NSSF/SAAMI Call for ATF Review of Bump Fire Stocks

In the wake of the tragic shooting in Las Vegas two important shooting organisations have released a joint statement calling for a review of bump fire-type stocks.

The statement below comes from the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF) and the Sporting Arms and Ammunition Manufacturers’ Institute (SAAMI):

Our thoughts and prayers continue to be with the families and loved ones of all those killed and injured in the criminal attack in Las Vegas. The manufacture, distribution and sale of automatic firearms and their components has been stringently regulated by federal laws since 1934. We believe the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) should interpret and enforce existing laws and regulations. We call upon ATF to conduct a prompt review and evaluation of aftermarket trigger activation devices such as bump stocks to determine whether they are lawful to install and use on a firearm under the National Firearms Act of 1934 (NFA), or whether, if they have no function or purpose other than to convert a conventional firearm into an automatic firearm, they are regulated items under the NFA. We urge Congress to allow ATF to complete its review before considering any legislation so that any policy decisions can be informed by the facts and ATF’s analysis.

One of the NSSF’s roles is to advocate on behalf of the ‘firearms and ammunition industry at all levels and before all branches of government’ while SAAMI are known for the testing and safety standards for ammunition and firearms.

The call for a “prompt review and evaluation” come in the wake of the NRA’s recent statements and the debate surrounding the issue within the industry and community. Over the weekend Gunbroker moved to ban the sale of SlideFire and BumpFire stocks and subsequently reversed the decision two days later. Adam & Corey have been following that story and the price gouging that has been seen in recent days.



Matthew Moss is a British historian specialising in small arms development and military history. He has written for a variety of publications in both the US and UK he also runs www.historicalfirearms.info, a blog that explores the history, development and use of firearms. Matthew is also co-founder of www.armourersbench.com, a new video series on historically significant small arms.


Advertisement

  • Twilight sparkle

    Hasn’t the ATF reviewed this at least twice, first with the Akins accelerator (without a spring) and then with slidefire’s product? Maybe I’m wrong???

    • Budogunner

      You are correct. The Akins was initially approved, then the ATF reversed itself and said the spring mechanism that would work to push the firearm forward again after recoiling made it a machinegun. Existing owners had to surrender the springs, but without those the stock had no function/would be damaging to the firearm to use.

      Likewise, the ATF has approved the slidefire stock, largely because they could find no violation of the law (either by letter or interpretation. They have no moving parts or springs, they are just loose stocks.

      Here is what I would expect the ATF to return on a second review, and I guarantee this is already written and signed on someone’s desk, waiting for the right political climate for release:

      “…upon further review, we have determined that the ‘finger rest’ of this and similar devices constitutes the new trigger when the device is installed. When used as designed by the manufacturer, the end user places his or her trigger finger on this ‘finger rest’ only once, with the forward pressure from the support arm performing a spring-like action resulting in more than one round fired per ‘trigger pull’.

      A Machine gun is defined as…. yada yada yada.”

      That is how I figure they will rewrite the law without need of Legislative action by a predominantly Republican Congress.

      • BrandonAKsALot

        Stop giving them ideas!

  • DoctorH

    One step forward, two steps back.

  • Jeff Smith

    Maybe I’m missing something here. What’s the purpose in saying “we want the ATF to review these items” when the ATF has already reviewed and approved then on multiple occasions? Is the plan to prevent congress from passing legislation by preemptively getting the ATF to rerule on them? I’M SO CONFUSED.

    • Roy G Bunting

      The purpose is it show that the gun community isn’t deaf to the tragedy and outcry. By calling for ATF review these groups are saying “ok, maybe there’s a problem, and the designated enforcement group should check to make sure that this is ok.” It is a hedge against legislation and a public opinion response. It is quite possibly the least that could be done rather then “well this is legal, we’re sorry someone killed a bunch of people, but maybe if the concert goers had their rifles with them they could have stopped him.” And then being the group that “defended a killers right to machine guns”.

      • Brick

        We urge Congress to allow ATF to complete its review before considering any legislation so that any policy decisions can be informed by the facts and ATF’s analysis.

        Right there. Reads to me like “Don’t make a sweeping emotional knee jerk decision right away, let the ATF do their job”

      • Major Tom

        Problem is by surrendering without a fight they’ll lose a mile for the inch they conceded.

        Worse gun owners have a tendency to have long memories. I remember the pro gun control NRA of the 1990s and their ally in Colt with the AWB. It took 9/11 and 20 years of atonement for either to even begin shaking off those sins.

        • Roy G Bunting

          I’d argue that the mile was lost anyways in this case. It’s hard enough to convince people that semiautomatic rifles are not “machine guns.” The difference between a bump stock modified rifle and one with a lightening link (for example) won’t be evident on video, where most people will make their decision. Holding out on this issue was a no-win situation.

        • Andrew

          Imo, its not even surrendering without a fight. Its more like France marching into Berlin unsolicited and saying, “Hey guys can you come to Paris and hang out? We’re a little confused on whether or not we like Poland.”.

    • pistol pete

      “Is the plan to prevent congress from passing legislation by preemptively getting the ATF to rerule on them?”

      Yes. Anything congress comes up with will be far more encompassing, i.e. bye bye binary triggers, bye bye drop in trigger packs, bye bye anything that could be even vaguely interpreted as potenially accelerating the rate of semi-auto fire…

    • J

      It seems as though they want the ATF, in the wake of the vegas shooting, to reaffirm that the shooting has not changed things and to reaffirm the bumpfire stock’s classification as a non-nfa item.

  • Haulin’ Oats

    SAMMI needs to stick to the technical stuff and keep their arms out of politics and infringing on our rights.

    • The Punisher

      With “friends” like these, who needs enemies?

    • Anonymoose

      If ammo manufacturers formed a group they would be extremely pro-bumpfire.

      • Haulin’ Oats

        They would also help us repeal the Hughes amendment and all other gun control acts.

  • Somebody

    National Shoot Slowly Foundation

    • Major Tom

      Nonsense Spineless Stupid Foundation

      • Schnarf Ate Liono

        Ninnies Spout Silly Fuddness

  • marine6680

    I said this before… The NRA, and now the NSSF and SAAMI, are seeing the writing on the wall.

    They know that prior to the attack, pro gun support in the political arena was at it’s highest in years, and even then, getting pro gun regulations passed was not going to be a cake walk.

    And now after the attack, anti gun support is bolstered, and turn coats are likely… Which has proven true…

    The goal is to head off any broad reaching and vaguely written legislation, which may be interpreted in ways not originally intended, to broaden the scope by ATF in the future. Which it has had a long history of doing. And to make them look like they are responsive to public concerns, to make them less of a target to rally the masses against.

    They know that under the current political climate and public opinion… That if new legislation is introduced, it has a good chance of passing. Basically, it is a fight we have a great chance to lose… And that loss has the potential to be very devastating to the 2nd Amendment.

    This is a strategic ploy… To minimize risk and losses.

    It’s all well and good to glorify the valiant struggle against Injustice, and to stand for what is right…

    But you can’t win the war, if you risk the entirety of your forces in a battle you know you are highly likely to lose.

    • Dr. Longfellow Buchenrad

      I can certainly say I would prefer the ATF to ban bump fire stocks than for that bill to pass. IF (a very big if) those were my only two options.

      But you would think with the current arrangement of congress that I wouldnt have to worry about the bill passing, but more spineless things have happened.

      • marine6680

        We already have turn coats… If we can snap them out of it, then we can win…

        But that is not a given at this point.

        Really, the whole thing hinges on winning back the turn coats… Even the idiot that co-authored the bill.

    • We Will Win

      This is a sell-out, pure and simple. Go back to your hole, quisling. When it comes to our rights, not an inch.

      • Lee Attiny

        Spoken like a true simpleton.

        • Some Random Guy

          Strategic ploy or not, if we play a defense-only game we’re going to lose any way. Frog in the boiling pot of water and all that.

          • marine6680

            Very true.

            We had hoped to go on the offensive with our current political climate of having a gun favorable majority.

            But even then, we were not strong enough to force legislation through. We still had to use finesse to pass new laws. That is why they were not rushing the SHARE act through.

            We have gone from having just enough support, to not enough. We are not in a position to press an attack, all we can do is hope to quell the one forced on us.

            In a year, once this dies down, we can push forward again.

          • totenglocke

            We had everything in our favor, except Republican politicians are NT actually pro gun. They just realize that since Democrats are anti-gun, they must say they’re pro gun to win elections.

          • marine6680

            That is beyond the scope of the conversation… but it is tangent to it. Whether they are are not secretly anti gun, is another topic. And your viewpoint depends on you attitude I guess.

            But history of their voting habits can give clues.

      • marine6680

        People like you will lose us everything… You are not thinking smart, you are not thinking end game.

        You can stand there and say you won’t give an inch… But they can and will take a mile… They have the support to win and they will use it to destroy the 2nd entirely if they can. This recent bill has that ability.

        They have enough political clout and power to force this bill through. We may have a chance to win, but the question is…

        Is the risk worth it? Do we risk losing the war, or do we allow a smaller loss now, so we can fight again tomorrow?

        • ARCNA442

          So when do you stand and fight? You can’t just keep giving them bits and pieces because we’ve been doing that for nearly 100 years and they just keep coming back and asking for more.

          • marine6680

            You fight when you can win, or when not fighting will result in heavy loss.

            Up until a couple weeks ago, we had the strength to fight and push forward. If we can weather this storm, and maintain our support over the next several months… We can push forward again.

            We have been on the defensive for a long time, because we never had enough support. With the current makeup of Congress and the White House, we barely had the support needed to push forward with SHARE.

            Right or wrong is meaningless in a battle that uses emotions as ammunition. Our position is weak… Because of the emotional push against us, and not due to our side being wrong.

            We have to play smart, and we have to play the long game.

            We have to push for youth initiatives… Education and participation.

            Win the support of the children now, and in a couple decades, we have support of voting adults.

            That’s how change is made in a society of laws… Where violence is a last resort.

            Look back to history… During the Civil Rights movement… Outside of the efforts of the minority population, who fought for themselves, the non-minority push was primary driven by the youth… Teens to mid twenties. Sure all age ranges got involved, but the changing attitudes of the youth, that carried into their voting years pushed against the racist attitudes of the older generation.

            All movements have similar fingerprints… The good ones, and the bad ones. Think back to 30s Germany… Recruiting the youth was important there as well.

            So get children involved whenever possible… Not just your children, but the neighbors and friends and well… Push for community events, education for school aged children… Education that isn’t about scaring them, but about the sport aspect, and responsible use and ownership.

          • Major Tom

            “You fight when you can win”

            And when is that?

          • marine6680

            When you have superiority, when you have the advantage.

            Right now, we must fight, as we have no choice any longer.

          • CountryBoy

            Actually, we should have learned that from the past administration’s dealings with North Korea, eh?

        • totenglocke

          People like you who talk a big game, yet always surrender will lose us everything. I’m not surprised that the person advocating gun control and insulting those who support the Constitution was in the military. Every soldier I’ve ever met has had nothing but disdain for the American people and the Constitution.

          • marine6680

            You know nothing…

            I am ready and willing to do what it takes. I am willing to fight and die for the constitution. For my rights, and the rights of others.

            At no point in time have I ever advocated gun control… Nor am I currently advocating gun control. I probably own more ARs than you own guns… Gun control would wipe out my entire gun collection.

            You are not reading and comprehending what I am saying… You are misinterpreting due to your own internal bias. You see what you want to see, not what is.

            Every military vet I know are die hard constitutionalists. Then again, I am from the south, and don’t know many yankee vets, from big cities. They might be as you say.

          • Andrew

            Go to hell. What have you done for the Constitution? Spout BS on the internet? You’re statement about Soldiers contains a major logical fallacy, and shows a lack of knowledge about the military. I don’t agree with Marine6680 on all points, but at least he is using his brain to discuss strategy in a thoughtful and articulate manner.

        • mosinman

          Losing ground inch by inch will still push you over the cliff. Gun owners have done nothing but give ground without taking any in return.

          • marine6680

            Yup… Which is why we need to think long term. Limit the damage, while we implement a plan.

            First thing we need… We need to take back the fight for the hearts and minds of the children. Through history, the big social changes happen, because the next generation grew up rejecting the ideas of the ones before.

            We can use that for our own gain… Get your kids involved early in shooting, Take them to the range, teach them to shoot, teach them safety, get them to enjoy guns in a manner that isn’t necessarily based on “death”, like hunting or defense… That comes as they mature. Also explain the way gun control advocates twist the truth… Teach them facts and the how and why…

            Then work to get your kid’s friends involved… Neighbors… Work to get gun safety programs for kids… in schools if possible… Wherever they are, they need to be fact based and educational… not fear mongering like the antis want…

            The Antis are working to sanitize children, isolate them from firearms, and instil instinctual fear in them… Then they grow up supporting gun control… And voting as such.

            We have to head that off, and get them on our side now, so they are on our side later, when they go to the voting booth… Maybe even increase the number of sport shooters, making up a larger demographic… one that even some democrats may feel they need to cater to at least to some degree.

      • Person

        If Trump puled something similar, there’d be echoes of “It’s 4D chess, you cucks. MAGA!” Where’s the “rolls eyes” emoji when I need it?

    • JumpIf NotZero

      I’m glad at least some people here see the bigger picture.

      There is no serious defense for bump fire stocks – so by throwing them under the bus they are protecting binary triggers, “fast” triggers, things that haven’t been invented yet, etc.

      This is the only rational move – to make the ATF directly evaluate bumpfire stocks as a specific item (again)… so of course a bunch of grown children here are complaining about it.

      • will ford

        Please invite the atf into your home to say what you can and can not have for self-defense, IM sure you will ask them? NOT????

      • Christian Hedegaard-Schou

        So now I have to “seriously defend” any firearm or firearm accessory I choose to use on the firearms that I supposedly have a right to keep and bear?

        If there is no “serious defense” to bump stocks, then how about large capacity magazines? How about match triggers?

        I realize the strategic play at the hands of the NRA here (even though I disagree with it), but get the eff out of here with that “no serious defense” crap.

        • marine6680

          I hate the necessity of it entirely…

          It’s bad either way.

          Risk losing in Congress, to a bill that may lose us the war… Or give up bump fire sticks.

          And I doubt the ATF could even justify a ban under current law, but they may manage to have them treated as a special case requiring a background check or something.

          And another poster made a plausible case as to how they could classify them as a machine gun part. Basically claiming the finger rest is the new trigger. It’s dubious, but possible.

          If the bill was better written… Basically, fine tuning the bill to target bump fire sticks only… The reduced risk would make the fight worth it.

          Because every win erodes the opposition.

          The biggest issue, is that the anti gun lobby risks nothing in the fight.

          They can reach for the moon, and if they lose, they can just try again.

          We can’t afford to lose, especially to lose the big fights.

        • JumpIf NotZero

          It’s cool you made it 4 words into my point then quit.

          But yes. That’s the whole idea of representatives, when they suggest stupid things like banning a stock you need to defend them. And there really isn’t a way to defend bumpfire stocks – in the wake of a high profile event. They were stupid before and still are.

          But if you want to stomp your feet, go ahead. The NRA and NSSF aren’t selling out – they see a bigger picture that you refuse to even consider.

          Calling for the ATF to review buys time. It lets emotions cool. It puts the blame on the ATF if they come back banning them. It creates a big process if they want to ban them with so many unserialized in circulation. Calling for a review is the smart move to prevent bad knee jerk bills from even being considered.

      • ARCNA442

        Until the antis learn about binary triggers and then call for the ATF to reinterpret law to ban those as well.

        • JumpIf NotZero

          You don’t think people were righting the ATF when they saw bumpfire stocks being shown on YouTube?

          It took a high profile event.

          So, sure… yell and complain… or see the reality of it. Either way.

          • ARCNA442

            Antis don’t know anything about guns beyond what the media tells them. You honestly think people who feel sick at the sight of an assault rifle (and I’m not exaggerating here) browse YouTube for videos of the latest gun gadgets? Before this shooting I bet 90% of actual gun owners didn’t even know bumpfire stocks existed.

            The loss of our rights isn’t inevitable. They came for magazines and assault rifles just a few years ago and the firearms community rallied and fought them off. If we had done the same this time there wouldn’t be any question of losing bumpfire but the NRA and a whole host of other “progun” people just decided it was too scary and caved.

          • autofull– kevin horning

            what tenntexan said, enough said.

      • Edeco

        I usually find your lofty airs amusing, but this time you go too far. I’d rather lose whatever they can take and keep our philosophical platform intact. Lose that and the horse trading will never end, which would be fine by the NRA.

      • BillyOblivion

        No, you aren’t protecting binary triggers, fast triggers or anything else.

        You’re making it easier for the anti-gunners to get come after them the next time some psycho uses one to scatter bodies around like a 5 year old with a bag of army men.

        You’re demonstrating that YOU are willing to give up *other peoples* stuff as long as they don’t come after yours.

        Yeah, bumpfire stocks are dumb. But freedom lets people make dumb choices. That’s what freedom *is*.

    • st381183

      You need to read the language in the bill. “Any device capable of increasing the rate of fire in a semi automatic firearm” so bye bye Geisselle, bye bye Timney, bye bye any trigger that alters or increases the ability to do follow up shots….I didn’t hear anyone calling for or demanding a statement from the NSSF, an organization that no one outside the gun world has even heard of. Who’s going to be left to fight for you when they come after Sig Braces, box mag fed bolt action guns, lever actions, etc etc? The thing you would not give up today is the thing they will be after tomorrow. I reject your feckless POV and pray that more gun owners see the truth of this rights stealing law. Whatever the NRA and NSSF master plan is, it is losing the war. Wars are won by engaging the enemy in battle to reduce the enemy’s willingness to engage, not ours.

      • marine6680

        Reading comprehension is low apparently…

        Yeah… That’s the point… We want to avoid the bill.

        I am not defending the bill recently introduced.

        And winning a war means only engaging in the fights you know you can win. Art of War… You never let the enemy dictate the battlefield. We did not choose this battle, and we are on the defensive.

        We can stop the bill now, or we can risk losing the battle and it gets passed… And then we have lost the war.

        • st381183

          My reading comprehension is fine. Believing that bending over will avoid a sexual assault by Congress is a false premise based on the master mind plan of the NRA? Keep dreaming.

          • marine6680

            I never said bend over and simply take it… In fact, having sufficiently angry individuals and organized events is still important… It’s actually one of the more important parts… Makes the average person believe that losing a minor loss via an ATF reclassification of the bump stocks, as a major loss. A loss much bigger than it really is.

            Basically, if they think we are losing big, they may not push for more. They will think they have dealt a serious blow rather than a minor one. Then we can keep the proposed bill off the floor for vote. We want that proposed bill gone, it’s horribly written and a disaster for us if it passes.

            So rage on… It’s key to the strategy.

            Then once the noise dies down 6 months from now, we can make our push for the SHARE act and maybe other positive legislation.

          • totenglocke

            “Then once the noise dies down 6 months from now, we can make our push for the SHARE act and maybe other positive legislation.”

            Never going to happen unless we replace a lot of Republicans. They’ve already had ten month of complete control of the Federal government and they’ve done precisely nothing. They don’t want pro gun bills passed and they will continue to find reasons to not bring them up for a vote and expose themselves for what they really are.

          • marine6680

            We never had a large majority of pro gun politicians. They couldn’t railroad through large pro gun legislation at will.

            But knowing who is wishy washy on pushing gun law does allow us to call them out directly.

            Then we can see who we need to vote out.

      • BrandonAKsALot

        The scary part is even muzzle devices could potentially start falling into it if the language is vague enough.

        • marine6680

          Yup… This bill is dangerous…

          The fight is lost without us convincing the turn coats to come back into the fold.

          The only other solution is the NRA and NSSF’s current feint. Get the ATF to preemptively limit bump stocks, to make the stated purpose of the bill redundant… Which will help swing support our way, and get the bill defeated in committee. Therefore avoiding a poorly written and gauge bill that can be interpreted in an overly broad manner outside the original intentions.

    • BillyOblivion

      You can’t win a war when your idea of fighting is “give ground without a fight”.

      • marine6680

        Never said just give up ground… A war is not about a single battle, but many battles, and winning the ones that matter.

    • b0x3r0ck

      I’m not paying the NRA to pick and choose there fights. I’m paying them to fight for gun rights no matter how stupid or off the wall it may be.

      • marine6680

        Yeah… But fighting blindly and without a long term strategy is how you lose.

        If someone starts a fight with you, that you know you can’t win, and the cost of loading is everything, and their cost is nothing… It’s not smart to stay in that fight.

        I’m not saying I like it… Just that I know what the long term strategy is.

        I think the general idea behind this by the NRA was this…

        NRA: Hey ATF, can you take another look at these bump stocks.
        ATF: Yeah sure give us a few months to get that done. (To self, we already did this twice already, sheesh)
        NRA: Hey Congress, slow your roll, we got this. No need to start proposing new laws.
        Congress: Ok, good to see you proactive for once. (To self: If it shuts the public up whatever)
        Public: Wow, the NRA is wanting to do something about this weird bump stock thing that I just found out that I hate? Maybe we will see change finally.
        ATF after several months: Determination made. (NRA hopes the ATF sticks with current determination, or at worse hopes that it only begins wanting a standard background check done to buy them)
        NRA: Thanks ATF
        Congress: Do what now, that’s old news…
        Public: Bump what now?

        I understand the direction they were taking, and why… They hoped to make this a strategic ploy to limit fallout and prevent an expensive (in further contributions, and palm greasing) legal fight on Capital Hill… One that had potential to be devastating if we lost.

        Unfortunately that is definitely not the direction this is going, and now we have to fight a new bill, that is poorly written and too vague, so it does not simply target one device.

        Hopefully pressure will get the turn coats to come back to the fold. And also further hopefully, we can get it killed in committee.

        • totenglocke

          You’re delusional if you think that’s the NRA’s plan. Their only strategy was providing cover for anti-gun Republicans to push without concern of backlash. It failed spectacularly and now the NRA is bleeding members (hence their sudden 180) and we have several Republicans who will probably lose their next primary. It’s nice to see the traitors expose themselves.

          • marine6680

            I guess it boils down to how cynical you are about the situation I guess. Some see a game plan, others like you see complete betrayal, with ulterior motive…

            I agree that these turncoats need to be voted out next time they are up for election.

  • Matt Taylor

    What has the NRA or the NSSF actually done for us? All the recent breaking through gun laws are from STATE organizations.

    We need to stop supporting these agencies like the NRA/NSSF that have been entirely unsuccessful yet act like they are advocating for us. Their CEO makes a million dollars a year yet I have seen no legislation passed in our favor. The NFA laws still stand. The Hearing Protection Act has gone nowhere but social media.

    They are inept and incapable.

    • Ambassador Vader

      It was the NRA who advocated for the NFA in the first place. They only protect firearms rights that they feel are worth protecting. Now they are starting to understand a certain poem by MARTIN NIEMÖLLER.

      • Matt Taylor

        Preach.

  • will ford

    JOIN THE GOA, SCREW all the other so called gun rights people

  • Veritas

    This is pistol braces all over again. If nobody writes a letter this time I will laugh my rear off. For the ATF to write an opinion they have to have a cause either the role of the agency, so someone either builds a new one and ask for approval or in the case of pistol braces coming up with wild analogies of “what about if I did this and held it to my shoulder.”

    I really hope the ATF answers and says “after careful review, it is the opinion of the ATF that using a bump fire to commit the crim of murder is using the product in a way other than it was designed for and would be a violation of 1934 act.

  • ozzallos .

    Hey, SAMMI, it’s not as if you fill a role that can’t easily be replaced by somebody else. Maybe good for you to remember that instead of colluding with the politick of the week, kk?

  • TennTexan

    This is bullshit! ATF has already reviewed these devices and determined that they DO NOT convert a semi-automatic firearm into a machine gun. Nothing has changed since that determination was made, and so there is no need for ATF to revisit the issue. A machine gun is defined under federal law as firing more than one shot per function of the trigger. A semi-automatic firearm, even one equipped with a bump stock, can never meet the statutory definition of a machine gun.

    • Ryfyle

      And for such reasons these bills might not float.

  • Ryfyle

    So what’s next? Banning pants?

    • TennTexan

      Banning Jerry Miculek’s trigger finger…

      • Ryfyle

        What about nerf guns? Years of heavy nerf gun trigger pulls made my hands crazy strong.

  • Royce Williams

    It seems inevitable any accessory or device that increases the rate of fire will be banned by Congress in the near future, so it really doesn’t matter if ATF reneges on previous technical rulings or not, which is why it’s unlikely they’re going to do anything but wait on Congress to act.

    Will I be pi$$ed off when I have to remove and turn in or destroy my binary trigger group when Congress bans it? You bet I will.

    Will I comply? As much as I’ll hate to, of course I’ll comply because it’s not worth going to prison over a $350 part for my 9mm range toy.

    Folks we’re going to lose this battle, but at least we won’t be losing the war like we would have if Hillary had won and stacked the SCOTUS with a liberal gun hating majority that wouldn’t have flinched as they reinterpreted and redefined the 2nd amendment to enable massive gun bans.

    • Edeco

      Pull yourself together. This ain’t our first rodeo.

    • totenglocke

      I remember when people like you came our of the woodwork post Sandy Hook screaming “preemptive surrender”! Look how that turned out. We won, despite people like you wanting to sell us out.

  • BillyOblivion

    They haven’t learned that if we don’t hang together we will surely hang seperately.

    Maggots.

  • Mitch

    This could easilly extend to aftermarket triggers, which I don’t find to be much of a stretch at all, especially considering that practically all gun control legislation is written by those that fear and despise firearms. We can at least breath relatively easy for now, but when 2020 rolls around, prepare for some potentially game changing, devastating anti-gun legislation. At least dead black people doesn’t bother the general public much. If people were as outraged by what continues to happen every day in Chicago (and around the country in poor black communities), we’d be lucky to have the right to use muskets by now.

    • DangerousClown

      I’m sure the shootings you reference are mostly committed by felons. The media won’t bring attention to them, since it’s proof that laws don’t deter crime.

  • Haulin’ Oats

    Jerry Miculek with a semiauto can shoot faster than Chuck Norris with a bumpfire stock.

  • marine6680

    Look… The problem is you do not understand what I am saying, or the point…

    Now that a bill has been promised… We no longer have a choice… WE MUST fight this bill.

    I was never talking about rolling over on the proposed bill. Only the strategy being used to combat it.

    The hope was to prevent new legislation from hitting the floor for a vote… Because if it makes it that far, we have a significant chance to lose.

    Now, the current feint from the NSSF and SAAMI is to kickstart the ATF, and make new legislation redundant, and kill momentum and support… So it does in committee, and never sees the floor for vote.

    It’s a two front defense… Get the gun community up in arms to fight the bill directly… By pestering their reps.

    And the NRA voicing up against the bill, while proposing an alternate solution.

    The alternate solution is key… The momentum is to do anything gun control related, the hope is to offer a placebo for them to shove at us instead, and drop the poison they are threatening us with.

    And yes we need to bring back the turn coats… We need them NOW, not new blood in their place later, when it’s too late.

    We can still vote their double crossing rears out the door when they are up for election again.

  • TangledThorns

    Yeah, this sucks but this is nothing compared to what we could have seen if Crooked Hillary was president. The fight still goes on.

  • Christopher Hartman

    Stupid Fuds

  • The_Real_Charlie_Horse

    The NRA has already called for this. If these organizations keep virtue signalling by calling for a review, the ATF is going to see it as pressure to reclassify them.

  • USMC03Vet

    More turn coats fudds.

  • Cymond

    “We urge Congress to allow ATF to complete its review before considering any legislation so that any policy decisions can be informed by the facts and ATF’s analysis.”

    I’m going to play devil’s advocate here.

    This sounds like a stalling tactic. If we can delay legislation long enough, the current anti-gun atmosphere will lose momentum.

  • 22winmag

    Well said… and punting to the ATF and Congress is not a strategy.

  • mosinman

    Oh look, more traitors. Oddly enough bump fire stocks are a result of gun control 🙂

  • Rogertc1

    I agree that bump fire is gimmicky and certainly not a substitute for real, select-fire firearms BUT don’t give these liberal scum ONE thing!! Because then it will turn into something else they’ll want to ban! And then another and then another. Look where it got us in the eighties, we fell for the “common sense” gun control line. NO MORE!! I keep hearing the whiny liberals repeating, “If not now, when?!”—The answer is: NEVER!! We know your endgame is to ban all guns and that this is a game of inches, they’ll slowly chip away until they get everything. I refuse to be punished by having MY right to own whatever I want within the confines of the law because of one cowardly piece of human garbage. I’ve got news for everyone if you don’t already know, THERE ISN’T ONE LAW THAT WOULD HAVE PREVENTED THIS!! This turd would’ve found a way even if bump fire stocks weren’t available to him. The answer is to stop being RE-active and start being PRO-active!! It is shameful that these liberals are using this tragedy to further their agenda! But then again, they have no shame!!

  • privacy privacy

    Just open the registry you f*cking dipsticks! Nobody would manufacture items like binary triggers & bumpfire stocks when you can register a post-86 MG. In fact the only reason why the bumpfire stock exists is to skirt around the Hughes amendment.

    The BATF should offer to exchange bumpfire stocks & binary triggers for tax stamps.
    There. People would shut up.

    In the mean time let’s kill the backdoor AWB,and then pass the SAGA act & bundle knifes in with it before we do anything else. The SAGA act would be revolutionary as it would eradicate current state level AWBs and prevent future ones.That way the only way they could ban guns or parts was to do it on the federal level.

  • blood283

    More “feel good” laws and regulations. Imagine if this guy had a decent semi auto with a 10X scope on it, or even a decent bolt gun with good optics. Much higher dead body count probably than with this “hose” attachment on his rifles. You would expect this kind of knee jerk reaction from the typical liberal don’t know a single thing about firearms motards, but these “professional” gun organizations should know better. They should also know better than giving the anti gun crowd even the proverbial inch, because they never stop there.