(Washington, DC) — With a Bump Stock Ban hearing in the Senate Judiciary Committee scheduled for next Wednesday, December 6, it’s important Second Amendment supporters across the country know who the Republicans are on the House side who are current cosponsors of the House version of the bill.
H.R. 3999 is the House is the companion to the Senate version of the bill, S. 1916.
Lead sponsor of H.R. 3999 in the House is REPUBLICAN Carlost Curbelo of Florida.
Here a list of the 13 other Republicans in the House who have joined him as a cosponsor:
Rep. King, Peter T. [R-NY-2]
Rep. Lance, Leonard [R-NJ-7]
Rep. Meehan, Patrick [R-PA-7]
Rep. Royce, Edward R. [R-CA-39]
Rep. Smith, Christopher H. [R-NJ-4]
Rep. Paulsen, Erik [R-MN-3]
Rep. Costello, Ryan A. [R-PA-6]
Rep. Ros-Lehtinen, Ileana [R-FL-27]
Rep. Dent, Charles W. [R-PA-15]
Rep. Stefanik, Elise M. [R-NY-21]
Rep. Ross, Dennis A. [R-FL-15]
Rep. Upton, Fred [R-MI-6]
Rep. Fitzpatrick, Brian K. [R-PA-8]
Despite an attempt by the NRA to have the BATF regulate “bump stocks” which were deregulated under the Obama BATF, hard core Second Amendment organizations like GOA and others are standing strong against the banning of H.R. 3999.
Long time Second Amendment fighter GOA is opposed to the ban.
Here’s a report from Fox News:
“Gun Owners of America opposes a ban on bump stocks,” Executive Director Erich Pratt said in a statement, noting that the Obama administration’s ATF allowed the devices “to help gun owners with disabilities fire their weapons.”
Pratt added, “Any type of ban will be ignored by criminals and only serve to disarm honest citizens.” He said it’s “sad to see some Republicans quickly call for a vote on gun control.”
“Bump stocks” can be used to effectively convert semi-automatic rifles to fire so rapidly as to simulate an automatic weapon. The devices were found on guns used by Las Vegas shooter Stephen Paddock, who killed 59 and injured hundreds Sunday night.
Erich Pratt of GOA also famously produced 10 Reason Why Gun Owners Should Be Opposed to Banning Bump Stocks.
The 10 reason were published in Breitbart on October 11:
The Second Amendment says the right of the people to keep and bear arms “shall not be infringed.” Our rights are not privileges from the government that can be revoked at will. Rather, they are “unalienable”—or irrevocable—and come from the Creator, as stated in our Declaration of Independence. To support an infringement here will weaken our ability to oppose the next infringement that comes down the pike.
Speaking of greater infringements, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) has already stated that “I certainly hope” a ban on bump stocks will lead to further gun restrictions. She actually has a point. Saying “yes” to one infringement will eventually lead to more.
A ban on bump stocks will also prohibit other gun parts and magazines. Senator Dianne Feinstein’s bill (S. 1916) to ban bump stocks would ban any part or device in a firearm that “functions to accelerate the rate of fire of a semi-automatic rifle.” This language could affect competitive shooters who outfit their rifles with lighter trigger pulls, accelerated hammer drops and polished bolts. Can anyone doubt that these modifications help shooters “accelerate the rate of fire”? In GOA’s opinion, Feinstein’s bill also puts magazines at risk from anti-gun presidents, liberal judges, and progressive bureaucrats. After all, they could simply make the ridiculous argument that rather than putting one round into a rifle at a time, a magazine helps “accelerate the rate of fire” of a semi-auto. No doubt, Feinstein would prefer that we be limited to single-action, cowboy-style revolvers.
The overwhelming majority of law enforcement officers disagree with efforts to limit a person’s rate of fire, arguing that it would not make America safer. According to a 2013 survey, 95% of cops said they do NOT think that a federal ban on large capacity magazines would reduce violent crime.
A ban on any firearm part only serves to demonize firearms, when the real culprit is the Las Vegas loser who murdered 58 people. Focusing on a product misses the point entirely. Hammers, like the one this creep used to break out the windows of his hotel room, kill far more people every year than do rifles of all kinds (including AR-15s).
If we go down the road of asking who needs a bump stock or an AR-15, then where will it end? Because who really needs a box truck, like the one used to murder 86 people in France? And does anyone truly need to fertilize their lawn when such a product can be used by a Timothy McVeigh to blow up a building and kill more than 160 people? And who actually needs a box cutter, like the ones that helped murder more than 3,000 people on 9-11?
Regulating or banning bump stocks will not stop the next mass shooter. There are plenty of YouTube videos showing how one can use rubber bands or belt loops to help increase the rate of fire with a semi-automatic firearm. Will blue jeans be next on the chopping block?
Draconian gun restrictions have also proved totally ineffective in other countries, like France. In just one year, 2015, more people were murdered in mass shootings in France than in all the U.S. mass shootings during the eight years of Obama’s presidency.
Why would anyone in the gun rights community support a gun control proposal when we have been waiting for several years to get concealed carry reciprocity? Congress should pass H.R. 38 right now, as this bill would enable good people to stop most mass shooters—similar to the firefighter in South Carolina or the concealed carry holder in Arlington, Texas.
The push to ban bump stocks is nothing more than an attempt by the anti-gun Left to put points on the board. They have been unable to get any traction during a Republican administration. Gun owners would be foolish to help them get an easy win.
Do You Support National Reciprocity? CLICK HERE TO VOTE BELOW IN THE POLL