Originally Posted By 1selvatico:

Ok, first the proposed changes to the definition of "machine gun"



http://i.imgur.com/VkcdZ5v.jpg



http://i.imgur.com/mueKlBq.jpg



We all know that semi-auto receivers (and bolts, usually) are made differently than their full-auto counterparts so the guns can't be readily converted into machine guns by just dropping in full-auto parts. One good example would be HK roller-locks:



http://i.imgur.com/PKdmdd6.jpg



Factory full-auto HKs have "push-pin" receivers and civilian semi's have "shelf" receivers so that standard full auto trigger groups can't be used on civilian semi auto's (yeah I know about NFA sear guns but that's another animal).



Even if you only had an FBI (semi only) trigger pack with your HK gun... even if you only had a push-pin upper that can't fire on it's own, the ATF would say you were in possession of a "machine gun" because it is a receiver that readily accepts full auto parts.



So if a bumpfire device is legally identified as a "machine gun" per the above definition, how is say, an AR-15 different than a push-pin HK receiver?



Bumpstocks are stupid-easy to install and slide right onto the buffer tube in minutes with no special tools or skills. Unless a firearm can't readily accept the "machine gun" part, the ATF would HAVE to rule a firearm is a "machine gun receiver" just as they've ruled before on the legality of semi-auto versions of full-auto firearms.



The ATF may not go that far... yet. But they could, and they'd have a pretty solid legal argument to ban and seize any firearm type that has a commercial bumpstock kit out there in the wild because it can shoot or be readily restored to shoot "full auto" with a legally declared "machine gun part" even if you don't have the part... just like a "push-pin" HK receiver. Ok, first the proposed changes to the definition of "machine gun"We all know that semi-auto receivers (and bolts, usually) are made differently than their full-auto counterparts so the guns can't be readily converted into machine guns by just dropping in full-auto parts. One good example would be HK roller-locks:Factory full-auto HKs have "push-pin" receivers and civilian semi's have "shelf" receivers so that standard full auto trigger groups can't be used on civilian semi auto's (yeah I know about NFA sear guns but that's another animal).Even if you only had an FBI (semi only) trigger pack with your HK gun... even if you only had a push-pin upper that can't fire on it's own, the ATF would say you were in possession of a "machine gun" because it is a receiver that readily accepts full auto parts.So if a bumpfire device is legally identified as a "machine gun" per the above definition, how is say, an AR-15 different than a push-pin HK receiver?Bumpstocks are stupid-easy to install and slide right onto the buffer tube in minutes with no special tools or skills. Unless a firearm can't readily accept the "machine gun" part, the ATF would HAVE to rule a firearm is a "machine gun receiver" just as they've ruled before on the legality of semi-auto versions of full-auto firearms.The ATF may not go that far... yet. But they could, and they'd have a pretty solid legal argument to ban and seize any firearm type that has a commercial bumpstock kit out there in the wild because it can shoot or be readily restored to shoot "full auto" with a legally declared "machine gun part" even if you don't have the part... just like a "push-pin" HK receiver. View Quote

We need to kill this shit with fire.

The slop isn't slippery, it's a 90* drop to the bottom. Solid argument.We need to kill this shit with fire.The slop isn't slippery, it's a 90* drop to the bottom.