LEFT WING LOONS
See other LEFT WING LOONS Articles
Title: Trump pushes ban on 'bump stocks' — devices that turn weapons into 'machine guns' (Executive Memorandum to AG Sessions)
Source:
CNBC
URL Source: https://www.cnbc.com/2018/02/20/tru ... weapons-into-machine-guns.html
Published: Feb 20, 2018
Author: Dan Mangan
Post Date: 2018-02-20 18:37:44 by Hondo68
Ping List: *Bang List* Subscribe to *Bang List*
Keywords: leaves no loopholes, should be illegal, a rule banning
Views: 7124
Comments: 62
Trump recommends bump stocks should be illegal from CNBC. President Donald Trump announced Tuesday that he has recommended that "bump stocks" — devices that let semi-automatic weapons fire hundreds of rounds per minute — be banned. Trump signed a memorandum recommending that Attorney General Jeff Sessions propose regulations that would declare that bump stocks are illegal because they effectively turn legal semi-automatic weapons into outlawed machine guns. Stephen Paddock, the gunman who killed 58 people and wounded hundreds of others in Las Vegas in October had at least 12 rifles fitted with bump stocks, authorities have said. Trump's announcement came six days after a gunman killed 17 people, 14 of them students, at a high school in Parkland, Florida, while armed with an AR-15 assault rifle. "We cannot merely take actions that make us feel like we are making a difference. We must actually make a difference," Trump said at a White House event honoring first responders. "After the deadly shooting in Las Vegas, I directed [Sessions] to clarify whether certain bump stock devices like the one used in Las Vegas are illegal under current law," Trump said. "That process began in December, and just a few moments ago I signed a memorandum directing the attorney general to propose regulations to ban all devices that turn legal weapons into machine guns," Trump said. "I expect that these critical regulations will be finalized, Jeff, very soon." The proposed regulators would first have to be published in the Federal Register and be subject to public comment before they could be adopted. Semi-automatic weapons require a shooter to pull the trigger each time to fire a single round. But when those weapons are outfitted with a bump stock, the gun's recoil energy is used to "bump" the trigger into the shooter's finger, making it fire much faster. That makes the weapon more akin to machine guns, which are largely banned in the United States. Read Trump's memo: THE WHITE HOUSE Office of the Press Secretary FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE February 20, 2018 February 20, 2018 MEMORANDUM FOR THE ATTORNEY GENERAL SUBJECT: Application of the Definition of Machinegun to "Bump Fire" Stocks and Other Similar Devices 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 ### Poster Comment: Getting a head start on Congressional 2a infringements. Trump has beaten Chuck Schumer and Diane Feinswine to the punch! MAGA till ya puke.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 14.
#1. To: hondo68 (#0)
I'm fine with this. It's not banning firearms,it's banning a buttstock. I honestly have no idea why anybody would want one to start with. They destroy accuracy. Why use 10 shots to do something you should be able to do with one shot? Then again,I HATE inaccurate firearms of all types,and ain't real crazy about legitimate full-auto guns. I see no real practical use for them unless you are facing a mass attack like the Chinese and Koreans did during the Korean War,or sometimes when firing from ambush. A round you send down range that falls to the dirt or ends up in a tree might as well be left at home. It's foolishness.
Anyone who understands how these things work can actually fake the same firing effect without a bump stock. Here's a guy showing two popular scary guns with standard stocks, autofiring just by careful positioning. Clearly, one works much better. There are dozens of these DIY bumpfire vids on YouBoob. Most gunowners don't care about these accessories. Trump is going to lose very little support if he goes for a ban. He might even pick up some votes.
Or you can use your belt loop. But liberals are not banning bumpfire stocks per se -- they're banning the concept of turning a semi-auto rifle into a full auto. Once we buy into that, they'll use videos like yours to demonstrate that more needs to be done. Perhaps a bolt-action AR-15 is not that far away.
I think the bumpstock is so marginal in appeal overall that a lot of pro-gun people would put up with a ban on it. LF, for instance, is highly pro-gun but none of us own or want to own one. I think this may be a political tradeoff. The GOP and NRA will sacrifice bumpstocks to satisfy some gungrabbing craving by the public after the Vegas shooting, the Florida school shooting and the Florida gay nightclub Muslim massacre. Florida does have two massacres in the last few years. We'll have "done something" even if it doesn't make the public safer. And even some gunfolk will consider sacrificing bumpstocks (a marginal product for good shooters) to be worth it. It may also be that the GOP is drawing into this debate just to kill it again. The proposed solutions like banning bumpstocks don't address any of the major recent massacres. And it could provide a debate forum for all the failures of the FBI, the school, the local cops, the state's child services. All were notified repeatedly about this kid, including specific warnings that he was going to shoot up a school. And all that See-Something-Say-Something still resulted in no action from any agency and 17 dead kids as a result. You start to wonder if anyone who knew this kid did not consider him a danger to massacre a school. That's not such a bad political debate to have.
Having that debate requires a population that's able to articulate the related precepts constituted to secure their right, and responsibility, to debate. Meanwhile... Der Brothel Baron reigns over the bleating masses.
In any extended debate, pro-gun advocates will be able to mention multiple failures of each of these agencies: FBI, local police, school, child services. This was not a failure to have appropriate laws to stop a psycho from getting firearms and going on a rampage. It was a failure of responsible agencies to do their jobs and take action before a massacre occurred. I'm now reading that the shooter had shot up a neighbor's chickens, for no good reason. That alone should have barred that little weirdo from having a gun of any kind. Nothing was done. The debate may change more. The school shooter had been observed hitting himself on the head, clapping his hands over his ears. This could be a case of schizophrenia hitting a kid between 18yo and 25yo. That is when the biggest number of schizophrenics manifest their symptoms and start to lose touch with the world or become extremely disfunctional. Another angle that most people haven't heard yet is that, after his adoptive mother died of pneumonia last fall, the shooter and his 17yo brother were supposedly under the care of a family friend. She supposedly kicked him out because he had a gun. The day after the shooting, the "friend" had the 17yo brother forcibly committed. And there has been mention that, if the shooter hadn't gone on a rampage, that he was supposed to inherit over $800 thousand when he turned 22, the same for the 17yo brother AFAIK. The shooter had said repeatedly that he thought the "family friend" was trying to seize his inheritance (or most of it) for herself. I think this story still has some legs that most people haven't seen yet. We always try to slot these things into some category but they all have unique features. This is why it is so hard to regulate firearms overall.
#15. To: Tooconservative, y'all (#14)
(Edited)
The debate may change more. The school shooter had been observed hitting himself on the head, clapping his hands over his ears. This could be a case of schizophrenia hitting a kid between 18yo and 25yo. That is when the biggest number of schizophrenics manifest their symptoms and start to lose touch with the world or become extremely disfunctional. I've known kids that have had episodes like those above, --- and turned out just fine in later life, --- without any treatment whatsoever.. As you say, this debate is needed, because every case has unique features. The one thing that's been long settled, is the principle that everyone has a right to self defense, and to be armed, anywhere, --- unless convicted (and cured) of criminal behaviors... . -- If we adhere to that principle, most of the other problems about guns go away.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#2. To: sneakypete (#1)
#11. To: Tooconservative (#2)
#12. To: misterwhite, sneakypete (#11)
But liberals are not banning bumpfire stocks per se -- they're banning the concept of turning a semi-auto rifle into a full auto. Once we buy into that, they'll use videos like yours to demonstrate that more needs to be done. Perhaps a bolt-action AR-15 is not that far away.
#13. To: Tooconservative (#12)
And it could provide a debate forum for all the failures of the FBI, the school, the local cops, the state's child services.
#14. To: VxH (#13)
(Edited)
Having that debate requires a population that's able to articulate the related precepts constituted to secure their right, and responsibility, to debate.
Replies to Comment # 14. I'm now reading that the shooter had shot up a neighbor's chickens, for no good reason. That alone should have barred that little weirdo from having a gun of any kind. Nothing was done.
End Trace Mode for Comment # 14.
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]