I think you left out a few other

Also, please note you have several national-level politicians enunciating the "a good first step" line. Like, who couldn't have guessed that?! More to come, soon!

Green tip ammo. ATF tried to ban it but did not have the authority to redefine AP ammo within the law. Hence no ban.

Ahh. Entered into fed register. Not that it impacts me, but I was under impression it was effective now. Not that Friday makes much difference.

Will it be challenged? Maybe, but I doubt it. On principle and who regulates I see could be issues, but I see at one of those that many will be indifferent to.

And yeah, they’ll need lots of warehouse space! 

GOA sent an email yesterday soliciting funds for their lawsuit that is "almost" ready to be filed. I'm guessing other organizations will also challenge. It's also why the anti-civil rights civilian-disarmament advocates say the regulation change is inadequate, because it can be challenged on grounds that regulations cannot override existing laws, and that the only likely-to-survive-court-challenge means would be to pass a law in Congress.

Upcoming event. No Hawaii location announced yet.



With Trump reluctantly passing a ban on bumpstocks today, we are left with only a finite number of days for us gun enthusiasts to enjoy our beloved bumpstocks before we all turn them into the ATF (which we will definitely do). So, it seems only fitting that we take a day to reminisce about the fun I know we've all had shooting meaningless crap with our bumpstocks. And where better to do that than on a nice, relaxing boat out on some calm waters?

Be sure to grab your bumpstocks and join us on March 17th 2019, the day before we're all legally obligated to (and totally plan on) turning in our bumpstocks for this day of fun on the water! And make sure you share this with all your firearm friends too!

**DISCLOSURE**
Due to the obvious danger boating in March carries, be certain you aren't a silly scatterbrain and accidentally drop your bumpstock out of your boat. We would certainly hate for anyone to not be able to turn theirs in to the ATF.

On one of the fake news sites, they had the response from a NRA spokesman.  "We're disappointing".  Really?  Didn't they help with the ban and actually support it?

Did anyone read the law?  As in, is there a hidden paragraph for reciprocity or something?

Feinstein rejects the bump xo. TWILIGHT ZONE.

Nah, she wants it to be law and not a XO. This way its harder to change later.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

Firearms Policy Coalition, along with Firearms Policy Foundation and Madison Society Foundation have filed a lawsuit for preliminary injunction against the bumpstock ban. I'm guessing there will be other lawsuits as well.

Here is a general information page about the lawsuit, with links to documents are explanatory articles:

https://www.firearmspolicy.org/guedes-v-batfe

Here is the actual Motion for Preliminary Injunction:

https://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/firearmspolicycoalition/pages/4959/attachments/original/1545161072/2-MPI.pdf?1545161072

Jacob Sullum at Reason does an excellent job of summarizing some of the questions and problems with the ban:

https://reason.com/blog/2018/12/18/trumps-bump-stock-ban-shows-once-again-h

Trump's Bump Stock Ban Shows Once Again He Is Happy to Ignore Inconvenient Laws

The administration usurps Congress by redefining machine guns.

Today the Justice Department finalized its ban on bump stocks, which Acting Attorney General Matthew Whitaker claims merely "clarifies" federal law. It actually rewrites federal law, a function the Constitution assigns to Congress. Whitaker also wants us to believe that the bump stock ban shows "President Donald Trump is a law and order president." To the contrary, it shows he is a president who ignores the law whenever it proves inconvenient.

The final rule defines "bump-stock-type devices" as "machineguns" under the National Firearms Act of 1934 and the Gun Control Act of 1968 "because such devices allow a shooter of a semiautomatic firearm to initiate a continuous firing cycle with a single pull of the trigger." That understanding of the law contradicts the plain language of the NFA, the position repeatedly taken by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) during the Obama administration, and the interpretation endorsed by both supporters and opponents of a legislative ban.

* * * * *
Legally, however, the precedent set by Trump's bump stock ban is troubling, regardless of how you feel about the Second Amendment or define its scope. The president does not have the authority to rewrite laws that interfere with his agenda, whether the subject is guns or immigration. Principled critics of this administration should call Trump out whenever he oversteps his legal powers, even when they happen to like the outcome.

A couple more columns detailing the disgusting lies and blatant overreach of the BATFE and DOJ and Trump in the BSTD [Bump-Stock-Type Devices] ruling.

I'll add one of my own hypotheses. The underlying premise of this ruling is: An "increased rate of fire", because it has the potential to do more harm than an "ordinary rate of fire", devices that facilitate an increased rate of fire may be banned in order to enhance public safety.
Then we have: Rubber bands, belt loops, string, pieces of wood, plastic, metal of particular lengths, that accomplish the same "increased rate of fire" are NOT BSTD because [utterly totally ludicrous disingenuous hand-waving lies and fallacious logic].
Followed by: "An increased rate of fire" can be accomplished without the use of any item at all, solely by a two-handed application of the proper forces upon a semi-automatic firearm, and obviously arms, hands and fingers cannot be banned.
Conclusion to be announced in the near future: Therefore, since an "increased rate of fire" is a "danger to public safety", and all the items and methods to achieve such an increased rate of fire other than BSTDs are not amenable to a ban, the only solution to prevent the "increased rate of fire" "danger to public safety" is to ban the semi-automatic firearms themselves that may be used to endanger the public.

If we've got what we've got now with a "Republican" president, guaranteed we'll get the above from a "Democrat" (and maybe even from a Republican, maybe even Trump!)... all without the need to pass any legislation at all... just a rule/regulation re-write... including one that is total bullshit lies like the BSTD ban. Feinstein's dream comes true: "Mr. and Mrs. America, turn 'em all in!" You have 90 days. You will not receive any compensation. You will go to prison if you do not comply. We now return you to your regularly scheduled programming.


http://zelmanpartisans.com/?p=5715

ANALYZING THE BUMP-STOCK-TYPE DEVICES RULE

The key points are:

It is an outright, ungrandfathered, ban on bump-fire stocks (BSTD; and there’s a reason I’m adopting the ATF’s acronym -grin-), as expected.
It is as bad as expected, reiterating lies.
It is potentially the basis for a complete semi-auto ban, due to the nature of the lies.

http://www.michaelzwilliamson.com/blog/index.php?itemid=484

What Everyone Needs To Know About The Bumpfire Stock Ban

Some people think they love it. Some people hate it. Some people think it's just a bit of political maneuvering.

I'm here to explain why, regardless of your feelings about firearms, this little item should utterly terrify you.

Rolling Stone: NRA Caved on Bump Stocks to Shield Semiautomatic Rifles

https://www.breitbart.com/2nd-amendment/2018/12/21/rolling-stone-nra-caved-on-bump-stocks-to-shield-semiautomatic-rifles/

Rolling Stone is asking why the NRA is not doing more, even now, to stop the ban before the legally-purchased property of hundreds of thousands of Americans is taken from them, saying, “Why is the NRA not kicking and screaming — or suing?”

Rolling Stone then answers its own question by suggesting the NRA surrendered bump stocks as a way to protect semiautomatic rifles:

The organization has long touted the distinction between civilian semi-automatic rifles and military guns with fully-automatic capability as the reason civilians should be able to own weapons like the AR-15. The sale of devices like bump stocks that put automatic-fire capability in the hands of the masses had threatened to undermine decades of public marketing and court arguments.

Rolling Stone next makes a subtle shift, suggesting a semiautomatic firearm without a bump stock would have allowed the October 1, 2017, Las Vegas gunman to be more accurate and therefore more lethal. This is the shift so many gun owners warned about when the final language of the bump stock ban was put forward; those gun owners fear a bump stock ban is a stepping stone to a semiautomatic ban. And Rolling Stone is already suggesting the real culprit is the semiautomatic rifle itself, not accessories that are added to it.

* * * * *
My editorial comments:

I still want to know how many have been turned in responding to the local ban?
Inquiring minds...

Wasnt there a law. Add 1 , remove 2?

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

Wasnt there a law. Add 1 , remove 2?

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

No. Congress would never agree to such a crazy thing!   

Trump signed an Executive Order that required that for every new regulation created by federal agencies affecting small businesses, they must rollback two existing regulations.

No. Congress would never agree to such a crazy thing!   

Trump signed an Executive Order that required that for every new regulation created by federal agencies affecting small businesses, they must rollback two existing regulations.

The companies that make bumps are small businesses right? Jk.

Word is the "lord" already made a work around the fed law and will release new "stock" in jan 2019. Many will buy just to support.

So the ATF just put a novelty item in more peoples hands by banning them.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

The companies that make bumps are small businesses right? Jk.

Word is the "lord" already made a work around the fed law and will release new "stock" in jan 2019. Many will buy just to support.

So the ATF just put a novelty item in more peoples hands by banning them.

* * * * *

Sneak Peek: Lord Rockwell Reveals the Not-A-Bumpstock Stock



https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2018/12/daniel-zimmerman/sneak-peek-lord-rockwell-reveals-the-not-a-bumpstock-stock/?utm_content=81643381&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook&hss_channel=fbp-225612270801893&fbclid=IwAR2TS9XQLJnwppNQKcUbOBQGua4ZyOVTmvR1K9m2biVK19V6X4CpR6w4rrs

Now, however, a new product is being announced by a company called Lord Rockwell. And for now, they’re archly calling their product the Not-A-Bumpstock (that name may change).

TTAG spoke to the Not-A-Bumpstock’s inventor last night who told us that he invented this thing for a relative who was born with a deformed arm, loves to shoot, but couldn’t use a standard bump fire stock.

He said that while this product accomplishes what a bump fire stock does, it does it in such a way as to be different enough that the ATF’s latest ruling won’t apply. Details about those differences are being withheld until early January when a full rollout will happen with a press release and video that will show exactly how the Not-A-Bumptock goes about its business. For now, all we have to go on is the drawing above.

I just listened to Armed American Radio's Mark Walters interview Washington Free Beacon reporter Stephen Gutowski (second half of hour three: http://armedamericanradio.org/show-archives/2018-12-23/), who was able to interview someone at the DOJ/BATFE about the "rule change". He asked about the fact that any semi-auto can be "bump fired" using other objects (rubber bands, sticks, belt loops, etc.), or can be "bump fired" using no other objects at all, why wouldn't the [il?]logic of the rule change apply to all those other objects and to any semi-automatic weapon in general. The response was "Well, we were only looking at those particular "bumpstock-type-devices"". There you have it. If or when they look at the other objects, or at semi-automatic weapons in general, if they apply the same reasoning, all semi-automatics will be "machine guns", just like a "bumpstock-type-device" is now deemed a "machine gun" (!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!), and thus illegal unless you have a tax stamp and they won't give you a tax stamp.

Just to clarify for anyone not familiar with how a bumpstock-type-device works, it requires 1. that the object, usually a finger, that pulls the trigger remain in a stationary position (thus how using a pants beltloop helps keep the trigger finger stationary despite the recoil), and 2. that forward pressure be exerted on the non-stock portion of the firearm (usually with the non-trigger-finger hand), which allows the recoil to be utilized to result in the trigger being pulled as long as the forward,pressure AND the static trigger pull position are maintained. The BATFE lies about "initiating a continuous sequence of firing" in and of itself by a bumpstock-type-device are easily proven false (as if we don't all already know it's false!) by simply placing the non'stock portion of the firearm in a vice, then use any object to pull the trigger one time... the result: one round fired. The end. Same thing if firing with only the trigger hand on the gun pulling the trigger... nothing at all will happen except the one round fired. Because there is no forward pressure exerted on the non-stock portion of the weapon, the recoil effect cannot be utilized to initiate a continuous sequence of firing. In other words, a bumpstock-type-device is a machine gun if forward pressure is applied to the non-stock portion, otherwise it's just a piece of plastic, but it's still a machine gun. Now turn 'em in or destroy 'em or else you're going to prison for 10 years and being fined $250,000. Thanks Trump. What have you got lined up for us next?

I'm very disappointing with the NRA/NRA-ILA.  At least 1 pro gun org has filed lawsuit and GOA was waiting to see the official law before filing.  NRA released who their new cooler partnership is with instead of Yeti the day the law was released.

"No bumpstock. Should fingers be next?"

14 second video...

https://www.facebook.com/Darensretry/videos/1587326441302770/

I'm very disappointing with the NRA/NRA-ILA.  At least 1 pro gun org has filed lawsuit and GOA was waiting to see the official law before filing.  NRA released who their new cooler partnership is with instead of Yeti the day the law was released.

THEN:

https://home.nra.org/joint-statement

NRA-ILA Joint Statement [a few days after the Las Vegas massacre]:

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. The NRA believes that devices designed to allow semi-automatic rifles to function like fully-automatic rifles should be subject to additional regulations.

NOW:

https://www.nraila.org/articles/20181221/nra-statement-on-bump-fire-stock-rule

NRA Statement on Bump Fire Stock Rule [last Friday, December 21, 2018]

[W]e further advised that ATF should at a minimum make an amnesty period available to deal with the fundamental inequity imposed on law-abiding gun owners who purchased their bump fire stocks in good faith reliance on prior ATF determinations.

 

"Amnesty period" how about at min, grandfather clause.  Like CA's grandfather mags.