Damn Furriners!

If you were to believe the representative from Giffords the AR market is being flooded with foreign imports and home-made ARs.

This came up today in the House Judiciary Committee hearing today on banning “assault weapons”. Rep. Steve Cohen (D-TN) started the conversation by asking David Chipman about Colt and their decision to temporarily leave the commercial market. Chipman, a retired BATFE agent, is now a Senior Policy Advisor with Giffords. He previously held a similar position with Mayor Bloomberg’s Illegal Mayors.

I seem to remember that the late President George H. W. Bush imposed a ban on so-called assault weapons in 1989. Given that, I wonder where Chipman is getting his information. I mean an ATF agent, active or retired, would never make stuff up, now would he?

They Should Have Done Like French Farmers

I was reading a press release on Monday from RW Arms of Fort Worth, Texas. They were a retailer of bump stocks. As I understand it, they had purchased the entire remaining inventory from Slide Fire last year. The press release said they were were surrendering their remaining 60,000 bump stock to BATFE for destruction.

Fort Worth based retailer, RW Arms, will turn in their entire inventory of bump stocks to the
Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) on Tuesday, March 26th, to be
destroyed, in compliance with the Bump Stock Ban. RW Arms will transfer 60,000 bump stocks
to American Shredder in Fort Worth, Texas, to be shredded and recycled under the supervision
of ATF agents.

 Subsequent stories in Texas newspapers shows them being crushed at the recycling plant.

Now I’m sure they turned them over like this because they want to stay in the good graces of the BATFE and the rest of the Deep State. However, I might have taken a page from the French farmers protesting what they considered injustices.

I would have loaded them up into this.

Driven them to this building which is the headquarters of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives.

Donned my yellow vest. And then done this like French farmers have done in Paris.

Bearing in mind that French farmers have dumped more “odiferous” offerings, I think this would have been a more gentle protest of the perversion of the rule of law by the administrative state at the behest of politician than those French farmers might have conducted. I guess we will have to wait and see if the courts can grow a spine and actually stand up for the rule of law.

She’s Right You Know

This is something that I thought that I’d ever write but Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) is correct. To be more precise, she is correct on one thing. That is that any ban on bump stocks is the business of Congress and not a regulatory agency.

In an op-ed published Wednesday in the Washington Post, she wrote:

Automatic weapons produced before 1986 are highly regulated, and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives tracks them. Despite this, the agency has consistently stated that bump stocks could not be regulated under the current law. That was because they do not fit the legal definition of an automatic weapon under the National Firearms Act.

Automatic weapons are defined by their ability to fire a continuous number of rounds by holding down the trigger. Bump stocks and other accessories have made this definition largely obsolete, creating a loophole that circumvents Congress’s intent to bar civilians from achieving automatic rates of fire. That’s because the recoil of the stock “bumps” the finger against the trigger, allowing the weapon to achieve automatic fire. Because of this technicality, bump stocks have not run afoul of the law.

ATF initially concluded that it could not ban these devices through regulation in 2008. And after the 2012 shooting at a movie theater in Aurora, Colo., ATF further explained in a 2013 letter to Congress that it could not take unilateral action because “stocks of this type are not subject to the provisions of federal firearms statutes.” In addition, internal ATF documents made public through Freedom of Information Act requests by Giffords Law Center and Democracy Forward show that the agency had reiterated its lack of authority to ban bump stocks unilaterally and that it had approved similar devices as recently as April 2017 — under the Trump administration.

In March 2018, the Justice Department did an about-face, claiming that bump stocks do, in fact, fall under the legal definition of a machine gun and therefore can be banned through regulations. The administration’s position hinges on a dubious analysis claiming that bumping the trigger is not the same as pulling it.

Feinstein goes on to say that banning bump stocks by executive fiat opens it to legal challenge and that the Final Rule provides a roadmap for the “gun lobby” to do just that. This is not to say that Feinstein is pro-bump stock. Far from it. She wants them banned along with “trigger cranks” but says it should be done by Congress. Part of her rationale is that if it is done by Congress a future President can’t change his or her mind about bump stocks and ditch the ban. The other part of her rationale is the feeling that President Trump and the BATFE with the ban are intruding upon a Congressional prerogative.

The bump stock ban is already being challenged in District Court in Guedes et al v. BATFE et al. Gun Owners of America have also been promising a lawsuit which as of this afternoon still hasn’t been filed.

Bumpstock Ban, Part II

The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives in response to the announcement by Acting Attorney General Matthew Whitaker that the final rule banning bump fire stocks has more detail as well as “instructions” for owners of these firearms accessories. You have to wonder if the release of this final rule was delayed until after Attorney General Jeff Sessions was fired and a more compliant acting AG was in place.

First, the final 157 page rule can be found here. It will officially become final when it is published in the Federal Register. The rule goes into effect 90 days from when it is published in the Federal Register.

Second, the BATFE has published instructions on how to destroy your bump fire stock. They also have links to diagrams for a number of named bump fire stocks which are below.

Third, the other opinion is turn in your bump fire stock at your local BATFE office. They “advise” to call ahead. Also, while they don’t mention it, make sure you have your dog in a safe, undisclosed location.

Fourth, and this is not mentioned by BATFE, you can support the lawsuits that have or will be filed seeking to have this overturned. I will cover some of them in the next post.

Wednesday Is The Last Day To Comment On ATF’s Proposed Retroactive Ban On Bump Stocks

Tomorrow, Wednesday, June 28th at 11:59pm EDT, is the close of the comment period on the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives proposed ban on bump fire stocks. According to the legal sophistry of the DOJ lawyers, the BATFE erred when it said bump fire stocks did not violate the National Firearms Act. Thus, if the rule is adopted, bump fire stocks will be treated as machine guns and since they were produced after the Hughes Amendment was enacted they will be destroyed without compensation.

Bump fire stocks are a novelty to me. However, more important is how this ruling could be used to expand restrictions on all semi-automatic firearms, trigger upgrades, and the list goes on. To paraphrase Pastor Martin Niemoller’s quote about the Nazis, “first they came for the bump fire stocks and I did not speak out because I didn’t own a bump fire stock…”

The corporate gun ban lobby has been active in the last few days trying to solicit their members to submit comments. I’m sure they’ll get a lot that will ignore the law and play on emotion. While I’ll have another post up in the morning about the Firearms Policy Coalition’s 900+ page submission, for the time being here is a reminder from Grass Roots North Carolina.

STOP THE ‘BUMP-STOCK’ GUN BAN

The Dangerous Precedent of the ‘Bump-Stock’  ban.


The law that a ‘machine gun’ is defined by one trigger
pull firing multiple rounds
was written by congress and signed off on
by the executive branch.  But with
‘Writing It Out’
 the executive branch all by its
lonesome is going to magically redefine multiple trigger pulls as one so that they can call a bump-stock equipped semi-auto firearm a
‘machine gun’.  

Specifically, these devices convert an otherwise semiautomatic firearm into
a machinegun
by functioning as a self-acting or self-regulating mechanism that harnesses the recoil energy of the semiautomatic firearm
in a manner that allows the trigger to reset and continue firing without additional physical manipulation of the trigger by the
shooter.

The trigger still has to be pulled for every shot, but with the word
play magic, those additional trigger pulls are going to be ‘written out’ so with supposedly one trigger pull, you have a
‘Machine gun’!

It’s a semi-automatic
miracle! 
    


If the
required trigger pull for every shot has been ‘written out’ devices such as Bump-stocks, belt loops, rubber
bands or fingers will have to be banned since these can also turn that which is ‘semi-automatic’ into something that is
‘automatic’. 
But they can’t very well ban pants, rubber bands or fingers, so
they will have to ban semi-automatic firearms instead.
   
But wait!  There’s more!
   
With
this magical word play any gun that can
fire again with just a trigger pull could also be banned as a ‘machine
gun’, meaning revolvers or shotguns could also be eliminated.


See how easy it is to ban just about everything by just changing the meaning of a few
words?
Nancy Pelosi [Bless her heart]
openly admitted that she hoped the ‘Bump-Stock’ ban would lead to a slippery slope towards other restrictions on our
freedom.  
The
Left wants
to cynically exploit the recent shootings for political gain, This is
only round one of a coming battle to defend your Constitutional
rights.

IMMEDIATE ACTION REQUIRED!

  • The end of the comment period is tomorrow: June 27,
    2018
      so you only have a short time to express your opinion on this important and far reaching
    issue.
  • Help GRNC reload for the coming
    battle
    The
    Left cannot stand it when you exercise your rights and they will stop at nothing to deprive you of them. 
  •  We desperately need money and volunteers for
    the upcoming battle. Please help by donating at:
    https://www.grnc.org/join-grnc/contribute

 

DELIVER THIS MESSAGE

This is in opposition to the ‘bump device’ ban, or any such rule.
  
 The Executive branch
of the Federal government cannot simply change the meaning of words to ‘write out’ things that are unpopular at the moment.

It also cannot turn
semi-automatic firearms into ‘machine guns’ with the stroke of a pen.  These firearms require multiple trigger pulls to fire. 
No amount of word magic can change that fact.


Attempting to do so will set a dangerous precedent with potential to put all guns on the
chopping block.  That will most certainly INFRINGE on the 2nd amendment. 


The Federal government has no authority to  change the meaning of words
that impact the law in this matter.
 
Respectfully,

Comment Period Opens On Proposed Bump Stock Ban

Adam Kraut gives a good thumbnail overview of how to respond to the BATFE proposed rulemaking in the video below. He suggests taking a shotgun approach as the more objections you can raise, the more the BATFE has to work to respond to them. Moreover, if it isn’t brought up now, it can’t be brought up in court later.

Here is the document released by the lawyers of the Department of Justice with their legal rationale (or bullshit, to be more honest about it) saying why they can now define bump fire stocks as machine guns. It is important to note that if this rule is enacted then all existing bump fire stocks become contraband unregistered machine guns and must be destroyed or turned into BATFE. Why? That little amendment to FOPA 1986 called the Hughes Amendment comes into play as bump fire stocks were developed, manufactured, and sold after 1986.

Here is the correct link to the comments page.

I say correct link because www.regulations.gov has two links to the proposed regulations. One is the correct link and the other says comments are closed. Remember, never attribute to malice that which can be explained by incompetence or stupidity.

So scan through the DOJ document to find areas on which to make comments. There is nothing to say you can’t make multiple comments on different things. The comment period closes on June 27, 2018 at 11:59pm. So do it now while it is still fresh in your mind.

Sorry Donald But This Is Bovine Excrement

President Donald Trump released a Presidential Memorandum today directing Attorney General Jeff Sessions to complete the review of bump fire stocks and to promulgate a rule banning them. The problem with this Presidential Memorandum is that bump fire stocks as exemplified by the SlideFire Stock do not meet the definition of machine guns under the National Firearms Act and applicable BATFE rulings. That was why Rich Vasquez when he was charged with analyzing the SlideFire Stock found that it was not a machine gun nor did it convert a semi-automatic firearm into one. I made this very point in my own comment under the Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking.

If President Trump wishes to change the definition of a machine gun under the National Firearms Act or if he wishes to pass a bill banning bump fire stocks, then he should ask Congress to pass such a bill. Directing the Department of Justice and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives to make such a change to the existing rules governing bump fire stocks ignores the rule of law despite what he might say in this Presidential Memorandum.

You can read the full Presidential Memorandum below:

After the deadly mass murder in Las Vegas, Nevada, on October 1, 2017, I asked my Administration to fully review how the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives regulates bump fire stocks and similar devices.


Although the Obama Administration repeatedly concluded that particular bump stock type devices were lawful to purchase and possess, I sought further clarification of the law restricting fully automatic machineguns.


Accordingly, following established legal protocols, the Department of Justice started the process of promulgating a Federal regulation interpreting the definition of “machinegun” under Federal law to clarify whether certain bump stock type devices should be illegal. The Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking was published in the Federal Register on December 26, 2017. Public comment concluded on January 25, 2018, with the Department of Justice receiving over 100,000 comments.


Today, I am directing the Department of Justice to dedicate all available resources to complete the review of the comments received, and, as expeditiously as possible, to propose for notice and comment a rule banning all devices that turn legal weapons into machineguns.


Although I desire swift and decisive action, I remain committed to the rule of law and to the procedures the law prescribes. Doing this the right way will ensure that the resulting regulation is workable and effective and leaves no loopholes for criminals to exploit. I would ask that you keep me regularly apprised of your progress.


You are authorized and directed to publish this memorandum in the Federal Register.


DONALD J. TRUMP

If Donald Trump has any desire to have a second term, pissing off the gun rights community which provided his margin of victory in battleground states is a damn poor way to go about it.

Much Ado About Nothing

The Brady Campaign, CNN, and the cult of personality known as Giffords are all in a tizzy that an BATFE official actually reached out to a lobbyist for comments. You may remember the white paper written by BATFE Associate Deputy Director Ron Turk that suggested items for discussion with regard to firearms regulations. The white paper was released after the inauguration of President Trump. It is to be noted that Ron Turk has always maintained that the items discussed in the paper were not official policy but rather items for discussion that he proposed.

According to CNN, after writing his initial draft of the white paper, Turk sent it to firearms lobbyist Mark Barnes for comments.

“If I am missing the mark on a major issue or disregarding a major discussion point any feedback you have would be appreciated,” Turk wrote to the lobbyist, Mark Barnes, on January 9, 2017. “My hope is that the agency can demonstrate flexibility where appropriate and identify areas for further discussion, recognizing that solving everyone’s concerns on each side would be difficult.”

Some of the suggestions from Barnes were included in the final draft of the white paper. Things like allowing dealers to use the NICS system to run background check on their own employees and a re-examination of a 20-year old sporting use study in light of the sporting uses of AKs and ARs. However, things that Barnes also suggested like loosening restrictions on the imports of SKS carbines and Makarov pistols from Russia were not included.

I think what has the gun control lobby and their enablers in the media so upset is that they weren’t approached for suggestions.

From Avery Gardiner of the Brady Campaign:

“I was surprised to see that the draft document had been emailed out to a gun industry lawyer and the final product took his suggestions as edits — without any disclosure of that until we went to court to get these documents,” said Avery W. Gardiner, co-president of the Brady Center. …


“There was a secret white paper that was partially written by the gun lobby. That’s exactly the kind of thing the Freedom of Information Act is supposed to address — transparency of government,” Gardiner said.

And from David Chipman, the former BATFE Special Agent who now works for Giffords, who is dismayed by the revelation:

“An independent ATF is critical to this nation’s security. The white paper suggests that the gun industry’s quest for power and influence has trumped public safety,” Chipman said.

An interesting side note on Chipman, he is a 1984 graduate of Phillips Exeter Academy – the ultra-expensive, ultra-upper class, prep school. I’m having a little bit of cognitive dissonance over a preppy actually getting his hands dirty working for a lackluster agency like BATFE. Isn’t that a little beneath a graduate of Phillips Exeter?

Back to the story in question, think back to the Obama Administration and all the photo ops and meeting held with the gun control industry. They were quite numerous. I think the problem here is that they are miffed to be on the outside looking in as opposed to the good old days when they had a seat at the table.

The CNN story does have link to all the drafts of the white papers if you are interested. They have also included a video on the page that seems like an outright editorial call for universal background checks. As Glenn Reynolds has often said they are Democratic operatives with a byline. I’d modify it to include gun control advocates with a byline.

Firearms Policy Coalition Promises Cost Will Be High For BATFE If They Ban Bump Stocks

Last night at midnight EST, the comment period on the BATFE’s Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking closed. My comment was submitted last Saturday so that I wouldn’t forget it in all the hub-bub of the SHOT Show.

The Firearms Policy Coalition submitted their comment yesterday (on time). Their release below makes some very good points especially on the costs of implementing such a rule. It is important to bear in mind that if BATFE were to create a ruling banning bump fire or slide fire stocks, they would be making it up out of whole cloth. In other words, they would be assuming extra-constitutional powers that have no basis in either legislation or the rule of law.

Furthermore, there is the cost issue. There will be millions spent on enforcing an illegal law as well as untold millions on litigation. The Firearms Policy Coalition is upfront in saying that they will go to Federal court if the BATFE does create a regulation banning or regulating bump fire stocks. That said, I hope that cooler heads will prevail and any further moves towards a new regulation die in infancy.

From the FPC:

WASHINGTON, D.C. (January 25, 2018) — Today, civil rights advocacy organization Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) submitted formal comments to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (BATFE) regarding a regulatory proposal that would apply the definition of ‘machinegun’ to so-called “bump fire stocks” and countless other devices. In a letter sent by FPC President Brandon Combs, the group called the proposal “troubling” and said that it “raises serious constitutional concerns, including the violation of the separation of powers.”

“The DOJ and BATFE clearly lack the statutory authority to re-define the targeted devices as ‘machineguns.’” But the gun rights group said that, if the government does re-classify so-called “bump stocks” and other devices to be “machineguns” under federal law, they would file a federal lawsuit that “would provide an excellent vehicle for the Supreme Court to re-visit and eliminate the made-up judicial construct of agency deference”—something many Supreme Court justices have signaled as an issue they may revisit soon.

FPC also said that the proposed ban would come at a high price. “These costs would necessarily include likely millions of dollars in BATFE implementation and enforcement costs, in addition to potentially millions of dollars in fending off the inevitable litigation arising from the serious constitutional and statutory violations engendered by this regulatory process,” FPC argued. “Moreover, American taxpayers would also likely be stuck with the bill for the plaintiffs’ attorneys fees and costs should the government fail in attempting to defend this illegal and unconstitutional action.”

After the October 1, 2017, mass shooting in Las Vegas, FPC released a statement ( http://bit.ly/fpc-las-vegas ) saying that, even “in troubled and troubling times like these, we are honor-bound to stand united in defense of fundamental, individual liberties, in all cases, and in spite of the incalculable grief we feel for the victims of Las Vegas as fellow human beings.”

In a subsequent statement ( http://bit.ly/fpc-2017-10-6 ) FPC repudiated proposed bans on semi-automatic firearms and accessories, including “bump fire” stocks. “All unconstitutional laws are unjust, illegitimate, and offensive to the rule of law—even if they are enacted in response to a very real tragedy. FPC opposes all restrictions on the acquisition, possession, carry, and use of common, semi-automatic firearms, ammunition, and accessories by law-abiding people.”

Later in October, California Attorney General Xavier Becerra issued a news release declaring “bump stock” devices to be “multiburst trigger activators” and “illegal in California.” But FPC responded days later ( http://bit.ly/fpc-becerra-illegal-bump-stocks ) and said that it was Becerra’s statements that were “disingenuous at best and probably illegal.” Said FPC President Brandon Combs at the time, “Not only is Attorney General Becerra’s so-called ‘news release’ inaccurate and misleading, it is almost certainly an illegal underground regulation.”

Reminder From GRNC – ATF Comment Period Closes Next Week

Grass Roots North Carolina sent out an alert reminding people that the comment period for the Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking closes on January 25th. They also have a suggested comment. I have sent my comment in and will post it as a separately.

Just a reminder, all comments must reference Docket Number  2017R-22.

PROPOSED RULE TO
STIFLE THE 2ND AMENDMENT

It seems our friends at the
Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATFE, often referred to
as the ATF) would like to impose “maximum firing rates” on American gun
owners. Apparently, there is even talk that they may classify your
semi-automatic rifle as a “machine gun.”

Reason and legalities tell us that a machine gun fires continuously and
automatically with a single function of the trigger.  But the BATFE is
no longer sure that definition suits them. This is because, since the
definition was established, super high-tech items have been developed, such
as rubber bands, belt loops, shoestrings and Jerry
Miculek
.  The truth is, even with these “high-tech” devices, nothing
has really changed. So-called “bump firing” still requires one trigger action for each
round fired. Yet, the BATFE is looking to “clarify” the NFA
and whether certain devices, commonly known as bump fire stocks, fall within
the definition of machine gun. Absurd.

With the flick of a bureaucrat’s wrist, your lowly non-NFA firearm (read:
semi-automatic) may suddenly be elevated to the status of machine gun. It
will be classified not by trigger action, but by arbitrary firing rate, which
is something that can be altered by any number of things, including something
as nebulous as the skill of its owner. The list of items that can affect rate
of fire also includes innocuous, legal and unrelated things such as: optical
sights, trigger jobs, muzzle compensators, and who knows what else?
Picture Andrew
Cuomo screaming:
“No one needs a gun
that can shoot more than once every 5 minutes to kill a deer!”

Surely, we can trust the government to not take advantage of a new-found
power over the peoples’ guns, right?
Comment
Against This Infringement

The BATFE’s comment period regarding this proposed rule is still
open
, and it is critical that you submit a comment against this proposed
infringement on your gun rights.
BUT HURRY!
THE COMMENTS PERIOD
IS
ONLY OPEN FOR FIVE MORE DAYS!
If this is not stopped, who
knows when all guns will be classified as “machine guns?” To comment, find a link below, and a
copy/paste message you can use to comment.

IMMEDIATE ACTION REQUIRED!

  • SUBMIT A COMMENT AGAINST THIS SO-CALLED “BUMP FIRE” RULE.
    Click on the link provided, and use the copy/paste message provided
    below under ‘Deliver This Message.’ CLICK HERE (or go to:
    tinyurl.com/yavpvb4n).

    Comments MUST be submitted by
    Thursday, January 25th.

DELIVER THIS MESSAGE

I’m writing to day to speak
against the formation of a so-called “Bump Fire” rule.

Clearly, the proposed rule is designed to open a debate about semi-automatic
firing rates, something that is not open to debate in a free country. This is
dangerous territory where ambiguous language, established by unelected
government employees, is sure to infringe on the Second Amendment rights of
The People.

The proposed rule references “devices used with a semiautomatic firearm to
increase the firearm’s cyclic firing rate.” Clearly, that sort of open-ended
language could be used to ban any device that increases the firearm’s cyclic
firing rate regardless of trigger action, e.g. trigger jobs, muzzle
compensators, optical sights, shoestrings, rubber bands, and who knows what
else?

Given that bump stocks do not alter trigger function, firearms remain
semi-automatic, the BATFE has no legitimate authority to impose this
infringement on the American people. Indeed, there is no statutory definition
of “machinegun” in the National Firearms Act of 1934 nor the Gun Control Act
of 1968 that would allow the BATFE to make this stretch.

Any “Bump Fire” rule would be unconstitutional, and any “rule” imposed by
federal bureaucrats is really just a law established without the approval of
the peoples’ representatives. Surely, those at the BATFE have no interest in
circumventing the Constitution of the United States, nor would they want to
disrespect the country’s law-abiding people in such a manner.

For these reasons, I must insist that the BATFE immediately discard any
thoughts of imposing a “Bump Fire” rule.