Treetop wrote:natsb88 wrote:
Yep. The supreme court would have been one decision away from outlawing anything semi auto and maybe more. whereas according to what I read the other day the supreme court is apparently expected to block the bumpstock ban. Maybe that is wrong Im not sure. Either way its a huge difference.
SCOTUS refused to hear both bump stock cases and sent them back to the lower courts (at least for now). They also refused to issue a stay on enforcement pending the lawsuits.
As of Tuesday 3/26/19, if you own a bump stock and have not destroyed it in compliance with ATF guidelines or surrendered it to an ATF office, you are a felon facing the same 10 years in prison / $250,000 fine as you would for possessing an unlicensed fully automatic firearm, for each bump stock you own.
One exception appears to be for members of the FIrearms Policy Foundation. They got a DC circuit court to issue a stay to "any current bona fide members of Firearms Policy Foundation & the named membership org Appellants," pending their lawsuit.
I've read estimates of 500,000 - 1,000,000+ bump stocks owned in this country. The ATF put it around 600,000.
An ATF spokesman declined Thursday to say how many bump stocks were surrendered before the ban went into effect, adding that the agency "does not feel the number turned in is an accurate depiction, because there were alternative methods of disposal." However, local ATF offices around the country said very few were turned in.Several states have commented on bump stocks, reporting between zero and ten-ish turned in
. The exception is Washington which offered owners $150 in a buy back program and collected ~1000 bump stocks. Some entrepreneurial individuals probably made some money with that one.
Still, unless owners destroyed the remaining 599,000 - 999,000 bump stocks on their own, there are a lot of new federal felons this week.
Every firearm owner should care about every second amendment infringement because gun control is implemented incrementally. First it was automatic weapons and short barreled rifles and shotguns, then for a while it was "assault weapons," now it's bump stocks. This action, where a regulatory agency reinterpreted old laws to ban things they previously explicitly stated were perfectly legal, without any legislative action, should be very alarming.
It sets a precedent that unelected bureaucrats, at the direction of the president, can change the legality of existing legally acquired firearm accessories and require their surrender or destruction. Just wait until the next Democrat administration (or heck, even Trump after the 2020 election, assuming he wins). Don't get too attached to any other "military style" accessories. 30-round magazines? Oh boy, we don't like those. Let's tweak the definition of "machine gun" to include any firearm capable of holding and feeding more than 10 rounds in rapid succession.
A Hillary presidency would have most likely meant Republicans retaining control of both houses and showing a united front against any gun control action initiated by the Hillary administration. When a Republican administration proposes second amendment infringements, most Republicans turn a blind eye or make excuses, as they are afraid of getting on the party's / president's bad side. Only a few protested this gun grab. Most are spineless.
