Calguns.net  

Home My iTrader Join the NRA Donate to CGSSA Sponsors CGN Google Search
CA Semiauto Ban(AW)ID Flowchart CA Handgun Ban ID Flowchart CA Shotgun Ban ID Flowchart
Go Back   Calguns.net > POLITICS, LITIGATION AND ACTIVISM > National 2nd Amend. Political & Legal Discussion
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read

National 2nd Amend. Political & Legal Discussion Discuss national gun rights and 2A related political topics here. All advice given is NOT legal counsel.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 10-05-2017, 11:06 PM
phrogg111's Avatar
phrogg111 phrogg111 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Folsom
Posts: 739
iTrader: 10 / 92%
Default The real reason why the NRA betrayed us this week

"The NRA believes that devices designed to allow semi-automatic rifles to function like fully-automatic rifles should be subject to additional regulations. In an increasingly dangerous world..."

This quote, right here? This is the NRA betraying all gun owners.

It's not about these dumb slide fire stocks.

The NRA has just claimed that there are guns, which exist, that are capable of being fired so rapidly, that people shouldn't be allowed to own them.

They support existing machine gun laws, which are blatantly unconstitutional...

And, in their press release, following the biggest mass shooting in our nation's history, they've just said that a 64 year old millionaire, with no criminal record whatsoever, should not be able to buy "rapid fire guns"

This is the very logic that the regressive left wing will use to ban so-called "assault weapons" - followed by as many more guns as possible.

The NRA has not helped gun owners this week.No one more is convinced that the NRA is reasonable, and that we need suppressors and national carry reciprocity.

The NRA literally only helped the people who want to see me dead in the streets - not because I don't have a machine gun (which it is my right to have), but because I can't have a 5 shot revolver.

The NRA supports unconstitutional gun regulation. Therefore, they are my enemy.

The NRA can go to hell. Anyone that supports unconstitutional laws can go to hell. Anyone defending the NRA for supporting unconstitutional laws can go to hell.

Allowing unconstitutional laws to be signed in the coming weeks, like the ones the NRA supports, could literally get me killed.
__________________
Hunting is a loophole in the 2nd Amendment to the Bill of Rights.

There is no privilege to keep and bear arms.

Arms are for killing people. All other uses of an arm are illegitimate uses.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 10-05-2017, 11:23 PM
lapriester lapriester is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Cobb in N CA
Posts: 211
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Default

Then I will certainly go to hell. :-)
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 10-05-2017, 11:33 PM
TRICKSTER's Avatar
TRICKSTER TRICKSTER is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Contra Costa County
Posts: 11,802
iTrader: 15 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by phrogg111 View Post
"The NRA believes that devices designed to allow semi-automatic rifles to function like fully-automatic rifles should be subject to additional regulations. In an increasingly dangerous world..."

This quote, right here? This is the NRA betraying all gun owners.

It's not about these dumb slide fire stocks.

The NRA has just claimed that there are guns, which exist, that are capable of being fired so rapidly, that people shouldn't be allowed to own them.

They support existing machine gun laws, which are blatantly unconstitutional...

And, in their press release, following the biggest mass shooting in our nation's history, they've just said that a 64 year old millionaire, with no criminal record whatsoever, should not be able to buy "rapid fire guns"

This is the very logic that the regressive left wing will use to ban so-called "assault weapons" - followed by as many more guns as possible.

The NRA has not helped gun owners this week.No one more is convinced that the NRA is reasonable, and that we need suppressors and national carry reciprocity.

The NRA literally only helped the people who want to see me dead in the streets - not because I don't have a machine gun (which it is my right to have), but because I can't have a 5 shot revolver.

The NRA supports unconstitutional gun regulation. Therefore, they are my enemy.

The NRA can go to hell. Anyone that supports unconstitutional laws can go to hell. Anyone defending the NRA for supporting unconstitutional laws can go to hell.

Allowing unconstitutional laws to be signed in the coming weeks, like the ones the NRA supports, could literally get me killed.
No they didn't. If you can get something as simple as that wrong, who knows what else you are getting wrong.
__________________


Sent from my Ivory Tower using Moral High Ground 2.0

No messages are hidden because I am not an emotional snowflake.

DACA; Registration leads to deportation.


NRA Benefactor Member
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 10-05-2017, 11:39 PM
IVC's Avatar
IVC IVC is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Temecula
Posts: 12,689
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by phrogg111 View Post
The NRA has just claimed that there are guns, which exist, that are capable of being fired so rapidly, that people shouldn't be allowed to own them.

They support existing machine gun laws, which are blatantly unconstitutional...
Nonsense on both counts. ATF regulates full auto firearms. That's the current fact. If a new stock functionally converts a semi-auto into full auto, then it's already up to ATF to regulate it. That's what the NRA said.

This PREVENTS new legislation that would ban bump stocks.
__________________
NRA Benefactor Member
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 10-06-2017, 12:46 AM
phrogg111's Avatar
phrogg111 phrogg111 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Folsom
Posts: 739
iTrader: 10 / 92%
Default

The nation's biggest gun rights organization just had a press release, which claimed that there are weapons that fire so rapidly that normal people like you, me, and a 64 year old millionaire with no criminal record or history of mental health problems, should not be able to own them.

This is not "nonsense"

This is not "The ATF says"

This is not "no they didn't, you got that wrong"

This is fact.

The NRA is the enemy as much as the regressive left. They just compromised our rights. They're giving a victory to the regressive left, which will go along with nothing in return.
__________________
Hunting is a loophole in the 2nd Amendment to the Bill of Rights.

There is no privilege to keep and bear arms.

Arms are for killing people. All other uses of an arm are illegitimate uses.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 10-06-2017, 1:12 AM
lightcav lightcav is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 2,170
iTrader: 18 / 100%
Default

Fact is the NRA is the only thing standing between the left completely abolishing the 2A. Good luck keeping any gun rights after the NRA is gone. "Bump fire" stocks are for jokers anyway. No serious marksmen want them, they just waste ammo.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 10-06-2017, 9:39 AM
TRICKSTER's Avatar
TRICKSTER TRICKSTER is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Contra Costa County
Posts: 11,802
iTrader: 15 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by phrogg111 View Post
The nation's biggest gun rights organization just had a press release, which claimed that there are weapons that fire so rapidly that normal people like you, me, and a 64 year old millionaire with no criminal record or history of mental health problems, should not be able to own them.

This is not "nonsense"

This is not "The ATF says"

This is not "no they didn't, you got that wrong"

This is fact.

The NRA is the enemy as much as the regressive left. They just compromised our rights. They're giving a victory to the regressive left, which will go along with nothing in return.
Just one problem, that is not what they said. Just because you imagine they said that doesn't make it a "fact".
Then again, since I don't know you, there may be a legitimate reason that you shouldn't own a weapon at all, but they said nothing that would stop me from owning one.
__________________


Sent from my Ivory Tower using Moral High Ground 2.0

No messages are hidden because I am not an emotional snowflake.

DACA; Registration leads to deportation.


NRA Benefactor Member

Last edited by TRICKSTER; 10-06-2017 at 9:42 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 10-06-2017, 10:28 AM
madjack956's Avatar
madjack956 madjack956 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: ORANGE COUNTY
Posts: 2,325
iTrader: 9 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lightcav View Post
Fact is the NRA is the only thing standing between the left completely abolishing the 2A. Good luck keeping any gun rights after the NRA is gone. "Bump fire" stocks are for jokers anyway. No serious marksmen want them, they just waste ammo.
Full auto suppressive fire has its place.
__________________
Paralyzed Veterans of America www.pva.org
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 10-06-2017, 10:40 AM
superdave50 superdave50 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: Central valley
Posts: 140
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Barry said climate change was fact too
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 10-06-2017, 10:44 AM
njineermike's Avatar
njineermike njineermike is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: CO
Posts: 9,333
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Who here is a member of the NRA with voting privileges?
__________________
NRA lifetime member
2AF Defender member

When did I go from being a "citizen" to a "taxpayer"?

Jon Lovitz: I cant wait to go to a hospital run by the DMV!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kestryll View Post
Dude went full CNN...
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 10-06-2017, 10:54 AM
splithoof splithoof is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 889
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by njineermike View Post
Who here is a member of the NRA with voting privileges?
I am one with voting privileges. Have never missed an election for several decades.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 10-06-2017, 10:57 AM
71MUSTY's Avatar
71MUSTY 71MUSTY is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 5,376
iTrader: 15 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by IVC View Post
Nonsense on both counts. ATF regulates full auto firearms. That's the current fact. If a new stock functionally converts a semi-auto into full auto, then it's already up to ATF to regulate it. That's what the NRA said.

This PREVENTS new legislation that would ban bump stocks.
Exactly, ATF has already ruled twice it was legal because it does not alter the internal function of the gun and does not violate current law. NRA is lust advocating throwing it back onto ATF.

We don't need a new law making it illegal. All we need is for ATF to review it one more time and in about 6 months decide it complies with current law.

But if you would rather have a new law...
__________________
We stand for the Anthem, we kneel for the cross


We already have the only reasonable Gun Control we need, It's called the Second Amendment and it's the government it controls.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 10-06-2017, 11:03 AM
njineermike's Avatar
njineermike njineermike is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: CO
Posts: 9,333
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by splithoof View Post
I am one with voting privileges. Have never missed an election for several decades.
We are the ones who can claim to be "betrayed". Those who never supported the NRA are now coming out of the woodwork to claim betrayal by an organization they refused to join, even when offered free memberships. If anything, those people betrayed US by not helping when it was easy.
__________________
NRA lifetime member
2AF Defender member

When did I go from being a "citizen" to a "taxpayer"?

Jon Lovitz: I cant wait to go to a hospital run by the DMV!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kestryll View Post
Dude went full CNN...
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 10-06-2017, 11:12 AM
IVC's Avatar
IVC IVC is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Temecula
Posts: 12,689
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by phrogg111 View Post
This is not "nonsense"

This is not "The ATF says"

This is not "no they didn't, you got that wrong"

This is fact.
Here is the quote.
Despite the fact that the Obama administration approved the sale of bump fire stocks on at least two occasions, the National Rifle Association is calling on the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATFE) to immediately review whether these devices comply with federal law. Devices designed to allow semi-automatic rifles to function like fully-automatic rifles should be subject to additional regulations.
Point in the text where NRA supports "existing machine gun laws." Point in the text where NRA says "people shouldn't be allowed to own them," or worse, "they shouldn't be allowed to own them because they are too dangerous."

What the NRA says is that these stocks were approved by an anti-gun administration and that if there is something that doesn't comply with the CURRENT law, it's up to ATF to make such determination. Notice that NRA doesn't say these devices don't comply, just that ATF has to determine whether they do.

The last sentence says that if a rifle functions like fully-automatic rifle, it's subject to the same CURRENT laws for fully-automatic rifles. That's just stating the fact of how the regulatory authority of the ATF works.

So, the NRA states the obvious, but in a way that deflates the anti-gun calls, diffuses the movement to create *new legislation* to address bump fire stocks, and positions the debate to allow passing of pro-gun legislation including reciprocity and delisting of suppressors from the NFA, and all you can see is what the left media is telling you.

Well, good! That's the point of this press release. If you can't tell the difference, journalists and masses certainly cannot either. We'll either get pro-gun legislation out of this, or the left won't be able to blame the NRA, or both. Win-win-win if you ask me.
__________________
NRA Benefactor Member
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 10-06-2017, 11:20 AM
stevebla stevebla is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: North
Posts: 474
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Take a deep breath it's not like the NRA is proposing "assault weapons" registration. "bump fire" devices and 100 round magazines are not going to help the RKBA.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 10-06-2017, 11:20 AM
hunterb's Avatar
hunterb hunterb is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: SGV
Posts: 2,474
iTrader: 68 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by phrogg111 View Post
...The NRA is the enemy as much as the regressive left. They just compromised our rights. They're giving a victory to the regressive left, which will go along with nothing in return.
Sometimes, when I am REALLY ANGRY, I say crazy arse stupid chit too...
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnthomas View Post
...The hardest part getting rid of crap is getting started.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 10-06-2017, 11:39 AM
seabee1's Avatar
seabee1 seabee1 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: SoCal
Posts: 957
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by stevebla View Post
Take a deep breath it's not like the NRA is proposing "assault weapons" registration. "bump fire" devices and 100 round magazines are not going to help the RKBA.
God, really! I barely knew they existed, let alone knew they were legal. and 100 round mags? People got that much ammo just to burn through bumpstocking??? I don't think you could call giving these things up a betrayal. I'd call it a sacrifice in an attempt to satisfy the left. The bigger problem I see is that the left won't be satisfied until all legal firearms are made illegal, and concessions like this are a wasted on a futile attempt to sate their hunger to remove our rights from the Constitution.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 10-06-2017, 12:20 PM
BAJ475's Avatar
BAJ475 BAJ475 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Butte County, California
Posts: 1,476
iTrader: 6 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by IVC View Post
Here is the quote.
Despite the fact that the Obama administration approved the sale of bump fire stocks on at least two occasions, the National Rifle Association is calling on the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATFE) to immediately review whether these devices comply with federal law. Devices designed to allow semi-automatic rifles to function like fully-automatic rifles should be subject to additional regulations.
Point in the text where NRA supports "existing machine gun laws." Point in the text where NRA says "people shouldn't be allowed to own them," or worse, "they shouldn't be allowed to own them because they are too dangerous."

What the NRA says is that these stocks were approved by an anti-gun administration and that if there is something that doesn't comply with the CURRENT law, it's up to ATF to make such determination. Notice that NRA doesn't say these devices don't comply, just that ATF has to determine whether they do.

The last sentence says that if a rifle functions like fully-automatic rifle, it's subject to the same CURRENT laws for fully-automatic rifles. That's just stating the fact of how the regulatory authority of the ATF works.

So, the NRA states the obvious, but in a way that deflates the anti-gun calls, diffuses the movement to create *new legislation* to address bump fire stocks, and positions the debate to allow passing of pro-gun legislation including reciprocity and delisting of suppressors from the NFA, and all you can see is what the left media is telling you.

Well, good! That's the point of this press release. If you can't tell the difference, journalists and masses certainly cannot either. We'll either get pro-gun legislation out of this, or the left won't be able to blame the NRA, or both. Win-win-win if you ask me.
Here is the problem. If the ATF determines that these are machine guns, what about all those who purchased them in good faith reliance on the ATF's previous determinations. Sort of smacks of ex post facto.

And what sort of regulations does the NRA think would be appropriate? Anything that the shooter would not have satisfied? If not, they would merely restrict our 2A rights for no good purpose.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 10-06-2017, 12:46 PM
njineermike's Avatar
njineermike njineermike is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: CO
Posts: 9,333
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BAJ475 View Post
Here is the problem. If the ATF determines that these are machine guns, what about all those who purchased them in good faith reliance on the ATF's previous determinations. Sort of smacks of ex post facto.

And what sort of regulations does the NRA think would be appropriate? Anything that the shooter would not have satisfied? If not, they would merely restrict our 2A rights for no good purpose.
The ATF can change thier rulings on that (or any other) device anytime they want. All the NRA is doing is pointing out that the ATF has already ruled it as a non NFA device, and is asking them to review again under the existing laws it was already under. If the ATF decides it's an NFA device, the same rules as any other NFA device would come into play, just as though they'd reviewed it without the NRA's suggestion and changed a determination. They changed how they viewed 80% builds based on who owns the milling machine, so it could happen again on other items, with or without the NRA.
__________________
NRA lifetime member
2AF Defender member

When did I go from being a "citizen" to a "taxpayer"?

Jon Lovitz: I cant wait to go to a hospital run by the DMV!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kestryll View Post
Dude went full CNN...
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 10-06-2017, 12:54 PM
Chewy65 Chewy65 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 2,302
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

It would only be ex post facto if one was criminally prosecuted for what was done before enactment of a law. However, here the law exists and the problem is with the interpretation of existing law by ATF. There might be grounds for a civil action for a taking without compensation.
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 10-06-2017, 1:11 PM
ECG_88's Avatar
ECG_88 ECG_88 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: San Diego
Posts: 437
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Default

What I do not understand is why people think that their allies in the fight have to be perfect? SO because the NRA sold us out on Bump Fire, that makes them the enemy? What about all the other stuff they do to help, does that not balance out to show them to be better to have as an ally?

Look at WWII, Russia helped pull the German's attention away from the Western Front. What if they had not? We may not have won the war. The Russians definitely had their flaws (gulags and communism), but we definitely needed their help in WWII.

I think we should stop this crap about ending memberships and badmouthing the NRA. They help way more than this one incident hurts.
__________________
Emotional appeal is a marketing tactic and not a foundation for effective argument.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 10-06-2017, 1:23 PM
GreggieBoy's Avatar
GreggieBoy GreggieBoy is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Bay Area
Posts: 425
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Guess some people don't read the entire statement before flying off the handle and screaming about being betrayed. It wasn't a sell out at all. It was smart move pointing out that the Obama administration did nothing about bumpstocks.

Enjoy reading the posts about "how I'm not going to renew my membership". Goes right along with the belief that the NRA doesn't do anything in or for California. Wrong.

Take a deep breath, un-bunch your panties, and let this thing run it's course.
__________________
NRA Life Member
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 10-06-2017, 2:03 PM
rdtompki rdtompki is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Hollister, CA
Posts: 561
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

A "ban" via legislative initiative would be extremely dangerous offering the lefties opportunities to do more damage via the amendment process. Imagine the press the left would garner if a piece of legislation intended to "save the children" (i.e, ban bump stocks) stalled because Republicans reject a few harmless tweaks.

Tossing this back to ATF is exactly the right thing to do. I'd like to see quick action on the part of the ATF. I don't have much time behind a rifle, but I know how fast someone can operate a handgun when precision isn't required.

Short circuit the current narrative before real damage is done and focus on the societal issues that are tearing us apart.
__________________
San Benito County, CA
NRA Life Member
CRPA Life Member
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 10-06-2017, 2:12 PM
njineermike's Avatar
njineermike njineermike is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: CO
Posts: 9,333
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BAJ475 View Post
Here is the problem. If the ATF determines that these are machine guns, what about all those who purchased them in good faith reliance on the ATF's previous determinations. Sort of smacks of ex post facto.

And what sort of regulations does the NRA think would be appropriate? Anything that the shooter would not have satisfied? If not, they would merely restrict our 2A rights for no good purpose.
The ATF can change thier rulings on that (or any other) device anytime they want. All the NRA is doing is pointing out that the ATF has already ruled it as a non NFA device, and is asking them to review again under the existing laws it was already under. If the ATF decides it's an NFA device, the same rules as any other NFA device would come into play, just as though they'd reviewed it without the NRA's suggestion and changed a determination. They changed how they viewed 80% builds based on who owns the milling machine, so it could happen again on other firearms related items, with or without the NRA.

This way, if the ATF decides its an NFA device, the NRA has leverage against the antis by virtue of calling for this review, and they can also legitimately claim this tragedy could have been mitigated had the ATF previously put this item under the NFA rulings, pushing the blame to the Obama administration, and if the ATF once again decides its not an NFA item, the NRA can legitimately claim they did ask for an independent review. The hardcore antis won't accept that, but there is a talking point to say that it was a government agency under 2 different administrations ruled it wasn't an NFA item.

Either way, we win. And by "we" I mean NRA members and the NRA as an organization. If you're not an NRA member, you really have zero legitimate standing to complain one way or the other.
__________________
NRA lifetime member
2AF Defender member

When did I go from being a "citizen" to a "taxpayer"?

Jon Lovitz: I cant wait to go to a hospital run by the DMV!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kestryll View Post
Dude went full CNN...
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 10-06-2017, 2:21 PM
smak28's Avatar
smak28 smak28 is offline
GF complains about CG
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: SF bay area
Posts: 3,607
iTrader: 80 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ECG_88 View Post
What I do not understand is why people think that their allies in the fight have to be perfect? SO because the NRA sold us out on Bump Fire, that makes them the enemy? What about all the other stuff they do to help, does that not balance out to show them to be better to have as an ally?

Look at WWII, Russia helped pull the German's attention away from the Western Front. What if they had not? We may not have won the war. The Russians definitely had their flaws (gulags and communism), but we definitely needed their help in WWII.

I think we should stop this crap about ending memberships and badmouthing the NRA. They help way more than this one incident hurts.
ditto!
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 10-06-2017, 2:58 PM
BAJ475's Avatar
BAJ475 BAJ475 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Butte County, California
Posts: 1,476
iTrader: 6 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by njineermike View Post
The ATF can change thier rulings on that (or any other) device anytime they want. All the NRA is doing is pointing out that the ATF has already ruled it as a non NFA device, and is asking them to review again under the existing laws it was already under. If the ATF decides it's an NFA device, the same rules as any other NFA device would come into play, just as though they'd reviewed it without the NRA's suggestion and changed a determination. They changed how they viewed 80% builds based on who owns the milling machine, so it could happen again on other items, with or without the NRA.
No argument that they could revisit prior rulings at any time. However, with regard to 80% builds, the effect of that change was only prospective, not retroactive. But bump or slide stocks are fundamentally different because a change in their prior ruling that would make them NFA firearms would logically apply to all of those that already exist. And this causes a problem, because the law changed prohibiting the sale of newly manufactured machine guns to civilians. Accordingly, such a change would have ex post facto problems that the 80% ruling did not have.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 10-06-2017, 3:01 PM
SSGTSemperFI's Avatar
SSGTSemperFI SSGTSemperFI is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Posts: 31
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lightcav View Post
Fact is the NRA is the only thing standing between the left completely abolishing the 2A. Good luck keeping any gun rights after the NRA is gone. "Bump fire" stocks are for jokers anyway. No serious marksmen want them, they just waste ammo.
This is largely the way I feel, as well.

As far as i'm concerned, the slide fire stock is, itself, constitutional as it does nothing more than help assist in trigger reset. Same basic concept of the Tac Con 3MR. Where you start to get into legally (constitutionally and legally being identified as two separate entities in this day and age) gray area issues is with the Fostech Echo. It lies somewhere between semi automatic and select fire. The same effect can be attained without modification of anything, internal or external anyway, the inspiration for the stock, so far as I remember. Bump Firing has been around longer than i've been alive.

All three of these devices, however, are nothing more than "for fun". They hold zero life and liberty value as any responsible gun owner is not going to have something like this on a gun they grab when something goes bump in the night, in my opinion, at least.

I don't know how I feel about the statements and position the NRA has taken, as I haven't had time to find out exactly what was said for myself. I believe it was Mark Twain who said "If you don't read the newspaper you're uninformed, If you read the newspaper, you're misinformed." And it's never been more true, on both sides. We all know that CNN is a glorified tabloid establishment, however Fox News (The "Gun friendly" network) still have guests and hosts that refer to "high capacity clips" and believe that the .223/5.56 is a powerful, high caliber cartridge, the most basic of terminology that can't be gotten correct.
More than that, though, in the big-scary-gun-fearing world we live in today, some battles need be looked over with the objective of winning the war in sight. This wouldn't be the case in a perfect world, however in a perfect world, we wouldn't be having this discussion at all, and the NRA wouldn't need be a thing that has a legislative branch. From my standing, were I the head of the NRA, this would be a battle I don't believe needs have time and resources invested into. There's much bigger fish to catch for basic live and liberty 2a rights.

Last edited by SSGTSemperFI; 10-06-2017 at 3:07 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 10-06-2017, 3:05 PM
njineermike's Avatar
njineermike njineermike is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: CO
Posts: 9,333
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BAJ475 View Post
No argument that they could revisit prior rulings at any time. However, with regard to 80% builds, the effect of that change was only prospective, not retroactive. But bump or slide stocks are fundamentally different because a change in their prior ruling that would make them NFA firearms would logically apply to all of those that already exist. And this causes a problem, because the law changed prohibiting the sale of newly manufactured machine guns to civilians. Accordingly, such a change would have ex post facto problems that the 80% ruling did not have.
No one knows how such items would be handled at that point, but when fully automatic weapons were first regulated by the NFA, they weren't confiscated.
__________________
NRA lifetime member
2AF Defender member

When did I go from being a "citizen" to a "taxpayer"?

Jon Lovitz: I cant wait to go to a hospital run by the DMV!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kestryll View Post
Dude went full CNN...
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 10-06-2017, 3:19 PM
wpage's Avatar
wpage wpage is online now
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 3,400
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

The NRA is attempting to make a deal. Negotiate the bump for a win on interstate carry. This would be a win for NRA members.
__________________
God so loved the world He gave His only Son... Believe in Him and have everlasting life.
John 3:16

United Air Epic Fail Video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u99Q7pNAjvg
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 10-06-2017, 3:46 PM
dfletcher dfletcher is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Bay Area
Posts: 11,913
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by phrogg111 View Post
The nation's biggest gun rights organization just had a press release, which claimed that there are weapons that fire so rapidly that normal people like you, me, and a 64 year old millionaire with no criminal record or history of mental health problems, should not be able to own them.

This is not "nonsense"

This is not "The ATF says"

This is not "no they didn't, you got that wrong"

This is fact.

The NRA is the enemy as much as the regressive left. They just compromised our rights. They're giving a victory to the regressive left, which will go along with nothing in return.
Well, since you're not in the NRA but benefited when they did well - heck, who cares what your opinion is regarding NRA? When the soup is good you eat for free and don't say "thank you". When the soup is bad you complain? Simple solution - make your own darn soup.

I'll wait until the dust settles.

It's always been a bit of a mystery to me. President Obama did his "I respect the 2nd Amendment but ....." routine and all the anti-gunners knew what that meant. Soon as the NRA makes an oblique statement that could reference a DIAS or be designed to delay - well the free riders start moaning and groaning. Which is amusing in itself. Because it's akin to someone sitting on their *** on the sidelines telling those carrying the load "well I'm just not going to 'help' anymore."

CA is a wonderful place, isn't it? We have the "ban hi caps" gunowners and the "sue SlideFire" posters and the "I hate NRA" poster. As they say down south - bless their hearts.
Reply With Quote
  #31  
Old 10-06-2017, 3:59 PM
dfletcher dfletcher is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Bay Area
Posts: 11,913
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SSGTSemperFI View Post
This is largely the way I feel, as well.

As far as i'm concerned, the slide fire stock is, itself, constitutional as it does nothing more than help assist in trigger reset. Same basic concept of the Tac Con 3MR. Where you start to get into legally (constitutionally and legally being identified as two separate entities in this day and age) gray area issues is with the Fostech Echo. It lies somewhere between semi automatic and select fire. The same effect can be attained without modification of anything, internal or external anyway, the inspiration for the stock, so far as I remember. Bump Firing has been around longer than i've been alive.

All three of these devices, however, are nothing more than "for fun". They hold zero life and liberty value as any responsible gun owner is not going to have something like this on a gun they grab when something goes bump in the night, in my opinion, at least.
Something we should consider regarding ATF and slidefire, it also applies to our legislators. I'll mangle a line from a forbear and note that "the power to define is the power to destroy".

Let's suppose ATF were to redefine the stock in such a way as to have it covered under NFA. I suppose alot of folks would be indifferent. But is it a stretch to imagine a future ATF regulation which adds to the definition any firearm that is "readily adaptable to" the stock in question? Let's keep in mind that according to CA a less than 16" barrel all by itself is an SBS. That federally a part such as a DIAS is a "machine gun" - all by itself. The contrivances of "assault weapon" legislation by itself, in 1994 and by states, is alarming on its own.

So whether we find the stock silly (I do) or useless (I do) and something we'd never buy (ditto) we'd should be very careful about throwing it overboard. Like many others here I recall when "Saturday Night Specials" were on the chopping block and gun folks weren't so eager to defend them. Until it was learned that some Smiths and Colts would be caught up in that malleable definition.
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 10-06-2017, 6:06 PM
rplaw rplaw is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 388
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by wpage View Post
The NRA is attempting to make a deal. Negotiate the bump for a win on interstate carry. This would be a win for NRA members.
This is total hypocrisy. The NRA is against concealed carry (Peruta in the beginning). The NRA is against open carry (Nichols). The NRA is against "assault weapons" and "high capacity magazines". The NRA is now requesting review of slide fire stocks that are LEGAL with an eye towards making them ILLEGAL for those who don't pay the tax and get the stamp.

Now you say this is part of a negotiating strategy where the NRA pisses away our rights in order to achieve some smaller privilege of permitted reciprocity. What a joke.

The NRA hasn't been a friend of gun owners since the days of Al Capone. They cave and give away OUR RIGHTS while calling it a good deal for gun owners. And you think this is a good thing. Shame on you. Shame on all of you who support this tripe.
__________________
Some random thoughts:

Evil doesn't only come in black.

Life is like a discount bakery. Usually everything is just what you ordered. But, occasionally you come face to face with an unexpected fruitcake. Surprise!

There is no "I" in Team; no "Me" in sports; no "You" in life. However, there's a ton of "Wheeeeee!" on roller coasters.
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 10-06-2017, 6:38 PM
Dago Red Dago Red is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Central Valley
Posts: 316
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Giving away our rights has always been such a sound strategy for retaining any of them.

There should be no gun illegal to non-criminal citizens. Bump fire stocks don't make the rifle full auto. Full Auto you hold down and it keeps firing. Bump stocks help you pull the trigger faster.

How many could he have killed by barreling into them with a nice big bus or a semi with a trailer?

Sometimes I think stupid is the main product of the US.

Red
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 10-06-2017, 7:03 PM
RobG's Avatar
RobG RobG is online now
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Commiefornia
Posts: 4,393
iTrader: 90 / 100%
Default

Reading is fundamental. Well, at least it used to be...
__________________
*PSE Archery* *Gold Tip Arrows* *Riptide Code Red* *Magnus Broadheads* *Scott Release* *Archery Shack bowstrings* *Trophy Ridge bow sights* *Bee Stinger* *Vortex Optics* *EXO Mountain*
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 10-06-2017, 8:14 PM
packnrat's Avatar
packnrat packnrat is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 3,788
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Default

can someone please give a link to where the nra said this.
__________________
big gun's...i love big gun's
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 10-06-2017, 8:47 PM
dfletcher dfletcher is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Bay Area
Posts: 11,913
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Gee, that darn NRA ....

https://www.nraila.org/issues/assaul...rge-magazines/

http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/201...e-foolishness/

If one cares to read the NRA letter they said open carry of long guns is foolish, but they didn't support or even suggest it should be banned.

https://www.nraila.org/articles/2017...a-v-california

http://crpa.org/crpa-files-nra-suppo...ying-firearms/

Between the Democrats working to take our guns and the NRA doing the same I kind of wonder why gun rights are doing so well across the country.
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 10-06-2017, 10:32 PM
SSGTSemperFI's Avatar
SSGTSemperFI SSGTSemperFI is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Posts: 31
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dfletcher View Post
Something we should consider regarding ATF and slidefire, it also applies to our legislators. I'll mangle a line from a forbear and note that "the power to define is the power to destroy".

Let's suppose ATF were to redefine the stock in such a way as to have it covered under NFA. I suppose alot of folks would be indifferent. But is it a stretch to imagine a future ATF regulation which adds to the definition any firearm that is "readily adaptable to" the stock in question? Let's keep in mind that according to CA a less than 16" barrel all by itself is an SBS. That federally a part such as a DIAS is a "machine gun" - all by itself. The contrivances of "assault weapon" legislation by itself, in 1994 and by states, is alarming on its own.

So whether we find the stock silly (I do) or useless (I do) and something we'd never buy (ditto) we'd should be very careful about throwing it overboard. Like many others here I recall when "Saturday Night Specials" were on the chopping block and gun folks weren't so eager to defend them. Until it was learned that some Smiths and Colts would be caught up in that malleable definition.
I entirely agree with what you're getting at here, but, look at it from a different perspective.

The next two (four potentially, if midterms go well) years have been the most perfect storm, for repealing and restoring rights stripped from us long before I was born, that we have seen since 1928. There are a lot of fish to catch and fry in two years, and letting slide (no pun intended) a fight over a nonessential life and liberty accessory is acceptable in my eyes, so long as a genuine effort is made to restore rights we've lost. Giving an inch is a slippery slope, but gaining a mile (minus that inch) is a victory that you can build upon.

Some will look down upon me as I am not currently an NRA member. I simply can't afford it at the moment, I've been hit VERY hard financially and i've all but drained my bank account to help family members out with various expenses. (genuinely, my bank account is under the $100 mark at the present time, and all my paychecks currently are 100% accounted for) I call them out on their missteps, but I also give credit where credit is due. Sometimes sacrifices that aren't popular with your base need be made in order to protect your base. SB199, for example, was a compromise that the Airsoft community made, because the alternative was a law that we could not beat that would effectively have killed the hobby/sport/whatever you classify it as outright. Damned if you do, damned if you don't type of matter.

My Understanding is that the ATF can change their definition/interpretation of laws at will (someone, please correct me if i'm wrong!) but can not arbitrarily create new laws and enforce them, so regardless of the NRA saying they should review them or not, the decision to classify them as a component of a machine gun could have changed the day before this happened. Assumedly, if the SlideFire stocks are reclassified as an NFA item, it would be legal to possess said item (because the logistics of trying to confiscate them would be overbearing in the very best of situations), but illegal for it to be attached to any firearm. Same with the "Sig brace". The ATF released an (assumedly intentional) vague statement on what the Brace is and where it stands legally, then a year later(?), came through with a much more defined "yes you can shoulder it" definition after pressure for a defined answer.

So while, yes, we find them useless for life and liberty, our 2a right, and i'd even go as far as to say there's a level of loss of full control over a weapon using said stocks that i'm not comfortable with (more so than a true automatic counterpart would have), sometimes you do have to pick and choose your battles. As big as the NRA is, they're still limited by time and resources. As I said previously, though, I don't know where I stand on the NRA's position as I haven't read their statement directly from the source. What I know is what i've heard from others, and i've heard several different stories of the definition, all claiming to be absolute truth.
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 10-07-2017, 12:58 AM
Noble Cause Noble Cause is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: California
Posts: 2,151
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rplaw View Post
This is total hypocrisy. The NRA is against concealed carry (Peruta in the beginning). The NRA is against open carry (Nichols). The NRA is against "assault weapons" and "high capacity magazines". The NRA is now requesting review of slide fire stocks that are LEGAL with an eye towards making them ILLEGAL for those who don't pay the tax and get the stamp.

Now you say this is part of a negotiating strategy where the NRA pisses away our rights in order to achieve some smaller privilege of permitted reciprocity. What a joke.

The NRA hasn't been a friend of gun owners since the days of Al Capone. They cave and give away OUR RIGHTS while calling it a good deal for gun owners. And you think this is a good thing. Shame on you. Shame on all of you who support this tripe.
Wow, that's a lot of extraordinary claims regarding the NRA.

Carl Sagan popularized "Extraordinary Claims require Extraordinary
Evidence"
, however, I will settle for just your regular, everyday, Evidence.

Lets start with your assertion:

The NRA is against "assault weapons" and "high capacity magazines".

What evidence do you have that the NRA currently supports this position ?


Noble
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 10-07-2017, 3:52 AM
socal147's Avatar
socal147 socal147 is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,156
iTrader: 37 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by njineermike View Post
We are the ones who can claim to be "betrayed". Those who never supported the NRA are now coming out of the woodwork to claim betrayal by an organization they refused to join, even when offered free memberships. If anything, those people betrayed US by not helping when it was easy.
Exactly. Thank You!
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 10-07-2017, 4:14 AM
Mayor McRifle's Avatar
Mayor McRifle Mayor McRifle is online now
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Central California
Posts: 4,984
iTrader: 13 / 100%
Default

The wild, almost incoherent ranting of gun owners against the NRA makes me appreciate how difficult the NRA's job really is. For anyone who actually has the capacity to see and understand the big picture, could you imagine what the state of our gun rights would be without the NRA?

I just made another donation to the NRA on behalf of all gun owners who just don't get it.
__________________
Anchors Aweigh

Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 1:41 PM.




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Proudly hosted by GeoVario the Premier 2A host.
Calguns.net, the 'Calguns' name and all associated variants and logos are ® Trademark and © Copyright 2002-2016, Calguns.net an Incorporated Company All Rights Reserved.