WelcomeUser Guide
ToSPrivacyCanary
DonateBugsLicense

©2024 Poal.co

354

(post is archived)

[–] 1 pt

Which president banned the bump stock?

[–] 1 pt

None. It never happened. Trump foolishly let the ATF reclassify bumpstocks as machine guns. Courts later overturned it. Trump was apathetic towards guns his entire presidency which sucks because that was the shot we had to get the bullshit unwound. I don’t care about being mad at Trump for not fighting for gun rights or liking Israel too much or whatever, but he didn’t ban bumpstocks.

[–] 0 pt

https://www.atf.gov/rules-and-regulations/bump-stocks

On December 18, 2018, Acting Attorney General Matthew Whitaker announced that the Department of Justice has amended the regulations of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF), clarifying that bump stocks fall within the definition of “machinegun” under federal law, as such devices allow a shooter of a semiautomatic firearm to initiate a continuous firing cycle with a single pull of the trigger.

The Final Rule The rule will go into effect March 26, 2019; 90 days from the date of publication in the Federal Register.

The final rule clarifies that the definition of “machinegun” in the Gun Control Act (GCA) and National Firearms Act (NFA) includes bump-stock-type devices, i.e., devices that allow a semiautomatic firearm to shoot more than one shot with a single pull of the trigger by harnessing the recoil energy of the semiautomatic firearm to which it is affixed so that the trigger resets and continues firing without additional physical manipulation of the trigger by the shooter.

Access the final rule in the Federal Register

What To Do Current possessors of bump-stock-type devices must divest themselves of possession as of the effective date of the final rule (March 26, 2019).

One option is to destroy the device, and the final rule identifies possible methods of destruction, to include completely melting, shredding, or crushing the device. Any method of destruction must render the device incapable of being readily restored to function.

[–] 1 pt

And that was overturned in the sixth circuit court of appeals. What’s your point?