yukonjasper wrote:Do we really want to die on the Bumpstock Hill?
They are a fun gimmick for sure, but I can't see going to war over something as inconsequential as that. Whether that particular toy is legal isn't my litmus test for how hard anyone is working. Ive never seen a convincing argument made to keep them except for the classic MALON LABE hardcore 2A there should be no restrictions on anything, ever by anyone. Which is not at all realistic. I'd rather save the powder and the time for serious issues. That's my $.02, flame suit on for all the big" L" Libertarians who live in an idealized universe that most likely will never return. I, personally, am willing to trade bumpstocks for high cap magazines - I know, slippery slope, what's next, but within the context of existing laws, i haven't heard one convincing argument made for keeping bumpstocks legal.
Please convince me.
Bottom line is, I'd rather have the NRA than not have the NRA.
Because if we don't fight this, then we're agreeing that accessories are something that can be banned.
Because if we don't fight this, then we're saying that a bump stock ban is going to actually to do something to lower violent crime with a firearm.
Because if we don't fight this, we're saying that the ATF has the legal authority to regulate something that in statute they have no such authority to regulate.
Because if we don't fight this, the anti's will take those resources and move on to their next target.
I want them to have to fight tooth and nail for every single inch - on everything that's out there. The longer we hold the line on current law, the more we expand gun rights when we have the votes, the harder it is for them to get to the stuff they really want. Registration, AWB, magazine restrictions, gun owner licensing, and more.
Bryan