“Bump Stock’ Ban Proposed In Florida After Vegas Shootings

October 10, 2017

Little more than a week after a massacre in Las Vegas, a Florida state senator Monday proposed banning devices — known as “bump stocks” — that can be used to increase the rate of firing bullets from semi-automatic weapons.

Sen. Linda Stewart, D-Orlando, filed the bill  for consideration during the 2018 legislative session, which starts in January.

Bump stocks have drawn widespread attention since Stephen Paddock fired guns Oct. 1 from a window at the Mandalay Bay resort in Las Vegas, killing 58 people and injuring hundreds of others who had gathered for a country-music concert.

Paddock, who also killed himself, had modified weapons to make them fire more rapidly.

Stewart’s bill would ban the possession and sale of bump stocks in Florida.

by The News Service of Florida.

Stock photo.


32 Responses to ““Bump Stock’ Ban Proposed In Florida After Vegas Shootings”

  1. Edward Kessler on October 18th, 2017 4:38 am

    Duke, Guess what – America is home to Americans. Multicultural or not, the right to self defense is not GIVEN by the Bill of Rights, rather it is specifically PROTECTED from infringement. If you don’t like guns, DON’T OWN ONE. If you don’t like living with guns, may I suggest a move to someplace with near total gun control, such as Mexico, Brazil, El Salvador or Honduras.

  2. Duke of Wawbeek on October 13th, 2017 10:05 am

    There is no place for guns in a multicultural society.

    I keep hearing references to Switzerland requiring a gun in every home, well guess what, Switzerland is not a multicultural society, it is the home of the Swiss people.

  3. Edward Kessler on October 12th, 2017 11:56 am

    Grand Locust – Thank you for sharing YOUR OPINION of the reason for the drop in Gun Violence while Gun Ownership and Lawful Concealed Carry has skyrocketed, but that’s all it is, an OPINION. There is no data to back up your claim that people over 50 years of age magically stop committing crimes. Meanwhile, the simple fact that that the Crime rate HAS dropped, while lawful concealed carry and private gun ownership has skyrocketed completely disproves your theory that more guns equals more crime. There IS NO data to prove that higher rates of gun ownership increases gun violence or violent crime…PERIOD.

    As for your claim that there is nothing in the Constitution that allows citizens to transport firearms, have you any idea what the word “BEAR”, as in the right to keep and BEAR arms means? It means transport or carry. Couldn’t be any clearer.

  4. Edward Kessler on October 11th, 2017 5:04 pm

    Grand Locust – Ummm, nice theory about why violent crime has been falling, but that’s all it is, a theory. You are basically saying that crime stops magically once people reach the age of 50???? You’re entitled to your opinion, but that’s all it is….your opinion. My reasoning, even if you disagree with it, clearly dismantles the mantra that more guns equals more crime. Firearm ownership and lawful concealed carry have skyrocketed in the last 20+ years, and violent crime rates have plummeted. Making the case that more guns equals more crime just doesn’t hold water – Sorry.

    The rest of your post is even more bizarre. You believe the Constitution allows us to own firearms but not to transport them? What do you think “to Keep and BEAR” means??? I’ll help you – BEAR means to carry or TRANSPORT.

  5. Grand Locust on October 11th, 2017 10:41 am

    Sorry, but the crime rate was reduced by simple demographics. The largest bubble of population has been the baby boomers who when the were less than 15 had low crime rates, but crime rates skyrocketed when they entered young adulthood and continued into their early fifties when a very defined drop off which all criminologist agree an aged population sees a drop in crime. The idea of everyone having a gun reducing crime is idiotic. However, until they amend the second amendment every citizen has the right to bear arms, and if I have a bump stock in my home for my protection, I believe the supreme court has made it clear that should be legal. Our problem with weapons is transport. There is nothing in the constitution which allows a citizen to transport weapons in public unless part of a well formed milita. It is simple. Let me keep whatever firearms I desire in my home, but do not let me walk in public or transport the same by car unless they are not on the banned weaponry list. So my bump stock in my home is legal. A bump stock in a vehicle is not. This is not liberal or conservative it is strict construction of our founding father’s constitution, and it does not matter that the second amendment was really about allowing armed militias to track down run away property.

  6. Sedition on October 11th, 2017 9:41 am

    @CW, your definition of NEED is dubious at best, but I have something that trumps (no pun intended) your NEED…my RIGHTS.
    @Thor Odinson, Politicians are not afraid of our firearms? Then why do they walk around with such well armed security that often carry weapons that we civilians are not normally “allowed” to have?
    Yes, you need a license, and blah, blah, blah for automobiles because they are a privilege not a right.
    The truth of the matter is, you anti-2ndA crown don’t give one whit about the numbers of preventable deaths each year. Pretty consistently, year after, the list is the same. By June of 2016 in the USA, over half a million lives were lost due to abortion., Tobacco deaths at almost 170,000, obesity sat at almost 150,000 deaths, medical errors at just over 115,000, on and on and on. At the bottom of the list, coming in with 5,276 deaths by all guns…statistically a blip on the radar. Blunt objects like hammers, fists and feet took more lives than firearms! You don’t really care about the number of people killed, you only care about the METHOD in which lives were lost. The leftist party agenda and rampant hoplophobia are clear and obvious. Why are you not as, if not more, outraged by the methods that cost more American lives than firearms? Is that in any way logical, or are you all blood-dancing in an emotional response?

  7. myrightsalso on October 11th, 2017 8:46 am

    The government, laws or restrictions will ever be able to stop evil. Anyone that took the time, effort and knowledge to plan that attack was not suffering from mental illness. JUST plain EVIL. No amount of laws or government will ever be able to protect people for someone that is hell bent on destroying them. Any thing can be used as a weapon. Stop blaming the guns, rounds, the hotel security and giving the Mental Ill a bad name. This man was just evil.

  8. Edward Kessler on October 11th, 2017 7:07 am

    Robert – The STANDARD Magazine that is issued with modern semi-automatic handguns is typically 13-17 rounds/ Are you aware how long it takes to change a magazine? The total time to fire three 10-round magazines versus two 15-round magazines is so close, there is virtually no difference. If criminals can be armed with STANDARD 15-round magazines to come rob me, then I should be allowed to have the same capability. Also, there are many documented cases where multiple attackers were thwarted because the intended victim was able to shoot several times at each thug.

  9. Edward Kessler on October 11th, 2017 7:03 am

    Tom – You state that “This problem continues to get far worse with each passing year”. Typical uninformed Liberal nonsense. The Violent Crime Rate in the United States has been DECREASING for the last 25 years, and is now at historic low levels. Please feel free to google it yourself. As for Countries with “more sensible Gun laws” having lower violent crime rates, please check your “facts”. Four of the Countries with the most stringent Gun Control (Brazil, El Salvador, Mexico and Honduras) have all the “sensible” gun control regulations you folks carry on about, background checks, waiting periods, limits on ammo purchases, one-gun-a-month limits, total handgun bans, etc. and have MUCH HIGHER Violent Crime and Gun Violence rates than the US. Just because you think something should be true doesn’t mean it is.

  10. Wilykyote on October 11th, 2017 5:23 am

    How / why were hand grenades done away with ? If we all had maybe a hundred
    of them plus a launcher would we be really safe then ? Unfortunately life kinda just
    teeters on the edge……driving is more than dangerous…..heart attacks and strokes
    can instantly change everything…….cancer is a beast and the list goes on and on.
    We ( American’s) have the right to arm ourselves for protection…..I’m sure thankful our predecessors provided that for us. I am also pretty sure they
    (Our predecessors) had no idea of how we’d evolve nor how our
    population would expand and change. Common sense should prevail in our
    existence ( every facet of life ) but unfortunately it doesn’t. Somehow stupidity
    has taken a foothold and has become pervasive!

  11. john on October 11th, 2017 3:59 am

    I believe we should lobby for full-auto and selective fire rifles, with a grenade launcher, and a RPG would be nice, but if we have to give something up at least make the left give something up in return…let’s be smart about it.

  12. Robert on October 11th, 2017 12:59 am

    I can’t believe I’m thinking this, but right now it seems we need more protection from ourselves than the government

  13. david lamb on October 10th, 2017 11:15 pm

    The 2nd Amendment was put in the constitution to protect all Americans from a government control of its citizenry.
    America can never be overthrown because of the American hunter/ sportsman which is the largest Army in the world. The second largest Army is the Minnesota and Wisconsin enthusiast. I think the US military is 3rd. To control Americans the 2nd amendment has to be destroyed,
    The NRAA, while powerful is not controlling gun laws. “We the people are”.
    As long as we stay strong liberals will not get their way.

    You say tyranny will never happen in the US>…. LETS MAKE SURE IT DOESNT….That is why the 2nd amendment is in the constitution.

  14. Grand Locust on October 10th, 2017 11:11 pm

    I should be able to have a 50 cal. The ISIS milita, the Sunni milita, and the Shia Militia all can have 50 cal, but in America where we are told we have a right to bear arms and it is all an illusion. Now they want to take more of our guaranteed rights away. Stop taking our gun rights away.

  15. Thor Odinson on October 10th, 2017 10:48 pm


    You’d think with all the automobile deaths annually, there would be some sort of regulatory testing, qualification, and licensing procedures before owning or operating one.

    Politicians aren’t afraid of your guns. The NRA pays them all very well to shut up and tolerate an arbitrary number of “acceptable” gun deaths every year.

    I am an armed Democrat and all this wrapping yourself in the 2nd Amendment garbage is what keeps civilians dying every year. It would just be a damn shame to implement some common sense solutions in order to save some lives. But it didn’t happen to you, so out of sight out of mind, right?

  16. CW on October 10th, 2017 8:38 pm

    “I guess it’s time to begin the ban on automobiles and doctors since they kill FAR more people a year than all rifles combined.”


    There’s a difference, we NEED automobiles and doctors, we don’t NEED bump stocks… unless you want to mow people down of course.

  17. Jim on October 10th, 2017 6:19 pm

    @Tom – The USA doesn’t havs the most mass shootings. There are actually several countries that surpass us. Additionally, “more laws, more laws” isn’t the answer, either. Just look to Chicago, LA, and St. Louis for proof of that. The over-abundance of legislation, particularly as a knee-jerk, only hurts law-abiding gun owners.

  18. Robert on October 10th, 2017 5:40 pm

    Great news. Now if we can just get magazines with more than 10 rounds outlawed as well.

    For those fussing about their rights to bear arms, give me some reasoning for why you think all citizens (including the crazies) need to be able to own these types of weapons. How many lives have high capacity magazines saved in the last 10 years, because they seem to be used in most of the high profile mass shootings.

  19. Robert on October 10th, 2017 5:38 pm

    Great news. Now if we can just get magazines with more than 10 rounds outlawed as well.

    For those fussing about their rights to bear arms, give me some reasoning for why you think all citizens (including the crazies) need to be able to own these types of weapons. How many lives have high capacity magazines saved in the last 10 years, because they have sure taken many lives.

  20. Phil on October 10th, 2017 5:24 pm

    You can bump fire almost any semi auto rifle with no need for a “bump stock”. It’s really disappointing that people don’t do any research into what they are talking about. And here comes the drum beat of people saying “let’s just ban them”.

  21. jp on October 10th, 2017 4:59 pm

    Let’s take the emotion out of the discussion and insert some facts.
    Do an internet search and learn that countries with the most death by gunshot are the countries with the most restrictive gun laws to a complete ban on civilian gun ownership.
    The US would have a much lower incident of gun violence and death but for a few cities that have an almost complete ban on gun ownership.
    Incidently those cities that ban guns and still have the highest rate of gun violence are all controlled by Democrats.
    It’s hard to hide the truth……

  22. Micah on October 10th, 2017 4:18 pm

    I wonder how many barrels are getting melted by folks in a rush to get one before/if they’re banned.

  23. sam on October 10th, 2017 2:33 pm

    this guy was crazy. he was also very smart. an elevated position over a crowd of 20,000 people. it didn’t require aiming with an automatic weapon. i’ve used a bump stock and it is fun. also a waste of ammo. you can’t aim with it. with people standing shoulder to shoulder he didn’t have to aim. the same effect could have been done with a IED, and he could have gotten away. he didn’t want to get away.

  24. heba franklin on October 10th, 2017 2:05 pm

    i agree NRA

  25. Tom on October 10th, 2017 1:04 pm

    Some may not know that we as a country have a heck of a lot of mass shootings (the most) and just plain gun incidents compared with other countries that have more sensible gun laws. This problem continues to get far worse with each passing year and a solution needs to be found before the majority of the population starts saying repeal and replace the 2nd Amendment. Like it or not there are two major parties in this country with radical different views on how guns should or should not be governed and once a breaking point is meet with the majority of the populace who do not own guns, laws will change..

  26. mike on October 10th, 2017 11:01 am

    “shall not be infringed upon”

    guess we know who will be voted out the next go round. bye Linda! :)

  27. NRA Member on October 10th, 2017 9:24 am

    This is a joke, the man owned two planes that he could have easily flown into the crowd and caused even more deaths than he did with the guns. When a person gets a DUI, you take his drivers license, you don’t take everybody’s drivers license away. My Rights and 2nd amendment will not be infringed on.

  28. jp on October 10th, 2017 8:52 am

    Amazing how some people let irrational fears dominate their actions!
    Anything to do with guns make some people crazy!
    Why guns when pools kill more small children or many other everyday things that get a pass?

    Bump stocks on rifles do increase the amount of shots that can be fired in a given period of time by a small margine, but at the same time drasticly decreases accuracy.
    The difference in speed of shooting a bump fire stock and shooting single shots with one pull of a trigger isn’t near as great as non shooters may think.
    Shooting a rifle at distances of say 100 yards distance or more with a bump fire stock, it is very difficult to hit a target.
    Shooting a rifle with controlled single shots it is fairly easy to hit a given target for most shooters to at least 400 yards, and many shooters much farther.

    Banning bump fire stocks is just another way to appease the uninformed.

  29. Matthew B on October 10th, 2017 8:46 am

    1. Criminals don’t obey laws.
    2. This would not affect the bump stocks already in criminal hands.
    3. This is a part that can be made fairly easily by criminals.

    Therefore, it is a pointless act by a politician to appear to be doin something constructive.

  30. Kevin Stead on October 10th, 2017 8:27 am

    I would support a bill like this. As a Marine Corps veteran, I appreciate the enthusiasm of people wanting to fire automatic firearms. I do not see where anyone would need to possess an automatic firearm or to make a firearm automatic short of the entertainment of shooting that kind of firepower. I also would not want to rob those enthusiasts of that hobby and feel it would be best regulated in a safe firing range environment where those hobbyists could rent time on the range and fire a weapon owned by the range.

  31. Sedition on October 10th, 2017 8:02 am

    Well, I guess it’s time to begin the ban on automobiles and doctors since they kill FAR more people a year than all rifles combined.
    Stupid liberals still trying to stoke the idea that these types of guns “have no sporting or hunting purpose”. Ummm, yea. Go back to middle/high school and relearn the Constitution. Read the writings of the founders. Learn the real reason POLITICIANS fear the Second Amendment. Keep them in fear.

  32. Local Floridian on October 10th, 2017 7:09 am

    This gun didn’t kill anybody, the person pulling the trigger did. This is like banning aircraft because of what happened on 911, twin towers!

Have a comment on this story?

We welcome your comments on this story, but there are some rules to follow::

(1) Be Nice. No comments that slander another, no racism, no sexism, no personal attacks.

(2) No Harrassing Comments. If someone says something bad about you, don't respond. That's childish.

(3) No Libel. That's saying something is not true about someone. Don't do it.

(4) Keep it clean. Nothing vulgar, obscene or sexually related. No profanity or obvious substitutions. Period.

(5) NorthEscambia.com reserves the right to remove any comments that violate our rules or we think to be inappropriate. We are not responsible for what is posted. Comments may not appear right away until they are approved by a moderator.

(6) Limit your comments to the subject in this story only, and limit comments to 300 words or less. Do not post copyrighted material. Comments will not be added to stories that are over 30 days old.

(7) No posts may advertise a commercial business or political group, or link to another commercial web site or political site of any kind.