Ban Bumpstocks?

[Skull Pilot]

There is no way a semiauto with a bump stock can fire faster than a full auto

You might not want to get your information about guns from the main stream media

I don't see you providing ANY evidence to support your nonsense.

And neither did you.

But the fact that the firing mechanism for a semiauto takes more time to fire, eject the shell, load the next round and reset the trigger pull takes longer than in a full auto because the full auto has less steps in the firing chain

It's common sense but you first have to actually know something about how rifles work and you don't

lol, so if there's no rate of fire difference between semi-auto fire and bump stock fire,

why does anyone bother with the latter?

It's an impractical way to shoot. The accuracy sucks and believe it or not the rifle is far more likely to jam when bump firing.

An "expert" would know that buy you don't seem to.

Was that supposed to answer my question? lol

I don't know and I don't care why people bump fire their rifles.

Maybe you think you can read peoples' minds but I don't

 

[Skull Pilot]

Keep in mind that probably every nut poster in this thread who's against banning the bump stock also opposes banning ANY automatic weapon,

in the first place. These people are the most extreme of the extremists.

Funny I never said if I was for or against them you just jumped to conclusions

lol, and it's noteworthy you don't state your position NOW.

I am 100% neutral.
I really don't care if they stay legal or are deemed illegal.

It's not going to stop anyone from bump firing because as I said you can do it with nothing but your own two hands

 

[NYcarbineer]

Did I say guns are only for murder? No. I said fully-automatic guns are. Or at least I heavily implied it. Good for clearing a room and suppressing fire and that's about it.

These were not fully automatic weapons, as has been said here several times.

When was the last time a fully automatic weapon was used in a crime in the US?

Why not?

They were modified to act similarly to a fully automatic.

I'm a little worried we might see more attacks like this now, seeing how "successful" it was. Pretty easy to kill a lot of people with a gun like that. Just post up somewhere when people are gathered together and pop as many as you can.

The next time it will probably be a Muslim terrorist. Then all the people here will be outraged even though they are suspiciously quiet about the old white guy.

No it didn't act like an automatic. The trigger was pulled for every round fired that is by definition a semiautomatic
All the bump stock does is pull the trigger faster

A semi-auto requires you to pull the trigger for each shot. The bump stock pulls the trigger FOR you. That makes it an automatic.

It's interesting how so many rightwing fanatics, on any issue, are attracted to USMB.

Wrong.

If the trigger needs to be pulled for every shot by definition the rifle is a semiauto, All bump firing is is a technique to increase the speed of the trigger pull and FYI anyone can bump fire a semiauto rifle with nothing but their own 2 hands

Wrong. Since the mechanism pulls the trigger, not the shooter, that is an automatic.

Why are you obsessed with keeping this device legal?

 

[NYcarbineer]

I don't see you providing ANY evidence to support your nonsense.

And neither did you.

But the fact that the firing mechanism for a semiauto takes more time to fire, eject the shell, load the next round and reset the trigger pull takes longer than in a full auto because the full auto has less steps in the firing chain

It's common sense but you first have to actually know something about how rifles work and you don't

lol, so if there's no rate of fire difference between semi-auto fire and bump stock fire,

why does anyone bother with the latter?

It's an impractical way to shoot. The accuracy sucks and believe it or not the rifle is far more likely to jam when bump firing.

An "expert" would know that buy you don't seem to.

Was that supposed to answer my question? lol

I don't know and I don't care why people bump fire their rifles.

Maybe you think you can read peoples' minds but I don't

LOLOLOLOLOL, you read millions of people's minds when you claimed that no law has any deterrent effect whatsoever.

 

[Skull Pilot]

These were not fully automatic weapons, as has been said here several times.

When was the last time a fully automatic weapon was used in a crime in the US?

Why not?

They were modified to act similarly to a fully automatic.

I'm a little worried we might see more attacks like this now, seeing how "successful" it was. Pretty easy to kill a lot of people with a gun like that. Just post up somewhere when people are gathered together and pop as many as you can.

The next time it will probably be a Muslim terrorist. Then all the people here will be outraged even though they are suspiciously quiet about the old white guy.

No it didn't act like an automatic. The trigger was pulled for every round fired that is by definition a semiautomatic
All the bump stock does is pull the trigger faster

A semi-auto requires you to pull the trigger for each shot. The bump stock pulls the trigger FOR you. That makes it an automatic.

It's interesting how so many rightwing fanatics, on any issue, are attracted to USMB.

Wrong.

If the trigger needs to be pulled for every shot by definition the rifle is a semiauto, All bump firing is is a technique to increase the speed of the trigger pull and FYI anyone can bump fire a semiauto rifle with nothing but their own 2 hands

Wrong. Since the mechanism pulls the trigger, not the shooter, that is an automatic.

Why are you obsessed with keeping this device legal?

Like I said you can bump fire with nothing but your own 2 hands. So should fingers and thumbs be banned too?

 

[Skull Pilot]

And neither did you.

But the fact that the firing mechanism for a semiauto takes more time to fire, eject the shell, load the next round and reset the trigger pull takes longer than in a full auto because the full auto has less steps in the firing chain

It's common sense but you first have to actually know something about how rifles work and you don't

lol, so if there's no rate of fire difference between semi-auto fire and bump stock fire,

why does anyone bother with the latter?

It's an impractical way to shoot. The accuracy sucks and believe it or not the rifle is far more likely to jam when bump firing.

An "expert" would know that buy you don't seem to.

Was that supposed to answer my question? lol

I don't know and I don't care why people bump fire their rifles.

Maybe you think you can read peoples' minds but I don't

LOLOLOLOLOL, you read millions of people's minds when you claimed that no law has any deterrent effect whatsoever.

You use the word deterrent I said laws do not prevent crimes they never have and they never will

 

[Johann]

Banning bumpstocks is fucking pointless.

Have you seen them?

It's basically just a fancy plastic stock. You could make a similar contraption in your garage.

You could murder someone in your garage too. That's not an argument for making murder legal.

Murder is legal in some cases.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Banning bumpstocks is fucking pointless.

Have you seen them?

It's basically just a fancy plastic stock. You could make a similar contraption in your garage.

You could murder someone in your garage too. That's not an argument for making murder legal.

Murder is legal in some cases.

No, homicide can be legal in some cases such as self defense or defense of another murder is by definition unlawful

 

[MikeK]

I qualified expert with an M-16. Did you?

btw, bump stock rates are ten times that of the same gun being fired on semi-auto.

The M-16 is a fully automatic rifle (machine-gun). A bump-stock equipped AR-15 is a mechanically modified semi-automatic rifle (not a machine-gun). Technically, a semi-auto rifle is not a full-auto rifle even if its semi-auto function has been mechanically enhanced.

The thing to keep in mind is it's entirely possible that you can operate the trigger of your semi-auto rifle faster than I can operate the trigger on mine. But if I put a bump-stock on my semi-auto rifle to operate my trigger faster than you can operate yours with a finger, that enhancement does not convert my semi-auto to full-auto -- regardless of your personal opinion and impressions.

Also, the difference between 400 rounds output per-minute and 600 rounds output per-minute is very substantial. That variation represents the important functional difference between enhanced semi-auto and full-auto.

 

[Crixus]

They were modified to act similarly to a fully automatic.

I'm a little worried we might see more attacks like this now, seeing how "successful" it was. Pretty easy to kill a lot of people with a gun like that. Just post up somewhere when people are gathered together and pop as many as you can.

The next time it will probably be a Muslim terrorist. Then all the people here will be outraged even though they are suspiciously quiet about the old white guy.

No it didn't act like an automatic. The trigger was pulled for every round fired that is by definition a semiautomatic
All the bump stock does is pull the trigger faster

A semi-auto requires you to pull the trigger for each shot. The bump stock pulls the trigger FOR you. That makes it an automatic.

It's interesting how so many rightwing fanatics, on any issue, are attracted to USMB.

Wrong.

If the trigger needs to be pulled for every shot by definition the rifle is a semiauto, All bump firing is is a technique to increase the speed of the trigger pull and FYI anyone can bump fire a semiauto rifle with nothing but their own 2 hands

Wrong. Since the mechanism pulls the trigger, not the shooter, that is an automatic.

Why are you obsessed with keeping this device legal?

Like I said you can bump fire with nothing but your own 2 hands. So should fingers and thumbs be banned too?

One needs only one finger and a very small amount of practice.

 

[JoeB131]

What we are talking about, is a person who is willing and able to go on a mass shooting spree.

A person who is willing to commit murder, and then kill himself afterwards, is not going to be deterred in the slightest by a gun law.

If he can't get the kind of guns that spray hundreds of bullets from a long distance- which again, no civilian had any need for - then, yeah, that's a deterrent.

 

[Crixus]

What we are talking about, is a person who is willing and able to go on a mass shooting spree.

A person who is willing to commit murder, and then kill himself afterwards, is not going to be deterred in the slightest by a gun law.

If he can't get the kind of guns that spray hundreds of bullets from a long distance- which again, no civilian had any need for - then, yeah, that's a deterrent.

He would have gotten his guns joe. Had guns been banned way back when Kennedy was zapped with a simple old ass crappy ass Italian bolt gun, Paddok would still have had his guns and they would likely have been much better. No law would have stopped that.

 

[JoeB131]

He would have gotten his guns joe. Had guns been banned way back when Kennedy was zapped with a simple old ass crappy ass Italian bolt gun, Paddok would still have had his guns and they would likely have been much better. No law would have stopped that.

I'm sure he wouldn't have been able to kill 60 people and wound 500 others with a crappy bolt action gun.

 

[LordBrownTrout]

Because ... they are tools of mass murder. Vehicles are tools of transportation. The first serves only one purpose ... well, two if you count dicking around in target practice with a half-assed fully automatic. The second keeps society from falling apart.

Just because you're much more likely to die in a car wreck or from eating too many hamburgers doesn't mean we shouldn't try and shave off that extra 0.00001% chance of being gunned down at a concert by some lunatic spraying hundreds of rounds.

They're not tools of mass murder. Your mind is the tool.

 

[Crixus]

He would have gotten his guns joe. Had guns been banned way back when Kennedy was zapped with a simple old ass crappy ass Italian bolt gun, Paddok would still have had his guns and they would likely have been much better. No law would have stopped that.

I'm sure he wouldn't have been able to kill 60 people and wound 500 others with a crappy bolt action gun.

You would be surprised. People bent on doing those type things are scary productive when it comes to getting it done. Look at Charles Whitman killed 15-16 and wounded thirty with a bolt gun in 6mm. And more have been killed with less. Don’t matter really. In the end this was not an lSIS converged Democrat Trump hating republican assassin. It was just a really crazy mother fucker.

 

[JoeB131]

You would be surprised. People bent on doing those type things are scary productive when it comes to getting it done. Look at Charles Whitman killed 15-16 and wounded thirty with a bolt gun in 6mm. And more have been killed with less. Don’t matter really. In the end this was not an lSIS converged Democrat Trump hating republican assassin. It was just a really crazy mother fucker.

Whitman had the advantage that nobody had tried it before, and he had specialized military training.

YOu probably couldn't pull the same thing off today.

But the very fact that "Active Shooter" has become a phrase that has entered the vocabulary should be frightening enough.

 

[Crixus]

You would be surprised. People bent on doing those type things are scary productive when it comes to getting it done. Look at Charles Whitman killed 15-16 and wounded thirty with a bolt gun in 6mm. And more have been killed with less. Don’t matter really. In the end this was not an lSIS converged Democrat Trump hating republican assassin. It was just a really crazy mother fucker.

Whitman had the advantage that nobody had tried it before, and he had specialized military training.

YOu probably couldn't pull the same thing off today.

But the very fact that "Active Shooter" has become a phrase that has entered the vocabulary should be frightening enough.

First off, I don’t care for the idea of shooting folks. If you mean rapid fire with a bolt action rifle, I think I could do that pretty good. I hunt pretty much every weekend year round. Matter of fact, this is why the bulk of that shooting is done with an AR 15. A save my bolt guns barrels for important stuff like deer. And I agree 100% about the active shooter thing. But if can be running a bus through a crowed. Sick fucks bent on killing are going to kill people. Guns or not.