Page 1 of 4

Gun Rights Group: NRA’s Support of Regulation Is Laying Down

Posted: Wed Oct 11, 2017 10:27 pm
by Chuck
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government ... egulation/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Following the NRA’s statement favoring ATF regulatory action on bump stocks versus Congressional action on gun control, Ohioans for Concealed Carry warned that the NRA’s move lays down “cover” for pro-gun control Republicans whose behavior is usually checked by a strong NRA stand.
In other words, Republicans who have expressed openness to gun control following the Las Vegas attack do not have the normal degree of pro-gun pressure on them because the NRA quickly acquiesced to the option of ATF regulation over their old mantra of “Stand and Fight.”

Re: Gun Rights Group: NRA’s Support of Regulation Is Laying

Posted: Thu Oct 12, 2017 7:13 am
by WhyNot
Ooops

The went ahead and stepped in it.


http://thehill.com/homenews/house/35476 ... ump-stocks" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Re: Gun Rights Group: NRA’s Support of Regulation Is Laying

Posted: Thu Oct 12, 2017 8:24 am
by WestonDon
Looks like NRA's plan to keep this in the administrative realm and out of Congress has failed miserably. Who would have thought it.

Re: Gun Rights Group: NRA’s Support of Regulation Is Laying

Posted: Thu Oct 12, 2017 1:06 pm
by JustaShooter
If they had left it at recommending another BATFE review, I could understand it and accepted it as a positioning move since we all know the likely outcome would be the same as previous reviews. But as soon as they followed with the statement that the NRA believes they should be subject to additional regulation, they crossed the line. They *had* to know this would give cover to new proposed laws to *regulate* them. I want to say bad words that will get automatically filtered by the form software. A lot of them. Directed at the NRA and the boot-lickers who decided now was the time to back down.

Re: Gun Rights Group: NRA’s Support of Regulation Is Laying

Posted: Thu Oct 12, 2017 1:37 pm
by M-Quigley
Violations of a bump stock ban under Curbelo and Moulton’s bill would result in up to five years in prison, fines or both.

The legislation authored by Cicilline and Titus, meanwhile, would punish bump stock ban violators with up to 10 years in prison.
Well, that will certainly give pause to anyone planning mass murder and then suicide afterwards. :roll:

Re: Gun Rights Group: NRA’s Support of Regulation Is Laying

Posted: Thu Oct 12, 2017 5:23 pm
by JimE
In the same vein, ATF refused to approve a thing called the "Auto Glove" just a couple of weeks ago.
http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/?s=auto+glove" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Here's a thought....
If ATF and our congress critters want to regulate the bump stocks and duplex triggers, fine.
Add them to the NFA.
BUT....remove the Hughes amendment to the FOPA , suppressors from the NFA, give us a amnesty period for registration of bump stocks AND the class 3
trophies that have been brought home over the years, tax free.

Re: Gun Rights Group: NRA’s Support of Regulation Is Laying

Posted: Thu Oct 12, 2017 9:24 pm
by Imcrazy
Good, those devices are dangerous I'm glad they're supporting making them harder to get... Full auto and bump stocks have no place in private hands IMO.

Re: Gun Rights Group: NRA’s Support of Regulation Is Laying

Posted: Fri Oct 13, 2017 6:01 am
by Chuck
Stand and Fight??


Image

Re: Gun Rights Group: NRA’s Support of Regulation Is Laying

Posted: Fri Oct 13, 2017 6:35 am
by OhioPaints
Imcrazy wrote:Good, those devices are dangerous I'm glad they're supporting making them harder to get... Full auto and bump stocks have no place in private hands IMO.
Sure the Second Amendment was never meant to protect the country from enemies foreign and domestic. It's just about hunting and shooting clays. We should be limited to BB guns and bolt action .22s

Even the government realized that full auto was protected, the 1934 NFA did not make them illegal, just controlled their use with a lengthy tax process.

Re: Gun Rights Group: NRA’s Support of Regulation Is Laying

Posted: Fri Oct 13, 2017 6:42 am
by JustaShooter
Imcrazy wrote:Good, those devices are dangerous I'm glad they're supporting making them harder to get... Full auto and bump stocks have no place in private hands IMO.
Even if this was a rational argument (and I don't believe it is), they aren't planning on making them "harder to get" they are planning on banning them entirely. And even worse, the bill presented to Congress goes far beyond banning bump stocks. The way the bill is written it could effectively ban just about any aftermarket trigger or action parts and improvements.

But back to your original premise:
Imcrazy wrote:those devices are dangerous ... bump stocks have no place in private hands
What exactly is dangerous about them? Please, be specific and help me understand what you consider dangerous about them, and why they "have no place in private hands".

Re: Gun Rights Group: NRA’s Support of Regulation Is Laying

Posted: Fri Oct 13, 2017 7:39 am
by Mustang380gal
Imcrazy wrote:Good, those devices are dangerous I'm glad they're supporting making them harder to get... Full auto and bump stocks have no place in private hands IMO.
You do realize that the 2nd Amendment was about making sure that an out of control government could be reined in, right? The writers were the ones who had defeated the greatest military of their time. Not everyone would need a full-auto of course, but if some want it, why shouldn't they have it? Liberty and all...

Unfortunately, we may have let the .gov go too far to rein in. I can see the majority of Americans happily turning over the Arisaka that great granddad brought back fro the Pacific.

I would love to have a full auto, and afford to shoot it. Alas, I have kids, not money, and have to be content with semi-auto.

Re: Gun Rights Group: NRA’s Support of Regulation Is Laying

Posted: Fri Oct 13, 2017 8:48 am
by bignflnut
OhioPaints wrote: Sure the Second Amendment was never meant to protect the country from enemies foreign and domestic. It's just about hunting and shooting clays. We should be limited to BB guns and bolt action .22s
Aren't internal magazines very dangerous?

Bolt action might be operated very quickly, so as to simulate semi-auto, which simulates full-auto, fire.

Therefore only break-action 22s should be allowed. (*sarcasm indicated by non-black color*)

Re: Gun Rights Group: NRA’s Support of Regulation Is Laying

Posted: Fri Oct 13, 2017 8:52 am
by WestonDon
OhioPaints wrote:
Even the government realized that full auto was protected, the 1934 NFA did not make them illegal, just controlled their use with a lengthy tax process.
About time someone said this^. Repealing NFA34 is the holy grail of 2A advocacy IMHO.

Re: Gun Rights Group: NRA’s Support of Regulation Is Laying

Posted: Fri Oct 13, 2017 9:49 pm
by mrbone
Imcrazy wrote:Good, those devices are dangerous I'm glad they're supporting making them harder to get... Full auto and bump stocks have no place in private hands IMO.
The only way to ban bump firing is to ban all semi-auto weapons. If the ATF rules that owning a bumpstock and a semi-auto firearm is illegal then it should be illegal to own rubberbands and semi-auto firearms because you can bump fire with a rubberband. Some people can bump fire without any modifications.

Re: Gun Rights Group: NRA’s Support of Regulation Is Laying

Posted: Sun Oct 15, 2017 9:30 pm
by Imcrazy
You guys kill me... The second any regulation is mentioned so many people think we'll all be running muzzleloaders by next week... Banning a vanity toy isn't going to infringe on anyone's right to defend themselves from enemies foreign or domestic.

Full auto or bump firing is inherently dangerous without some serious training, no further explanation needed.