The recently and surreptitiously amended National Firearms Act of 1934 and the Gun Control Act of 1968 were passed by dims. Originally Posted by I B Hankering
but they were dems of a different flavor.
- dilbert firestorm
- 01-02-2019, 12:22 PM
but they were dems of a different flavor.
- oeb11
- 01-02-2019, 12:30 PM
Here’s What’s Happening With Trump’s Bump Stock Ban
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry...b0decad04cb02a
First, it’s important to understand that bump stocks are not firearms. A bump stock is a component, typically made of plastic, that replaces a rifle’s standard stock and harnesses the gun’s recoil to slide the firearm back and forth onto the shooter’s trigger finger, allowing it to fire like an automatic weapon. (In the image below, the bump stock is the piece resting against the shooter’s shoulder.)
Federal law strictly regulates private ownership of automatic firearms, which the 1934 National Firearms Act defines as “machineguns.” But in most states, anyone who can buy a gun can get a semi-automatic rifle and a bump stock.
Although firearms equipped with bump stocks may fire like so-called “machineguns,” federal law specifically defines that term as any weapon that can “shoot automatically more than one shot, without manual reloading, by a single function of the trigger.”
The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives has previously determined that it does not have the authority to regulate bump stocks because they don’t fit this definition. Not only are bump stocks not firearms, but because the accessories still require users to pull the trigger each time they fire a cartridge, the agency has ruled that automatic firing is not technically activated by “single function of the trigger.”
The Trump administration now wants the ATF to change its determination. In his statement Friday, Sessions laid out a proposal to amend the regulations and clarify that bump stocks fall within the definition of “machinegun” under federal law, claiming that they do allow semi-automatic firearms to initiate a “continuous firing cycle with a single pull of the trigger.”
Because bump stocks ”[allow] the trigger to reset and continue firing without additional physical manipulation of the trigger by the shooter,” according to the document, “a semiautomatic firearm to which a bump-stock-type device is attached is able to produce automatic fire with a single pull of the trigger.”
It’s not yet clear if this attempt to change the reading of federal law will pass muster. Critics from across the political spectrum believe the administration’s move is likely to face a legal challenge and may ultimately be struck down.
Others have argued that Congress should act instead, and change the federal statute on machine guns to specifically cover bump stocks and similar devices. Although congressional lawmakers have introduced bipartisan legislation to prohibit such accessories, the National Rifle Association and a number of Republicans have said they’d prefer that the ATF handle the matter by simply changing its ruling.
GOP leaders on Capitol Hill have opted not to take up the bump stock issue, allowing them to duck accusations that they’re considering a gun ban.
A year after Vegas shooting, ATF emails reveal blame, alarm over bump stocks
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...ks/1432137002/
Articles on why the BATFE could not disapprove bump stocks - due to interpretation of the law regulating the Agency
And second- article on the politics of the issue.
Please feel free to read and become an informed poster.
O/W - this has become partisan drivel.
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry...b0decad04cb02a
First, it’s important to understand that bump stocks are not firearms. A bump stock is a component, typically made of plastic, that replaces a rifle’s standard stock and harnesses the gun’s recoil to slide the firearm back and forth onto the shooter’s trigger finger, allowing it to fire like an automatic weapon. (In the image below, the bump stock is the piece resting against the shooter’s shoulder.)
Federal law strictly regulates private ownership of automatic firearms, which the 1934 National Firearms Act defines as “machineguns.” But in most states, anyone who can buy a gun can get a semi-automatic rifle and a bump stock.
Although firearms equipped with bump stocks may fire like so-called “machineguns,” federal law specifically defines that term as any weapon that can “shoot automatically more than one shot, without manual reloading, by a single function of the trigger.”
The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives has previously determined that it does not have the authority to regulate bump stocks because they don’t fit this definition. Not only are bump stocks not firearms, but because the accessories still require users to pull the trigger each time they fire a cartridge, the agency has ruled that automatic firing is not technically activated by “single function of the trigger.”
The Trump administration now wants the ATF to change its determination. In his statement Friday, Sessions laid out a proposal to amend the regulations and clarify that bump stocks fall within the definition of “machinegun” under federal law, claiming that they do allow semi-automatic firearms to initiate a “continuous firing cycle with a single pull of the trigger.”
Because bump stocks ”[allow] the trigger to reset and continue firing without additional physical manipulation of the trigger by the shooter,” according to the document, “a semiautomatic firearm to which a bump-stock-type device is attached is able to produce automatic fire with a single pull of the trigger.”
It’s not yet clear if this attempt to change the reading of federal law will pass muster. Critics from across the political spectrum believe the administration’s move is likely to face a legal challenge and may ultimately be struck down.
Others have argued that Congress should act instead, and change the federal statute on machine guns to specifically cover bump stocks and similar devices. Although congressional lawmakers have introduced bipartisan legislation to prohibit such accessories, the National Rifle Association and a number of Republicans have said they’d prefer that the ATF handle the matter by simply changing its ruling.
GOP leaders on Capitol Hill have opted not to take up the bump stock issue, allowing them to duck accusations that they’re considering a gun ban.
A year after Vegas shooting, ATF emails reveal blame, alarm over bump stocks
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...ks/1432137002/
Articles on why the BATFE could not disapprove bump stocks - due to interpretation of the law regulating the Agency
And second- article on the politics of the issue.
Please feel free to read and become an informed poster.
O/W - this has become partisan drivel.