Skip to content

Donald Trump bans bump stocks through executive fiat

December 18, 2018

  Back in February Donald Trump directed then Attorney General Jeff Sessions to ban bump stocks after the man we have been told killed all those people in Las Vegas allegedly used one. Since that time the Trump administration has been working on a new rule to carry out the President’s wishes, and today acting Attorney General signed a new rule which bans bump stocks be reclassifying them as machine guns–something even the Obama administration felt was not necessary to do. 

  Here is more:

The Trump administration Tuesday banned bump stocks, the firearm attachments that allow semi-automatic weapons to fire like machine guns and were used during the worst mass shooting in modern U.S. history. 

The regulation was signed Tuesday by Acting Attorney General Matthew Whitaker. It will take effect 90 days after it is published in the Federal Register, which is expected to happen Friday.

  Donald Trump had urged the Congress to ban bump stocks but when they failed to do so the President, in Obama-esque fashion, grabbed his pen and and phone and did it on his own. Before this rule went into effect the ATF had already ruled it would take a new law from the Congress to do this:

The amended regulations reverse a 2010 ATF decision that found bump stocks did not amount to machine guns and could not be regulated unless Congress changed existing firearms law or passed a new one. 

And on top of that owners are required to turn them over or face the consequences if they are found:

Bump stock owners will be required to either destroy them or surrender them to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, a senior Justice Department official said.

Investigators expect most owners will comply with the new rule and ATF will take action against those who don’t, the official said.

  I did not approve of Barack Obama creating new laws by executive fiat when he was President and I fail to see the difference here, this is unacceptable to me. Do you think I am being a little harsh? If so ask yourself what you would be saying if Barack Obama had ordered Eric Holder to do the same.

malo periculosam libertatem quam quietum servitium

10 Comments leave one →
  1. Dr. Jeff permalink
    December 18, 2018 9:35 pm

    This is not a good precedent. If this Executive Order isn’t knocked down in court, there will be serious trouble with in the future. Every Executive Order that is used to get around Congress or some bureaucrat, increases the power of the government and whoever is in control of it at any given time.

    I’m assuming Trump actually believes in the cause, because he gets no political points for it. The Anti Gun Libs will hate him no matter what he does and this EO damages a fair portion of his voter base.

    A bad deal all around.

    Liked by 1 person

    • December 19, 2018 6:14 am

      I couldn’t agree more! I don’t actually have a problem with bump stocks being made illegal but rather with the way this was done. If this stands there is nothing to stop the next President from taking this even further with guns and it is dangerous.


      • Dr. Jeff permalink
        December 19, 2018 5:16 pm

        The bump stocks are relatively minor. The problem is one of spreading, unchecked Presidential power. I didn’t like it when Obama made a point of setting the precedent and I don’t like it when Trump does the same thing.

        My famous Hollywood Liberal Cousin once said that what the U.S. needs is a “Great Leader” in the mold of Roosevelt or Churchill. I responded that Stalin, Pol Pot and Mao Tse Tung were also considered “Great Leaders”.

        Even if I trust the current occupant of the Oval Office to use the power wisely, that doesn’t mean I will trust the next one and the precedent has been set.

        Liked by 1 person

      • December 19, 2018 8:04 pm

        What bothers me most about this is how his supporters seem to be okay with the way he did this when we know they would be screaming bloody murder if Obama did it this way.
        I agree with you about this being bad precedent, we know if a Democrat wins in 2020 he or she will take this to the next level, this will just be the beginning.


  2. December 18, 2018 9:41 pm

    Supreme Court Will Consider Case That Could Help Undermine Administrative State

    Federal Lawsuit Filed Challenging Trump Bump-Stock Ban; Injunction Sought

    The Unconstitutional Bump Stock Ban and What to do About it

    Liked by 1 person

    • December 19, 2018 6:15 am

      This is going to be fought and one thing we have seen before is that there is always a judge out there who will overturn Trump’s executive actions. It will be interesting to see if this one gets overturned as well.


  3. December 19, 2018 8:48 am

    First they came for the bump stocks… Truthfully I find no reason for them. It makes the hitting the target a lot less effective, often causes the gun to lock… if Trump can ban this, then the precedent is set.
    Honestly, I wouldn’t be surprised if Trump is getting sick of the whole thing. Case in point the border wall. The GOP will do nothing to support him.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Dr. Jeff permalink
      December 19, 2018 5:21 pm

      It is the precedent that is dangerous. Bump stocks are basically a toy with a very limited practical purpose. The precedent of using Executive Orders as an alternate to legislation is the real problem.

      Liked by 2 people

    • December 19, 2018 8:06 pm

      I agree with you Bunkerville and with Dr Jeff, the bump stocks are a minor issue and I would bet most people never even heard of them before, but it is what will come next after Trump is out of there.



  1. Donald Trump voices support for ‘red flag’ gun control laws | America's Watchtower

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: