View Full Version : Banning Bump Fire Stocks (and binary triggers) Do We Give the Left a Moral Victory?
RobertTheTexan
10-04-17, 14:28
I have a friend of mine who said to me, "We need to show the gun control advocates that we're willing to work with them, I think we should give them a moral victory and pass legislation banning binary triggers and bump fire stocks. It's better to lose those, which have no tactical value, than to lose our AR's. "
I responded by saying, yes, that is one way to look at it and personally I would be more than happy if the guys who invented the binary trigger and bump-fire stocks had never done so. In my mind, they have zero value. BUT, do you actually believe that if you give them (gun control advocates) bump fire stocks and even binary triggers, will they will be satiated or satisfied? No. They will not. That will be the foot in the door for them to want and ultimately get more. The adage "Give them an inch and they will take a mile" is never more true in this scenario.
I said, but above all of that, you're failing to remember one important truth. For the majority of policy makers/influencers who are pro gun-control, for them, it is not, and has never been about reducing crimes committed with firearms. It's about disarming the citizenry. So yeah, slide fire stock and binary triggers, the world would be better off without them, but I'm not willing to open the door that will likely lead to a whole lot worse in the near future. You are assuming they operate on the same moral and ethical level as you.
Back to my friends comment and the focal point of my post, he said "Better to give them a moral victory on bump-fire stocks than to give them our AR's."
What do you think and why?
Just as an observation. I have not searched for bump fire stocks.... ever. But when I type "bum" into Google, look at the word suggestions it already comes up with...
(I do use StartPage most often) just wanted to see what Google would fetch up.
https://s1.postimg.org/1nkr9abn9r/BUMP.jpg
Quoting a friend, who owns neither an AR nor likely any mil rifle, though owns a fair number of shotguns, and who, as he put it, just celebrated the 53rd annaversity of his 21st birthday. "Don't give them a ****ing inch!" He gets it. Why is it so hard for others?
titsonritz
10-04-17, 14:33
You can't give those assholes shit, **** them they are wrong.
No.
No.
No.
Find a new friend.
Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk
Doc Safari
10-04-17, 14:39
NEVER. GIVE. AN. INCH.
If we want to score a moral victory, we should point out the number of innocent people who die every year because they live in places where firearms are restricted and they cannot defend themselves.
SomeOtherGuy
10-04-17, 14:40
No.
I have no interest in or use for those things, but most of my life has been a steady erosion of 2A rights, with absolutely nothing good in return, only more attacks on 2A rights and no reduction in apparent risk of violent crime involving guns. Giving in any slight bit will simply be seen as "a good start" by those who want a full ban, a significant subset of whom seem to actually want left-wing death squads as well. Give nothing.
RobertTheTexan
10-04-17, 14:41
No.
No.
No.
Find a new friend.
Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk
LOL well the good news is after I made my points, he acknowledged the error of his way and said, "Yeah you're right, they wouldn't stop there." So he did see the light.
I'm having this argument on another gun forum. I actually can't believe I'm saying this but there are people ON A GUN FORUM willing to give up not just the slide fire. One guy is ok with giving up slide fire AND mag limit to 15 or less as long as it allows him shipping s firearm through the US Postal Service!
I seriously don't know how to react to that. Part of me thinks he's just being sarcastic and I'm not getting it.
Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk
What took her so long? California Senator Diane Feinstein’s had almost three days, and now she’s announced the inevitable…a bill to ban bump fire stocks.
Sen. Dianne Feinstein, a longtime advocate of stricter gun control measures, introduced a bill Wednesday that would ban the sale and possession of bump-stock equipment and other devices that essentially turn a semiautomatic weapon into an automatic one.
The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) told reporters Tuesday that multiple bump stocks were found in the hotel room used by the shooter, who opened fire during the Route 91 Harvest Music Festival on Sunday, killing 58 people and injuring over 500 others.
Here’s the relevant language from the bill:
Except as provided in paragraph (2), on and after the date that is 180 days after the date of enactment of this subsection, it shall be unlawful for any person to import, sell, manufacture, transfer, or possess, in or af- fecting interstate or foreign commerce, a trigger crank, a bump-fire device, or any part, combination of parts, component, device, attachment, or accessory that is de- signed or functions to accelerate the rate of fire of a semi- automatic rifle but not convert the semiautomatic rifle into a machinegun.
Again, the ATF deemed bump fire stocks to be legal firearm accessories about six years ago. Feinstein’s bill would not only prohibit bump fire stock sales to the public, but would outlaw their possession. That means tens…maybe hundreds of thousands of the items would have to be turned in or destroyed. Here we go.
Continues...
http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2017/10/daniel-zimmerman/diane-feinstein-introduces-bill-to-ban-bump-fire-stocks/
Doc Safari
10-04-17, 15:14
I'm sure the owners will be lining up to turn them in.
SomeOtherGuy
10-04-17, 15:16
One guy is ok with giving up slide fire AND mag limit to 15 or less as long as it allows him shipping s firearm through the US Postal Service!
These people need to be reminded of the "Firearms Owners Protection Act of 1986", which was labeled and billed as good for gun owners but in fact was mostly a defeat. Sure, it provided some modest legal protections for interstate travel, except that several states completely ignore it and there seems to be no legal repercussion against them. It gave up a lot and set the tone for a wave of restrictions in the following 8 years.
No. If you give them an inch, they will figure out how to take a mile. Repeal unconstitutional laws on the book instead.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I figured that it wouldn't take long.
They banning belt loops too?
Nobody ever gave up anything for me.....
I decline. F' em
I say let them ban murder.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I will not apologize for the actions of an evil man. Nor will I blame an inanimate object.
If she wants to save lives she can ban medical malpractice, drunk drivers, vehicle accidents, and industrial accidents.
If she is looking for a quick way to save 700,000 American sons and daughters, she can ban abortions.
The woman doesn't want to save lives, she wants to impose her social views.
Agreed, I suggest all start stocking up on everything, a coming storm is on the horizon.
Hello Robert............I don't think your friend understands who we're dealing with. Someone in another thread, sorry forgot who, used a line from the Terminator, which described the nature of the machine. That pretty much sums it up.
TOS has a thread specific to bumpfire rifles and a few people have made their own, from scratch. It's not rocket science. If criminals want one, they're easily made. I'd bet dollars to donuts there's even an instruction video on YouTube.
I almost voted yes with the stipulation that it be added to the share act and specific wording would be needed that would leave semi auto untouchable. But I remembered we're not dealing with reasonable people (gun grabbers) and then I remembered how easy they are to make.
militarymoron
10-04-17, 16:05
Gotta ban index fingers too, which are part of the bump fire technique. Or people who can shoot semi's as fast as full autos like Jerry Miculek.
ginzomatic
10-04-17, 16:06
What an asshat
I am looking forward to turning in all my belt loops.
Or, is it like the shoestring controversy whereby we may be allowed to keep them if they are not used in an unapproved fashion?
Ummm, no. It should be looked at like giving up the first amendment piecemeal. I'd be willing to give them the finger, but it might trigger a psycho into committing another crime.
Eurodriver
10-04-17, 16:10
We have a republican POTUS, Senate, and a House.
I emailed my senator today and told him if he votes to “send anti gun legislation to the President for signature while being unable to pass health or tax reform I would never vote for a Republican ever again”.
I mean it.
You wanna ban bumpfire stocks and triggers? Fine. But you better go ****ing nuts with the compromise. I’m talking scorched earth. Federal preemption of firearms laws. Nationwide permitless CCW. Get suppressors and SBRs out of the NFA. Repeal the Hughes amendment.
Im sick and tired of idiot gun owners and democrats alike talking about compromise like this.
A compromise is not someone stealing your car and then letting you use it on the weekends at 55mph or slower.
Bump fire stocks are just a product improved version of your trigger finger on the trigger and your thumb in your belt loop......now balance the recoil force. But maybe it's a good idea to keep non-gun lefties obsessed on stocks, that way they won't want to go after what they really want......a total and absolute ban on all things gun.
titsonritz
10-04-17, 16:19
Bump fire stocks are just a product improved version of your trigger finger on the trigger and your thumb in your belt loop......now balance the recoil force. But maybe it's a good idea to keep non-gun lefties obsessed on stocks, that way they won't want to go after what they really want......a total and absolute ban on all things gun.
The problem is EVERYTHING is just one more stepping stone to them.
The problem is EVERYTHING is just one more stepping stone to them.
Yeah I know. Lefties are evil not so much stupid. They've probably figured out already that things like bump stocks are silly toys. The wretch could have created basically the same carnage with just his tuned up trigger finger and some reasonably efficient mag c/o's.
https://www.everydaynodaysoff.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/Illustrated-Guide-To-Gun-Control.png
Yep, only one side is expected to and is in fact giving "it" up.
titsonritz
10-04-17, 16:33
They like to "compromise" and "ban" shit, ok I've got a compromise for them ban all liberals from owning guns. :neo:
They like to "compromise" and "ban" shit, ok I've got a compromise for them ban all liberals from owning guns. :neo:
If we could just get that out there, especially, maybe, after we find out that Paddock was some sort of raving lefty.
Doc Safari
10-04-17, 16:40
What we should tell the Dems is that the GOP will vote to ban bump stocks if they will vote to ban abortions in the same bill.
That will kill it.
You see, killing is perfectly okay with the democrat party as long as defenseless babies are being murdered.
Isn't she like 80?
Do they do senility tests or something?
Doc Safari
10-04-17, 16:42
What we should tell the Dems is that the GOP will vote to ban bump stocks if they will vote to ban abortions in the same bill.
That will kill it.
You see, killing is perfectly okay with the democrat party as long as defenseless babies are being murdered.
No. If you give them an inch, they will figure out how to take a mile. Repeal unconstitutional laws on the book instead.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Trade for National Conceal Carry and when that shit is in committee tack on suppressors as a Title I firearm as an amendment. Let the Dems be the ones to have to kill the evil "bumpfire stock" bill.
Let's hope she overlooks binary triggers. If she goes after those, I have no doubt she'll eventually go after electronic triggers bc they can fire faster and are more accurate (deadly). It's all nonsense.
The_War_Wagon
10-04-17, 16:46
Damn... if it ticks her off, NOW I gotta go BUY one. :rolleyes:
Nope. No compromise. No deal. The gun banners are out to f$&k us at every turn, let's not be willing participants.
These people need to be reminded of the "Firearms Owners Protection Act of 1986", which was labeled and billed as good for gun owners but in fact was mostly a defeat. Sure, it provided some modest legal protections for interstate travel, except that several states completely ignore it and there seems to be no legal repercussion against them. It gave up a lot and set the tone for a wave of restrictions in the following 8 years.
Ummm No.
The FIRST thing it did was protect you from being declared an unlicensed dealer if you sold a gun for profit.
The SECOND thing it did was allow mail order ammo, they used to keep a bound book on ammo sales.
The THIRD thing it did was allow the continued transfer of NFA weapons, they had no intention to grandfather anything.
https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?138963-H-R-3155-Racketeer-Weapons-and-Violent-Crime-Control-Act
No.
I have no interest in or use for those things, but most of my life has been a steady erosion of 2A rights, with absolutely nothing good in return, only more attacks on 2A rights and no reduction in apparent risk of violent crime involving guns. Giving in any slight bit will simply be seen as "a good start" by those who want a full ban, a significant subset of whom seem to actually want left-wing death squads as well. Give nothing.
I honestly don't know how I feel about banning the listed items. On the one hand, the folks who use them are, IMO, morons, and not good representatives of responsible use of 2nd Amendment rights, or general gun owners. On the other hand, I see the point the 'no compromise' folks try to make. However, I don't totally agree with the no compromise mindset.
Based on where you live, your life may have been a steady erosion of 2A rights, for most of us, not so bad. I'm not going to pretend that you should consider the Brady Act good news, or the assault weapon ban. With respect to the ban, it expired in 2004. No serious attempts to reintroduce/extend until Obama took office. Even then, after Sandy Hook, those efforts were unsuccessful.
The NFA still stands, but the process for SBR's and Suppressors, was streamlined, and despite 41F, which took effect in July 2016, the process is still not onerous. Suppressors, once a rarity, are now commonplace in the 42 states which allow possession.
Concealed carry, once a privilege for those in LE or those with connections, is now commonplace. In 1986 there was 1 Constitutional/Unrestricted Carry state; 9 Shall Issue; 25 May-Issue (at the whim of the Sheriff in most cases) and 16 No-Issue states. Fast forward to 2017. There are 13 Constitutional Carry states; 29 Shall-Issue; 8 May-Issue and 0 No-Issue States.
I feel for those who are still residing in May-Issue states, but 30 years ago they were in No-Issue states. I know the response is that all states should be Constitutional Carry states, and I agree. But the bottom line is as this point it is, IMO, a state's rights issue.
So I really don't see the erosion, in fact things have been on the upswing.
MountainRaven
10-04-17, 16:53
Let me just... change some things, here....
I have a friend of mine who said to me, "We need to show the gun control advocates that we're willing to work with them, I think we should give them a moral victory and pass legislation banning semi-automatic rifles and high-capacity magazines. It's better to lose those, which have no practical value, than to lose our hunting guns. "
How's that work for y'all?
We either hang together or we each hang separately.
What we should tell the Dems is that the GOP will vote to ban bump stocks if they will vote to ban abortions in the same bill.
That will kill it.
You see, killing is perfectly okay with the democrat party as long as defenseless babies are being murdered.
I'm with ya'. Sounds like an imminently good trade to me. BUT, this will drive a big big wedge in the "gun unity" around here, where there are some who consider abortion one of those great freedoms we enjoy. A practice that screams "true liberty" right here, right now.
Let's hope she overlooks binary triggers. If she goes after those, I have no doubt she'll eventually go after electronic triggers bc they can fire faster and are more accurate (deadly). It's all nonsense.
I was under the impression those were included in the bill already. The bill mentions any item used to increase rate of fire. They specifically mention slide stocks, gatling trigger, and a couple others.
"Except as provided in paragraph (2), on and after the date that is 180 days after the date of enactment of this subsection, it shall be unlawful for any person to import, sell, manufacture, transfer, or possess, in or af- fecting interstate or foreign commerce, a trigger crank, a bump-fire device, or any part, combination of parts, component, device, attachment, or accessory that is de- signed or functions to accelerate the rate of fire of a semi- automatic rifle but not convert the semiautomatic rifle into a machinegun."
Coal Dragger
10-04-17, 17:16
No desire to own a bumpfire stock or binary trigger, and consider those who buy and use them to be morons engaged in ballistic masturbation. That said I'll write my congress critters urging them to vote against Feinstein and her pile of shit bill.
Gotta do somethin’....amirite?
[emoji57]
NEWP
Doc Safari
10-04-17, 17:18
Just remember, "It's for the children" is the Democrat party mantra unless the child is unborn.
I was under the impression those were included in the bill already. The bill mentions any item used to increase rate of fire. They specifically mention slide stocks, gatling trigger, and a couple others.
"Except as provided in paragraph (2), on and after the date that is 180 days after the date of enactment of this subsection, it shall be unlawful for any person to import, sell, manufacture, transfer, or possess, in or af- fecting interstate or foreign commerce, a trigger crank, a bump-fire device, or any part, combination of parts, component, device, attachment, or accessory that is de- signed or functions to accelerate the rate of fire of a semi- automatic rifle but not convert the semiautomatic rifle into a machinegun."
I am 100% sure this bill will die immediately.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I'm sure the owners will be lining up to turn them in.
Put me on the jury if they get caught.
nightchief
10-04-17, 18:48
I was under the impression those were included in the bill already. The bill mentions any item used to increase rate of fire. They specifically mention slide stocks, gatling trigger, and a couple others.
"Except as provided in paragraph (2), on and after the date that is 180 days after the date of enactment of this subsection, it shall be unlawful for any person to import, sell, manufacture, transfer, or possess, in or af- fecting interstate or foreign commerce, a trigger crank, a bump-fire device, or any part, combination of parts, component, device, attachment, or accessory that is de- signed or functions to accelerate the rate of fire of a semi- automatic rifle but not convert the semiautomatic rifle into a machinegun."
What about a Geissele Super Dynamic 3 Gun trigger with the light spring? I can shoot it damn quickly...not accurately, but really fast. It accelerates the rate of fire...
This is a slippery slope toward the gun grabbers ultimate goal of total disarmament...
No way to "compromise" on this...no "throwing the gun grabbers a bone"...just no! No! No!
crusader377
10-04-17, 19:03
Although I could care less about bump fire stocks and think they are stupid, I voted no. My reasoning is you can't do anything in good faith with the left and giving in to them will only embolden them more.
PatrioticDisorder
10-04-17, 19:07
Screw em, you can't compromise with people who don't want compromise. Frankenstein's vague wording will allow BATFE NFA branch to ban provably every Geissele trigger in existence, NOT ONE INCH. Bump fire and other crap is stupid, but not one inch, this is the time to be on the offense, Ryan needs to be tossed out, national reciprocity & SHARE need to be pushed through.
Dist. Expert 26
10-04-17, 19:25
The RINOs may be spineless but they aren't stupid. They know that any gun control bill they pass results in a massacre next election. So let's dial back the panic a little bit.
As to the OP, no compromise ever, on anything.
RobertTheTexan
10-04-17, 19:26
Hello Robert............I don't think your friend understands who we're dealing with. Someone in another thread, sorry forgot who, used a line from the Terminator, which described the nature of the machine. That pretty much sums it up.
You're right Tom. Interesting background, he's form LEO, PD type. That's one key mistake. These people do not have an agenda designed to save lives. Their agenda is mean to DISARM the citizenry of the United States.
Feinstein and those witches and warlocks chomp at the bit, drool at them mouth for something like this to happen. His second mistake was assuming that they would be satisfied and stop.
We're talking about people who don't even wait until the bodies are cold to start pushing their agenda.
You simply cannot please the anti gunners they will only be happy with all out bans and nothing less. They will chip away until there is nothing left and if we give them moral victories every time something like this happens it wont take long.
Unpopular opinion incoming. I don't see banning bump stocks as a slippery slope. They're an outlier, a fluke - a tacky, gimmicky mod that no serious shooter ever uses. The current interpretation that these don't actually alter the weapon for full-auto is a bizarre technicality, and quite the stretch of the imagination. The intent of them is clear. There doesn't even necessarily need to be new legislation - a narrow reinterpretation by the ATF on these devices would not bother me at all.
They're garbage devices. We'd be giving up nothing. I say "return to regular order" instead of going to battle over a junk piece of plastic just to stick it to "liberals". That level of petty divisiveness will cause much bigger problems for everyone eventually.
They're garbage devices. We'd be giving up nothing. I say "return to regular order" instead of going to battle over a junk piece of plastic just to stick it to liberals.
Like I said in another thread, I will never own one.
That said I’m leaning towards no more compromise. Reference that cartoon strip from a previous page. Compromise is not the correct word. Remember that. It’s pure surrender.
The people that we are up against aren’t dealing with logic and facts. It’s an ideology. They want to turn us into Australia or the UK, with the same gun laws.
If we give them these stupid little toys, they just tack up another one in the win column, regroup then come back that much more emboldened for the next grab.
Rest assured, when the dust from this settles there will be another grab, caused by another crisis.
The progressive ideologists that we are dealing with, are looking for a complete domestic disarmament just like Australia and the UK.
I think the NRA has it right, and I’m glad I became a life member a few years ago. There never has been any compromising. It’s always been law-abiding citizens giving up their Second Amendment rights, and getting absolutely nothing in return.
The founding fathers have been rolling in their graves so hard, they’ve probably drilled themselves halfway to China by now.
No! Never give in to any form of Gun Control. It's just another chip taken out of the 2nd amendment and they will always push for more. Always.
FromMyColdDeadHand
10-04-17, 19:55
I am amazed at the lack of thought on this. Now that Fienstien has brought out a bill, we are stuck defending. It isn't about giving the left anything, it was all about taking away from them.
When you have a bad event happen, you investigate, you assign blame, you come up with a plan to deal with it, you implement it and then you make up numbers about how it worked. The classic case is Coke getting kids sick in the EU. Just like Coke doesn't want people rooting around in what actually makes a Coke a Coke, we don't want people rummaging around for things to blame.
Our whole argument about semi vs full auto and not being true assault weapons is thrown out the window with the bump-fire stocks. Out. The. Window. So you had a distinction with a difference and now any rational person will look at you like you are crazy when you argue mechanics about how the trigger is pulled each time.
The key was to get out in front of this. The DNCs talking points are that these are assault weapons, the GOP doesn't respond fast enough and they are in the pocket of the NRA.
What is different about this shooting? The volume and rate of fire and the number of people hit. What is to blame for this? Let's go multiple choice. Large cap magazines, assault weapons or bump-fire stocks? So you blame the bump stock, you get ahead of the problem and put together legislation to outlaw them. Boom.
You have now taken away every point that the DNC runs with on guns. You are closing the machine gun loop-hole, you acted quickly and you are not being held hostage by the NRA. Now here is the important part, the only really relevant part- you have to message the crap out of it. Think of it this way in the mind of a millennial or swing voter- the only national level gun control IN THEIR LIFETIMES has come from the GOP. You hammer that everytime that the Progressives bring up guns. Even the DNC didn't do this when they were in power.
And all for the price of pissing of some gun range retards.
Maybe you can salvage that strategy, but it is weakened by the fact that Fienstein came out with it first. Now, they can paint it just as the GOP following the grabbers lead.
So where are we now. With a Dem written bill instead of a sanely written GOP version. All this talk about belt buckles and shoelaces is ****ing stupid because it just cements in people's minds that the ARs are just bursting to be made full auto.
That and now the DNC staffers are filling FOIA requests to see all the stupid stuff people ask the AFT for legal mother-may-I. Gives them a whole new list of things to go after. PLUS. Who in the hell at the ATF is going to write a letter approving anything anymore. So now all we need is the gear **** wads to start sending in letters on everything and the ATF is going to say no. WAY less risky than be known as the guy who let the next bump-stock happen.
But sure. Let's stand with the butt-stock jigglers and the biggest mass shooter in history. Let's throw away the last decade where we finally got people to understand the difference between semi and FA.
Unpopular opinion incoming. I don't see banning bump stocks as a slippery slope. They're an outlier, a fluke - a tacky, gimmicky mod that no serious shooter ever uses. The current interpretation that these don't actually alter the weapon for full-auto is a bizarre technicality, and quite the stretch of the imagination. The intent of them is clear. There doesn't even necessarily need to be new legislation - a narrow reinterpretation by the ATF on these devices would not bother me at all.
They're garbage devices. We'd be giving up nothing. I say "return to regular order" instead of going to battle over a junk piece of plastic just to stick it to "liberals". That level of petty divisiveness will cause much bigger problems for everyone eventually.
No. The problem is the "intent" of the NFA cannot be quantified. There will always be a method or decice that people say "gets around it" because the entire thing is based on feels. What is athe line when a semi becomes a MG? A bump fire stock? A e-trigger? A highe end mechanical trigger? When will a stock trigger be "too easy to shoot fast?
Please define it for me, because no one in the nearly 100 years of NFA could do it.
That all said, what is wrong with bump stocks- you guys are calling other pro 2a people morons because they buy a stock?
Is it unsafe? Where does them buying a stock hurt you? Morons with guns are morons, buying a stock does not a moron make.
Get over yourselves, don't roll on your back at the thought of legislation- get on your feet. They have no leverage - **** them. I don't get some of you, you side with gun grabbers before someone with a bump stock. Good God.
...and no I don't own one. But I won't say I never will (I'll likely just buy a machine gun).
I am amazed at the lack of thought on this. Now that Fienstien has brought out a bill, we are stuck defending. It isn't about giving the left anything, it was all about taking away from them.
When you have a bad event happen, you investigate, you assign blame, you come up with a plan to deal with it, you implement it and then you make up numbers about how it worked. The classic case is Coke getting kids sick in the EU. Just like Coke doesn't want people rooting around in what actually makes a Coke a Coke, we don't want people rummaging around for things to blame.
Our whole argument about semi vs full auto and not being true assault weapons is thrown out the window with the bump-fire stocks. Out. The. Window. So you had a distinction with a difference and now any rational person will look at you like you are crazy when you argue mechanics about how the trigger is pulled each time.
The key was to get out in front of this. The DNCs talking points are that these are assault weapons, the GOP doesn't respond fast enough and they are in the pocket of the NRA.
What is different about this shooting? The volume and rate of fire and the number of people hit. What is to blame for this? Let's go multiple choice. Large cap magazines, assault weapons or bump-fire stocks? So you blame the bump stock, you get ahead of the problem and put together legislation to outlaw them. Boom.
You have now taken away every point that the DNC runs with on guns. You are closing the machine gun loop-hole, you acted quickly and you are not being held hostage by the NRA. Now here is the important part, the only really relevant part- you have to message the crap out of it. Think of it this way in the mind of a millennial or swing voter- the only national level gun control IN THEIR LIFETIMES has come from the GOP. You hammer that everytime that the Progressives bring up guns. Even the DNC didn't do this when they were in power.
And all for the price of pissing of some gun range retards.
Maybe you can salvage that strategy, but it is weakened by the fact that Fienstein came out with it first. Now, they can paint it just as the GOP following the grabbers lead.
So where are we now. With a Dem written bill instead of a sanely written GOP version. All this talk about belt buckles and shoelaces is ****ing stupid because it just cements in people's minds that the ARs are just bursting to be made full auto.
That and now the DNC staffers are filling FOIA requests to see all the stupid stuff people ask the AFT for legal mother-may-I. Gives them a whole new list of things to go after. PLUS. Who in the hell at the ATF is going to write a letter approving anything anymore. So now all we need is the gear **** wads to start sending in letters on everything and the ATF is going to say no. WAY less risky than be known as the guy who let the next bump-stock happen.
But sure. Let's stand with the butt-stock jigglers and the biggest mass shooter in history. Let's throw away the last decade where we finally got people to understand the difference between semi and FA.
Your entire argument is based off a false multiple choice.
The gun did no wrong. A man did.
And you want gun control as a selling point for politics? WTF? It's a loser, everybody knows that. Why did Obama not touch it? GOP bringing GC would piss off the very base that got them elected.
And on top of all that, we don't know root cause-they are still investigating.
I am amazed at the lack of thought on this. Now that Fienstien has brought out a bill, we are stuck defending. It isn't about giving the left anything, it was all about taking away from them.
When you have a bad event happen, you investigate, you assign blame, you come up with a plan to deal with it, you implement it and then you make up numbers about how it worked. The classic case is Coke getting kids sick in the EU. Just like Coke doesn't want people rooting around in what actually makes a Coke a Coke, we don't want people rummaging around for things to blame.
Our whole argument about semi vs full auto and not being true assault weapons is thrown out the window with the bump-fire stocks. Out. The. Window. So you had a distinction with a difference and now any rational person will look at you like you are crazy when you argue mechanics about how the trigger is pulled each time.
The key was to get out in front of this. The DNCs talking points are that these are assault weapons, the GOP doesn't respond fast enough and they are in the pocket of the NRA.
What is different about this shooting? The volume and rate of fire and the number of people hit. What is to blame for this? Let's go multiple choice. Large cap magazines, assault weapons or bump-fire stocks? So you blame the bump stock, you get ahead of the problem and put together legislation to outlaw them. Boom.
You have now taken away every point that the DNC runs with on guns. You are closing the machine gun loop-hole, you acted quickly and you are not being held hostage by the NRA. Now here is the important part, the only really relevant part- you have to message the crap out of it. Think of it this way in the mind of a millennial or swing voter- the only national level gun control IN THEIR LIFETIMES has come from the GOP. You hammer that everytime that the Progressives bring up guns. Even the DNC didn't do this when they were in power.
And all for the price of pissing of some gun range retards.
Maybe you can salvage that strategy, but it is weakened by the fact that Fienstein came out with it first. Now, they can paint it just as the GOP following the grabbers lead.
So where are we now. With a Dem written bill instead of a sanely written GOP version. All this talk about belt buckles and shoelaces is ****ing stupid because it just cements in people's minds that the ARs are just bursting to be made full auto.
That and now the DNC staffers are filling FOIA requests to see all the stupid stuff people ask the AFT for legal mother-may-I. Gives them a whole new list of things to go after. PLUS. Who in the hell at the ATF is going to write a letter approving anything anymore. So now all we need is the gear **** wads to start sending in letters on everything and the ATF is going to say no. WAY less risky than be known as the guy who let the next bump-stock happen.
But sure. Let's stand with the butt-stock jigglers and the biggest mass shooter in history. Let's throw away the last decade where we finally got people to understand the difference between semi and FA.
F%#k that bullshit idea.
Why don't we ban your freedom of speech because you're saying something we find hateful? After all, it's only the hateful speech that causes a problem. Control the narrative that we won't stand for hate speech.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
How fast can you shoot a semi auto before it becomes illegal?
Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk
How fast can you shoot a semi auto before it becomes illegal?
Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk
Exactly. That's the slippery slope these cowards here want to step on.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Business_Casual
10-04-17, 20:34
Do we work with cancer or bacteria?
Ask the ROMANOVS. Oh, wait, we can’t because they are all dead.
Not sure how anyone could even ask this question.
RobertTheTexan
10-04-17, 20:39
Unpopular opinion incoming. I don't see banning bump stocks as a slippery slope.
You do not see this setting a precedence?
They're an outlier, a fluke - a tacky, gimmicky mod that no serious shooter ever uses.
I think you need to put your comments in context . Do you believe the liberal left sees the bump fire and binary trigger as “gimmicky”, a fads, toys for mall ninjas? No, they do not. They do not make a distinction between this and a suppressor, or a firearm. Do you actually believe they want to save and protect lives?
I must admit I find that shocking. My OP brought into focus some assumptions made by a friend. One of those was that he presumed the gun grabbing left to operate on the same moral and ethical level as he. That is an incorrect assumption.
[
They're garbage devices. We'd be giving up nothing. I say "return to regular order" instead of going to battle over a junk piece of plastic just to stick it to "liberals". That level of petty divisiveness will cause much bigger problems for everyone eventually.
“We’d be giving up nothing.” “Return to regular order.”
You actually view the 99.999% percentile view to reject ANY form of gun control as “sticking it to the liberals”? We aren’t sticking anything to them.
No, it’s called sound tactics and strategy.
So it sounds like you believe we throw the sacrificial bump stock and trigger, and the liberal left whose agenda is not security of citizens by disarmament- and you honestly believe t stops there. Diane et al are happy and satisfied and they leave us alone forever.
Your statement leads me to believe that you consider that atrocious act as immediate grounds for gun legislation. Evil me do evil things. We live on a fallen world. Attacking liberty and the 2A is not a solution. Addressing what led to this? That’s a topic to address. Guns and bump stocks are still inanimate, unfeeling pieces of plastic.
I’m having a hard time seeing the logic in your point of view. Not for someone who should embrace his liberties and guard our 2A rights like a lion guarding and protecting his pride.
As in my OP, bump stocks are not my thing. Nor are binary triggers. I see ZERO value in the devices. But this legislation is not about a device. It’s an attack on principle and it’s to set precedence.
As the OP says, we give them an inch - they won’t settle until they have gone the long journey and they does touch you and what you own.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
We'd be giving up nothing.
Negotiation 101. Always get something. What is Feinstein offering in return? Nothing. She negotiates from strength. Gun owners can't wait to give up rights of other gun owners in some foolish notion appeasement will work. If she gets bump fire stocks without a fight, she will be right back with something else. The only strategy is to fight them on everything, so they go away with nothing. And don't come back. Which is what we have been doing and have not lost ground in over 20 years.
I think bump fire stocks and arm braces can be fixed in one trade.
Make bump fire stocks considered machine guns. Let people who own them register them with the atf as a transferable machine gun like a lightning link or rdias.
In return remove short barrel rifles from the NFA. The pistol braces really are making the SBR part of the NFA a joke.
This will make things simple. I'd go for it and be happy.
To me semi auto guns should not have any limit in features. To include barrrel length. It's stupid and it's not where the danger of the gun comes from, being semi auto is.
I understand gun grabbers would never go for this.
Exactly. That's the slippery slope these cowards here want to step on.
Sent from my iPhone using TapatalkA coworker said we should just give up the bump stocks.
When I explained the mechanics of it and that they would be legislating the speed of which one shoots he changed his mind very quickly.
Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk
So would you gun-ban supporters want to make it illegal to bump-fire a gun?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I have zero use for a bump fire stock and the local gun clubs in our area prohibit their use. I am still opposed to banning bump fire stocks, because that would place us on the edge of the slippery slope toward a complete ban on firearm ownership.
First off, I think the whole premise is off. If he had used a normal semi auto without a bump stock, I don't think the outcome would be much different.
I think legislation like this is a real slippery slope. First bump stocks, then light triggers, next semi autos because no matter what, you can shoot them fast.
Sent from my SM-S327VL using Tapatalk
The only compromise: ban bump fire stocks, repeal NFA.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
We give the Left no quarter.
Our whole argument about semi vs full auto and not being true assault weapons is thrown out the window with the bump-fire stocks. Out. The. Window. So you had a distinction with a difference and now any rational person will look at you like you are crazy when you argue mechanics about how the trigger is pulled each time.
I'm still leaning back to my original thought with this as throwing them a bone. Not for the left, but for your neighbors, your coworkers, sisters, etc. The general public doesn't a give one flying **** about the bolded part above. In my opinion it the only way to keep the general public on our side about an outright ban of guns in future. Like I said in an earlier post. Tie this in with the share act or like steyr said, national reciprocity, either way, let republicans write it so we get something out of it.
Flame suit on. Flame away.
We give the Left no quarter.
Now we just need to get our reps to understand that.
brushy bill
10-04-17, 22:27
Compromise entails both sides giving up something...so we give up bump stocks and they eliminate legislation prohibiting SBS, SBR, and suppressors.
No not a fracking Inch. Nothing. Send them home crying liberal tears. Negotiation no surrender and no damn compromise. Compromise with these jackasses is a one way street their way. So you cannot compromise with them. Everyone in this place should be aware of that by now.
Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk
**** no.
We should be leading a stampede of enacting legislation aimed at destroying any and all current ant gun laws and future anti gun legislation.
Any and all legislation that is anti liberty should be fought to the bitter end. No amount of "compromising" and giving up ones rights will solve the problem of people wanting to take away your rights.
Banning anything, especially a piece of plastic is retarded. Even having this debate is quite silly.
If you voted yes you should seriously consider sending me all of your high capacity magazines- because those obviously enable you to fire more rounds faster and even though they are banning that piece of plastic that turns any rifle into a fully auto killing machine, how can they be sure people won't make their own or create some other way of doing it?
You can't logic your way out of an emotional problem with emotional people, you have to throw all that emotional bullshit right back at them.
They want to talk Gun control, lets talk about the proliferation of rights in general, be it firearms rights or otherwise.
Anything else is a death sentence. You stand for what is right or you bow to what is wrong.
It saddens me to no end that some alleged shooters on a black rifle forum, are so willing to throw other gun owners under the liberal bus to save their own toys. You might as well be snobbish, tweed wearing english double gun owners, throwing black rifle owners under the bus. You disgust me equally as much if not more so, because you should know better. You should be ashamed of yourselves. :(
BoringGuy45
10-04-17, 23:29
Compromise entails both sides giving up something...so we give up bump stocks and they eliminate legislation prohibiting SBS, SBR, and suppressors.
The problem is, the left is, subtly, giving their "compromise". They want ALL our guns, down to the Brown Bess over the fireplace that your great-great-great-etc. grandpa carried as a soldier in the Continental Army. We don't want to give up ANY guns. So by only taking some, and the most dangerous ones that we "don't need", they are compromising: We get to keep some, and they get to take some, so everyone is happy.
HOWEVER, if we could, as Steyr said, use bump fire stocks as a bargaining chip, I might be more interested. In the Battle of Cannae, Hannibal let his infantry center collapse and sacrificed a lot of his own guys, considered a big no-no by the logic of warfare in the day. But in the end, his infantry's collapsing center allowed him to flank the Romans, and completely slaughter him. My point being, if there's ways of turning what looks like a defeat into a greater victory, it might be worth it.
Oh, and another thing about these loophole devices (slide fire, bullet buttons, etc), every time one gets banned, gun companies find another way around the new law.
Phillygunguy
10-05-17, 00:29
What do we get? Are they going to pass national reciprocity? Pass the hearing protection act? Then No
I personally don't care about bump fire stock or binary trigger Doo hickey that simulates full auto. But compromise isn't this mother may I keep my guns bullshit.
I hold as much respect for people like Fineswine, Schumer as I do the shit bag who shot up all those people.
OK, this is a non cartoon version of the illustration presented earlier but this is what I think and why.
In 1934, the Congress passed a law that it stated was for the protection of the citizenry. It banned the possession of only those weapons which it decided the People did not really need unless they could afford to really need them. It was ostensibly the only infringement of the 2nd Amendment that would ever be necessary. The government soon began abusing its authority.
In 1968, just 34 years later, the Congress decided that the previous Congress had been a little shortsighted and that just a little more infringement of the 2nd Amendment would be necessary, again, for the protection of the citizenry. They were a little worried about some of the newer weapons the People could get and how easy it was to get them. Again, the government soon began abusing its authority under the new laws.
In 1986, eighteen years later, the Congress once again decided that the previous Congress had not gone quite far enough and that a little more infringement of the 2nd Amendment was necessary for the protection of the citizenry. They decided there were already enough of the kinds of weapons around that the People with enough money to really need them could get. The government had come under heavy fire for abusing its authority by now and the People were beginning to catch on to what the government was up to. The government was at last forced to make some compromises.
A mere eight years later, in 1994, the Congress once again came to the conclusion that they had not gone quite far enough and just a tad more infringement was necessary. But this was really all the infringement that would ever be necessary, the Congress assured. They even told the People that 10 years down the road, the law would go away unless it was really, really necessary.
10 years later, in 2004, the People had already decided that the new law was not necessary and Congress didn't dare push it again. The People had finally had enough of incremental infringement.
The government will never stop trying to disarm the good People of this country under the guise of protecting them from the bad people of this country. It's not a matter of political party differences. The left wing and right wing belong to the same goddamned bird and that bird is a vulture.
If you're of the opinion that a bumpfire stock is something only a window licking, inbred idiot would buy and use, that's fine. I don't even disagree with you. Ya' know what though? All you gotta do is not buy and use one.
As for me, I'm not willing to cede the most miniscule fraction of an inch to an ideology whose ultimate goal is to have the U.S. People and more importantly to me, my descendants with ZERO rights to own any firearm. Don't kid yourself, that is the goal of the left. I say not only no but F*** NO!!!
never give an inch
i thought the binary and bumpstock was a novelty and not for me but its like making your car go faster,how many people do that???
way more auto fatalities per year................except maybe in detroit and chicago
I voted ‘no,’ but with the caveat that I’d accept no further restrictions on firearms ownership ever, along with a permanent and irrevocable repeal of SBR, SBS, suppressor, destructive device, and ammunition limitations in exchange for this legislation. It would also have to be nationwide, preemptive of all state and territory / possession laws and / or regulations.
And a repeal of Obamacare in its entirety.
And the abolition of the health insurance industry.
And the repeal of the 16th amendment.
And 2-term limits for all elected officials nationwide regardless of level of government, to a maximum of 12 years.
And a nationwide concealed carry, shall-issue law, effective across all internal US borders.
And a requirement that the United States must maintain at lest $1 positive cash flow every fiscal year.
And **** it, I want a cookie.
OK, this is a non cartoon version of the illustration presented earlier but this is what I think and why.
In 1934, the Congress passed a law that it stated was for the protection of the citizenry. It banned the possession of only those weapons which it decided the People did not really need unless they could afford to really need them. It was ostensibly the only infringement of the 2nd Amendment that would ever be necessary. The government soon began abusing its authority.
In 1968, just 34 years later, the Congress decided that the previous Congress had been a little shortsighted and that just a little more infringement of the 2nd Amendment would be necessary, again, for the protection of the citizenry. They were a little worried about some of the newer weapons the People could get and how easy it was to get them. Again, the government soon began abusing its authority under the new laws.
In 1986, eighteen years later, the Congress once again decided that the previous Congress had not gone quite far enough and that a little more infringement of the 2nd Amendment was necessary for the protection of the citizenry. They decided there were already enough of the kinds of weapons around that the People with enough money to really need them could get. The government had come under heavy fire for abusing its authority by now and the People were beginning to catch on to what the government was up to. The government was at last forced to make some compromises.
A mere eight years later, in 1994, the Congress once again came to the conclusion that they had not gone quite far enough and just a tad more infringement was necessary. But this was really all the infringement that would ever be necessary, the Congress assured. They even told the People that 10 years down the road, the law would go away unless it was really, really necessary.
10 years later, in 2004, the People had already decided that the new law was not necessary and Congress didn't dare push it again. The People had finally had enough of incremental infringement.
The government will never stop trying to disarm the good People of this country under the guise of protecting them from the bad people of this country. It's not a matter of political party differences. The left wing and right wing belong to the same goddamned bird and that bird is a vulture.
If you're of the opinion that a bumpfire stock is something only a window licking, inbred idiot would buy and use, that's fine. I don't even disagree with you. Ya' know what though? All you gotta do is not buy and use one.
As for me, I'm not willing to cede the most miniscule fraction of an inch to an ideology whose ultimate goal is to have the U.S. People and more importantly to me, my descendants with ZERO rights to own any firearm. Don't kid yourself, that is the goal of the left. I say not only no but F*** NO!!!
You forgot 1989 and overlooked the fact that the 1986 law permitted the importation of previously banned firearms.
You forgot 1989 and overlooked the fact that the 1986 law permitted the importation of previously banned firearms.
Yeah, you're right. I sure did. In my defense, I got in a rush to make my point. It hasn't changed.
By the way, very glad to hear your damage from the storm was minimal. Have you made your escape from FL yet?
Moose-Knuckle
10-05-17, 05:55
I'm having this argument on another gun forum. I actually can't believe I'm saying this but there are people ON A GUN FORUM willing to give up not just the slide fire. One guy is ok with giving up slide fire AND mag limit to 15 or less as long as it allows him shipping s firearm through the US Postal Service!
I seriously don't know how to react to that. Part of me thinks he's just being sarcastic and I'm not getting it.
Well IF the conspiracies theories are correct and all these mass shootings are some how orchestrated to garner support for anti-2nd Amendment legislation and negative public opinions of firearms and their owners . . . it's working.
Have you listened to any of the conservative talk shows this week? Micheal Savage went full retard and is demanding some sort of gun control on semi-autos and high capacity magaines, the very guy who has been preaching against such false sense of security measures for over twenty years. He even went as far to say that if you have a loaded semi-auto rifle in your bedroom for self-defense you are a real sicko. Yammered on about how you don't need a semi-auto rifle for home defense and to just get yourself a shotgun.
@ 30:00
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nj5mP4seuKw
A local talk show to me on WBAP 820 AM had their entire show last night devoted to callers debating to ban bump stocks. Many of the callers on Savage's Monday show and this one last night claimed to be "2nd Amendment supporters and gun owners" actually advocating for this shit.
Then there are the "pro-gun celebs" who have now pulled a complete 180 publicly. . .
Country star Caleb Keeter changes guns stance: 'I cannot express how wrong I was'
https://www.usatoday.com/story/life/nation-now/2017/10/03/performer-las-vegas-shooting-we-had-legal-firearms-they-were-useless/726646001/
Gun owner Ashton Kutcher advocating for new gun laws: 'Enough is enough'
http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/2017/10/04/gun-owner-ashton-kutcher-advocating-for-new-gun-laws-enough-is-enough.html
RobertTheTexan
10-05-17, 07:18
Let me just... change some things, here....
How's that work for y'all?
We either hang together or we each hang separately.
I see no difference in what I wrote or what you wrote. The net result is the same for the Left. One would just sucks way worse than the other from a practical ownership perspective.
I agree with you, and that's why I do not support any give whatsoever. It is NOT about a bump stock. The argument and consequently mistake, the folks who support a bump stock ban are making is that they think the law is about the flipping stock, and it is NOT about a bump-stock or binary trigger. I'll stand next to you at neck stretching time. Share a kolache with you before we go to the big mout site in the sky.
Watching Fox news this morning. Clearly, bump fire stocks are going down. The question is "what are they going to take with them"?
Watching Fox news this morning. Clearly, bump fire stocks are going down. The question is "what are they going to take with them"?
Definitely looks that way. However, there is talk about a compromise and trading off the Bump Stock for Suppressors.
sundance435
10-05-17, 08:07
One thing that worries me is that the (D)s seemed to have learned from the past and are playing small ball this time. There was no far-reaching, broad gun control bill pushed by Feinstein - she went after bump fire stocks specifically. It seems they've learned that past calls for thinly veiled massive gun control were unpopular to those in the middle on the gun "debate". They're hoping to notch an easy win on bump fire stocks, which will probably give them the incremental momentum they'll need to pass broader bills in the future - going piecemeal for what they've advocated in the past.
One thing that worries me is that the (D)s seemed to have learned from the past and are playing small ball this time. There was no far-reaching, broad gun control bill pushed by Feinstein - she went after bump fire stocks specifically. It seems they've learned that past calls for thinly veiled massive gun control were unpopular to those in the middle on the gun "debate". They're hoping to notch an easy win on bump fire stocks, which will probably give them the incremental momentum they'll need to pass broader bills in the future - going piecemeal for what they've advocated in the past.
In other words some reminded them how one eats an elephant.
Dist. Expert 26
10-05-17, 08:24
Watching Fox news this morning. Clearly, bump fire stocks are going down. The question is "what are they going to take with them"?
I'm not so sure. Once the shock wears off the RINOs and Trump might stop to consider what caving in will do to their chances of staying in office. Especially given that all of their other promises have fallen through.
I don't have a bump stock, have no use for or desire to own a bump stock, so I say...
NOT ONLY NO BUT HELL NO!
In this fight EVERY hill is the hill worth dying on.
FromMyColdDeadHand
10-05-17, 08:58
No. The problem is the "intent" of the NFA cannot be quantified. There will always be a method or decice that people say "gets around it" because the entire thing is based on feels. What is athe line when a semi becomes a MG? A bump fire stock? A e-trigger? A highe end mechanical trigger? When will a stock trigger be "too easy to shoot fast?
Please define it for me, because no one in the nearly 100 years of NFA could do it.
That all said, what is wrong with bump stocks- you guys are calling other pro 2a people morons because they buy a stock?
Is it unsafe? Where does them buying a stock hurt you? Morons with guns are morons, buying a stock does not a moron make.
Get over yourselves, don't roll on your back at the thought of legislation- get on your feet. They have no leverage - **** them. I don't get some of you, you side with gun grabbers before someone with a bump stock. Good God.
...and no I don't own one. But I won't say I never will (I'll likely just buy a machine gun).
I have no issues or qualms calling bump-fire stock owners morons and short-bus riders. We deride all kinds of acts people do at ranges with guns. Who wouldn't walk out of a class where people clear their firearms and then practice trigger control in a classroom? People make bad decisions in handling and outfitting guns.
Yes, putting a bump-stock on a gun makes you a moron. Taking it off removes the M for moron. It is just that simple. That isn't being elitist, that is being a realist.
Does BCM, B5, Magpul, Colt or Vltor make a bump-fire stock? Show up at a top-flight class with one and what would happen? They call that a clue.
How fast can you shoot a semi auto before it becomes illegal?
So would you gun-ban supporters want to make it illegal to bump-fire a gun?
Those are the kind of questions keeping bump stocks around opens up. We have made great strides about SA vs FA and that is all thrown into question now. Now people are all wondering about the triggers on these SA rifles. Do we really want, based on this tragedy, people looking into 3rd party replacement triggers? Having the ATF certify triggers as "bump-resistant". These are the realities that franken-fire stocks bring out in the open.
These things are a curse on the gun community. I may be an asshole, but I'm right.
Let's put it this way. Would there be all this chest thumping on slide-fire stocks if the ATF had come out with a negative opinion on them? It is perfectly logical that since it makes the gun operate in FA mode, that is it viewed as a device making the gun a machine gun
ETA: Since it seem conspiracies are the flavor of the week, I almost wonder if the ATF approved slide-fire stocks with the intent of giving monkees machine guns- eventually, something is going to go wrong.
I have no issues or qualms calling bump-fire stock owners morons and short-bus riders. We deride all kinds of acts people do at ranges with guns. Who wouldn't walk out of a class where people clear their firearms and then practice trigger control in a classroom? People make bad decisions in handling and outfitting guns.
Yes, putting a bump-stock on a gun makes you a moron. Taking it off removes the M for moron. It is just that simple. That isn't being elitist, that is being a realist.
Does BCM, B5, Magpul, Colt or Vltor make a bump-fire stock? Show up at a top-flight class with one and what would happen? They call that a clue.
Those are the kind of questions keeping bump stocks around opens up. We have made great strides about SA vs FA and that is all thrown into question now. Now people are all wondering about the triggers on these SA rifles. Do we really want, based on this tragedy, people looking into 3rd party replacement triggers? Having the ATF certify triggers as "bump-resistant". These are the realities that franken-fire stocks bring out in the open.
These things are a curse on the gun community. I may be an asshole, but I'm right.
Let's put it this way. Would there be all this chest thumping on slide-fire stocks if the ATF had come out with a negative opinion on them? It is perfectly logical that since it makes the gun operate in FA mode, that is it viewed as a device making the gun a machine gun
ETA: Since it seem conspiracies are the flavor of the week, I almost wonder if the ATF approved slide-fire stocks with the intent of giving monkees machine guns- eventually, something is going to go wrong.
Actually, you're not right. Such devices just increase the ability of the user to increase the rate of semi-auto fire.
If we decide and device that can induce bump-fire, we are agreeing the rate of semi-auto fire should be regulated.
The next thing we know, another shooting happens and lighter triggers become illegal because they are easier to bump fire. Then we have things on all semi-autos to intentionally reduce the rate of fire.
You cannot appease these people. Don't try. You're a fool if you do.
And all of you guys who were upset the Fudds didn't back us after Sandy Hook and now want to roll over on braces and slide-fires; shame on you! You are no better than the turn-coat Fudds. I'm ashamed of you.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Doc Safari
10-05-17, 09:50
And all of you guys who were upset the Fudds didn't back us after Sandy Hook and now want to roll over on braces and slide-fires; shame on you! You are no better than the turn-coat Fudds. I'm ashamed of you.
A perfect illustration of what the Fudds are all about just happened when a Fudd called in to Glenn Beck's program. He went on and on spouting the BS on how "assault rifles" should be banned because they aren't good for hunting and blah blah. The fill-in host, Pat Gray, put him in his place pretty good, but it just goes to show that the Fudds are not our friends. They will throw any firearm overboard that doesn't fit their narrow definition of sporting or for hunting.
Guys stop posting for 10 minutes and contact yor senators and representatives. Also write Speaker Ryan.
I do not see how bump stocks are going to stay legal, however perhaps we can find a middle ground and put verbiage in the share act.
Definitely looks that way. However, there is talk about a compromise and trading off the Bump Stock for Suppressors.
Do you have any links to this or was it watching interviews?
RobertTheTexan
10-05-17, 10:05
One thing that worries me is that the (D)s seemed to have learned from the past and are playing small ball this time. There was no far-reaching, broad gun control bill pushed by Feinstein - she went after bump fire stocks specifically. It seems they've learned that past calls for thinly veiled massive gun control were unpopular to those in the middle on the gun "debate". They're hoping to notch an easy win on bump fire stocks, which will probably give them the incremental momentum they'll need to pass broader bills in the future - going piecemeal for what they've advocated in the past.
Good observation. All the more reason we need solidarity and need to resist this.
The word may not matter much to the average person on the street, but to those who sit on The Bench, I believe “precedence” carries a lot of weight in forming opinions, decisions m, and rulings.
Do you have any links to this or was it watching interviews?
These were just interviews I heard on Sirius Foxnews and also on TV.
FromMyColdDeadHand
10-05-17, 10:35
Actually, you're not right. Such devices just increase the ability of the user to increase the rate of semi-auto fire.
If we decide and device that can induce bump-fire, we are agreeing the rate of semi-auto fire should be regulated.
The next thing we know, another shooting happens and lighter triggers become illegal because they are easier to bump fire. Then we have things on all semi-autos to intentionally reduce the rate of fire.
You cannot appease these people. Don't try. You're a fool if you do.
And all of you guys who were upset the Fudds didn't back us after Sandy Hook and now want to roll over on braces and slide-fires; shame on you! You are no better than the turn-coat Fudds. I'm ashamed of you.
You are making my point. By having these slide-fire stocks, you decrease the distinction between FA and SA. If I didn't know better, I'd say that bump-fire stocks were invented by gun grabbers to diminish the difference between FA and SA guns. We need to get a favorable SCOTUS decision on ARs- and having the things go full auto isn't going to help that argument.
BoringGuy45
10-05-17, 10:37
One thing that worries me is that the (D)s seemed to have learned from the past and are playing small ball this time. There was no far-reaching, broad gun control bill pushed by Feinstein - she went after bump fire stocks specifically. It seems they've learned that past calls for thinly veiled massive gun control were unpopular to those in the middle on the gun "debate". They're hoping to notch an easy win on bump fire stocks, which will probably give them the incremental momentum they'll need to pass broader bills in the future - going piecemeal for what they've advocated in the past.
I noticed that too. Normally, she has an assault weapons ban bill springloaded for a case like this. As we know, she has famously stated that she wants an outright ban, but that she only comes up with bills when she believes the votes are there.
If it DOES look like such a bill will pass, and there's nothing we can do about it, we need to start pressuring our reps and senators to get a true compromise. Good has come out of such things in the past, such as the provisions that Steyr pointed out in the 86 bill, the sunset provision in the 94 AWB, etc.
Trade for National Conceal Carry and when that shit is in committee tack on suppressors as a Title I firearm as an amendment. Let the Dems be the ones to have to kill the evil "bumpfire stock" bill.
If they would do something like that it might be worth thinking about with a "if you repeal national carry, bump fires are legal again". However, the antis don't work this way. It's all their way, they take take take and don't give. So don't give them anything I say!
NYH1.
***Edited to add, I posted this reply before reading the whole thread.***
You are making my point. By having these slide-fire stocks, you decrease the distinction between FA and SA. If I didn't know better, I'd say that bump-fire stocks were invented by gun grabbers to diminish the difference between FA and SA guns. We need to get a favorable SCOTUS decision on ARs- and having the things go full auto isn't going to help that argument.
No. Not really making your point at all. Because your point is that semi-auto rate should be controlled. **** that.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
No. Not really making your point at all. Because your point is that semi-auto rate should be controlled. **** that.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Yes he is correct.
I think bump fire stocks and arm braces can be fixed in one trade.
Make bump fire stocks considered machine guns. Let people who own them register them with the atf as a transferable machine gun like a lightning link or rdias.
In return remove short barrel rifles from the NFA. The pistol braces really are making the SBR part of the NFA a joke.
This will make things simple. I'd go for it and be happy.
To me semi auto guns should not have any limit in features. To include barrrel length. It's stupid and it's not where the danger of the gun comes from, being semi auto is.
I understand gun grabbers would never go for this.
This will never happen.
BoringGuy45
10-05-17, 12:13
If they would do something like that it might be worth thinking about with a "if you repeal national carry, bump fires are legal again". However, the antis don't work this way. It's all their way, they take take take and don't give. So don't give them anything I say!
NYH1.
***Edited to add, I posted this reply before reading the whole thread.***
And that's the point.
We have these shootings piling up, and the perception is that literally nothing has been done to help the situation, and that it's the GOP that's at fault for that. Eventually, and probably sooner rather than later, Congress and the White House are going to be aligned in such a way that a nightmarish bill will be passed. We can ask for things like universal carry in exchange for bump fire stocks, but like you said, they want every last gun without exception. But if pro-gunners can campaign on the the illusion that they offered a reasonable compromise, and the anti-gunners turned it down, then it's the anti-gunners who are doing nothing to stop these shootings.
You are making my point. By having these slide-fire stocks, you decrease the distinction between FA and SA. If I didn't know better, I'd say that bump-fire stocks were invented by gun grabbers to diminish the difference between FA and SA guns. We need to get a favorable SCOTUS decision on ARs- and having the things go full auto isn't going to help that argument.
Correct answer.
I have no issues or qualms calling bump-fire stock owners morons and short-bus riders. We deride all kinds of acts people do at ranges with guns. Who wouldn't walk out of a class where people clear their firearms and then practice trigger control in a classroom? People make bad decisions in handling and outfitting guns.
Yes, putting a bump-stock on a gun makes you a moron. Taking it off removes the M for moron. It is just that simple. That isn't being elitist, that is being a realist.
Does BCM, B5, Magpul, Colt or Vltor make a bump-fire stock? Show up at a top-flight class with one and what would happen? They call that a clue.
Those are the kind of questions keeping bump stocks around opens up. We have made great strides about SA vs FA and that is all thrown into question now. Now people are all wondering about the triggers on these SA rifles. Do we really want, based on this tragedy, people looking into 3rd party replacement triggers? Having the ATF certify triggers as "bump-resistant". These are the realities that franken-fire stocks bring out in the open.
These things are a curse on the gun community. I may be an asshole, but I'm right.
Let's put it this way. Would there be all this chest thumping on slide-fire stocks if the ATF had come out with a negative opinion on them? It is perfectly logical that since it makes the gun operate in FA mode, that is it viewed as a device making the gun a machine gun
ETA: Since it seem conspiracies are the flavor of the week, I almost wonder if the ATF approved slide-fire stocks with the intent of giving monkees machine guns- eventually, something is going to go wrong.
A+ answer !!!
We were on the cusp of getting SHARE passed and a possible favorable ruling in SCOTUS on semi autos in the near future after we get another conservative on the court.
All this has now been thrown out the window. Bump stocks blur the difference between full auto and semi auto fire.
We were on the cusp of getting SHARE passed and a possible favorable ruling in SCOTUS on semi autos in the near future after we get another conservative on the court.
All this has now been thrown out the window. Bump stocks blur the difference between full auto and semi auto fire.
Yes they do, and they damn well should!
Everyone who cherishes the 2nd Amendment needs to understand why the "bump fire" stock came into being. Republicans were working to combat liberal jurisdictions and the BATF in the mid 80's, which were prosecuting and imprisoning American citizens simply for exercising their 2nd Amendment rights. This effort was called the Firearms Owner's Protection Act of 1986. The purpose of this Act was entirely to prevent government abuses against the citizenry for exercising their rights under the 2nd Amendment
The ultra-liberal New Jersey Senator William J. "Bill" Hughes introduced a "poison pill" amendment to the bill that banned civilian sale of any machinegun manufactured after implementation of the Act (May 19, 1986). He was hoping that supporters of the FOPA would decline to vote for the bill due to the amendment, so that his state could continue violating the 2nd Amendment rights of Americans unimpeded. Even if they went ahead and passed it, he would effectively be denying the rights of all the citizenry in the country to own a machinegun. Everyone except approximately 175,000, which is the estimated number of legally transferrable machineguns in the NFA Register.
In essence, Senator Hughes created a "loophole" for the government to deny the citizenry their 2nd Amendment rights. How can you defend that it's perfectly OK and legal for 175,000 Americans to own and use machineguns, but no one else, forever?
Enter Slide Fire Solutions owner USAF SSgt(RET) Jeremiah Cottle. Recognizing a need, he created the bump fire stock. He was awarded a U.S. Patent and BATFE legal concurrence in 2010 to manufacture and sell them to the citizenry, which as closely as possible reinstated their lawful ability to obtain something that had been denied to them for a quarter century.
So contrary to what the media and politicians are telling you, the bump stock is a "loophole" to partially restore a 2nd Amendment right that was taken from us in 1986. Spinning this any other way is flat our 100% wrong.
So if you believe bump stocks should be banned, you are in lockstep with Bill Hughes and the State of New Jersey. You can't spin it any other way. To attempt doing so is misleading and disingenuous. You must decide whether you'll abandon your principles, or stand and fight. Tread carefully...
No. The problem is the "intent" of the NFA cannot be quantified. There will always be a method or decice that people say "gets around it" because the entire thing is based on feels. What is athe line when a semi becomes a MG? A bump fire stock? A e-trigger? A highe end mechanical trigger? When will a stock trigger be "too easy to shoot fast?
But it will be defined. Either by law or case law.
Just like Obamacare wasn't a tax until it was.
Yes they do, and they damn well should!
Everyone who cherishes the 2nd Amendment needs to understand why the "bump fire" stock came into being. Republicans were working to combat liberal jurisdictions and the BATF in the mid 80's, which were prosecuting and imprisoning American citizens simply for exercising their 2nd Amendment rights. This effort was called the Firearms Owner's Protection Act of 1986. The purpose of this Act was entirely to prevent government abuses against the citizenry for exercising their rights under the 2nd Amendment
The ultra-liberal New Jersey Senator William J. "Bill" Hughes introduced a "poison pill" amendment to the bill that banned civilian sale of any machinegun manufactured after implementation of the Act (May 19, 1986). He was hoping that supporters of the FOPA would decline to vote for the bill due to the amendment, so that his state could continue violating the 2nd Amendment rights of Americans unimpeded. Even if they went ahead and passed it, he would effectively be denying the rights of all the citizenry in the country to own a machinegun. Everyone except approximately 175,000, which is the estimated number of legally transferrable machineguns in the NFA Register.
In essence, Senator Hughes created a "loophole" for the government to deny the citizenry their 2nd Amendment rights. How can you defend that it's perfectly OK and legal for 175,000 Americans to own and use machineguns, but no one else, forever?
Enter Slide Fire Solutions owner USAF SSgt(RET) Jeremiah Cottle. Recognizing a need, he created the bump fire stock. He was awarded a U.S. Patent and BATFE legal concurrence in 2010 to manufacture and sell them to the citizenry, which as closely as possible reinstated their lawful ability to obtain something that had been denied to them for a quarter century.
So contrary to what the media and politicians are telling you, the bump stock is a "loophole" to partially restore a 2nd Amendment right that was taken from us in 1986. Spinning this any other way is flat our 100% wrong.
So if you believe bump stocks should be banned, you are in lockstep with Bill Hughes and the State of New Jersey. You can't spin it any other way. To attempt doing so is misleading and disingenuous. You must decide whether you'll abandon your principles, or stand and fight. Tread carefully...
Your understanding of history is correct.
The issue is given the current political/legal landscape, nobody cares or knows about the history. All they see is a SA being turned into a FA. This situation is not going to get us any points in court.
Your understanding of history is correct.
The issue is given the current political/legal landscape, nobody cares or knows about the history. All they see is a SA being turned into a FA. This situation is not going to get us any points in court.
Capitulate if you must, many of us won't. :(
What is going to happen now is there is going to be a law which bans devices which increase the rate of fire.
This calls into question every trigger made for every semi auto rifle, shotgun, and pistol.
It gives the ATF legal grounds to make "determinations" to ban any device they want.
This is the reality of the situation.
What is going to happen now is there is going to be a law which bans devices which increase the rate of fire.
This calls into question every trigger made for every semi auto rifle, shotgun, and pistol.
It gives the ATF legal grounds to make "determinations" to ban any device they want.
This is the reality of the situation.
The anti-gunners are coming for everything eventually, regardless of what you "give" them thinking it will slow them down or appease them momentarily. Don't cave, don't make it easier for them.
You give them bumpfires and it only emboldens them to go after that Gieselle SSA trigger...
Banning a piece of plastic or a trigger, etc is retarded. It won't change human nature it won't stop murder nor mass murder and it certainly won't stop evil from existing. It also won't stop the all out onslaught on our rights, all of them not just firearm rights.
Stop giving up your rights willingly, stop throwing others under the buss because you think they are fudd or whatever else.
Freedom and liberty are not succinct with this idiotic logic you guys are positing- "well what he does is dumb and that accessory is stupid and I don't use it so who cares if it's outlawed"
I don't care what you or anyone else thinks about what anyone else has, needs or should have. Liberty trumps all of that effing nonsense.
Honestly, anything we give them just turns into a check mark on the list and on to the next item. Wash rinse repeat. It's sad folks don't get it.
What is going to happen now is there is going to be a law which bans devices which increase the rate of fire.
This calls into question every trigger made for every semi auto rifle, shotgun, and pistol.
It gives the ATF legal grounds to make "determinations" to ban any device they want.
This is the reality of the situation.
by definition, a bump stock does not change it to full auto. There are no blurred lines, only people who don't know what they are looking at.
The anti-gunners are coming for everything eventually, regardless of what you "give" them thinking it will slow them down or appease them momentarily. Don't cave, don't make it easier for them.
You give them bumpfires and it only emboldens them to go after that Gieselle SSA trigger...
Banning a piece of plastic or a trigger, etc is retarded. It won't change human nature it won't stop murder nor mass murder and it certainly won't stop evil from existing. It also won't stop the all out onslaught on our rights, all of them not just firearm rights.
Stop giving up your rights willingly, stop throwing others under the buss because you think they are fudd or whatever else.
Freedom and liberty are not succinct with this idiotic logic you guys are positing- "well what he does is dumb and that accessory is stupid and I don't use it so who cares if it's outlawed"
I don't care what you or anyone else thinks about what anyone else has, needs or should have. Liberty trumps all of that effing nonsense.
Honestly, anything we give them just turns into a check mark on the list and on to the next item. Wash rinse repeat. It's sad folks don't get it.
AMEN!!!!!!!!!!
by definition, a bump stock does not change it to full auto. There are no blurred lines, only people who don't know what they are looking at.
I would say that that makes up the majority of the population, augmented by the equally ignorant news media, and will ultimately be legislated by equally clueless Senators and Congressmen.
by definition, a bump stock does not change it to full auto. There are no blurred lines, only people who don't know what they are looking at.
When has that mattered? Changing a stock and adding a scope didn't used to constitute "manufacturing", now it does. ATF as frequently and willfully ignored it's own definitions and determinations so many times it is astonishing.
The problem is that ATF is allowed to make these determinations at all. They rule by decree with the simple phrase "ATF has determined..." The same agency gave us 10 years where flash hiders and bayonet lugs made a firearm illegal and the owner a criminal.
Yes they do, and they damn well should!
Everyone who cherishes the 2nd Amendment needs to understand why the "bump fire" stock came into being. Republicans were working to combat liberal jurisdictions and the BATF in the mid 80's, which were prosecuting and imprisoning American citizens simply for exercising their 2nd Amendment rights. This effort was called the Firearms Owner's Protection Act of 1986. The purpose of this Act was entirely to prevent government abuses against the citizenry for exercising their rights under the 2nd Amendment
The ultra-liberal New Jersey Senator William J. "Bill" Hughes introduced a "poison pill" amendment to the bill that banned civilian sale of any machinegun manufactured after implementation of the Act (May 19, 1986). He was hoping that supporters of the FOPA would decline to vote for the bill due to the amendment, so that his state could continue violating the 2nd Amendment rights of Americans unimpeded. Even if they went ahead and passed it, he would effectively be denying the rights of all the citizenry in the country to own a machinegun. Everyone except approximately 175,000, which is the estimated number of legally transferrable machineguns in the NFA Register.
In essence, Senator Hughes created a "loophole" for the government to deny the citizenry their 2nd Amendment rights. How can you defend that it's perfectly OK and legal for 175,000 Americans to own and use machineguns, but no one else, forever?
Enter Slide Fire Solutions owner USAF SSgt(RET) Jeremiah Cottle. Recognizing a need, he created the bump fire stock. He was awarded a U.S. Patent and BATFE legal concurrence in 2010 to manufacture and sell them to the citizenry, which as closely as possible reinstated their lawful ability to obtain something that had been denied to them for a quarter century.
So contrary to what the media and politicians are telling you, the bump stock is a "loophole" to partially restore a 2nd Amendment right that was taken from us in 1986. Spinning this any other way is flat our 100% wrong.
So if you believe bump stocks should be banned, you are in lockstep with Bill Hughes and the State of New Jersey. You can't spin it any other way. To attempt doing so is misleading and disingenuous. You must decide whether you'll abandon your principles, or stand and fight. Tread carefully...
Hell Fire devices existed prior to FOPA 86.
Hell Fire devices existed prior to FOPA 86.
A hellfire isn't a bump stock. The HF satisfied the crowd that wouldn't do NFA. The BF is for those that CAN'T do NFA.
Doc Safari
10-05-17, 14:07
Just caught top-of-the-hour Fox News on the AM station I listen to.
Sounds like the NRA is caving to new restrictions on bump stocks, or at least caving into looking at new regs.
by definition, a bump stock does not change it to full auto. There are no blurred lines, only people who don't know what they are looking at.
Based off current law as it is written today.
From the NRA website:
'Despite the fact that the Obama administration approved the sale of bump fire stocks on at least two occasions, the National Rifle Association is calling on the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATFE) to immediately review whether these devices comply with federal law. The NRA believes that devices designed to allow semi-automatic rifles to function like fully-automatic rifles should be subject to additional regulations.'
It does mean that there is no requirement for additional legislation, however. Actually, not a bad move (given a bad hand to play), and, depending on how any regulations are promulgated, may be very limited in scope and subject to litigation.
Based off current law as it is written today.
That's the crux of it. It should be defined by law, not agency rulemaking or "determination letter".
This isn't why I'm not a member of the NRA.
Dist. Expert 26
10-05-17, 14:32
This isn't why I'm not a member of the NRA.
Same. They're utterly pathetic and every bit as spineless as the politicians they endorse.
It is defined by law
one discrete human action = one trigger movement = one bullet fired = not a machinegun
This is why the slidefire is legal along with the fostech trigger.
Everyone is up in arms about machine guns, which no one owns or uses and even less people have ever spent time behind- and bump fire stocks, the virtual ID card for white trash rednecks, that also no one owns or uses on here. I get the slippery slope theory, but denying the retardation of both slidefire stocks and binary triggers is.... retarded.
I'm stunned that at the time of this post, 11 members voted yes. Shame on the NRA also. Chip, chip, chip away until one day you wake up and our rights are gone.
ColtSeavers
10-05-17, 14:43
From the NRA website:
'Despite the fact that the Obama administration approved the sale of bump fire stocks on at least two occasions, the National Rifle Association is calling on the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATFE) to immediately review whether these devices comply with federal law. The NRA believes that devices designed to allow semi-automatic rifles to function like fully-automatic rifles should be subject to additional regulations.'
It does mean that there is no requirement for additional legislation, however. Actually, not a bad move (given a bad hand to play), and, depending on how any regulations are promulgated, may be very limited in scope and subject to litigation.
Gawd
F$&CKING
Damnit
There it is, the capitulation and shitty verbiage that leads to triggers next.
What took her so long? California Senator Diane Feinstein’s had almost three days, and now she’s announced the inevitable…a bill to ban bump fire stocks.
Sen. Dianne Feinstein, a longtime advocate of stricter gun control measures, introduced a bill Wednesday that would ban the sale and possession of bump-stock equipment and other devices that essentially turn a semiautomatic weapon into an automatic one.
]
And the NRA is apparently OK with that:
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-41519815?ocid=socialflow_facebook&ns_mchannel=social&ns_campaign=bbcnews&ns_source=facebook
Is it just me, or don't people think it should actually be established they were used in that event before banning them?
Gawd
F$&CKING
Damnit
There it is, the capitulation and shitty verbiage that leads to triggers next.
The only reason bumpfire stocks exist is because of the Hughes Amendment. Ergo, the proper move is to repeal the Hughes Amendment. I'm perfectly OK with making bf stocks NFA, so long as Hughes is simultaneously repealed.
I say that knowing full well what that would do to my RR M16A1 "investment". :)
Ironic. Half you assholes are calling for a ban on bumpfire stocks while the other half are pissed at the NRA. What a segmented group we've become.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
BoringGuy45
10-05-17, 14:55
Let's all calm down.
Again, as FromMyColdDeadHands said, rather than just stonewalling, it's time to get out in front of this, and use this to our advantage. This is why the left wins; not only because they eat the elephant one bite at a time, but because the right refuses to eat the elephant unless it can be swallowed whole. If we can take two steps forward to only one step back over this whole bump fire thing, it's a victory. We can come back for this stuff later. We need to figure out a way to advance. We've been dug into defensive positions for too long.
Ironic. Half you assholes are calling for a ban on bumpfire stocks while the other half are pissed at the NRA. What a segmented group we've become.
It's a gadget that means nothing to anyone but mall ninjas and such so many see it as a sacrificial lamb they don't care about anyway to get the gun grabbers away from the stuff they really want, ignoring the obvious slippery slope and the fact at worse, said gadget used in exactly one mass shooting to date.
Let's all calm down.
If we can take two steps forward to only one step back over this whole bump fire thing, it's a victory. We can come back for this stuff later. We need to figure out a way to advance. We've been dug into defensive positions for too long.
Unfortunately NRA just gave away our one step backward in exchange for NO steps forward.
Let's all calm down.
Again, as FromMyColdDeadHands said, rather than just stonewalling, it's time to get out in front of this, and use this to our advantage. This is why the left wins; not only because they eat the elephant one bite at a time, but because the right refuses to eat the elephant unless it can be swallowed whole. If we can take two steps forward to only one step back over this whole bump fire thing, it's a victory. We can come back for this stuff later. We need to figure out a way to advance. We've been dug into defensive positions for too long.
Agreed. Repealing Hughes to get bfs' on the NFA registry is the only "bite" I'm willing to take.
RetroRevolver77
10-05-17, 15:02
The slippery slope, banning anything that can change the rate of fire for a standard semi-auto- making sear packs, registered bolts, adjustable triggers, binary triggers, slide fire stocks all illegal.
Your understanding of history is correct.
The issue is given the current political/legal landscape, nobody cares or knows about the history. All they see is a SA being turned into a FA. This situation is not going to get us any points in court.
Or the court of public opinion. Like I said earlier, you're neighbors, co-workers, your children's teachers, etc. don't give one flying **** that this meets the definition of the law. If a law outlawing these is worded correctly by Republicans instead of Democrats, you can protect normal semi-autos. If Republicans do nothing and we wait until there's a democratic congress, you can kiss all semiautos goodbye.
I don't think the problem is hardware, it's software. I think that once the investigation is completed, we will learn that Paddock had mental health issues.
We need to think about how to address mental health issues and what steps we can take to help prevent another mass casualty incident. Banning an item used to increase rate of fire will not solve the problem.
People into bump fire shooting will just watch and download and save the many youtube vids, that show you how to built a better and cheaper one yourself. And the black on black gang killing in Chicago and other cities across the nation, that have the tuff gun laws will go on and on and on. You don't here boo from the CNN talking heads, BLM and Antifa , or anyone taking a stupid knee over that. Evidently they don't care.
While the NRA is not perfect, IMHO, without them we would have lost our gun rights a long time ago. Don't let *anyone* try to divide and conquer us gun owners by insinuating the NRA is crooked, and just in it for the money. Anti gunners will try and have been infiltrating pro gun forums to create doubt and cause strife and division about organizations working in our behalf to keep our gun rights.
Dist. Expert 26
10-05-17, 15:10
The only reason bumpfire stocks exist is because of the Hughes Amendment. Ergo, the proper move is to repeal the Hughes Amendment. I'm perfectly OK with making bf stocks NFA, so long as Hughes is simultaneously repealed.
I say that knowing full well what that would do to my RR M16A1 "investment". :)
That would require the NRA to grow a spine. They'll just roll over and give up rights without even trying to bargain.
From the second part of this statement, it sounds like they are going to attempt to exchange national CCW reciprocity for a bump-stock ban:
https://twitter.com/ChrisCoxNRA/status/916014752442220549
From the second part of this statement, it sounds like they are going to attempt to exchange national CCW reciprocity for a bump-stock ban:
https://twitter.com/ChrisCoxNRA/status/916014752442220549
Interesting. That would be a fair trade and the anti types not doubt think the bump stock is actually a thing.
From the second part of this statement, it sounds like they are going to attempt to exchange national CCW reciprocity for a bump-stock ban:
https://twitter.com/ChrisCoxNRA/status/916014752442220549
I voted no on the poll and am against simply offering up things to be banned without something in exchange.
With that being said if they agreed to concealed carry reciprocity in exchange for agreement to ban bumpfire devices I would change my opinion.
wildcard600
10-05-17, 15:43
National reciprocity for bump fire stocks ?
Stop kidding yourselves. States/cities already openly defy federal laws with zero repercussions. Any city or state that does not want citizens to be armed will scoff at any regulation that says otherwise.
Suppressors and SBR off NFA for bump fire stocks ? Gladly.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/nra-white-house-congress-support-review-lawfulness-bump-stocks-190949986.html
Its a done deal!!! White House as well as NRA agree that bump stocks need regulations!!
https://www.yahoo.com/news/nra-white-house-congress-support-review-lawfulness-bump-stocks-190949986.html
Its a done deal!!! White House as well as NRA agree that bump stocks need regulations!!
Republicans can kiss 2018/2020 good bye.
Doc Safari
10-05-17, 15:51
Republicans can kiss 2018/2020 good bye.
That may have already happened over not being able to repeal Obamacare. This is just the cherry on top.
Suppressors and SBR off NFA for bump fire stocks ? Gladly.
This!
I voted no on the poll and am against simply offering up things to be banned without something in exchange.
With that being said if they agreed to concealed carry reciprocity in exchange for agreement to ban bumpfire devices I would change my opinion.
Ditto for me.
But, I still kind of like the NRA suggesting that the issue be kicked to BATF&E. Given the past history between the NRA and BATF&E, do you think the NRA made that suggestion lightly?
If the BATF&E takes this up as a rulemaking, then the GOP Congress can say "no need to act now, it's in the hands of the 'experts'." BATF&E publishes a notice, solicits comments, then issues a rule, many months from now.
If the BATF&E reverses itself and the rule states something like "installation of a bump fire stock makes the firearms a NFA weapon," then you will have litigation on the subject, which the BATF&E will probably lose, after many years of lawyers, hearings, amici briefs and hassle. End result? No impact, and years have gone by.
I would be more concerned if the BATF&E either took no action, or, confirmed its previous view that a bump fire stock does not involve the NFA. But, even so, time will have passed and the political climate would be more calm than this torrid mess now.
It's far worse to take actions that the Dems want now, than to wait a while and see how things shake out.
The ONLY sensible and fair trade would be repealing Hughes. Not national reciprocity, not sbr's and cans. Machineguns, the real ones.
And I don't blame them! We already skirt the law with "arm braces" as a type of paperless SBR. Bump stocks, binary triggers were just asking for trouble. The shooter was using a Surefire 100 round magazine so I can guess that 30+ round magazines may be up for review as well. I doubt 30 round magazines will ever be banned nationally but 50, 60, 100 round? Perhaps. Im afraid this last shooting is going to be the ice breaker congress needs to for both GOB and Dems to start talking. I doubt they will take away our guns but they will make it a headache trying to buy one and possibly make us wait for a period of time before receiving it. I have heard a lot of republicans talk about other things they can do besides "gun control".
vicious_cb
10-05-17, 15:56
22 Sunshine patriots voted in this thread. If the shoe fits.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mEemOMsz5Q8
Doc Safari
10-05-17, 15:58
The 800-lb gorilla in the room is that if we give an inch on ANYTHING, then the next time there is another mass shooting the libs will be saying, "Well, you let us regulate bump stocks last time. Clearly (fill in the blank) is just as bad with this recent shooting..."
And we will be in a downward spiral where each shooting is another excuse to get rid of something else and they will argue that we were reasonable last time-why not this time.
BoringGuy45
10-05-17, 16:10
Republicans can kiss 2018/2020 good bye.
People are going to vote for even more anti-gun politicians in their place?
If anything, they're saving their asses by keeping the moderates and independents happy. The MAGA crowd isn't going to vote Dem no matter what.
People are going to vote for even more anti-gun politicians in their place?
History shows they stay home or vote 3rd party. Ask Bush41 how 92 went after he pissed off voters with tax raises and gun control. Even victory in Gulf War could not save him. Add in all the other Republican failures as mentioned, they have no chance really.
A friend of mine just sold his whatever brand bump fire stock on GB for $650 ! I hate him :) because I don't have one to sell.
Averageman
10-05-17, 16:18
Next they will go after triggers.
Think about that.
Everyone is up in arms about machine guns, which no one owns or uses and even less people have ever spent time behind- and bump fire stocks, the virtual ID card for white trash rednecks, that also no one owns or uses on here. I get the slippery slope theory, but denying the retardation of both slidefire stocks and binary triggers is.... retarded.
Correct
Looks like our friends the Republicans are limbering up their arms and sharpening their knives for another round of back stabbing.
Next they will go after triggers.
Think about that.
As long as NRA/Republicans give things up without a fight, they will keep coming.
Looks like our friends the Republicans are limbering up their backs and lubing up their backsides for another round of cuckery.
Fify. :(
Fify. :(
That too. Maybe their battle cry should be BOHICA, BOHICA or die!!!!!
Looks like our friends the Republicans are limbering up their arms and sharpening their knives for another round of back stabbing.
This situation is what the GOPe needed to stick it to Trump voters for putting Trump in power.
This situation is what the GOPe needed to stick it to Trump voters for putting Trump in power.
Yes, we have seen the enemy and they are us. :(
Look at all the gun owners in posts on F*ckface advocating for banning these things. It is almost disheartening.
While we are at it, let's put all who own electronic devices that have the ability for one to have a voice, on a mandatory registry list and require backgrounds checks to purchase them. Where these devices can access the internet, require permits/licenses too. That is essentially the First Amendment equivalent to what people are advocating for in regards to the Second Amendment. How absurd is that?
FromMyColdDeadHand
10-05-17, 17:01
The ONLY sensible and fair trade would be repealing Hughes. Not national reciprocity, not sbr's and cans. Machineguns, the real ones.
The only way that banning the stocks makes sense is with a GOP bill that makes sure it limits it to these slide-fire stocks and most importantly, and what everyone seems to really over look, is that the GOP gets all the credit for the only national level gun control to make our streets safe from machine guns in the 21st century. That is the only thing that matters is you get the shouting point that the DNC didn't do anything when they controlled everything. Everytime gun control comes all that you talk about is how the GOP did something and the DNC didn't. Why didn't the DNC do it when they had a chance?
Hell, have the NRA be against it. The optics look even better then. And get the passed this week. That way the GOP acted quickly, against the NRA and made streets safer- things the DNC never did. Then you hammer, hammer, hammer that point. Pull the nail out and hammer, hammer, hammer it again. Then if needed, pivot to Chicago and how most gun deaths happen in Dem run cities.
The GOP waited too long and now you have Feinstein out there. Now you pretty much need to put national reciprocity or suppressors in there to keep dems from voting for it because you need to be able to say that the Dems voted against taking the loop-hole machine guns off the streets.
You do see what is possible here, right. It isn't that hard to flip the gun debate hammering that the GOP has taken over the past 20 years and if you act fast and smart get inside the DNC OODA loop and out maneuver them. Heck. Make it a theme. Find some meaningless or ineffective thing in each mass shooting to legislate on.
Keep them on their back heels so that they can't tee up on mags, ARs, UBCs and all the stuff that really matters.
How about winning for once and not whining about losing?
Doc Safari
10-05-17, 17:06
The only way that banning the stocks makes sense is with a GOP bill that makes sure it limits it to these slide-fire stocks and most importantly, and what everyone seems to really over look, is that the GOP gets all the credit for the only national level gun control to make our streets safe from machine guns in the 21st century. That is the only thing that matters is you get the shouting point that the DNC didn't do anything when they controlled everything. Everytime gun control comes all that you talk about is how the GOP did something and the DNC didn't. Why didn't the DNC do it when they had a chance?
Hell, have the NRA be against it. The optics look even better then. And get the passed this week. That way the GOP acted quickly, against the NRA and made streets safer- things the DNC never did. Then you hammer, hammer, hammer that point. Pull the nail out and hammer, hammer, hammer it again. Then if needed, pivot to Chicago and how most gun deaths happen in Dem run cities.
The GOP waited too long and now you have Feinstein out there. Now you pretty much need to put national reciprocity or suppressors in there to keep dems from voting for it because you need to be able to say that the Dems voted against taking the loop-hole machine guns off the streets.
You do see what is possible here, right. It isn't that hard to flip the gun debate hammering that the GOP has taken over the past 20 years and if you act fast and smart get inside the DNC OODA loop and out maneuver them. Heck. Make it a theme. Find some meaningless or ineffective thing in each mass shooting to legislate on.
Keep them on their back heels so that they can't tee up on mags, ARs, UBCs and all the stuff that really matters.
How about winning for once and not whining about losing?
I see your argument, but it's a given that politicians first and foremost care only about keeping their jobs. What you're talking about sets a dangerous precedent in that if the GOP suddenly sees that gun control is a winning issue, they will happily become gun grabbers just like the left. Look at the Obamacare debacle: somehow there are enough RINO's to keep the thing alive even though the House voted a gazillion times to repeal it when they knew the repeal wouldn't pass the Senate or be signed by Obama. The last thing you want is for RINO's to suddenly see that gun control is a winning issue. We are screwed, blued, and tattooed if that happens.
The only hope if the GOP gets on board with this is that it costs so may Repubs their seats (to independents, not Dems) in 2018 that they know what caused their defeat and it goes down in history as "we'd best not make that mistake again."
I'm beginning to share the opinion that the best thing is to let ATF be the quintessential bad guy and ban them under current regulations. Then the NRA can say they tried, and the GOP can tell their base they tried to protect gun rights, and everybody except range ninjas will be happy.
This will never happen.
because unlike Republicans and the NRA, the anti-gunners NEVER give in.
The only way that banning the stocks makes sense is with a GOP bill that makes sure it limits it to these slide-fire stocks and most importantly, and what everyone seems to really over look, is that the GOP gets all the credit for the only national level gun control to make our streets safe from machine guns in the 21st century. That is the only thing that matters is you get the shouting point that the DNC didn't do anything when they controlled everything. Everytime gun control comes all that you talk about is how the GOP did something and the DNC didn't. Why didn't the DNC do it when they had a chance?
Hell, have the NRA be against it. The optics look even better then. And get the passed this week. That way the GOP acted quickly, against the NRA and made streets safer- things the DNC never did. Then you hammer, hammer, hammer that point. Pull the nail out and hammer, hammer, hammer it again. Then if needed, pivot to Chicago and how most gun deaths happen in Dem run cities.
The GOP waited too long and now you have Feinstein out there. Now you pretty much need to put national reciprocity or suppressors in there to keep dems from voting for it because you need to be able to say that the Dems voted against taking the loop-hole machine guns off the streets.
You do see what is possible here, right. It isn't that hard to flip the gun debate hammering that the GOP has taken over the past 20 years and if you act fast and smart get inside the DNC OODA loop and out maneuver them. Heck. Make it a theme. Find some meaningless or ineffective thing in each mass shooting to legislate on.
Keep them on their back heels so that they can't tee up on mags, ARs, UBCs and all the stuff that really matters.
How about winning for once and not whining about losing?
How about you forgot to mention repealing Hughes. That is the only way to "win" on this topic. Nothing else makes sense.
The only reason bumpfire stocks exist is because of the Hughes Amendment. Ergo, the proper move is to repeal the Hughes Amendment. I'm perfectly OK with making bf stocks NFA, so long as Hughes is simultaneously repealed.
I say that knowing full well what that would do to my RR M16A1 "investment". :)
Actually you bring up a means to sell the repell of the Hughes amendment. Pitch to to the dems that it would destroy the value of the investments of gun owners, not that it really would affect some things that have honest collector value all that much, but it could be made to appear that away, and ensuring that the time to take possession would be increased due to the way the ATF works.
There would of course be all kinds of bullshit to deal with in the media if it passed because heads would ****ing explode.
RetroRevolver77
10-05-17, 17:28
The left long term goal; "we must ban all semi-autos due to the Miculek loophole".
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ddPTyoV-Irc
Actually you bring up a means to sell the repell of the Hughes amendment. Pitch to to the dems that it would destroy the value of the investments of gun owners, not that it really would affect some things that have honest collector value all that much, but it could be made to appear that away, and ensuring that the time to take possession would be increased due to the way the ATF works.
There would of course be all kinds of bullshit to deal with in the media if it passed because heads would ****ing explode.
Yep, and I'd be placing orders for an M249 and M60E6 shortly thereafter!
Doc Safari
10-05-17, 17:33
The left long term goal; "we must ban all semi-autos due to the Miculek loophole".
"You can keep your semi-auto if you want to."
Back in the 1990's certain members of Congress wanted to extend NFA to include semi-autos. It's already been thought of. I still have a gun publication from that era that hit the newsstands before the final version of the 1994 AWB passed, and a couple of the articles lamented how gun owners were going to have to register their semi-autos to comply. Chilling.
All the NRA had to do was keep it's mouth shut. How hard is that? The investigation isn't even over, and there is still no confirmation a bump stock even contributed substantially to the event.
I have publicly supported the NRA on this page, at my rifle range, and in the general public. I have personally raised over $150,000 for the Friends on NRA. Even though the FNRA doesn't involve the political side of things, it is inseparable from the NRA. The NRA can suck it if they head any further down this path and never see another dime from me.
The only way that banning the stocks makes sense is with a GOP bill that makes sure it limits it to these slide-fire stocks and most importantly, and what everyone seems to really over look, is that the GOP gets all the credit for the only national level gun control to make our streets safe from machine guns in the 21st century. That is the only thing that matters is you get the shouting point that the DNC didn't do anything when they controlled everything. Everytime gun control comes all that you talk about is how the GOP did something and the DNC didn't. Why didn't the DNC do it when they had a chance?
Hell, have the NRA be against it. The optics look even better then. And get the passed this week. That way the GOP acted quickly, against the NRA and made streets safer- things the DNC never did. Then you hammer, hammer, hammer that point. Pull the nail out and hammer, hammer, hammer it again. Then if needed, pivot to Chicago and how most gun deaths happen in Dem run cities.
The GOP waited too long and now you have Feinstein out there. Now you pretty much need to put national reciprocity or suppressors in there to keep dems from voting for it because you need to be able to say that the Dems voted against taking the loop-hole machine guns off the streets.
You do see what is possible here, right. It isn't that hard to flip the gun debate hammering that the GOP has taken over the past 20 years and if you act fast and smart get inside the DNC OODA loop and out maneuver them. Heck. Make it a theme. Find some meaningless or ineffective thing in each mass shooting to legislate on.
Keep them on their back heels so that they can't tee up on mags, ARs, UBCs and all the stuff that really matters.
How about winning for once and not whining about losing?
**** that
Gentlemen,
Wheither you like it or not, a bill is going to the floor.
We can either sit back, bitch, and get nothing from it; or we can load it up with stuff that we want. At this time, this is the only realistic outcome.
You have a GOP in which more than half are RINOs who don't give a shit about guns. At best, 25% of congress is truly pro gun.
Yep, and I'd be placing orders for an M249 and M60E6 shortly thereafter!
I still want an MP5 personally. Actually, that is really the one gun in FA that I really like. After that, meh. Not to say having happy switch wouldn't be nice to have just on GP. Of course, after my new MP5 arrives a belt fed would be the next logical step. A man can dream after all damn it.
Sorry for thread drift.
kaiservontexas
10-05-17, 18:12
Infringe on nothing.
If I were able to get a FA. I would like a B&T APC 45.
Coal Dragger
10-05-17, 18:19
Gentlemen,
Wheither you like it or not, a bill is going to the floor.
We can either sit back, bitch, and get nothing from it; or we can load it up with stuff that we want. At this time, this is the only realistic outcome.
You have a GOP in which more than half are RINOs who don't give a shit about guns. At best, 25% of congress is truly pro gun.
You're trying to convince zealots to see reason and make the best deal they can under the circumstances. It will not work here, not enough mental flexibility.
I'll write my congress critters and ask that in exchange for bumpfire stocks being banned, that the Hughes Act be repealed, national CCW is included, and suppressors and SBR's no longer need a class 3 stamp etc.
Tack all that on, and let Democrats vote against it.
You're trying to convince zealots to see reason and make the best deal they can under the circumstances. It will not work here, not enough mental flexibility.
I'll write my congress critters and ask that in exchange for bumpfire stocks being banned, that the Hughes Act be repealed, national CCW is included, and suppressors and SBR's no longer need a class 3 stamp etc.
Tack all that on, and let Democrats vote against it.
NOW we're getting somewhere! If the Dems can insert poison pill amendments in 1986, there isn't a reason in the world that we can't do the same!
FromMyColdDeadHand
10-05-17, 18:30
How about you forgot to mention repealing Hughes. That is the only way to "win" on this topic. Nothing else makes sense.
So the only solution is to make FA legal again? I really don't think that you can win with the argument that since these bump-fire are legal, we need to make all FA legal. It would be a nice trick. Registering all the bump-fire with back ground checks and open the door to new FA guns. That might be a sweet win.
The lack of strategic vision here and the desire to stay on the Dem message about guns is really disheartening. There is an opportunity here to flip the script and change the direction and tone of the debate. The GOP did something and the DNC didn't- and look at all the gun deaths in cities run by DEM mayors. Compare the death rate of young black men in those cities with the death rate of young black men serving in war zones.
Everyone is up in arms about machine guns, which no one owns or uses and even less people have ever spent time behind- and bump fire stocks, the virtual ID card for white trash rednecks, that also no one owns or uses on here. I get the slippery slope theory, but denying the retardation of both slidefire stocks and binary triggers is.... retarded.
Agreed. This is not the hill to die on.
Gun control is fronted by the entire democratic party as well as ever celebrity on twitter, Facebook, and every late night show on TV, Trevor Noah, Bill Maher, Jimmy Kimmel, Jimmy Fallon, Conan Obrien, John Oliver, Stephen Colbert, Seth Meyers- its ****ing everywhere. Its not going to go away. The NRA can not go up against Hollywood NBA, NFL, MSN, Google, Facebook, or the celebrity stars who endorse gun control. We have who? Fox News? A couple Navy Seals, the wife's of a few dead navy seals, a few country music stars and some cute blonde bimbos. That's it!! We either give them an inch and I mean a single ****ing inch or we fight and loose! Plain and simple END OF STORY!! We either lose a little or we lose a lot!
donlapalma
10-05-17, 18:43
Deleted.
Dist. Expert 26
10-05-17, 18:45
So what happens to the bump stocks already in circulation? Confiscation? Grandfathered in? Just how far are you willing to go to appease your enemies?
So the only solution is to make FA legal again? I really don't think that you can win with the argument that since these bump-fire are legal, we need to make all FA legal. It would be a nice trick. Registering all the bump-fire with back ground checks and open the door to new FA guns. That might be a sweet win.
The lack of strategic vision here and the desire to stay on the Dem message about guns is really disheartening. There is an opportunity here to flip the script and change the direction and tone of the debate. The GOP did something and the DNC didn't- and look at all the gun deaths in cities run by DEM mayors. Compare the death rate of young black men in those cities with the death rate of young black men serving in war zones.
See post 193. You don't have a voice to control the message. Anything you try to do to "flip the script" will be drowned out immediately. So your "strategic vision" is a figment of your imagination.
The only chance we have to flip this into a win, is to insert poison pills and force the Dems to decide just how bad they want it. That's the only way we're going to reach a compromise.
This situation is what the GOPe needed to stick it to Trump voters for putting Trump in power.
Yeah, because the Paul Ryan crew was going to have our back right?
RetroRevolver77
10-05-17, 19:03
What is an acceptable cyclic rate of fire for a civilian?
600 RPM? 60 RPM? 6 RPM?
Because that's where this is going.
7n6
Well if ban legislation is inevitable (as it now seems over the last 24 hrs) we need to take advantage of the lefts ignorance and disingenuous slobbering quest to get "something". The "takes" have to FAR out way the "gives."
If they are to get a victory it must be a Pyrrhic victory. Nat. Reciprocity, SBR and suppressors off the NFA, and language that bans magazine restrictions, etc.
RetroRevolver77
10-05-17, 19:08
Well if ban legislation is inevitable (as it now seems over the last 24 hrs) we need to take advantage of the lefts ignorance and disingenuous slobbering quest to get "something". The "takes" have to FAR out way the "gives."
If they are to get a victory it must be a Pyrrhic victory. Nat. Reciprocity, SBR and suppressors off the NFA, and language that bans magazine restrictions, etc.
You seem to think this is a negotiation.
Paul Ryan already said the HPA was dead in the water after this incident, we need to fire his ass and push it through, hard.
You seem to think this is a negotiation.
Yep, this is an attack by a hostile enemy. We either defeat them, fight them to a draw, or lose. There is no fourth option. :(
I am a Jew, I don't give a damn what laws are passed. History bears witness to the folly of Jews not owning lots of guns and ammo. Don't get me started on how much I hate liberal Jews.
My guns are mine, my right to own them was given to me by G-D and can't be taken away from me by any man.
Now as to bump fire and the situation in our country.
It was once said that politics is the art of compromise. You want to ban bump fire, then give me nation wide CCW.
But since they just want to ban things and not compromise, then I am willing to fight you. No quarter given and if the NRA rolls over for a ban, then they will never get a penny from me from that point on.
RetroRevolver77
10-05-17, 19:55
It's already happening, banning bump stocks is simply not enough.
http://www.cnn.com/2017/10/05/politics/nra-bump-stock/index.html
Next we'll need to ban gas tubes, gas pistons, triggers- just start banning individual parts. No rifle shall fire more than x rounds per minute- then whittle that down over time.
I told you guys, it's the slippery slope.
7n6
This debate can easily be viewed as one big slippery slope logical fallacy.
If we get rid of bumpfire stocks, next guns will be confiscated.
Really? How exactly does that work?
Official Kremlin Transmission
RetroRevolver77
10-05-17, 20:53
This debate can easily be viewed as one big slippery slope logical fallacy.
If we get rid of bumpfire stocks, next guns will be confiscated.
Really? How exactly does that work?
Official Kremlin Transmission
Because they can then form a new conversation around cyclic rate.
"No civilian needs to fire more than 20 rounds per minute to defend themselves".
"A skilled hunter doesn't need more than 5 rounds per minute to hunt deer."
"These gas tubes are allowing for unfair cyclic rate loophole"
Etc etc.
I feel like I'm the only one making this point repeatedly, the GOP, NRA, etc should simply state they will hold off on voting/supporting a discussion on banning bunp stocks until the investigation is done and the findings released. Would not be the first nor the last time X was banned and after the fact it's found X did not plat any, and or a major, part in Y crime. That bump stocks found in the room a crime don't f-ing make here.
I feel like I'm the only one making this point repeatedly, the GOP, NRA, etc should simply state they will hold off on voting/supporting a discussion on banning bunp stocks until the investigation is done and the findings released. Would not be the first nor the last time X was banned and after the fact it's found X did not plat any, and or a major, part in Y crime. That bump stocks found in the room a crime don't f-ing make here.
Yep. The NRA should have just kept their mouth shut. They will gain ZERO members by taking the middle road. The will likely lose millions by doing what they are doing, myself included.
FromMyColdDeadHand
10-05-17, 21:18
Because they can then form a new conversation around cyclic rate.
"No civilian needs to fire more than 20 rounds per minute to defend themselves".
"A skilled hunter doesn't need more than 5 rounds per minute to hunt deer."
"These gas tubes are allowing for unfair cyclic rate loophole"
Etc etc.
Easy answer.
"The GOP is the only political party to pass national level gun safety legislation after a mass shooting. They did it within a week, over the objections of NRA. This is something that the Democrats didn't do when they controlled the House, Senate and the Presidency. At the same time alarming numbers of young black men are killed in cities run by Democratic mayors. The truth is that Democrats like to make noise about guns but when it comes to actually doing something- even when they are in control, they prefer to politicize the issue rather than actually address the issue."
The only slope is the one you rhetorically snap kick their asses backwards on. You need something besides "It's my right" and something about the Founders. I'm tired of being on the defensive when it comes to guns. Play their game harder and smarter than they are playing it. We have good arguments on FA vs SA, gun ownership up with crime down, the effect on CCW on crime, and how few CCWers are involved in crime and all the other winners.
Bump-stocks are a loser. A horrible argument to pin all our other's futures on. But you have to pass a bill FAST. No hold up for dem changes. Anyone who gets in the way is flayed alive for getting in the way of saving lives.
Seriously. This is crisis management and politics 101.
Bump stocks are a shit sandwhich and people seem to think it can be traded for something. It is a clerical error by the ATF and some people seem to think it is manna from heaven.
The slipper slope started with the NFA and limiting barrel length on a semi auto fire arm.
They are going for banning all semi auto. Anything else is stupid, they just have to whittle away at it.
There for we need to seek to remove short barrel rifles from the NFA. This will solve the arm brace issue to.
I see how a belt loop and bump stick are different. I see how a bump stock is a physical modification to the gun. I also see how the gun does not have an auto sear or fcg. It's a grey zone. It wouldn't have surprised me if the atf shot down the bump stock in the first place. But I do think 'to late now'
We have compromised. We did it with machine guns. Under the constitution we should have them. Morally we should be able to have them. But we gave them up because it wasn't safe. That's the line. Full auto vs semi auto.
We gave up all full auto, we should never give up any part of semi auto. To include number of rounds fed or barrel length.
I feel like I'm the only one making this point repeatedly, the GOP, NRA, etc should simply state they will hold off on voting/supporting a discussion on banning bunk stocks until the investigation is done and the findings released. Would not be the first nor the last time X was banned and after the fact it's found X did not plat any, and or a major, part in Y crime.
Exactly! But they didn't do that now did they?
There are two scenarios. One, they watched the news with urine running down their legs. Two, they had a costly amber liquid (probably over ice because they're heathens) as they discussed throwing us under the bus on the phone because that's how they did it in 1986, so it should work just fine this time too.
Either way, eff em. All we need is one Senator to shove a poison pill amendment up their keisters at the last minute, then primary the hell out of the RINO cucks in 2018. I've got a tax stamp equivalent check for the Senator that burns them and another one for a promising primary challenger in a tight GOP primary.
Seriously, this isn't over yet and now is the time to fight dirtier than ever before.
You seem to think this is a negotiation.
I hope it's not but from what I'm reading and hearing I think there is a very high chance a GOP backed bill is written to ban these.
MountainRaven
10-05-17, 22:10
I feel like I'm the only one making this point repeatedly, the GOP, NRA, etc should simply state they will hold off on voting/supporting a discussion on banning bunp stocks until the investigation is done and the findings released. Would not be the first nor the last time X was banned and after the fact it's found X did not plat any, and or a major, part in Y crime. That bump stocks found in the room a crime don't f-ing make here.
Per NPR this evening, all that the GOP and NRA have called for, in essence, are hearings. Not legislation. So it may be a while after the hearings that we get any legislation.
Easy answer.
"The GOP is the only political party to pass national level gun safety legislation after a mass shooting. They did it within a week, over the objections of NRA. This is something that the Democrats didn't do when they controlled the House, Senate and the Presidency. At the same time alarming numbers of young black men are killed in cities run by Democratic mayors. The truth is that Democrats like to make noise about guns but when it comes to actually doing something- even when they are in control, they prefer to politicize the issue rather than actually address the issue."
The only slope is the one you rhetorically snap kick their asses backwards on. You need something besides "It's my right" and something about the Founders. I'm tired of being on the defensive when it comes to guns. Play their game harder and smarter than they are playing it. We have good arguments on FA vs SA, gun ownership up with crime down, the effect on CCW on crime, and how few CCWers are involved in crime and all the other winners.
Bump-stocks are a loser. A horrible argument to pin all our other's futures on. But you have to pass a bill FAST. No hold up for dem changes. Anyone who gets in the way is flayed alive for getting in the way of saving lives.
Seriously. This is crisis management and politics 101.
Bump stocks are a shit sandwhich and people seem to think it can be traded for something. It is a clerical error by the ATF and some people seem to think it is manna from heaven.
I'm not sure how to put this...
This is like being a German general in 1944 and suggesting that letting the Allies take Normandy is key to defeating them. Or a Spanish general in 1898 thinking that surrendering San Juan Hill will preserve Santiago and Spanish possession of Cuba.
I'm all for trading the Hughes Amendment or National Reciprocity and the Hearing Protection Act for bump-fire stocks. But you're not suggesting that. You're even suggesting that it shouldn't be done.
What you're suggesting is giving an uncontested beachhead that our political opponents and part-time allies can use to regulate the weight and length of trigger pulls and resets and even the mere possession of semi-automatic firearms of all descriptions and types.
https://www.everydaynodaysoff.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/Illustrated-Guide-To-Gun-Control.png
Unpopular opinion incoming. I don't see banning bump stocks as a slippery slope. They're an outlier, a fluke - a tacky, gimmicky mod that no serious shooter ever uses. The current interpretation that these don't actually alter the weapon for full-auto is a bizarre technicality, and quite the stretch of the imagination. The intent of them is clear. There doesn't even necessarily need to be new legislation - a narrow reinterpretation by the ATF on these devices would not bother me at all.
They're garbage devices. We'd be giving up nothing. I say "return to regular order" instead of going to battle over a junk piece of plastic just to stick it to "liberals". That level of petty divisiveness will cause much bigger problems for everyone eventually.
You seem to think this is a negotiation.
I love all the people here that think they have any influence at all on legislation talking about the wish list they'd like to tack on to the incoming and likely inevitable wave of bullshit the anti-gunners have planned. You think you're going to get suppressors after the left's lord and savior Hilldawg says no? Or repeal legislation preventing ownership of a legit MG?
Laughable. It's like wearing a "f*** cancer" shirt. It's a nice sentiment. But you're still dying of cancer...
Since nobody here affects what laws will be chosen and enacted "for our own good", if we walk away with a *very specifically* worded bill on bump stocks or whatever else they decide to "define", it'll be a stroke of luck...
And after we have this wonderful bipartisan love affair, there will be plenty of future opportunities for both sides to reach across the aisle to further "define" this and any other inalienable-my-ass right.
It is ALL a slippery slope!
Unfortunately this forum's membership are the equivalent of the kids in the back seat asking if we could please slow down a bit being ignored because "the adults are talking"...
FWIW, I *get* both sides of this argument, and I might have actually agreed with the pro-ban crowd if there was any legitimacy to the claims that there's a fair trade to be had here.
But this is just going to end, as usual, with another "thing" being banned or used to find some loophole to re-define another thing to snatch later, and given that we've already been written off as worthless deplorables by these ****ers, no amount of pro-active self-flagellating goodwill on my part is going to change that.
But what the hell do I know, I'm just one of the kids...
FromMyColdDeadHand
10-05-17, 22:30
Screw hearings. This isn't time for deliberation. Hearings are for when you want to draw things out and make people look bad. You ram this fast and hard so that people don't start asking questions about all the other stuff around triggers and cyclic rates. You ram it through THIS WEEK. That is the only way this works.
Hearings? Are you all serious? Sure, let's have 58 sets of families come in and 500 injured people take the stands with their crutches and scars. Then you have the Dems walking them in and out and it is the Dems and the victims vs the GOP who is defending the shooters tools. Sure, that is going to go well.
You get it passed, like in the next 48 hours so the Sunday shows aren't about the bump stocks and the GOP arming mass killers, it is about how Dems never do anything on guns.
This is simple.
Ok, really simple test. Show me a post from when the Slide-stock came out or when the ATF letter was released where anyone here hailed this as a major win and a huge move forward in gun rights. You can only be pissed off at it going away as much as you were excited that they were invented. All I can find is some reviews that it actually worked and was kind of fun and over 50% of posters talking about how ghey it is. Show me the posts from before the stocks introduction where people were demanding something like the bump-stock.
All of a sudden it's Mom, Apple Pie and bump-stocks.
They arrived on the short-bus with a note from mother ATF and no one should mourn their passing.
It is a quantum gun right. As soon as everyone looked more closely at them, the bump-stock disappeared into the quantum foam.
So your willing to concede infringement over something (albeit retarded in nature) and somehow you're cool with that?
Solid dude...
Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk
Ok, really simple test. Show me a post from when the Slide-stock came out or when the ATF letter was released where anyone here hailed this as a major win and a huge move forward in gun rights. You can only be pissed off at it going away as much as you were excited that they were invented. All I can find is some reviews that it actually worked and was kind of fun and over 50% of posters talking about how ghey it is. Show me the posts from before the stocks introduction where people were demanding something like the bump-stock
When Akins Accelerator came out, lots of folks were against it, ATF was repeatedly asked to verify classification, and as we all know it was killed off. SlideFire came out, and unlike AA, had no mechanical parts to assist, so it passed. People hated it, ad scoffed at the idea it was to help the disabled shoot. Repeat this for other gimic gun toys like the Sig Muzzle Brake, and pistol braces.
Few will miss this when it is gone, but the principal of appeasement is hard to swallow for most folks, especially getting nothing in return.
I myself despise the idea law-abiding folks have used this for years for enjoyment, and one mis-use takes away that away.
One thing you are spot on about, we do NOT want hearing with the Dems wheeling in/out people like props for 5 weeks.
I thought I had seen everything; bump stocks, drop in trigger groups, all to simulate automatic fire. Screw all that. Now there's another abomination called the Auto Glove:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DPWuyP5AwTk
PatrioticDisorder
10-05-17, 23:09
When Akins Accelerator came out, lots of folks were against it, ATF was repeatedly asked to verify classification, and as we all know it was killed off. SlideFire came out, and unlike AA, had no mechanical parts to assist, so it passed. People hated it, ad scoffed at the idea it was to help the disabled shoot. Repeat this for other gimic gun toys like the Sig Muzzle Brake, and pistol braces.
Few will miss this when it is gone, but the principal of appeasement is hard to swallow for most folks, especially getting nothing in return.
I myself despise the idea law-abiding folks have used this for years for enjoyment, and one mis-use takes away that away.
One thing you are spot on about, we do NOT want hearing with the Dems wheeling in/out people like props for 5 weeks.
I don't believe the NRA threw gun owners under the bus today, but they can't exactly say that. I think what you stated about hearings is exactly what this play by the NRA was about, it was to avoid these hearings. This is why the NRA asked the BATFE to review it, this is about running out the clock. It may or may not ever actually get banned, meanwhile national reciprocity (and I believe SHARE) was discussed today.
FromMyColdDeadHand
10-05-17, 23:13
So your willing to concede infringement over something (albeit retarded in nature) and somehow you're cool with that?
Solid dude...
Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk
Yes.
Slide-stocks are like the lawn game Jarts. Not really a good idea, all it takes is one moron to go to far with them and someone gets hurt.
The slide-stock wasn't here, it was here, and now it's gone. Net gain and loss- zero. But for some reason, some people act like the thing was invented by John Browning, approved of by Davy Crockett and helped us win WWII.
Still waiting for the post from 2011'ish about how the stock was a huge advancement for 2A rights and an indispensable firearm accessory. Anyone got anything?
FromMyColdDeadHand
10-05-17, 23:16
I thought I had seen everything; bump stocks, drop in trigger groups, all to simulate automatic fire. Screw all that. Now there's another abomination called the Auto Glove:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DPWuyP5AwTk
That's a joke right? My first thought was one with more padding and, never mind.
https://i.imgur.com/HwM9LNG.jpg
That's a joke right? My first thought was one with more padding and, never mind.
I guess I was late on the Auto Glove. The ATF already said NO. From Guns.com: "Remember the Auto Glove electric trigger finger? ATF says, nope"
http://www.guns.com/2017/09/20/remember-the-auto-glove-electric-trigger-finger-atf-says-nope/
Yes.
Slide-stocks are like the lawn game Jarts. Not really a good idea, all it takes is one moron to go to far with them and someone gets hurt.
The slide-stock wasn't here, it was here, and now it's gone. Net gain and loss- zero. But for some reason, some people act like the thing was invented by John Browning, approved of by Davy Crockett and helped us win WWII.
Still waiting for the post from 2011'ish about how the stock was a huge advancement for 2A rights and an indispensable firearm accessory. Anyone got anything?It's apparent you don't understand freedom. That's disappointing.
Can we band Priuses because I don't like those?
Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk
"Guys, guys.....they'll just gas a couple of Jews we dont like either. We HAVE been kinda stingy after all post-war. These are reasonable people. They were democratically elected after all! They'll gas a few us we agree to sacrifice as a compromise, get it out of their systems, and we'll be outta these striped pajamas by next week......"
Is all I'm hearing.......
Well you can count The Kid OUT on that one, Bucko
say sure but then we get back the full auto weapons suppressors etc.. LIKE WE HAD
so of course NO WAY
they have NOTHING we want and we keep giving in
again this needs to be turned around and every actor and studio that has put out movies with mass shootings blamed for the violence and law suits up the okole on every single one
blame the left and show how almsot ALL mass shootings are carried out by democrats and go after all of them as inciting violence and bring up every single one of them quoting the violence and photos they have posted etc.
but sadly that wont happen
We gave up all full auto, we should never give up any part of semi auto. To include number of rounds fed or barrel length.
Not picking on you specifically, but does ANYONE know that we actually lost full autos in 1968? That is when they banned foreign machine guns, which is why all true MP5s and factory Uzis are "dealer samples" and all transferrables are registered conversions. That is because in 1968 ATF got the "sporter clause."
And we didn't "give anything" in 1986. After almost two decades a bill undoing the more draconian parts of the 68 GCA finally reached a Presidents desk. Among other things it deregulated retail ammo sales, they used to be recorded in a bound book just like firearms. It protected collectors who made favorable sales or trades from being prosecuted as unlicensed dealers, otherwise 99% of the EE would be potentially criminal. It allowed for the importation of military surplus firearms which is why K-98s, Moisin Nagants and vintage SKS rifles aren't exceptionally rare firearms anymore. And it did a bunch of other stuff to protect gun owners, but at the last minute a very anti gun rep added the Hughes amendment and Reagan did not have a line item veto...it was all or nothing and the NRA told him to sign it.
And for those who think it was a "bad deal" here is the legislation Hughes and Rodino were trying to get passed.
https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?138963-H-R-3155-Racketeer-Weapons-and-Violent-Crime-Control-Act
It's apparent you don't understand freedom. That's disappointing.
Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk
Its disappointing that you think we have freedom.
Freedom- you mean the term our so called "representatives" use as a footnote to satisfy there critics? This country is worse than what we declared independence from in 1776.
If you haven't notice by now, every time you go through airport security you have to remove your shoes, belt and everything out of your pockets and walk barefoot- that's like, Nazi SS tactics!!
Freedom is a joke because no one in this country has ever had real freedom!
We have to get permission and pay a fee to get married, get divorced, build a house, start a business, drive a car, vote, get a license, have a garage sale, paint our house. We have to notify our government if we move, send or receive more than $7500 in cash, set up a 401k, Roth IRA, donate to charities, churches or schools. We pay the government taxes on things like milk, cheese, bread, clothes, water, wages, profit on home sale, insurance, automotive, transportation, luxury, gas, cable, internet, communications. And the government regulates everything from the common laser pointer and radio to the condenser for your A/C to the ladder that goes to your attic. We are not allowed by law to own or operate a cellular phone that transmits more than 1.6 watts of power! We are not allowed by law to remove the tag from mattress.
That's not freedom: that is control and oversight!!
Yes.
Slide-stocks are like the lawn game Jarts. Not really a good idea, all it takes is one moron to go to far with them and someone gets hurt.
The slide-stock wasn't here, it was here, and now it's gone. Net gain and loss- zero. But for some reason, some people act like the thing was invented by John Browning, approved of by Davy Crockett and helped us win WWII.
Still waiting for the post from 2011'ish about how the stock was a huge advancement for 2A rights and an indispensable firearm accessory. Anyone got anything?
You just don't get it and you never will.
The bumpfire design stock is not really about fulfilling a need or enhancing design, though it technically qualifies. It's about defiance of abuse of authority. It's not like prior to the 1934 NFA hordes of people were buying up all the automatic weapons that could be produced. Almost immediately, the Treasury Dept began abusing its authority. The bumpstock came about because more than anything else, it was about a few people looking at the government and saying, "Ya' see this? F*** You and your BS rule! I did this to prove I'll figure out a way to do what the hell I want just to spite you and not technically violate your rule. No one was rushing out to buy them last week or ever. Look at what bumpstocks that were on sale a week ago for under a C-note are going for now. I wish I'd bought a dozen or two last week.
It's about principle and sometimes exercising a right for no other reason than just because you can.
Not picking on you specifically, but does ANYONE know that we actually lost full autos in 1968? That is when they banned foreign machine guns, which is why all true MP5s and factory Uzis are "dealer samples" and all transferrables are registered conversions. That is because in 1968 ATF got the "sporter clause."
And we didn't "give anything" in 1986. After almost two decades a bill undoing the more draconian parts of the 68 GCA finally reached a Presidents desk. Among other things it deregulated retail ammo sales, they used to be recorded in a bound book just like firearms. It protected collectors who made favorable sales or trades from being prosecuted as unlicensed dealers, otherwise 99% of the EE would be potentially criminal. It allowed for the importation of military surplus firearms which is why K-98s, Moisin Nagants and vintage SKS rifles aren't exceptionally rare firearms anymore. And it did a bunch of other stuff to protect gun owners, but at the last minute a very anti gun rep added the Hughes amendment and Reagan did not have a line item veto...it was all or nothing and the NRA told him to sign it.
And for those who think it was a "bad deal" here is the legislation Hughes and Rodino were trying to get passed.
https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?138963-H-R-3155-Racketeer-Weapons-and-Violent-Crime-Control-Act
Steyr, excellent information. It's easy to for a lot of us (myself included) to overlook those important details.
Here we are, doing nothing but typing about it- here's a guy who's actually doing something: http://tribunist.com/news/phoenix-resident-turns-his-guns-over-to-police-following-vegas-shooting-encourages-others-to-do-the-same/?utm_source=ITA
Moose-Knuckle
10-06-17, 06:00
Gun control is fronted by the entire democratic party as well as ever celebrity on twitter, Facebook, and every late night show on TV, Trevor Noah, Bill Maher, Jimmy Kimmel, Jimmy Fallon, Conan Obrien, John Oliver, Stephen Colbert, Seth Meyers- its ****ing everywhere. Its not going to go away.
****ing propagandists one and all . . .
https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4511/37498097132_58b95c1710_b.jpg
Moose-Knuckle
10-06-17, 06:13
Slidefire has ceased any further orders/sells . . .
"We have decided to temporarily suspend taking new orders in order to provide the best service with those already placed."
http://www.slidefire.com/products/ar-platform
BREAKING: Gunbroker BANS Sale of Slidefire & Bumpfire Stocks
"Dear Gunbroker User,
The Management of Gunbroker.com has made the decision to no longer allow listings of Bump/Slide Fire stocks or similar items on the site. All existing listings have been removed without winning bidders. Please do not relist these items.
Thank you for your cooperation and continued support.
Thank you,
The Management of Gunbroker.com"
http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2017/10/05/breaking-gunbroker-bans-sale-slidefire-bumpfire-stocks/
FromMyColdDeadHand
10-06-17, 06:46
It's apparent you don't understand freedom. That's disappointing.
Can we band Priuses because I don't like those?
Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk
You just don't get it and you never will.
The bumpfire design stock is not really about fulfilling a need or enhancing design, though it technically qualifies. It's about defiance of abuse of authority. It's not like prior to the 1934 NFA hordes of people were buying up all the automatic weapons that could be produced. Almost immediately, the Treasury Dept began abusing its authority. The bumpstock came about because more than anything else, it was about a few people looking at the government and saying, "Ya' see this? F*** You and your BS rule! I did this to prove I'll figure out a way to do what the hell I want just to spite you and not technically violate your rule. No one was rushing out to buy them last week or ever. Look at what bumpstocks that were on sale a week ago for under a C-note are going for now. I wish I'd bought a dozen or two last week.
It's about principle and sometimes exercising a right for no other reason than just because you can.
Put up or shut up.
Show me the reviews or posts when this came out touting it as a huge gain in 2A rights. The gnashing of teeth and chest thumping over this POS is almost comical.
The inability to understand how to use this POS as a way to pivot the gun debate is huge blind spot and a failure that we'll regret.
You aren't going to hurt my feelings. I get a lot of butt hurt people mad at me because they don't understand the bigger picture. I'm used to it.
Dist. Expert 26
10-06-17, 07:52
Put up or shut up.
Show me the reviews or posts when this came out touting it as a huge gain in 2A rights. The gnashing of teeth and chest thumping over this POS is almost comical.
The inability to understand how to use this POS as a way to pivot the gun debate is huge blind spot and a failure that we'll regret.
You aren't going to hurt my feelings. I get a lot of butt hurt people mad at me because they don't understand the bigger picture. I'm used to it.
Your delusion that the cucks in Washington will make any attempt to "pivot the debate" is laughable.
They don't give a single f**k.
They'll use this opportunity to gain political support to pass bills that will make their already plush lives even more so. And they'll continue to do so until they die or get voted out of office.
Here we are, doing nothing but typing about it- here's a guy who's actually doing something: http://tribunist.com/news/phoenix-resident-turns-his-guns-over-to-police-following-vegas-shooting-encourages-others-to-do-the-same/?utm_source=ITA
I fully support his right to do that as long as he supports my right not to. If he feels he can't trust himself around firearms, by all means give them away.
People are going to vote for even more anti-gun politicians in their place?
If anything, they're saving their asses by keeping the moderates and independents happy. The MAGA crowd isn't going to vote Dem no matter what.
No, they won't vote at all.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I'm ashamed of you guys.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
He used an eotech which is a staple of the mall ninja crowd. Everybody knows they are for fast fording but they don't hold zero. Ban them because only idiots use eotech.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
He used an eotech which is a staple of the mall ninja crowd. Everybody knows they are for fast fording but they don't hold zero. Ban them because only idiots use eotech.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Really? Please tell me that was nothing but sarcasm.
Not picking on you specifically, but does ANYONE know that we actually lost full autos in 1968? That is when they banned foreign machine guns, which is why all true MP5s and factory Uzis are "dealer samples" and all transferrables are registered conversions. That is because in 1968 ATF got the "sporter clause."
And we didn't "give anything" in 1986. After almost two decades a bill undoing the more draconian parts of the 68 GCA
It didn't undo the the draconian NFA import ban you spoke of in paragraph one, it doubled down on it.
FOPA was a compromise. We lost some ground, we gained some ground, we lost a lot of the FOPA gains in later years. If you were into NFA, FOPA screwed you. FOPA was good for FFLS at the time, most shooters did not notice it.
The problem with FOPA, WHICH NRA IS REPEATING TODAY, is we told anti-gunners we would be willing to compromise on gun rights, instead of fighting to the end as they had in the past. And that came back to haunt us in 94/95.
So now the question is, how much are we going to lose this time:
1) Bump Stocks.
2) TBD
3) TBD
4) TBD
5) TBD
Really? Please tell me that was nothing but sarcasm.
I think he was being sarcastic towards the crowd if folks who feel that bump fire stocks can be thrown under the bus cause they are only for mall ninjas.
RobertTheTexan
10-06-17, 09:34
Here we are, doing nothing but typing about it- here's a guy who's actually doing something: http://tribunist.com/news/phoenix-resident-turns-his-guns-over-to-police-following-vegas-shooting-encourages-others-to-do-the-same/?utm_source=ITA
And what was that he did? Gave up a .22and a .380.
I believe in context. If I truly want to understand something, I need to know context.
“There can be an America without guns.”
Here’s your context: How’s that working out for Chicago? The majority of people killed with firearms are not killed en masse. So how’s that working for Chicago?
I have to admit I really can’t believe you’d praise something like this. So let’s call up our local sherif and give all our guns away. I’m sure the thugs and criminals are already making plans to do that, and also give them all the drugs, the cash, the women they imprison as sex trade slaves.
I’ve been reading or trying to read every post to my thread and the thought in my mind these past two days, is “What can I do?” What can I do to preserve our Amendment? Write my senator. Tell him what I think and what I think he should do if he truly supports those that put him in office. But he doesn’t.
But hoping for a disarmed America is hoping for tyranny to have its rule in our beloved country. How can I admire a guy who supports such a socialist view of not just firearms, but of the country he is now raising his family in? If we CARE and LOVE our country then, as responsible citizens we should be armed, and trained to defend her and her constitution.
This act, is irresponsible in my opinion, and I do not admire it. I think with all the glam shots, he’s going to capitalize on it. I know something should be done but that doesn’t make everything done acceptable. This is nonsensical in my viewpoint.
Doc Safari
10-06-17, 09:36
So now the question is, how much are we going to lose this time:
1) Bump Stocks.
2) TBD
3) TBD
4) TBD
5) TBD
You know the antis are going after
1. Bump Stocks
2. So-called "assault weapons"
3. Standard capacity (a.k.a. hi cap) mags
4. Suppressors
5. The so-called gun show loophole
6. The one I don't even want to say because it will give them ideas.
We don't have to lose anything. Why are you guys so quick to roll over?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Put up or shut up.
Show me the reviews or posts when this came out touting it as a huge gain in 2A rights. The gnashing of teeth and chest thumping over this POS is almost comical.
The inability to understand how to use this POS as a way to pivot the gun debate is huge blind spot and a failure that we'll regret.
You aren't going to hurt my feelings. I get a lot of butt hurt people mad at me because they don't understand the bigger picture. I'm used to it.
The bigger picture? Why are you so pretentious? What makes your tastes so much more important? Quite frankly, guys like you are the problem.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
It didn't undo the the draconian NFA import ban you spoke of in paragraph one, it doubled down on it.
FOPA was a compromise. We lost some ground, we gained some ground, we lost a lot of the FOPA gains in later years. If you were into NFA, FOPA screwed you. FOPA was good for FFLS at the time, most shooters did not notice it.
The problem with FOPA, WHICH NRA IS REPEATING TODAY, is we told anti-gunners we would be willing to compromise on gun rights, instead of fighting to the end as they had in the past. And that came back to haunt us in 94/95.
So now the question is, how much are we going to lose this time:
1) Bump Stocks.
2) TBD
3) TBD
4) TBD
5) TBD
Completely agree.
Really? Please tell me that was nothing but sarcasm.
Well, he used a slidefire stock and idiots on this very forum want to ban them because they "don't like them" or "don't see a point".
He also used an eotech. I don't like them and think them crap. Why shouldn't I call for a ban to fit in with the cool-guy crowd here?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
skywalkrNCSU
10-06-17, 09:43
So your willing to concede infringement over something (albeit retarded in nature) and somehow you're cool with that?
Solid dude...
Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk
Isn’t not allowing convicted felons to possess firearms conceding infringement? Shall not be infringed doesn’t say shall not be infringed unless you committed a felony but we are willing to concede that one.
I don’t really have a strong opinion either way about this issue because I see both sides of the argument but the whole shall not be infringed thing isn’t a good argument when we already are perfectly fine with in being infringed in some ways.
So now the question is, how much are we going to lose this time:
1) Bump Stocks.
2) TBD
3) TBD
4) TBD
5) TBD
1) Bump Stocks
2) Magazines over 10 round capacity
3) Black rifles and carbines
4) M1 Garands and M1 Carbines
5) Any firearms with a military appearance
6) Lever action rifles and revolvers
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.