I am

I am SUPER WORRIED about this - just the precedent it sets - not for guns but for ANYTHING!! It must be found unconstitutional. Otherwise, if they can call something you already possess "illegal" and order you to destroy it, what's next? Gas and diesel powered vehicles? If this is upheld, anything goes. Next President doesn't like rap or country music? Destroy those albums. It is BAD BAD BAD precedent.

I'm starting to see yours and Duck Hunters point on this. If it came to a vote , i would vote against the ban. But it is not up for a vote, so how can we fix this? I support the NRA Nd TSRA financially. What else can be done?

Frank Zappa vs the PMRC suddenly comes to mind. As does the movie "Running Man".

That�s my biggest issue with this. It can be challenged in court, but that�s it. NRA can lobby against it, obviously, but I�m not sure how effective that would be (or if they�re even interested in doing so). Other than that, I don�t know how much else can be done.

I�m not defending bump stocks (I�ve never used one and have no interest in doing so); it�s the principle of it and the precedent it sets.

Edit: NRA supported restrictions on bump stocks.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/05/us/las-vegas-shooting.html

Simple fix...make full-auto legal (no need for special licensing).

It's none of the governments business if I have guns...let alone what kind...or what I do with/to them. If I want to use a fully automatic weapon to waste $5,000 in ammunition to mow down a tree on my property because it has a funny lean to it that I'm not comfortable standing under with a chainsaw....Why not?

The laws should only be for what/how/where it is used/displayed in public.

I am pro-background checks and giving more rights for dealers to discriminate.

The bottom line is to keep weapons out of the hands of criminals. Laws like this only impact the law abiding.

they have already told me I cant have anti-aircraft missiles and I cant even bury landmines on my OWN property? It must stop here, I worry about my children having to live in a world where the govt can tell them they cant have
a gun that shoots acid. slippery slope.

One of the first things you learn in law school is that you can't be held liable for something that was not illegal at the time of purchase/action, etc. So that is why when zoning changes non-conforming properties cannot be ordered to be torn down. But that's what is happening here. And/or it is a governmental taking without due process (compensation).

they can pull you over, take all your money and not charge you for anything, so theres that.

they can pull you over, take all your money and not charge you for anything, so theres that. I was finally on the same side of an argument with soggy. Then he had to somehow drag the cops into it and ruin it.

At one point in this country it was legal to purchase and own another human being. Then collectively the nation decided that was probably not a good idea. So then it became illegal. I don�t think you were allowed to keep all the slaves you bought while it was legal, but I could be wrong.

Apples & oranges. Those Constitutional amendments changed the status of slaves from property to people. You can only own property. If this latest rule changed the status of bump stocks from property to people, then I'd agree with you.

I hope they have beer in the FEMA camps.

This is not a good analogy for several reasons, but Zeek is right on the legal front.

Congress isn�t passing a law to ban bump stocks. The Trump administration is issuing a decree via the ATF.

Did you ask for permission, or get caught with something? Who is they? Hook me up with your SAM dealer.