Author Topic: Done with the NRA -- NRA wants to ban bumpfire stocks & other near f/a devices  (Read 1284 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline RSR

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3148
Looks like the NRA is back to compromising gun rights like they did for most of the 20th Century.  I'm tired of these cowards giving up our rights -- I'm done with them.  My money will continue going to the Second Amendment Foundation, and I'll be taking a long hard look at Gun Owners of America as well.  I will be contact the NRA to advise them of my opinion and cancel my membership -- I'm very thankful I didn't move forward with the Life Membership I was considering earlier this year.

http://www.politico.com/story/2017/10/05/nra-calls-for-federal-review-of-whether-bump-fire-stocks-comply-with-current-law-243500
Quote
The National Rifle Association on Thursday called on the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives to review whether bump fire stocks — like the device used in this week’s Las Vegas shooting massacre — comply with current federal law.

“The NRA believes that devices designed to allow semi-automatic rifles to function like fully-automatic rifles should be subject to additional regulations,” NRA CEO Wayne LaPierre and Executive Director Chris Cox added in a joint statement.

On the NRA's history of gun control: http://time.com/4431356/nra-gun-control-history/
Quote
In the 1920s, the National Revolver Association, the arm of the NRA responsible for handgun training, proposed regulations later adopted by nine states, requiring a permit to carry a concealed weapon, five years additional prison time if the gun was used in a crime, a ban on gun sales to non-citizens, a one day waiting period between the purchase and receipt of a gun, and that records of gun sales be made available to police.

The 1930s crime spree of the Prohibition era, which still summons images of outlaws outfitted with machine guns, prompted President Franklin Roosevelt to make gun control a feature of the New Deal. The NRA assisted Roosevelt in drafting the 1934 National Firearms Act and the 1938 Gun Control Act, the first federal gun control laws. These laws placed heavy taxes and regulation requirements on firearms that were associated with crime, such as machine guns, sawed-off shotguns and silencers. Gun sellers and owners were required to register with the federal government and felons were banned from owning weapons. Not only was the legislation unanimously upheld by the Supreme Court in 1939, but Karl T. Frederick, the president of the NRA, testified before Congress stating, “I have never believed in the general practice of carrying weapons. I do not believe in the general promiscuous toting of guns. I think it should be sharply restricted and only under licenses.”

For the next 30 years, the NRA continued to support gun control. By the late 1960s a shift in the NRA platform was on the horizon.

On Nov. 22, 1963, President John F. Kennedy was assassinated by Lee Harvey Oswald. He shot the president with an Italian military surplus rifle purchased from a NRA mail-order advertisement. NRA Executive Vice-President Franklin Orth agreed at a congressional hearing that mail-order sales should be banned stating, “We do think that any sane American, who calls himself an American, can object to placing into this bill the instrument which killed the president of the United States.” The NRA also supported California’s Mulford Act of 1967, which had banned carrying loaded weapons in public in response to the Black Panther Party’s impromptu march on the State Capitol to protest gun control legislation on May 2, 1967.

The summer riots of 1967 and assassinations of Martin Luther King Jr. and Robert F. Kennedy in 1968 prompted Congress to reenact a version of the FDR-era gun control laws as the Gun Control Act of 1968. The act updated the law to include minimum age and serial number requirements, and extended the gun ban to include the mentally ill and drug addicts. In addition, it restricted the shipping of guns across state lines to collectors and federally licensed dealers and certain types of bullets could only be purchased with a show of ID. The NRA, however, blocked the most stringent part of the legislation, which mandated a national registry of all guns and a license for all gun carriers. In an interview in American Rifleman, Franklin Orth stated that despite portions of the law appearing “unduly restrictive, the measure as a whole appears to be one that the sportsmen of America can live with.”
« Last Edit: October 05, 2017, 03:04:54 PM by RSR »

Offline RSR

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3148
Re: Done with the NRA
« Reply #1 on: October 05, 2017, 03:01:28 PM »
Second Amendment Foundation: https://www.saf.org/

Gun Owners of America: http://www.gunowners.org/

Offline Voodoo

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 39
You didn't post the whole statement.
I see it as we give up bump stock but you give us national concealed carry reciprocity.

Offline Clausewitz

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 25
Sometimes the reality of our situation dictates hard choices.  Then again, it is silly.  Anyone can bumpfire without a special stock.

Offline SI VIS PACEM PARRABELLUM

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1897
I have remained an NRA member but I stopped sending any extra money after they endorsed "dingy" harry reid and robert bird crap.
I know this is them trying to do damage control but it WILL set us down a slope we'll never reclimb once it's started.
The sad reality is this looney tune in Vegas would have done his damage bump stock or not.

Offline Tenbones

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 260
I know this is them trying to do damage control but it WILL set us down a slope we'll never reclimb once it's started.

I can appreciate your concern, but it's not like the left just started yesterday trying to take away our gun rights. They're not going to stop regardless of what we do.  If we can get a concession on some other piece of worthwhile gun legislation then I don't have any problem conceding them a useless device like the bump fire stock.

Offline RSR

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3148
The NRA can make the decision to give elected leaders a pass on their pro-gun scores (not including a slidefire stock ban vote in their score for this legislative session, which is what this is all about) without publicly making it sound as if their membership base that owns or opposes a slidefire/similar ban are a bunch of law breaking loony toons -- which is what their statement conveys.

I get strategic retreats -- that's what tabling legislation is.  Surrender like they're proposing here is an entirely other matter -- and by saying that bumpfire stocks should be/are illegal they're weakening the underlying, and essential, constitutional arguments for lawful firearms ownership being about more than just "sporting purposes."  Cowardly elitist sobs.

Oh, and to be clear, I DO NOT own any bumpfire stocks, gimmicky triggers, or similar.  No interest other than cowardly surrender and making it less likely that other government 2nd Amendment regulation overreach (especially anything NFA like suppressors) will be able to be rolled back in the near future -- it would have to wait until the current NRA/Congressional leadership is no more and lack of pride allows them to eat crow/label earlier positions "mistakes," which will be decades. 

Winning the presidency is EXTREMELY difficult for Republicans, and it may be years before another gun-friendly president is in office.  Elected officials and 2nd Amendment allies in Washington sitting on their hands has squandered a tremendous opportunity by failing to make swift and meaningful progress to expand 2nd Amendment rights before the shooting, and I am furious.
« Last Edit: October 05, 2017, 06:46:08 PM by RSR »

Offline M1A4ME

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2527
  • I've shot the rest, I now own the best - CZ
Anyone who has shot very many rifles knows accuracy in full auto sucks compared to semi-auto.  Bipod or not, scope/red dot or not, the more that rifle moves the more spread out the impact of the bullets will be.

I saw a video yesterday of a comparison between a veteran shooter J. Miculek and another guy.  Jerry had a semi auto AR15 and the other guy had a semi auto AR15 with a bump fire stock.  It was so very close as to who emptied the magazine first (during the discussion Jerry said he felt like the bump fire stock just barely won) but the group on the target told all.  Jerry's semi auto group, even though very nearly as fast as the bump fire stock rifle, was much better and in the center of the chest vs. all around.

I know not many people could do the same, but you get the idea.  Rifle movement (just like pistol movement) when the trigger is being pulled is a bad thing for group size or hitting the target.

Had people not been so tightly packed I don't believe the guy in the motel would have hit as many people as he did.

I don't own a bump fire stock.  I like small groups.

I don't need national concealed carry, etc.  I only drive in a couple states (been in most of the others at one time or another and don't know anyone that lives in them anyway.)  But I do realize it's a good thing for people who do travel to multiple states.

Guys, no matter what happened last weekend, the pendulum is swinging our way.  I don't know why, I just know it is.

If you don't think it is do some research on the number of states that have:

1. legalized concealed carry for their residents over the last 10 years.
2. agreed to recognize concealed carry permits from some/all other states.
3. legalized suppressors in the last 10 years.
4. legalized suppressors for hunting.

I don't own any suppressors either, but I'm pretty sure I might like to have 4 or 5 for different handguns/rifles I have.  That would make "taking out" an occasional squirrel or coyote behind the house so much easier/better.
Better to have it and not need it, than to need it and not have it.  So, if you see me walking the dogs with my SIG 556R, its okay.

Offline RSR

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3148
You didn't post the whole statement.
I see it as we give up bump stock but you give us national concealed carry reciprocity.

No, they want the ATF to ban bump stocks so that the Congress doesn't have to vote on it.  By suggesting the ban, there is zero certainty that pro-2nd Amendment forces will get anything in return.

Offline John A.

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1292
You didn't post the whole statement.
I see it as we give up bump stock but you give us national concealed carry reciprocity.

And they will get their bumpstock ban and you'll get neither.

They pulled this same crap with the '86 machinegun ban.  And that's also why I'm not an NRA supporter.  They don't speak for me.

The 2A isn't about hunting, it's not about sports.

They're the same weak kneed wussies they've always been.

Yes, this is an old ad I've been saving.  Just shows how a leopard doesn't change its' spots.

When people ignorant of guns make gun laws, you end up with ignorant gun laws.

Offline frgood

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 224
I could go with the Bump Stock ban ONLY if this ends the debate and we move onto important issues. Again, if this is the end of it.

The wheels of Government are intended to grind slowly as to dissuade knee-jerk activity. 'If we continue this path of jumping off the ship every time we hit a wave, we will certainly drown.' [this quote is mine]
It all sounded a lot funnier in my head.

Offline John A.

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1292
You know this is the end of nothing.  Right?
When people ignorant of guns make gun laws, you end up with ignorant gun laws.

Offline SI VIS PACEM PARRABELLUM

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1897
I won't go along with any ban on anything. Give them a bite at the apple and soon they'll have the tree gone to the stump. Evil will always find tools to create mayhem it's just that simple.
Till people get serious about fixing some of what actually ails society you'll never come close to stopping such attacks.

Offline Tyerone

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 642
  • Saving the planet.
Love to see a politician propose a law to make Murder really, REALLY illegal.  Maybe that would have stopped evil, not.

I'm tired of media and their libtard polical lackies blaming good people not involved in murderous acts and giving the actual murderer a free pass.  Just like the same libtard judges in Chicago ignore manditory sentances to those who use guns in crime in the name of social justice, releasing said thugs back on the street to thug some more, so too will they give true criminals a pass fo8r using full auto guns let alone bump stocks.  Absurd!  Perhaps the only law that would have an effect would be those that allow for God to come back into the mainstream.  Perhaps a reminder to at least some that human is not the almighty. We can't legislate the Sun (global warming).  Evil will pay no attention to their laws.  Its all about control.  The ends justify the means.  My press question to LV sherrif would have been, "Have any of the madman's guns been traced to Obama's fast and furious operation where he let full auto guns walk to Mexico"?  You know, in hopes they'd turn up at murder scenes so we could blame easily accessible guns in America for all crime?  Why else would they take the sting out of a sting operation?  The ends justify the means.  And yes, it was Obama, as Holder didn't really have the authority to claim executive privalege (only the POTUS does) but actually not against oversight. 

Offline Tyerone

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 642
  • Saving the planet.
Until we actually prosecute true crimes by these libtard politions, we'll just keep losing our civil rights and slip into something much less than a beacon of freedom,

 

anything