The Feinstein Bumpfire Bill

As usual with the Senator, we being with a lie:

No, it is not preventing or even regulating “automatic fire.” A firearm is defined to be an automatic when one pull of the trigger results in two or more cartridges are fired. Semi Automatic is only one cartridge fired per pull of the trigger. Bumpfire devices simply accelerate semi automatic fire by means of the natural recoil of the weapon. It is a gadget.

Net we have:

Now, let us not forget that this will probably be sent to the ATF for enforcement and this agency has the propensity to be very creative with its interpretation of the law when creating regulations.

Will the ATF consider a simple trigger job as “accelerating the rate of fire”? First off the gate is the many people with AK clones that switched their crappy East Block triggers with US Made parts which provide a smoother and quicker pull. ATF can very well say that those rifles are illegal… because they can. And in case you missed it, the bill does not allow grandfathering. If you own an AR, you should be butt-clenching by now.

And to demonstrate that she does not know what the frig is she making legislation about, Senator Feinstein makes and exception for the government.

“This is the FBI Director. Say, let’s get rid of our fully automatic AR rifles and buy semi auto versions with bumpfire devices attached to them. Apparently they are better according to Senator Feinstein.”

PS: I almost forgot, here is the text of the bill.

8 Replies to “The Feinstein Bumpfire Bill”

    1. The exercise is to pass a law; enforcement is irrelevant.
      I believe “part for” would include pieces of wire, since that’s about all you need (plus a minute or two with a pair of pliers) to make a trigger crank.
      Sanity? We don’t need no stinkin’ sanity!




      0



      0
  1. Looking forward to the day the este@med senator fatschwein gets locked up. Maybe her and fatassed hitlery could share a cell. They both like pussie.




    0



    0
  2. As usual with bills like this, the question is whether this steaming pile of donkey turds should be attributed to malice, or merely to ignorance.
    I would say malice, for two reasons. One, Feinstein’s track record which is entirely clear about her intentions. Two, that paragraph (2). If the goal were just to prohibit bump stocks and trigger cranks, that paragraph would not be needed. But since, as worded, it could be taken to put every single US resident in jail — after all, we all possess wire and rubber band and the like, right? — the conclusion is that the bill is intended to be very broad and therefore section (2) is actually necessary.




    0



    0
  3. Something truly comical: in a vain attempt to make this look like a Constitutional act, the words “in interstate trade” are sprinkled throughout. But what do you make of “possess… in interstate trade”? The concept makes no sense at all. No surprise, given the author.
    This of course also means that under this bill (going by the words on the paper) it remains perfectly legal to make and sell these devices so long as they never cross state lines. But in the real world, unfortunately, good luck with that argument…




    0



    0

Feel free to express your opinions. Trolling, overly cussing and Internet Commandos will not be tolerated .

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.