Grandfathering for Bump Stocks or Binary Triggers

thep1zzaman · May 30, 2018

ironpony said:
Any thoughts on an advisory letter to atf on a current stamped SBR maybe changing length or model number and add bump stock in the notes somewhere.

Thanks to MSI

No gimmicks needed if adept at holding a rifle and not sure what to do with my finger come oct. 1 now.

I have an SBR I need to submit a 5320.20 on. I could put on the form that it has an binary trigger and see what happens.

ironpony · May 30, 2018

thep1zzaman said:
I have an SBR I need to submit a 5320.20 on. I could put on the form that it has an binary trigger and see what happens.

Good idea, deleted.

Nothing against you pizzaman but there have been rumors of Annapolitan troll collusion with such topics. I'll still say, good idea.

esqappellate · May 30, 2018

Hawkeye said:
Also I just realized that I'd apparently let my MSI membership lapse, so I just re-upped for this year.

Thanks. Good move!!

rbird7282 · May 30, 2018

The ATF won’t issue a letter stating something is approved when it’s already legal as far as they’re concerned. (Obviously not an NFA item) If it’s not illegal, it’s legal.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

rbird7282 · May 30, 2018

Rwrighttt said:
Why cant the ATF just approve people because theres nothing that prohibits these to citizens on a federal level?

So you want them to approve something that’s already legal? This whole thing is BS

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

JohnnyE · May 30, 2018

rbird7282 said:
So you want them to approve something that’s already legal? This whole thing is BS

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yes, that the MGA said we may keep them if we obtain the unobtainable ... complete BS. A deliberate setup that attempts to deflect the blame from themselves and on to the BATFE.

Cold, calculating, cynical BS.

sxs · May 31, 2018

rbird7282 said:
So you want them to approve something that’s already legal? This whole thing is BS

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yeah...from my perspective that would mean it's pre approved. :rolleyes:

JohnnyE · May 31, 2018

sxs said:
Yeah...from my perspective that would mean it's pre approved.

I'd like to see that argument work. In the US, that which not prohibited is allowed!

There is a great quote from a speech to the Association of American Law Schools by former FCC chairman Newton Minow, where he said, rather tongue in cheek:

"After 35 years, I have finished a comprehensive study of European comparative law. In Germany, under the law, everything is prohibited, except that which is permitted. In France, under the law, everything is permitted, except that which is prohibited. In the Soviet Union, under the law, everything is prohibited, including that which is permitted. And in Italy, under the law, everything is permitted, especially that which is prohibited."

We're like France, and the opposite of Germany!

esqappellate · May 31, 2018

JohnnyE said:
I'd like to see that argument work. In the US, that which not prohibited is allowed!

There is a great quote from a speech to the Association of American Law Schools by former FCC chairman Newton Minow, where he said, rather tongue in cheek:

"After 35 years, I have finished a comprehensive study of European comparative law. In Germany, under the law, everything is prohibited, except that which is permitted. In France, under the law, everything is permitted, except that which is prohibited. In the Soviet Union, under the law, everything is prohibited, including that which is permitted. And in Italy, under the law, everything is permitted, especially that which is prohibited."

We're like France, and the opposite of Germany!

Love it! And quite correct.

EL1227 · Jun 1, 2018

You'll need to 'register' your bump stock with ATF

rbird7282 said:
So you want them to approve something that’s already legal? This whole thing is BS

Or, something more sinister ...

JohnnyE said:
Yes, that the MGA said we may keep them if we obtain the unobtainable ... complete BS. A deliberate setup that attempts to deflect the blame from themselves and on to the BATFE.

Cold, calculating, cynical BS.

Or a cold, calculating, cynical ... way of determining who has them ? Read on ...

California Farmer Charged With 12 Felonies After Trying To Register His Guns

Jeffrey 'Scott' Kirschenmann, CEO of Scott Kirschenmann Farms, Inc., which is one of the chief potato suppliers for Frito Lay, was attempting to comply with California’s ever-tightening gun laws, one of which required gun owners to register “assault-style weapons” by the end of June.

After all, we law-abiding gun owners would never want to run afoul of the intentions of the gun-grabbing MD GA by NOT seeking approval in writing from ATF. :sarcasm:

ironpony · Jun 1, 2018

October 1 is right around the corner.

esqappellate · Jun 1, 2018

erwos said:
The key thing is that they're classifying DEVICES in those cases, not individual ownership. The BATFE is not stupid, they are not responding to the MD letters at this point. The only way you could even conceivably force the issue is to apply for an SBR stamp with "HAS A BUMPSTOCK" in the notes, and I suspect they'd bounce it back anyways (albeit this would be a fun experiment).

I agree that you could probably argue to a judge that, hey, you asked for authorization, so you're good in October 2018. Where you're going to get nailed is when you have no authorization come October 2019. So this parlor trick where you extend out your ownership for a year... well, it's not impressive to me. You'd have to be all sorts of crazy to take it to the range in MD, because I'm sure the MSP direction would be "no one is allowed to own bumpstocks now".

Also unsure this is the fight I would want MSI et al to spend their money, but that's their choice.

Would you feel the same way if the bill banned magazines or banned other private property? There was a bill in the General Assembly this year that banned mags. It will be back next year. Exactly the same issue, viz., the government is "taking" private property and not paying for it.

Hawkeye · Jun 1, 2018

esqappellate said:
Would you feel the same way if the bill banned magazines or banned other private property? There was a bill in the General Assembly this year that banned mags. It will be back next year. Exactly the same issue, viz., the government is "taking" private property and not paying for it.

Exactly. If we don't challenge this now, it's just an invitation for more next time. I can't count the number of times I heard "well my constituents didn't say anything" when I talked to legislators about these bills this year.

MJD438 · Jun 1, 2018

Hawkeye said:
Exactly. If we don't challenge this now, it's just an invitation for more next time. I can't count the number of times I heard "well my constituents didn't say anything" when I talked to legislators about these bills this year.

This is exactly why the organizational lobbyists are constantly BEGGING people to get involved and contact their legislators. It is all well and good for me to put my nose in their offices and say MSRPA likes these bills and not those bills, but if their constituents are not backing up those visits with calls of their own, the ones who oppose us, and even some of our more friendly legislators, will just ignore the conversation.

44man · Jun 1, 2018

Hawkeye said:
Exactly. If we don't challenge this now, it's just an invitation for more next time. I can't count the number of times I heard "well my constituents didn't say anything" when I talked to legislators about these bills this year.

I can tell you this, my delegate heard it and someone in his office read dozens of my emails saying I didn’t like this bill and for him not to vote for it. I spoke to him several times about it. And he voted for both bills and when I called him on it he told me the same bs, no one said anything to me about it. I forwarded several emails from me to him and his responses back and I got a full page bs excuse and now I don’t get any response.

So in short when they say no one told them at least mine was lying

danb · Jun 1, 2018

Personally I am not really convinced we can sue MD over SB0707/CH0252. It is craftily worded to pass the buck to the BATFE. The BATFE is the one banning bump stocks. Maybe. They have not issued a final ruling yet. That was their bid. Maybe after seeing comments they will allow amnesty registration like they did with shotguns in the 90s.

The best a court may do is affirm that "authorization" means permitted and items other than bump stocks are permitted.

That said, to win you have to play the game.

esqappellate · Jun 1, 2018

danb said:
Personally I am not really convinced we can sue MD over SB0707/CH0252. It is craftily worded to pass the buck to the BATFE. The BATFE is the one banning bump stocks. Maybe. They have not issued a final ruling yet. That was their bid. Maybe after seeing comments they will allow amnesty registration like they did with shotguns in the 90s.

The best a court may do is affirm that "authorization" means permitted and items other than bump stocks are permitted.

That said, to win you have to play the game.

Of course, the BATF has now said authoritatively that they legally cannot authorize possession. So the GA's purported reliance on the BATF is a legal impossibility. That's a violation of the Due Process Clause, which makes that part of the bill invalid, as well as, arguably, the rest of the bill. So they were too clever by half. MSI has filed comments with the BATF on its proposed rule. One of those comments is that the BATF does not have the legal authority to promulgate retroactive regs or Take private property under the Takings Clause of the 5th Amendment. We shall see what they do.

esqappellate · Jun 1, 2018

MJD438 said:
This is exactly why the organizational lobbyists are constantly BEGGING people to get involved and contact their legislators. It is all well and good for me to put my nose in their offices and say MSRPA likes these bills and not those bills, but if their constituents are not backing up those visits with calls of their own, the ones who oppose us, and even some of our more friendly legislators, will just ignore the conversation.

A double AMEN to that.

Bob A · Jun 1, 2018

I go to Annapolis, picket, email, talk to delegates. But living in Takoma Park as I do, it's not worth the aggro to even speak to my delegates. They'd like nothing better than to drive me out of MD, and I'd like nothing better than to comply.

And I've been living here since before most of them were born. Place used to be real nice, until the metro opened and the six-figure-salary types moved in, riding the coattails of the original "activists".

ironpony · Jun 2, 2018

Is it correct to say a law can be passed and the constitutionality of it is passed on to more attorneys to figure out while the citizens suffer. Where does the burden of proof lie? On the citizens while possibly detained??

With this mentality why don’t they just pass a law saying no firearms after Oct. 1, confiscate, delay and destroy. We’ve now seen how this sausage can be made ....

Grandfathering for Bump Stocks or Binary Triggers

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

Member

Member

President, MSI

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

Senior Member

Ultimate Member

President, MSI

R.I.P.

Member

President, MSI

The Leatherstocking

Ultimate Member

Ultimate Member

dont be a dumbass

President, MSI

President, MSI

όυ φροντισ

Member

Users who are viewing this thread

Log in

Forum statistics