I think if any action is taken on bump stocks, it will be via the BATF issuing a new regulatory opinion on their legality, not a law passed by Congress.

Lots of talk about no benefits and many negatives for the bump stock. Wasted ammo, poor accuracy, wear and tear on the rifle, etc. that all makes sense from a rational, recreational shooter point of view or even from a tactical/operational standpoint with a conventional goal of hitting specific, designated targets.

If your goal is to kill and injure indiscriminately, shooting into a large group of people, then clearly the “negatives” are not of consequence. Essentially unlimited ammo for the attack, no concern for the weapon wear, and no specific target concerns.

In this particular incident, the bump fire stocks definitely increased the number of casualties simply because of the increased rate of fire. Consider it a “force multiplier”. Yes, accuracy suffers, however this wasn’t a case of trying to hit a particular target with accurate, aimed fire. It was a case of raining down lead with the hope of hitting as many targets as possible.

A single shooter, 400 yards away, night/darkened environment, non-magnifying optical sights. Someone with little skill or training, selecting individual targets to aim and fire placed rounds would be hard pressed to get 100 such rounds off in the 10-11 minutes he was shooting.

Indiscriminate rapid semi-auto fire might get off a few hundred rounds in that time, but the bump fire stocks multiplied that to several hundred to maybe even a thousand or more.


Increased hits counted mainly on increased rounds fired. The loss of accuracy with bump fire is irrelevant in a target rich environment of 22,000 people standing near shoulder to shoulder. It is difficult to miss so long as you simply point it in the general direction and your target is essentially a parking lot sized area full of potential victims.


Consider “combat” accuracy of a 12-15 inch diameter circle, bump fire stock opens that accuracy up to what, maybe a 3-4 foot diameter? That matters if there is a single target, or you need to hit the “right” person when 3-4 people are standing together. The loss in accuracy would likely lead to a miss or hitting a “good guy”. However in this particular case, it doesn’t matter because in any given 4’ diameter circle of the impact area, there is going to be 3-4 targets and it didn’t matter to the shooter who got hit.


Take a “casual” shooter who knows the basics but hasn’t really spent a lot of time honing skills. Imagine a 10-11 minute stage of fire. With aimed, accurate fire I would expect about an 80% score, or 120 hits for 150 rounds (being generous on how many such shots in the time frame).

With “spray and pray” of 80-100 rounds a minute shooting at a single target may only get a 20-30% hit rate, but with huge target “clusters” my guess is it would likely be closer to 40-50% hits. 100 round mags, 5-10 seconds to change mags or switch rifle and now in that time frame you are looking at 500-800 rounds fired in same time period and 200-400 hits.

Increase rate of fire by a factor of 2-3 with a bump stock and in the same time even if you only hit with 30%, you are looking at 1000-2400 rounds fired and 300-800 hits.



This asshole wanted to inflict maximum damage and terrorize his victims. Don’t under estimate the psychological effect of a near full-auto rate of fire. This wasn’t marksmanship, it was a single shooter looking to instill the most damage possible in a limited time. It was essentially “fire for effect”. To say the bump stocks didn’t add to the carnage is ignorance.


That said, I am not for banning them, making them NFA devices etc. I really can’t think of any law, constitutional or not, which would have prevented this or something similar. Where there is a will there is a way.


Freedom and liberty have risks attached. To think that laws will protect us from the criminals is foolish and serves only to increase the power and control exerted by the government on those who are law abiding to begin with while further eroding the liberties and freedoms this country was founded on.

The knee jerk reactions, talk of further regulations on inanimate objects and expectations that such regulations will somehow solve what is a morality or ideology problem is equally foolish.

Very well written post, 911Boss. Totally agree.

While these bump stocks are typically just a fucktard hillbilly gimmick, they were used quite effectively on this very sad occasion.

quote:

Originally posted by 911Boss:
To say the bump stocks didn’t add to the carnage is ignorance.

Well, I'll say it. I believe that in the same exact scenario with all things being equal minus the bump-stocks, the amount of casualties would've been exactly the same.

It's hard to say until a exact fired round count is published, which I'm sure they already know. The brass in the hotel room did not evaporate.

quote:

Originally posted by Balzé Halzé:

quote:

Originally posted by 911Boss:
To say the bump stocks didn’t add to the carnage is ignorance.

Well, I'll say it. I believe that in the same exact scenario with all things being equal minus the bump-stocks, the amount of casualties would've been exactly the same.

Bliss unto to you...

Well, right back at you.

CUT IT OUT

Let me see a couple of pages of this thread without your name on them, Balze

Cool it

Statement from GunBroker:

Bump/Slide Fire Stocks

Updated October 06, 2017

The Management of GunBroker.com has made the decision to no longer allow listings of Bump/Slide Fire stocks or similar items on the website. Please remove any active listings for these items if possible. Management is currently working on removing all active listings.

Please do not create new listings for these items or relist prior listings.

quote:

Originally posted by bigwagon:
I think if any action is taken on bump stocks, it will be via the BATF issuing a new regulatory opinion on their legality, not a law passed by Congress.

I think that is exactly what the NRA is hoping for.

I believe that is what they intend, yes.

The problem with folding on that fast semi automatic fire should be limited, then "how fast" has been put up for negotiation. A proposal for 3 seconds or so between trigger pulls might be "reasonable" and doesn't impinge hunting or step on 2A. Probably working on a proposal as we speak and some lackey is working on a delaying trigger mechanism.

That's silly. It's almost certainly not even possible.

quote:

Originally posted by parabellum:
That's silly. It's almost certainly not even possible.

If there is a burst setting on M16 that shoots 3 shots per trigger pull, it may not be that much of a stretch.

911boss said

quote:

hard pressed to get 100 such rounds off in the 10-11 minutes

100/Rds / 10 minutes = 10 rds a minute or 5 rds every 30 seconds or one rd every every 6 secs.

Ignorance or not, a blind lady with the hiccups could put that on a parking lot.

Parsing aside, I don't agree with you that the prime-mover here was the bump stock. It was the same thing on the ground as it was on the gun, a novelty.

At any rate, wish me some bliss too and I'll be moving on.

So, you guys are telling us that you think shooting three or four times as many bullets at a target area doesn't increase your odds in inflicting casualties?

What if there were 3 or 4 total shooters just shooting semi-automatic? Would the odds be higher that more would be shot than just one? (Not a conspiracy theory, just a frame of reference).

I'm assuming you aren't gamblers.

I'm not for banning anything...but I know math.

I considered trying the rubber band trick once. Then I thought about what it would do to the barrel, gas tube, bolt carrier group, and my wallet and decided that a few seconds of fun just wasn't worth it with MY gun.

I could care less if these are banned. What I see in Washington is nothing but political games.

quote:

Originally posted by pbslinger:

quote:

Originally posted by parabellum:
That's silly. It's almost certainly not even possible.

If there is a burst setting on M16 that shoots 3 shots per trigger pull, it may not be that much of a stretch.

Please think about what you're saying. You've come out of nowhere with a "three second delay" between shots. Now you're saying that a device can be configured to make the rifle pause for three seconds in between shots. That's just plain silly.

Can we please just try to stay grounded in reality? Please?

If we're going to start with speculation and making incredible claims, I'll just lock this thread.

quote:

Originally posted by chongosuerte:
So, you guys are telling us that you think shooting three or four times as many bullets at a target area doesn't increase your odds in inflicting casualties?

What if there were 3 or 4 total shooters just shooting semi-automatic? Would the odds be higher that more would be shot than just one? (Not a conspiracy theory, just a frame of reference).

I'm assuming you aren't gamblers.

I'm not for banning anything...but I know math.

I don't want to be shot at by anybody at any rate of fire, but I have had the opportunity to watch spray-and-pray in the practical application and it isn't impressive.

https://youtu.be/QkWuYr0cD4M

Bump fire with a stick. Ban all the things!