1. My hope is that someone will take this on to the the SCotUS and then we’ll see who’s for The Constitution and who’s for dictatorship.

  2. Dear Tesla owners:

    The self-driving feature has been involved in too many accidents. Therefore, the Department of Transportation has determined that the automobiles are inherently dangerous. All automobiles must be destroyed in the next 90 days through crushing after removal of the batteries.

    Non-compliance will be a felony.

    Have a nice day, and, remember, it is for the children.

  3. Well Mas I generally agree with you and I have only one objection to content here and that is the reference to wood stoves that fill the air with smoke. Yawn. I live in a rural area in So. Oregon and I and all of my neighbors have wood stoves or fireplaces. I consider bump stocks a great way to waste ammo at the range. I am more a precision shooter, and when it comes to self defense I take that attitude to a higher level. BP’s are a waste of money and ammo in my estimation and to the law abiding among us who own them I hope they have a good time using them. I don’t know how the gummint is going to track all of them down as they are not serialized. Happy New Year

      • If you paid cash at a big box store they have no idea who bought one. If you ordered from SlideFire or another place, then you better hope they destroyed their sales records.
        Otherwise hide them where nobody but you can find them.
        Jus’ Sayin’.

  4. I received an e-mail from Gun Owners of America recently stating they have filed a lawsuit in Michigan in opposition of the bump stock ban.

    If the Las Vegas mass murderer had used aimed semi-automatic fire instead of employing bump stocks on his rifles, he would have killed and wounded many more people, as most of his bullets went over the heads of his victims. Fortunately the killer was not a true “Gun Guy” because if he was, he would have used a pair of .308 caliber, semi-auto Browning 1919s mounted on tripods and equipped with scopes having lighted reticles instead of over a dozen rifles of various makes. He would have numerous cans of belted ammo and many bottles of water to spray on his guns to prevent them from overheating.

    I too, don’t own a bump stock and do not want one, but am not opposed to anyone wanting to waste large amounts of ammunition at the range as it’s good for the economy and keeps the ammo factories in business. Banning potentially dangerous items instead of the people who misuse them is a slippery slope, much to the delight of Nancy Pelosi and other slimy liberals, and good honest Americans should do everything they can to oppose it.

  5. Mas, you are on the mark with your taking without just compensation point. There is another equally nasty civil rights violation, that being that this law is an”ex post facto” law, or perhaps more correctly, rule. That means if something was done or made or possessed when it was legal to do so, no law can come along and make such making, doing, or possession ILLEGAL, and this rule/law does precisely that.

    Whoever owns one of those silly things now can, by the mere “act” of doing nothing for the next eighty seven days or so, become a criminal.

    Had they made a rule that says no more can be made or purchased, then it would not be “ex post facto”.

    You did allude to the fact that COngress did not make this law, nor did the President sign it. I believe it was the current ACTING Attorney General, who likely lacks such authority. The Constitution plainly declares that ONLY CONGRESS have the authority or power to MAKE LAW, and this thing, call it what you will, IS a law.. a criminal law, with harsh penalties.

    I read this morning that a group, which one I can’t recall just now, has filed a lawsuit in a District Court in Western Michiga, if memory serves, which is, quite handily, within the territory of the Fifth Circuit Court, which have a fairly solid record of coming down in favour of our right to arms. Haven’t read the filing, but I do hope they not only take after the illegality of the ban itself, but also the manner in which it was estra-constitutionally “enacted”. Let us hope that court imposes an unjunction against the ban’s scheduled taking effect until the matter is fully heard and decided. The “state” (government) will have a fun go of it trying to PROVE beyond a reasonable doubt )strict scrutiny) their “compellling interest”” and justifying their failure to provide for amnesty, and just compensation, not to mention the ex post facto angle.

    You also mentioned that bump stocks were only used in one criminal shooting event, Las Vegas. Two points on that score: when the video of the first breach of the room was released, there was reportedly only ONE rifle with one attached. No proof of any kind has ever been offered that THIS rifle fitted with THIS device, was ever actually USED by the alledged perp. Later “evidence photographs” taken in the room show close to fifteen weapons fitted with bump stocks…… many of them having no sighting devices of any kind. They appeared to be randomly tossed , a little too “staged” to my thinking. This guy was very meticulous… nor is there any evidence to establish that any of those were fired during the event.

    So bump stocks MAY have been used in one criminal event, and no more. With some half a million in circulation, that’s a pretty solid record of being harmless. Swimming pools are “responsible” for far more deaths than that. You know how they reach out and grab little kids, and pull them under the surface…….

    • That’s not what “ex post facto” means.

      Criminalizing future possession of something that was once legal, is not ex post facto.

      Ex post facto is criminalizing past possession of something that was legal at the time, but no longer is.

      On Day 91, they can charge you with illegal possession of the banned item; but what they *can’t* do, because it would be ex post facto, is charge you with illegal possession of the banned item that you no longer have, because you possessed it before the rule took affect.

    • Don’t start with the conspiracy theory crap. You can clearly hear this guy used them by the numerous videos taken. Nobody was shooting that fast manually.

      • Rather than speculate, let’s just check the FBI’s ballistics report on which rifle(s) were actually fired during the massacre.

        Oh, right…. They haven’t released it, despite multiple FOIA requests into this “closed” investigation. Hmmm….

        How about the ATF’s report from their examination of the rifles, how many were full-auto or semi-auto or equipped with bump-stocks, and which were fired.

        Oh, yeah…. The FBI did not let ATF examine the rifles. Hmmm….

        There are a lot of details about the event that don’t add up. At this point, nobody outside the FBI even knows if a bump-stock-equipped rifle was used. It could have been full-auto, but again, nobody outside the FBI knows, and they ain’t telling.

        If you ask me, the “conspiracy theory crap” about the new rule isn’t any less credible than the rule itself; it’s based entirely on speculation and political pressure, not evidence.

  6. Taking a contrary view … maybe it is time to buy one (on the ‘black” market).

    While I agree with the above comments and like you, Mas, and others, I don’t own one. And would otherwise not be interested in such an accessory.

    So why buy one now or in the future (or just build one)?

    Retirement planning.
    Free medical, room & board, etc.
    Just turn yourself in when you run out of money … or decide you just cannot put off that sex change operation any longer but still don’t have the money.

    As I told a Brit some 25 years ago who said “but you have the Constitution and 2nd Amendment”, constitutions & laws are only as good as those writing them, following them and enforcing them. Just paper in the end.

  7. Not to go on a rant here, but…

    Totally agree with the “slippery slope” concern. What’s next to ban? Trigger jobs? Optics? Stippling on grips? Semi- autos? Revolvers with 8-rounds, then 7-, etc.? How about caliber restrictions?

    Many gun owners will blame Trump for the bump stock ban. But, we had GOP control of Congress for awhile and what do gun owners have to show for it?

    So much for national reciprocity.

    The NRA also had Trump’s ear…what happened?

    • The GOP is part of the problem. They are not interested in advancing gun rights. At best, they are only slightly less inclined to further curtail the 2nd Amendment than the Democratic Socialists. They talk a big game at election time, but don’t expect them to risk their reputations standing up for our rights.

      National reciprocity? Hearing Protection Act? Never going to happen with the current GOP leadership.

      And yes, the NRA had Trump’s ear … and if you’ll recall, they said they wouldn’t oppose bump-stock regulation.

      That’s exactly how we got the new rule.

  8. I can see all kinds of constitutional and legal problems with this “instant bump-stock ban”. Just off the top of my head:

    1) As Mas points out, it represents a government “taking” of private property without compensation.

    2) It (retroactively) makes illegal property that was formerly legal to own. It makes “instant felons” out of (previously) law-abiding citizens.

    3) Since these items were not given serial numbers and cannot be tracked, it raises practical questions as to whether this law is enforceable.

    4) Finally, this whole bump-stock ban is based upon the ban, in Federal law, of the production and licensing of fully-automatic weapons past a certain date. It seems to me that, from a strict 2nd Amendment point of view, this has always been questionable. What authority did the Federal Government have to ban the further manufacture and distribution of automatic weapons to the public? What authority did they have to, effectively, limit all future use of these weapons (at least new ones) to the police and military? I am not a legal expert but I wonder if this Federal Law, banning the manufacture and use of new automatic weapons by American Citizens, has ever been tested at the Supreme Court level? It would not surprise me to find that some left-wing judge in a lower court said that it was OK. However, did the SCOTUS ever confirm that it was OK? If so, can someone give me the name of the decision since I would like to read it.

    If the core purpose of the 2nd Amendment is Defense, both on a personal and at a National (militia) level, then how can a ban on automatic weapons be supported since all modern warfare relies on the firepower of automatic weapons?

    This ban is simply more of a troubling trend. The erosion of our rights and liberties by bureaucrats and minor judges because no one is standing up to fight for them anymore. Our 1st Amendment rights are under increasing attack while the attacks against the 2nd Amendment are now continuous. In this day of deep-state surveillance and the internet, our rights to privacy are also being eroded daily.

    Clearly, George Orwell was a seer rather than just a writer. The only mistake he made was getting the time-frame wrong. He should have named his book 2024 instead of 1984.

    • sure there are several problems with the ban, all done in purpose. Rather than taking a risk voting a new law in Congress with the small margins the GOP had going this way will ensure the new rule will be tied up in court for years and eventually killed. Come on people this is Donald Trump, he’s no stupid and certainly not an anti-American gun grabber, that also explains why the NRA didn’t say a thing until the rule was published.
      There are already two lawsuits filed, one more getting ready to file as far as I know, just in the first week

  9. Anyone with an ABS 3D printer of necessary size can make one so I’m not sure they thought this out well…

  10. It is a terrible precedent. Couple this with pending Red Flag Laws in many states and probably on the federal level and we have lost our freedom. Say the wrong thing to your gun hating neighbor or relative and the swat team shows up at 2:00 AM. Very scary

  11. I’m all for the banning of bump stocks, so maybe my opinion isn’t well shared here. I saw no use for them until the Las Vegas shooter showed what it could be useful for. Literally you need a barrel with fish in it, and then you might get a few.

    But I’m totally against the taking of property without compensation. I think we would have been better served with 1) a ban on new sales of bump stocks, or resales and 2) a voluntary buy back (hey, use the money that you will now have to reserve for lawyers to bring this fight to the supreme court!).

    I’m less concerned of other accessory banning, simply because of the use cases. But I still expect some sort of court battle to be waged here before other accessories are targeted.

    BTW, Mas, not sure what happened with your editing, but so many words have no spaces in this article.

    • Thanks for the catch, Steven. We have it fixed, at least for this time. We think it’s an effect of a recent software update.

  12. Mas,

    Confiscation (without compensation) of lawfully purchased and owned property (bump stocks) is just another angle of attack taken by today’s leftist progressives.

    Their Stalinist goal is to use well funded agit prop to dehumanize gun owners and to stigmatize gun ownership ad nauseam until society as a whole is eventually conditioned to be repelled by firearms and by those who dare to own firearms or to advocate for their ownership.

    Read with due care and real concern how a NY Times writer proposes the finance industry should deal with gun owners who choose to use debit or credit cards to conduct retail purchases. Indeed, George Orwell’s 1984 is alive and well in 2018.

    A “Poseidon Adventure”-style tsunami of visceral hatred and relentless vitriol is going to smash headlong into American firearms owners, FFL Dealers, and firearms manufacturers when Democrats take power in the U.S. House of Representatives in January 2019. Cowabunga, gun owners! Like it or not, surf’s up! Grab your boards!

  13. More troubling precedent: this is the first time that any “firearm” has been outright banned, totally prohibited, by the federal government. It’s worse that it was done by executive rule-making, but even if Congress had passed the bill first, it would still be unique.

    Post-’86 machineguns could still be manufactured and transferred among those in the proper class, but this rule declares bump stocks to be “machineguns”, and doesn’t allow for any Type 07/08 exemptions. They could normally manufacture or import or deal in any machinegun if it was properly marked and added to the Registry; this Rule declares that people who can legally manufacture actual machineguns, can’t even possess a novelty stock.

    And of course, rulemaking doesn’t allow the creation of a Rule that defies to re-defines clear statute law. Federal firearms law is often vague, but it’s crystal clear on the definition of a “machinegun”.

    • And of course, rulemaking doesn’t allow the creation of a Rule that defies to re-defines clear statute law. Federal firearms law is often vague, but it’s crystal clear on the definition of a “machinegun”.

      That’s my biggest sticking point about the new rule. I don’t care much about or for bump-stocks myself, but the rule sets a precedent that the clear statutory terms in Congress-passed law can be redefined by the Executive branch at a whim. Also that an appointee who hasn’t received the “advice and consent” of the Senate can make such rules, and that items previously declared legal can suddenly be declared illegal and taken by government force and without compensation.

      All in all, a dangerous path to start down.

  14. Notice how often the Left gets what they want; abortion, including taxpayer money for Planned Parenthood, no-fault divorce, pornography as freedom of speech, bans on cigarette smoking in public places, EPA seizing public and private land because of spotted owls, white women being counted as “minorities” in the work force so they can be hired instead of black men, the 1994 Clinton Assault Weapons ban, neglect or banning of the death penalty, legalization of marijuana, gay marriage, sanctuary cities and states. I think the Left got a Harvard President fired when he stated the scientific fact that there are more male math wizards than female math wizards.

    So the Left is very powerful. They won the culture war and now they want to rule the USA. They think they know what is best for us.

    This bump stock ban happened with a Republican President, House of Representatives and Senate. Imagine what would be happening to Patriots two years into the administration of President Hillary Rodham Clinton!!!

  15. I honestly feel there’s more to the Vegas shooting. This is simply a way our government is going to handle getting our AR-15.

  16. Dang! I hope my antique “Amish Machine Gun” Model 760 pump-action, magazine-fed, 30-06 rifle with 22-inch barrel doesn’t come under “with slide-fire devices.” I can probably work the slide nearly as fast as a bump-fire can bump. The Model 1897 Winchester shotgun may be similarly endangered. Bob Munden could be considered a human bump-fire with his single-action revolver times under a tenth of a second per shot, so look out you SSAS folks. It is probably time to get a bunch of single-shot muzzle-loaders and rig them in a battery against the day when they are the last resort before full confiscation.

  17. There is no confirmation that bump stocks were used in Las Vegas. The FBI has clammed up on releasing any details. Listening to the cell video of the shooting seems to indicate a full auto M249 Light Machine Gun was used. The rate of fire is to slow for a bump stock and lasts a full 10 SECONDS for each of the 2 bursts of fire. Pictures released show bump stocks on ARs, but no other weapons. I do not believe they were used as the rate of fire is too slow and lasts too long for even a 100 round drum magazine.
    www dot youtube dot com/watch?v=oggQoNgXcqI
    An AR can empty a 100 round drum in a fraction over 6 seconds and this guy didn’t even have a bump stock.Go to 30 seconds in the video.
    www dot youtube dot com/watch?v=g62m7yOhgRY
    The bump stocks were used as a red herring to enact a ban or as the ATF did by illegally defining them as a machine gun.
    Until a full unredacted report is released to the public we will not know the full story of the Las Vegas shooting.

    • ^^ This ^^

      What’s not well-known is that the FBI did not allow the ATF to examine the rifles. The ATF doesn’t know which rifles were full-auto, semi-auto, or bump-stock equipped, or which were fired. They don’t know where the rifles came from, how the man purchased so many without raising concerns, or how they all got there.

      The FBI presumably does, but they aren’t telling.

      Supposedly the facts are known and the investigation is closed, but the reports haven’t been released despite multiple FOIA requests. And yet we’re supposed to accept all this at face value.


  18. Well now, seems the stars of sorts have aligned themselves on this topic. Long story here, please be patient.

    In light of the various “bans” taking place with regards to all things gun related, I am curious to know why the SCOTUS hans’t heard any cases pending. Personally, as has been said, the bumpstock is a gimmick of sorts, but didn’t really make the headlines until that fateful day in Las Vegas–where we STILL don’t have any substantial evidence or conclusions as to what really happened, other than EVERYONE who is anti-gun, clamoring for a bumpstock ban cuz “the ‘shooter’ used one.”

    Most folks here are evidence and science driven for the absolute truth in finding the facts, yes?

    Next, the New Jersey magazine ban–lawful when purchased, now illegal to own/possess. Felony if caught with one once the grace period expires. And of course, we can go into all the little things banned too, albeit, the items were legal when bought.

    About three weeks ago, I was watching one of my favorite Saturday cop shows called LIVE PD. In the episode, a young man was seen leaving a head shop (store where folks can buy smoking accruements–for legal or illegal purposes). The officer observed him leaving the store and decided to follow him under the suspicion the individual “may” have drugs in the car. After a few minutes of following him, the officer lit him up and pulled him over. The driver did not disobey any traffic laws, but the officer pulled him over anyway, indicating he was being pulled over for not coming to a complete stop a a stop sign. I can attest, the driver did come to a complete stop. The driver submitted all the documentation to the officer that he was legal and lawfully on the road. The officer asked the driver what was in the bag on the passenger seat and thats when the guy got nervous. He retrieved the bag containing his new purchase and handed it to the polite police officer and said he was giving the hand blown glass pipe to his friend for a present. Thats when the polite police officer became less than polite and ordered him out of the car. Handcuffed to be detained for everyones safety. The officer went through the car finding nothing. Called for K-9 to search the car. Nothing found, again. Contents in the truck were rummaged through extensively, several pat downs by both police officers, zip-nada-nothing. The driver was issued a citation for having drug paraphernalia in the car and risked having it impounded, on and on.

    So, this got me to thinking about all these little illegal laws, being ever so slowly implemented. This episode on my favorite TV show highlighted to me just how the bumpstock ban, magazine ban and all the other crazy laws being passed are really something bigger in the making. Stewing on this for the last couple of weeks, and then Mister Mas starts this thread.

    The glass pipe was legally sold to a customer who was old enough to have it in his possession, had never been used, but he is cited for illegal possession and it was confiscated. WTF?

    England and Australia, too far fetch to imagine? We have an uphill battle folks.

    Stay safe.

    • You make a good point. As gun owner’s we hold sacred our 2nd Amendment rights, but we need to be mindful of all of them. Based on what you wrote, this seems like a 4th Amendment violation.

  19. And then there are questions about what was actually used in the Las Vegas tragedy. Several hundred rounds of .223 via bump stocks on AR-15’s should have brass showing all over the room on video of “first entry.”
    I have never desired a bump stock. I look at weapons turn in records.
    I wonder what percentage will actually be turned in.

    The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms, has no venue or jurisdiction within the borders of any of the 50 States of the united States of America, except in pursuit of an importer of contraband alcohol, tobacco, or firearms, who failed to pay the TAX on those items. As proof, refer to the July 30, 1993 ruling of the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, 1 F.3d 1511; 1993 U.S. App. Lexis 19747, where the court ruled in United States v. D.J. Vollmer & Co. that “the B.A.T.F. has jurisdiction over the first sale of a firearm imported to the country, but they don’t have jurisdiction over subsequent sales.”

  21. The real test is yet to come. If it does. Maybe this specific ban is “testing the waters.” Seeing what will happen and how it will go down.

  22. Off topic. I’ve not been around these parts much recently, but I just wanted to drop by and say “Happy New Year” to all the regulars here.

    Y’all came to mind because we’be been having a lot of minor crimes of opportunity – stolen mail which was left in mailboxes overnight, porch piracy of packages left by delivery companies, burglaries of cars left unlocked overnight with valuables in sight, stuff stolen from garages with doors left open overnight, etc. – in our large neighborhood. There’s been a lot of security camera film taken and most of the thieves don’t seem to even try to hide their faces. There have been a couple of arrests, but there are new incidents almost every week. And neither we nor the police can seem to convince people to do the very simple things needed to deny the thieves the opportunities.

    Now some folks have started making noises about gunning up, accompanied by making macho noises about what they’ll do when they confront the thieves. I’ve been making a valiant effort to sell Mas’ and Andrew Branca’s books on self-defense so they’ll know what they’re getting into and how to best prepare for the need to use SD. I’m getting some of the “I’ll just take my chances with the legal system, I don’t need any book learning” kind of pushback but I think I’m starting to get some folks to pay attention. Mas, let me know if you get a spike in sales ;-).

    • Happy New Year, Dave – Yes, the folks that you are advising would be wise to pay attention. Keeping a firearm for self-defense is a serious business. Too many people think that the stuff that they watch on TV or in Hollywood movies is real. I can’t think of a bigger mistake since the majority of stuff on the tube is junk and nonsense.

      Reading a good book on the topic is not the same as getting good, hands-on training but it is at least a start. Mas’ book ‘In the Gravest Extreme’ is a bit dated now but it is still the standard. I would recommend that it be read by anyone who keeps a firearm for self-defense.

      • Gravest was the first one I recommended, though I went on to recommend his more recent work as well.

    • Happy New Year, Liberal Dave! Similar to what you describe, I know of two towns where cars were stolen from homes because they were unlocked AND THE KEYS WERE IN THE IGNITION! My guess is these sheeple feel very well protected by the police. That’s a good thing, but they have been lulled into a state of complacency and a false sense of security. They have really gone overboard when it comes to ease and convenience. Just leave those keys in the ignition so you don’t have to carry them, or take a chance on losing them. These sheeple are dumb and lazy, but they probably vote, and they are good at making money, because these were upscale neighborhoods.

      • Here’s how my involvement in this started. We’ve not had any muggings or residential burglaries by forced entry, though the other things I mentioned have been going on for at least a couple of years. The most recent event, which got the current discussion started, was someone’s car being stolen (and the victim has cagily resisted several inquiries about how the thieves were able to take it; my guess is that it was parked outside with the keys left in it). In the course of that discussion, one person brought up keeping a gun and said, which chilled my bones,

        “Really tired of all these robberies and car stealing bandits! Let them try my house, just once! I can promise if my dogs don’t get them first, my gun will! When I took my CHL class, the instructor said we are to shoot to make them stop whatever it is they are doing.”

        There haven’t been any robberies (generally, holdups or muggings) and only one car theft (and, again, no residential burglaries involving entry by force). I didn’t question whether the CHL instructor really said that (though I desperately hope he did not). Instead, I brought up the possible civil and criminal legal problems attendant to uninformed use of firearms and made the recommendations I mentioned above, knowing that the legitimate uses of deadly force will be addressed in those books.

        Of course, someone immediately replied, in effect, “I don’t need no more book larnin’, I’d rather be tried by 12 than carried by 6.” Jesus wept. Fortunately, a couple of others got the point. I would’ve recommended Mas’ courses, too, but I felt like I was just pushing my luck recommending a little reading.

      • Liberal Dave,

        It’s sad and chilling to hear you quote that person who is willingly ignorant of the law. Plus he is a bad example of a gun owner. Think about how many avenues of knowledge are open to him. He could ask you, or a cop, or a firearms instructor, phone an authority, watch gun shows on TV, or YouTube, or read a book. But instead he twists the words of an instructor into something he wants to believe. Yes, we really are living in the day of “smart machines, stupid people.”

  23. Hmmmmm, yes, the chilling effect the bump stock ban may bring to accessories of other types is only an election cycle away. Surely items that improve the shooter’s control and accuracy, such as arm braces and night sights, would be hailed as positives in scenarios with numerous bystanders present, wouldn’t they? What about tactical flashlights and night vision? Protective gear?

    What we do know for certain is that anti-gunners have no problem twisting and constraining facts to protect their arguments. They are loud and have lots of money. We cannot let their challenges go unanswered. Now, excuse me while I talc up my SB arm brace for installing on my new AR pistol. Merry Christmas and Happy New Year to ME! Or, should I say, ‘me too’?

  24. >In theinterest of perspective: bump stocks were used in exactly ONE atrocity, the Las Vegas massacre of 2017.
    Do we actually know that?

    LVMPD’s multiple official “timelines” make their competence questionable at best. They’ve had too many stories and walked back too many claims for their unsupported word to be worth anything… and since that’s almost all we have, we essentially know almost nothing.