|
Forum Rules | Firearms Safety | Firearms Photos | Links | Library | Lost Password | Email Changes |
Register | FAQ | Calendar | Today's Posts | Search |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
October 10, 2017, 05:08 PM | #1 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 20, 2008
Posts: 11,132
|
Echo / Binary Triggers Not Same As Bump-Stocks...
It seems to me that it would require two completely different laws to ban bump-stocks and binary pull-release triggers, since they do two completely different things. While both devices are legal under the laws as written, the definition of machine gun would need to be completely changed, or a completely new law which no longer permits a shot to be fired on the pull and release of the trigger would have to be drafted from scratch.
Do the legal scholars here think that any new laws relating to pull-release trigger would require registration? Or would be an outright confiscatory ban? |
October 10, 2017, 05:17 PM | #2 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: April 12, 2017
Location: Ohio
Posts: 1,048
|
If you look at Di-Fi's bill it's 2 pages long and pretty broad/plain to read.
Binary triggers while I have not heard anyone mention them it's likely the same situation as bump stocks.. they simply don't know about them. Im confident binary triggers would be banned under her bill as written. But only bump stocks and trigger cranks are "named" there is still a broad stroke past that would sweep up binary triggers and possibly a lot of other things like light weight bolt carriers. Remember the Assault weapon banned killed named specific models of guns.. but it also had broad language to snare guns not enumerated. Thus I would not have much hope of binary trigger escaping the language. https://www.feinstein.senate.gov/pub...ention-act.pdf Quote:
|
|
October 11, 2017, 08:42 AM | #3 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 20, 2008
Posts: 11,132
|
Thanks, I read the Bill. I don't think that will get passed as written.
|
October 11, 2017, 09:15 AM | #4 |
Senior Member
Join Date: April 22, 2016
Posts: 2,192
|
It would be easier to define what semi-auto is then to define everything that is not semi-auto. There would need to be some caveat about "incidental" to cover accidental double shots
|
October 11, 2017, 01:43 PM | #5 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: April 12, 2017
Location: Ohio
Posts: 1,048
|
Quote:
It's broad, would likely have unintended consequences beyond just bump stocks.. but it's only 2 pages long and specifically names those evil bump stocks. It looks like they're gonna load up the plate to the point it breaks in half and nothing gets past but if DiFi's bill as written gets the floor.. I'd bet money it passes. 6 months from now probably not but in the short term.. ya It passes handily I think. |
|
October 12, 2017, 03:51 AM | #6 |
Senior Member
Join Date: June 16, 2005
Location: AZ
Posts: 3,113
|
It depends on how things shake out.
If the ATF reclassifies bump stocks as MG's, then binary triggers will have to be addressed separately. Otherwise, things like Feinstein's bill are wide enough to apply to binary triggers. One issue with Feinstein's bill it that only applies to rifles. |
October 12, 2017, 05:02 AM | #7 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 22, 2007
Location: Arizona
Posts: 5,299
|
The bill is written with so much wiggle room it is scary
Quote:
It's not what the bill SAY it can do, but what it can be TWISTED to do, and this time, it is entirely by design. |
|
October 12, 2017, 07:21 AM | #8 |
Senior Member
Join Date: April 22, 2016
Posts: 2,192
|
My biggest complaint with the discussed portion is, as well, its vagueness. For instance it may include "low recoil" ammunition as it is designed to accelerate the rate of fire.
|
October 16, 2017, 09:50 PM | #9 |
Member
Join Date: February 26, 2017
Posts: 29
|
A Bump Board can be constructed from a small board and a 1" wood rod. This Ban will include High Cap mags. There plan would bring back the Clinton AWB.
|
November 10, 2017, 01:48 PM | #10 |
Senior Member
Join Date: September 5, 2010
Location: McMurdo Sound Texas
Posts: 4,322
|
Regarding her bill, DiFi noted in political-eze there was no expectation to pass, but they intended to wave the flag:
"We’re introducing an updated Assault Weapons Ban for one reason: so that after every mass shooting with a military-style assault weapon, the American people will know that a tool to reduce these massacres is sitting in the Senate, ready for debate and a vote." (My emphasis).
__________________
Cave illos in guns et backhoes |
November 12, 2017, 12:17 AM | #11 |
Junior member
Join Date: May 16, 2008
Posts: 9,995
|
As I heard on NPR today, not the most right leaning news organization, 'we recently had a shooting where actual members of congress were targeted by a lone gun man utilizing a semi-automatic weapon and absolutely no legislative changes occurred. Who in their right mind thinks a shooting in Las Vegas is going to motivate them to act?'
I am really not all that worried about it. |
|
|