Gun Control Reform Activism

Saviolo

(3,321 posts) Tue Dec 18, 2018, 03:20 PM Dec 2018

The bump stock ban will soon be official

From CBS News, full article here: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/the-bump-stock-ban-will-soon-be-official/

The Justice Department announced Tuesday that it is amending federal law to expand the definition of machine guns to say bump stocks fall under that term, making them likewise illegal. The department plans to submit paperwork by the end of the week, and the rule banning bump stocks will go into effect 90 days from that point. That means bump stocks will be illegal by the spring of 2019.

"The rule will take effect in 90 days from publication in the federal register," a senior Justice Department official told reporters on a conference call Tuesday morning. "At that point it will essentially become unlawful to posses a bump stock type device, they will be considered machine guns under both the National Firearms Act and the GCA — the Gun Control Act."

Mr. Trump announced last year that he intended to review bump stocks — something that came as a surprise to some. He announced that he had directed the DOJ to craft rules banning the devices earlier this year. The president hasn't taken further steps on gun control, to the dismay of gun control advocates.

One reporter on the conference call pointed out that the National Rifle Association may challenge the new rule. The senior DOJ official said that, no matter who files a lawsuit, the DOJ will defend its stance.

The only down side I can see to this is that it may mobilize NRA members to flood the organization's ailing coffers again once the direct mails about coming for your bump stocks start hitting email boxes.

5 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

The bump stock ban will soon be official (Original Post) Saviolo Dec 2018 OP

It's about time and a good start. BigmanPigman Dec 2018 #1

As soon as a Democrat becomes Prez again, NRA will find it easier to scare white wing gun-humpers. Hoyt Dec 2018 #2

The lawsuits to challenge have been filed, this could take years Amishman Dec 2018 #3

Due Process gunsmoker Dec 2018 #4

goaway goa jimmy the one Jan 2019 #5

BigmanPigman

(52,357 posts)

1. It's about time and a good start.

Reply to Saviolo (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2018, 05:51 PM

Dec 2018

Now let's change more gun policies before this happens again (which it will).

Hoyt

(54,770 posts)

2. As soon as a Democrat becomes Prez again, NRA will find it easier to scare white wing gun-humpers.

Reply to Saviolo (Original post)

Tue Dec 18, 2018, 07:05 PM

Dec 2018

Amishman

(5,832 posts)

3. The lawsuits to challenge have been filed, this could take years

Reply to Saviolo (Original post)

Thu Dec 20, 2018, 11:53 AM

Dec 2018

Though I am glad their challenges are ignoring the 5th amendment / no compensation angle, as that is probably the biggest potential legal weakness in the ban.

gunsmoker

(15 posts)

4. Due Process

Reply to Amishman (Reply #3)

Mon Dec 31, 2018, 08:50 PM

Dec 2018

The fifth amendment says that private property shall not be taken "for public use" without fair compensation. I don't think that gun rights groups have a good argument that banning a product and calling it contraband is the same as seizing it and using it for public use.

I believe the intent and purpose of that part of the constitution was meant to refer to taking property that was actually going to be used by the government or re-distributed from one group of private owners to another to better fulfill the government's public purpose.

But I think there are "due process of law" rights are at issue here because the government is banning a valuable product that many people paid between $100 and $500 for. And unlike alcohol or marijuana or other drugs, these products, these bumpfire or slidefire stocks, are not consumables. They're not disposable, and they were intended to last for a lifetime.

When the government bans a new synthetic substitute for marijuana, or bands a new type of drug that we generally call "bath salts," that is something that had not been regulated before, but the product only has de minimis value. It only costs a few dollars to buy, so that's the only amount of money that has been wasted if the government requires you to destroy it or turn it over to the authorities.

But product costing hundreds of dollars are in a different category .
I think fundamental fairness, and substantive due process, requires that the government buy back the stocks and compensate the owners for the monetary loss of value .

our Constitution itself teaches us that the dollar value of something can affect how much or how many rights you have as you fight to keep it. In civil suits, if the value in controversy is less than $20 you do not have a right to a jury trial, but you do if it is over that dollar threshold.

jimmy the one

(2,718 posts)

5. goaway goa

Reply to Saviolo (Original post)

Tue Jan 1, 2019, 11:46 AM

Jan 2019

the National Rifle Association may challenge the new rule. The senior DOJ official said that, no matter who files a lawsuit, the DOJ will defend its stance.

Wasnt Wayne Lapierre-head who challenged it, but nra satanic gundaddy goa:

Gun Owners of America (GOA) and its foundation said they will challenge the Trump administration’s new ban on bump stocks and seek a court order to block the rule.
After the Department of Justice (DOJ) issued a final rule Tuesday to ban the device, which allows a semi-automatic weapon to be fired much more rapidly, the gun rights group said it will challenge the rule in court.
“As written, this case has important implications for gun owners since, in the coming days, an estimated half a million bump stock owners will have the difficult decision of either destroying or surrendering their valuable property — or else risk felony prosecution,” Erich Pratt, the group’s executive director, said in a statement
ATF’s claim that it can rewrite Congressional law cannot pass legal muster. Agencies are not free to rewrite laws under the guise of ‘interpretation’ of a statute, especially where the law’s meaning is clear.”

Pratt said the DOJ is arbitrarily redefining bump stocks as "machineguns" and, down the road, could implicate the right to own AR-15s and many other lawfully owned semi-automatic firearms.
Bump stock owners have 90 days once the final rule is published in the Federal Register to destroy their devices or turn them into the nearest Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives office.
https://thehill.com/regulation/421928-gun-rights-group-says-it-will-sue-over-bump-stock-ban

Reply to this discussion