On Friday, March 23, 2018, Attorney General Sessions announced that the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) is seeking to classify bump-stocks as machineguns. The Notice has not yet been published in the Federal Register, but it is available on DOJ’s website. If adopted, the rules will amend ATF’s regulations to “clarify” the terms “single function of the trigger,” “automatically,” and “machinegun” as follows:
- Single function of the trigger – Single pull of the trigger
- Automatically – The result of a self-acting or self-regulating mechanism that allows the firing of multiple rounds through a single pull of the trigger
- Machinegun – A device that allows semi-automatic firearms to shoot more than one shot with a single pull of the trigger by harnessing the recoil energy of the semiautomatic firearm to which it is affixed so that the trigger resets and continues firing without additional physical manipulation of the trigger by the shooter (commonly known as bump-stock-type devices).
These new rules, if adopted, will supersede all prior determinations such that any device that meets these new definitions will qualify as a machinegun. Moreover, if adopted as proposed, those individuals currently owning bump-stock devices will be forced to turn them in or destroy the devices in their possession. Again, it is important to understand that this is only proposed right now, but if you fail to speak up and let your voices be heard these rules will likely go into effect.
ATF is requesting comments from the public with regard to the following five topics:
- The scope of the proposed rule, and the definition of “machinegun”
- The costs and benefits of the proposed rule, and the appropriate methodology and data for calculating those costs
- The reasonableness of the assumption that retailers of bump-stock-type devices are likely to be businesses with an online presence
- How ATF should address bump-stock-type devices that private parties currently possess
- The appropriate means of implementing a final rule
As such, you will have an opportunity to be heard and to voice your opinions. You must provide comments within 90 days after the Notice is published in the Federal Register. However, the Notice has not been officially published yet, so keep a look out and make sure to get your comments in before the time period expires and you miss your opportunity to weigh in on this important issue.
Robert Hanlin says
But a Bump Fire stock DOES NOT work on its own!! It requires you to ‘pull’ the front of the firearm away from you with just the slightest bit of force to make it run like a true “machinegun”..!! A true full auto firing weapon operates with the single pull of the trigger and relies soley on the mechanics or the weapon itself! Therefore the Bumpfire stock cannot truly be regulated as a machinegun!
Absolutely 200% correct. This is one of the most disturbing display of political abuse towards all gun owners. What will become of all those bump stocks and their legal owners? Is this where the collection pile begins for surrendering our firearms starting with bump stocks? President Trump declared that there would be no infringement on our Second Amendment Rights while he was in office. It is the time to voice our opinions before we end up like Massachusetts with no more semiauto rifles in gun shops. Remember all it takes is one swipe of the pen and you will lose your rights.
The bump stock REQUIRES THE TRIGGER TO TOUCH THE FINGER to fire each and every round; that is the additional physical manipulation of the trigger by the shooter.
If the finger does not touch the trigger, the weapon with the bump stock will not fire. Therefore technically your definition of a Machinegun DOES NOT cover “bump stocks”. But you can say what ever you want and the IGNORANT people in Congress will agree with you because YOU are the Government and they think YOU KNOW WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT. (But you don’t! You are trying to put a political desired answer on a mechanical problem and IT DOES NOT FIT! But you think if you put enough words there to confuse the reader, it will ring true, and everyone will be happy.)
Scotty Gunn says
Their argument is that you are not actually pulling your finger back for the follow up shots, the gun is bouncing into your finger. Very fine line with words,etc. That is what they do. They had the answer before they started, just need to “show” their work.
Probably trying to write similar for semi autos in general.
Charles Linder says
I can suspect huge possibility of fraudulent irrigation of the ANPRM with anti comments and foresee this occurring during this latest call for public comment by BATFE concerning the proposed redesignation of bump stocks and other so called firing rate enhancing firearm accessories.
This possibility could be construed by this reporting:
Charles Linder says
Due to the ATF routinely delving into the realm of law-making, the powers to be should consider this option.
I left this post months ago on Bearing Arms when this topic first reared it’s ugly head:
To do this -properly- as has been intimated in the statement, the Hughes amendment (no new machine guns produced after 1986 allowed for civilians) would have to be -at least temporarily- rescinded so as to allow a 201x (year) registration amnesty for the newly prohibited accessories. ALSO, the machine gun registry would need to be re-opened so that adding all those new -ahem- machine guns to the NFA/GCA registration lists would be possible.
For this to be practical, the addition of the multitude of war relic/trophies and other misc. NFA items would need to be allowed & amnestied also.
During the registration amnesty for machine guns, destructive devices, and sound suppressors during the several? months in the late 1960s the NFA tax of $200 was suspended for all new inclusions, but anything filed after the cutoff date reverted to the old system of a $200 tax per item and an additional $200 tax stamp for any subsequent transfer.
IF this new round of federal gun control were to follow prior practices, it could be somewhat of a boon for civilian market for NFA items. If the Trump administration were to include declassifying sound suppressors so as to remove them from the NFA (to get the pro-firearm crowd to embrace? the new legislation) we might witness an added benefit of seeing -at least a portion of- the gungrabber left dropping dead from their heads exploding.
John Walton says
The spineless actions taken by the Benedict Trump-old and Sessions are far more dire than anyone seems to understand. Obama wasn’t even so bold as to think he had the authority to re-define statutory language. The precedence this will set if gone unchallenged will give the left all they need to full disarm the American people. They can redefine semi-auto as machine gun if they so choose. This is an extremely careless act by this president doesn’t not surprise me one bit. No one wanted to see or listen to the facts right in front of them. Prior to the 2016 election cycle, Trump is on record as calling for a ban on “assault rifles” he was and has proven to be a gun banner!
It’s troubling to me that a legal semiautomatic rifle could be classified as a machine gun and that the ATF can change definitions of weapons to ban or regulate them. It is a slippery slope (I hate that term), and I could see them using a similar tactic to ban all military style rifles.
I GUESS IF YOU THROW A HANDFUL OF ROCKS AT SOMEONE YOU OR A GROUP OF PEOPLE
OR BUILD A BOW THAT SHOTS MORE THAN ONE ARROW ITS A MACHINE GUN OR ACTS AS ONE
THE ATF SHOULD HAVE NOT SAID THEY WERE LEGAL BUT NOW A LOT OF PEOPLE WILL BE OUT OF THERE HARD EARNED MONEY IF THEY HAVE TO TURN THEM IN OR DESTORY THEM
THE GOVERMENT SHOULD HAVE TO GIVE A REFUND TO THE PEOPLE WHO BOUGHT ONE
IT FALLS ON THE ATF FOR NOT DOING THERE JOB IN THE FIRST PLACE.
I don’t care for the things personally but it’s just a bone thrown to the gun grabbers to try and placate the a-holes.
Scotty Gunn says
There is no placating them. They will take all our guns if we let them. Then knives, swords, axes, chainsaws, rocks, bats,etc.
Jack o' Hearts says
As Robert Hanlin suggests, we yet again face those who take charge of “defining” matters they know nothing about.
So, who is going to lay down suppressing fire???,,, when there is no military or tact function in the vicinity…
Just the first step towards total ban on guns. If I owned one, I would certainly not surrender it to the government from which the 2nd amendment protects me.
The FIREARMS TECHNOLOGY BRANCH OF THE AND explains it perfectly: The stock has no automatically functioning mechanical parts of springs and performs no automatic mechanical functions when imstalled. For device to be used the shooter must apply constant forward pressure with the non-shooting hand and constant rear-ward pressure with the shooting hand. The bump stock is NOT regulated as a firearm under Gun Control Act or the National Firearms Act. The media says the shooter in Vegas used one which for someone who has never gone to a rifle range before, I find it hard to believe he could even operate it let alone hit anything since the rifle barrel would raise up in the air. That’s why the M16 was changed from fully automatic to a 3 round burst, because the upward motion makes a person loose sight of a target. The ATF should do nothing for the reason they provided, also do they plain on going door to door smashing in walls with a tank like in WACO to see if someone has one! Our Forefathers provided our second amendment rights so that people never become disarmed again by a Government, seems they were smart enough to see that one day someone in America would try to do so. The Bill of Rights existed long before Federal or State Governments existed.
Pete Alves says
It’s slippery slope,,, A VERY SLIPPERY SLOPE!!!!!! We need not go there!!!