of another element. Leaders should be responsible to control the fire of their subordinates to maintain fire discipline, but in those roles that I have outlined, full auto fire is very useful indeed.

The battle has been joined. The anti-gun hysterics are in full cry. They will never be satisfied until they achieve near total firearm confiscation. The genie is out of the bottle. You cannot stop psychopaths employing bump fire methods unless you can repeal the laws of Newtonian physics. I realize that some sort of regulation will ensue in the wake of this horrific atrocity. But I don’t like it one damn bit.

If they do enact this ban, then any so called “compromise” by repealing the 1986 Hughes Act which caused the prices of full auto weapons to skyrocket. There is NO REASON for a legally transferable M-16 to cost over 50,000 dollars. You can be assured that any such owner will be thoroughly vetted by the background check that would be required to purchase one.

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.