quote:

Originally posted by mbinky:
A semi auto can be bump fired without any special stock. How should we legislate against that?

I would love to hear an answer.

The answer would be to criminalize/ban semi-auto firearms.

quote:

Originally posted by parabellum:
Let's take it easy, please. Dtech is answering honestly and calmly. Let's reciprocate.

Roger.

Hey, I did say flipping...

quote:

Originally posted by Dtech:
I understand some people want to take a stand regarding the technical definition of what constitutes a full auto but it doesn't change the truth of the similarity of the end result with these devices.

Those people are the Firearms and Ammunition Technology Division of the ATF. They have disagreed with you regarding the matter of a bump stock converting a semi-automatic rifle into a machine gun.

quote:

Originally posted by airsoft guy:
What's the difference between the gizmo, and my finger, besides several hundred dollars?

The difference is that the Dems in congress need to define the item as an 'evil device' so they can attempt to push through legislation to try to ban it. It will be portrayed as the poster child for evil, similar to the way they tried to make black AR's the poster child of evil after Sandy Hook.

My feeling is that if they try to attach other 'evil devices' to the legislation such as high-cap mags or whatever they think contributes to increasing the number of casualties a person can take down in a short period of time, the legislation will stall.

If they only go after bump stocks, they may find some RINO's who are fearful of opposing a ban on this evil device because they don't want to look like heartless bastards.

But like all things of this nature, give an inch ...

quote:

Originally posted by MNSIG:

quote:

Originally posted by Sigmund:

quote:

Originally posted by smschulz:

....However, if you give them an inch they will take a mile.

Absolutely, the libs are NEVER satisfied.

It's always "a good first step" without any admission of what everyone knows is the ultimate step.

I'll tell you what Diane: We'll give you your stupid victory on banning bump fire devices in exchange for no additional anti-gun legislation of any kind to be introduced in Congress for 25 years. How's that?

Is she not one of the congress critters that packs a gun?

Confusing Rate of Fire with Automatic Weapons is the most slippery of slippery slopes.

What's next? Should double taps be illegal, too? Will I get arrested at the local range for doing a magazine dump, or the like? How will anyone be able to tell the difference? How fast is too fast? And this is in addition to the absurd problems re belt loops/rubber bands. What dtech suggests helps nothing or no one, accomplishes nothing useful, makes nothing or no one any safer, and opens a disgusting and enormous can of worms that fucks us all.

You probably couldn't make up a bigger lose-lose if you tried.

Have not read all the replies.

But, if the sound track I heard on TV of that asshole shooting was correct, there is no way, in my experience that he was firing full automatic.

The sequence of shots was way too slow to be full auto. And I have fired a LOT of full auto stuff. From 50 BMG, M2 Carbines, 30 cal MG, .45 grease guns,, M14s, BAR, etc. And they all shot a whole lot faster than what I heard on the TV news reports.

And I distinctly recall watching guys in Viet Nam dumping whole magazines while holding the damned weapon over head, shooting blind over a damned wall. I guess that was about when they decided not to teach troops aimed fire, rather teach/let them to point somewhere in the general direction and blast away.

Here is another one for you, Dtech. By the same reasoning of yours, hi-cap mags should be banned (although you said they shouldn't). The more time the shooter needs to change mags, the more chance folks have to escape, or even better, to take down the shooter. Heck, we should be allowed to own only single shots.

The ATF are people just like the rest of us with different reasoning and perspective. They obviously used a strict interpretation of what constitutes a full auto at the time of reviewing the bump stocks as many of you are mentioning. It is clear that they and / or the Congress will be revisiting it at least as a matter of discussion.

Not trying to make any enemies here, especially with as long as I've been around, but some of you need to realize that it is possible for others to be a fellow 2nd Amendment supporter and enthusiast without having 100% the same viewpoint. We really can't afford to eat our own can we?

Thanks Para for your words. That is all I'm truly doing.

Why is the stock different from shooting fast?

No one is calling you the "enemy", here, Dtech. That's just your emotion talking. A lot of us just happen to disagree with you about this issue. We are not "eating our own".

quote:

Originally posted by parabellum:

quote:

Originally posted by mbinky:
A semi auto can be bump fired without any special stock. How should we legislate against that?

I would love to hear an answer.

The answer would be to criminalize/ban semi-auto firearms.

Which is why I would oppose barring bump fire devices. They shorten the path to banning semi-auto.

quote:

Originally posted by jhe888:

quote:

Originally posted by parabellum:

quote:

Originally posted by mbinky:
A semi auto can be bump fired without any special stock. How should we legislate against that?

I would love to hear an answer.

The answer would be to criminalize/ban semi-auto firearms.

Which is why I would oppose barring bump fire devices. They shorten the path to banning semi-auto.

Exactly. Give them nothing, fight everything they bring, because no matter what, their end goal is disarmament. All we do by "compromising" is helping them chip away at our rights. Bump stocks are silly toys, but they ought not be banned, simply because doing so is one less obstacle to their endgame.

quote:

Originally posted by jhe888:

quote:

Originally posted by parabellum:

quote:

Originally posted by mbinky:
A semi auto can be bump fired without any special stock. How should we legislate against that?

I would love to hear an answer.

The answer would be to criminalize/ban semi-auto firearms.

Which is why I would oppose barring bump fire devices. They shorten the path to banning semi-auto.

That's exactly right. Because the real issue here is not this bump fire stock. It's semi-automatic firearms. People need to realize this before getting onboard any type of legislation that tries to ban how fast a person can pull the trigger on his gun.

quote:

Originally posted by Dtech:
They obviously used a strict interpretation of what constitutes a full auto at the time of reviewing the bump stocks as many of you are mentioning.

Strict interpretation meaning the definition of full auto versus semi? i.e. holding down trigger versus pulling trigger for each round fired. It does not take a rocket scientist to understand that a bump fire stock only increases semi auto fire, it never turns into full auto.

Dtech you have the right to feel however you want on the subject but you are more dangerous to gun owners than politicians wanting to take all my guns. Your way chips away in small pieces and folks like you think its a good trade off to surrender some rights for others.

“Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety”

Shoulder bump firing with bare hands..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L2YLgLj8KVY

Agreed with mbinky and others, banning bump fire stocks spell more arbitrary restrictive measures in near future. We'd be setting ourselves up big time with future mass tragedies.

quote:

Originally posted by sns3guppy:

quote:

Originally posted by Balzé Halzé:

The hotel is a gun free zone? Since when? I carry whenever I'm in vegas, including in the casinos and into my hotel.

And I don't think that this loser broke a single law until he actually started shooting people.

I have yet to see a casino that isn't posted for firearms, in Nevada. Nevada state law doesn't prohibit the carry of a firearm in a casino, but does prohibit it where the property owner has posted no firearms allowed. Casinos are private property.

The shooter was in violation of casino policy and by default, Nevada law.

There is no such law in Nevada that enforces a "No Guns Allowed" sign. He did not break any State law. And breaking hotel policy is not against the law.

NRA's Wayne LaPierre and Chris Cox Issue Joint Statement

(FAIRFAX, VA) - The National Rifle Association today issued the following statement:

"In the aftermath of the evil and senseless attack in Las Vegas, the American people are looking for answers as to how future tragedies can be prevented. Unfortunately, the first response from some politicians has been to call for more gun control. Banning guns from law-abiding Americans based on the criminal act of a madman will do nothing to prevent future attacks. This is a fact that has been proven time and again in countries across the world. In Las Vegas, reports indicate that certain devices were used to modify the firearms involved. 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. In an increasingly dangerous world, the NRA remains focused on our mission: strengthening Americans' Second Amendment freedom to defend themselves, their families and their communities. To that end, on behalf of our five million members across the country, we urge Congress to pass National Right-to-Carry reciprocity, which will allow law-abiding Americans to defend themselves and their families from acts of violence."

http://www.foxnews.com/politic...-vegas-shooting.html

The National Rifle Association, in its first statement on the Las Vegas shooting and in a rare break from its traditional opposition to gun-related regulations, called Thursday for a federal review of so-called bump stocks and suggested new rules might be needed for the device apparently used by the shooter in Sunday’s massacre.

“The NRA believes that devices designed to allow semi-automatic rifles to function like fully-automatic rifles should be subject to additional regulations,” the NRA said in a written statement.

Bump stocks can be used to effectively convert semi-automatic rifles to fire so rapidly as to simulate an automatic weapon. The devices were found on guns used by Las Vegas shooter Stephen Paddock, who killed 59 and injured hundreds Sunday night.

The Obama administration’s ATF gave its seal of approval to selling the devices in 2010 after concluding that they did not violate federal law. On Thursday, the NRA called on the ATF to review that assessment.

“In Las Vegas, reports indicate that certain devices were used to modify the firearms involved,” the NRA said. “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.”
FILE - In this Feb. 1, 2013, file photo, an employee of North Raleigh Guns demonstrates how a "bump" stock works at the Raleigh, N.C., shop. The gunman who unleashed hundreds of rounds of gunfire on a crowd of concertgoers in Las Vegas on Monday, Oct. 2, 2017, attached what is called a "bump-stock" to two of his weapons, in effect converting semiautomatic firearms into fully automatic ones. (AP Photo/Allen Breed, File)

In this Feb. 1, 2013, file photo, an employee of North Raleigh Guns demonstrates how a "bump" stock works at the Raleigh, N.C., shop. Lawmakers could now consider banning the devices in the wake of the Las Vegas shooting. (AP)

The NRA had remained largely silent since the worst mass shooting in modern U.S. history. In its written statement Thursday, the powerful gun lobby made clear its general position that gun control is not the answer to such tragedies:

"In the aftermath of the evil and senseless attack in Las Vegas, the American people are looking for answers as to how future tragedies can be prevented. Unfortunately, the first response from some politicians has been to call for more gun control. Banning guns from law-abiding Americans based on the criminal act of a madman will do nothing to prevent future attacks.”

But the call to reconsider rules for bump stocks comes as lawmakers from both parties gear up to consider legislation on the matter.

Fox News has learned that Rep. Carlos Curbelo, R-Fla., is writing a bipartisan bill to ban bump stocks.

House Speaker Paul Ryan, R-Wis., in an interview with Hugh Hewitt, also opened the door to looking at the issue.

And White House Counselor Kellyanne Conway, speaking Thursday on “Fox & Friends,” indicated a willingness to consider restrictions.

“We always welcome a thoughtful conversation on policy and issues. The Second Amendment is a bedrock in our Constitution along with the First Amendment. These rights must be protected,” she said. “But … I know this is something that many legislators have been telling us and I read publicly that they have never even heard of the device before. And they are in Congress. So, many of them are open to a conversation.”

Bump stocks are legal and originally were intended to help people with limited hand mobility fire a semi-automatic without the individual trigger pulls required. They can fit over the rear shoulder-stock assembly on an automatic rifle and with applied pressure cause the weapon to fire continuously, increasing the rate from between 45 and 60 rounds per minute to between 400 and 800 rounds per minute, according to California Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein’s office.

Feinstein, a prominent advocate for gun control, already has legislation to ban bump stocks.

Retailers and manufacturers are seeing an apparent surge in interest in so-called bump stocks as Congress eyes a possible crackdown. Slide Fire, which makes bump stocks, announced on its website it is suspending new orders, with a message indicating the company’s supply is low. Another site that sells the company’s products said in a message online that the device is “out of stock” and backordered.

Even the Senate’s No. 2 Republican, John Cornyn of Texas, opened the door to new restrictions.

"If somebody can essentially convert a semi-automatic weapon by buying one of these and utilizing it and cause the kind of mayhem and mass casualties that we saw in Las Vegas, that's something of obvious concern that we ought to explore," Cornyn told reporters.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

He still has not answered me regarding the the rubber bands and the hi-cap mags. You cannot tell me you favor banning/regulating bumpfire devices, but you're against banning hi-cap mags, and tell me it's not emotion talking.