ATF Admits It Lacked Authority To Ban Bump Stocks

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

  • No ad networks!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • HaveBlue

    HaveBlue
    Dec 4, 2014
    733
    Virginia
    The political spin (I do mean spin) for this could be that bump stocks are protected by the COTUS.

    I’d rather that they say that “weapons of war” are what the 2a was meant to cover. Ergo MGs are definitely in broad use around the world. If bumpstocks are MGs they are protected as well.
     

    frogman68

    товарищ плачевная
    Apr 7, 2013
    8,774
    so those charged with owning a bump stock get their charges dropped ?
     

    Mr. Ed

    This IS my Happy Face
    MDS Supporter
    Jun 8, 2009
    7,899
    Edgewater
    If an agency of the federal government openly admits that they have no authority to have enacted a regulation, does that not automatically render the regulation null and void?

    I can guarantee that if an agency (that had no authority) had regulated abortion and subsequently admitted that fact, it would become null faster than a heartbeat (gruesome pun intended).
     

    ShafTed

    Ultimate Member
    Mar 21, 2013
    2,212
    Juuuuust over the line
    Furthermore, every single claim they make about the silly little piece of plastic is either an outright lie or physically impossible. Bump firing does not do ANYTHING they say it does.
     

    DanGuy48

    Ultimate Member
    I’m confused. I thought the SCOTUS ruled against overturning the Auer Deference so I thought these agencies had carte blanche to do pretty much whatever they want in terms of deciding upon the legality of their own regulations. What am I not understanding?
     

    randomuser

    Ultimate Member
    Nov 12, 2018
    5,774
    Baltimore County
    I’m confused. I thought the SCOTUS ruled against overturning the Auer Deference so I thought these agencies had carte blanche to do pretty much whatever they want in terms of deciding upon the legality of their own regulations. What am I not understanding?

    They will do as always whatever they want until about 3% of the population tells them they can't. Sadly that's just how it works.
     

    babalou

    Ultimate Member
    MDS Supporter
    Aug 12, 2013
    16,016
    Glenelg
    chaps my ass

    View attachment 267959 Hopefully this will open up for those that like to read long documents. Matt Whitaker acting AG names at the end.


    Like trying to create or figure out a means to match the given ends. Also, Machine guns used to be ok. Thank you ahole mobsters in Chitcago. 2A supports that, as we all know.

    PDF stated 2A does not support right to a machine gun yet people have them. Just the gubbmint afraid of the people so they take rights away. I know that was just one of the reasons mentioned.

    smh
     

    TinCuda

    Sky Captain
    Apr 26, 2016
    1,556
    Texas
    Like trying to create or figure out a means to match the given ends. Also, Machine guns used to be ok. Thank you ahole mobsters in Chitcago. 2A supports that, as we all know.

    PDF stated 2A does not support right to a machine gun yet people have them. Just the gubbmint afraid of the people so they take rights away. I know that was just one of the reasons mentioned.

    smh

    Yeah, the government really does not care what the people have as long as they get their cut. You want to smoke? Pay your tax. You want to drink? Pay your tax. You want a machine gun? Pay your tax.

    .,
     

    Dogabutila

    Ultimate Member
    Dec 21, 2010
    2,359
    I’m confused. I thought the SCOTUS ruled against overturning the Auer Deference so I thought these agencies had carte blanche to do pretty much whatever they want in terms of deciding upon the legality of their own regulations. What am I not understanding?

    Interpreting law for enforcement is one thing. Changing a definition that is IN the law is a completely different thing.

    So, first example is if congress says MG's are illegal but doesn't define them. The ATF would have the ability to define what a MG is to enforce the law that congress passed.

    In this case, congress defined what a MG is in the law. The ATF cannot change the law to encompass whatever they want for enforcement. Their interpretations must stay within the boundaries of the definition provided. Since bump stocks actuate the trigger for each round, the firearm does not fall within the definition of a MG.
     

    HaveBlue

    HaveBlue
    Dec 4, 2014
    733
    Virginia
    Unfortunately someone (who is otherwise not prohibited) is going to get their life put on hold for a few years when they get caught with one. It’ll take a real case.

    I would even go on the offensive. If the ATF is unable to find any one of these newly minted machine guns, how exactly is that mandatory buy back of pistol grip shotguns going to work?

    I usually have shoes tied up with shoe laces when I go to the range. Is that going to be constructive possession?
     

    DanGuy48

    Ultimate Member
    Interpreting law for enforcement is one thing. Changing a definition that is IN the law is a completely different thing.

    So, first example is if congress says MG's are illegal but doesn't define them. The ATF would have the ability to define what a MG is to enforce the law that congress passed.

    In this case, congress defined what a MG is in the law. The ATF cannot change the law to encompass whatever they want for enforcement. Their interpretations must stay within the boundaries of the definition provided. Since bump stocks actuate the trigger for each round, the firearm does not fall within the definition of a MG.

    Thanks. :thumbsup:
     

    ellist

    Member
    Oct 15, 2014
    13
    Who cares? A bump stock is a toy. Lettem have it. Save "wins" for something that means something. Good grief guys, the stuff you get your panties in a wad over is mind boggling.
     

    Decoy

    Ultimate Member
    MDS Supporter
    Mar 2, 2007
    4,926
    Dystopia
    Who cares? A bump stock is a toy. Lettem have it. Save "wins" for something that means something. Good grief guys, the stuff you get your panties in a wad over is mind boggling.

    98W0XSl.gif
     

    Users who are viewing this thread

    Latest posts

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    274,917
    Messages
    7,258,586
    Members
    33,348
    Latest member
    Eric_Hehl

    Latest threads

    Top Bottom