21 February 2018

Another Rub

A problem of directing the Attorney General to create regulation banning bump stocks is they really do reside in a loophole in the law.

Regulation is supposed to support the enforcement of the law, but these stocks don't break it.

It's also low fruit.

How many people do you know whom have a bump stock?  Easy to attack a subgroup of a subgroup.

Kind of like how the NFA got passed in the first place.  It didn't affect the majority of gun owners in the slightest.

That's also how the assault weapon ban made it in 1994.  I remember that people thought I was strange for being into the kinds of guns I was into back then.  The owner of the local shop even called it Thagifying when someone converted their Mini-14 like I had.

It was expected that the sub group of gun owners could be screwed over and the Fudds, being unaffected, would tell us to shut up.

While I was part of the outcry, I am still surprised that we managed to get it sunsetted and that the AR is the most popular firearm in the US.  Not just rifle, firearm!

1 comment:

  1. The issue isn't technically banning 'bump stocks' - it is wording a ban that goes well beyond them; one set of proposed Federal rules that i saw banned anything that increased rate of fire of a weapon; that loose definition could be used to ban aftermarket triggers, stocks, foregrips, sights, etc - pretty much any modification to factory configuration.


You are a guest here when you comment. Be polite. Inappropriate comments will be deleted without mention. Amnesty period is expired.

Do not go off on a tangent, stay with the topic of the post. If I can't tell what your point is in the first couple of sentences I'm flushing it.

If you're trying to comment anonymously: Sign your work.

Anonymous comments must pass a higher bar than others. Repeat offenders must pass an even higher bar.

If you can't comprehend this, don't comment; because I'm going to moderate and mock you for wasting your time.