Glock Forum - GlockTalk banner

1 - 20 of 92 Posts

·
Mentally Frozen
Joined
·
27,327 Posts
One good thing about it is they don't rust.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
20,822 Posts
So you saw that on YouTube. And the commentator says she got it from FaceBook. And then you post it here. We definitely have a problem in this country. And then on top of all that the click bait thread title in all caps. Lack of critical thinking is what this countries problem is. Even down to the Parkland kids. No critical thinking thought process to figure stuff out on their own. But they are just manipulated kids. I won't be to hard on them just yet.



/
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
32,813 Posts
So you saw that on YouTube. And the commentator says she got it from FaceBook. And then you post it here. We definitely have a problem in this country. And then on top of all that the click bait thread title in all caps. Lack of critical thinking is what this countries problem is. Even down to the Parkland kids. No critical thinking thought process to figure stuff out on their own. But they are just manipulated kids. I won't be to hard on them just yet.



/
4D270425-161C-4EBA-A983-1F06A3904A34.gif
 

·
GoDirectly2Jail
Joined
·
1,909 Posts
Received the following this morning from the Va Citizens Defense League (Virginia's pro-gun organization):
The bump stock rule is now written and comments from citizens can be submitted. If implemented, this is a true ban, which classifies bump stocks as machine guns! No grandfathering of existing items. They must be destroyed or turned over to the police, with no compensation for the taking of your property that was lawful when you purchased it. The penalty is up to $10,000 and/or up to 10 years in jail.

Regardless of whether you own a bump stock or not, or whether you love them, hate them, or are indifferent toward them, we need to oppose this rule.

The government is not providing a valid reason to suddenly consider bump stocks as machine guns. Their reasoning is clearly political and nothing more, totally failing the smell test.

In the proposed rule, BATFE brushes off the idea that firing a semi-automatic rifle with a bump stock is no different than bump firing that same rifle using only one's bare hands. (Video of me doing just that can be seen here: https://tinyurl.com/ycb6lxto)

Here's what the BATFE writes about the supposed "differences" between firing with a bump stock vs bump firing with your bare hands:

"The relevant statutory question is whether a particular device causes a firearm to 'shoot ... automatically more than one shot, without manual reloading, by a single function of the trigger.' 26 U.S.C. 5845(b)."

"Bump firing and other techniques for increasing the rate of fire do not satisfy this definition because they do not produce an automatic firing sequence with a single pull of the trigger. Instead, bump firing without an assistive device requires the shooter to exert pressure with the trigger finger to re-engage the trigger for each round fired. [PVC: "Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain!" That's exactly what a bump stock does. Pressure from the trigger finger engages the trigger after each shot to fire the next one. With either method my finger stays stationary, while the gun bumps the trigger into my trigger finger and fires again. Nice try, though, BATFE!]

"...the bump-stock-type devices at issue cause the trigger to “bump” into the finger, so that the shooter need not pull the trigger repeatedly to expel ammunition." [PVC: Again, that is exactly how bump firing a gun with one's bare hands works.]

"...Because these bump-stock-type devices allow multiple rounds to be fired when the shooter maintains pressure on the extension ledge of the device, ATF has determined that bump-stock-type devices are machinegun conversion devices, and therefore qualify as machineguns under the GCA and the NFA." [PVC: It is still the trigger finger that activates the trigger, not any part of the bump stock. All that the extension ledge does is to hold your finger in a fixed position, same as if you hold it stiffly yourself when bump firing with your bare hands. BATFE hopes we are stupid enough not to see there is no difference in how bump firing works, with or without a bump fire stock.]


ACTION ITEM

Click this link to get to the proposed bump stock ban rule:

https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=ATF-2018-0002-0001

You can read all the text of the proposed rule at this point, if you wish.

To enter a comment against the proposed rule, click on the blue "Comments Now!" button in the upper right corner of the page.

Suggested comments:

"I fully oppose this ruling. The shooter's trigger finger is what activates the trigger, whether firing with a bump stock or with one's bare hands. No part of the bump stock touches the trigger, only the shooter's trigger finger. ATF's insistence otherwise is merely playing politics and hurts their credibility."

"I fully oppose this ruling. If the bump stock made a semi-automatic rifle fully automatic, then holding the gun with only the trigger-finger hand while squeezing and holding the trigger should cause the gun to repeatedly fire shots. It doesn't do that and therefore the bump stock has clearly NOT converted a semi-automatic rifle into a machine gun."
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
31,703 Posts
ATF is changing their position. Bump stocks used to be ok because the trigger had to be manipulated for each round. Now their position is that the FINGER has to be manipulated. What freaking morons. Ironically by doing so they've just validated that binary triggers are perfectly ok.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jay Mar

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,642 Posts
This machine gun thing is just ridiculous from the get go. If you are shooting into a crowd of people the difference between semi auto and full auto is slightly more than nil.



/
With the rare exception of the guy in Vegas just spraying into a crowd. He almost couldn't miss.
 

·
NRA Life Member
Joined
·
29,081 Posts
Strange; back when they decided Street Sweepers were DD's after the Clinton Ban; they allowed me to register it without any paperwork from Sheriff and no $200 tax. They seem to be going another direction this time around.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
20,822 Posts
With the rare exception of the guy in Vegas just spraying into a crowd. He almost couldn't miss.

Exactly my point. Full auto or semi every bullet has a good chance of hitting someone. Given the scenario I think I would rather take my chances in the crowd with the spray and pray full auto as compared to controlled and aimed semi auto.


/
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,308 Posts
With the rare exception of the guy in Vegas just spraying into a crowd. He almost couldn't miss.
Seems to me like he missed the majority of his shots. Almost 1200 shots discharged and only 58 dead? Even with a packed crowd where every bullet should have hit 2-3 people (through and through shots, ricochets, secondary missile damage), it seems to me like he hit pretty much everything but the crowd.

Grumpy
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
20,822 Posts
Seems to me like he missed the majority of his shots. Almost 1200 shots discharged and only 58 dead? Even with a packed crowd where every bullet should have hit 2-3 people (through and through shots, ricochets, secondary missile damage), it seems to me like he hit pretty much everything but the crowd.

Grumpy

I think this was mainly a distance issue and his downward angle to the ground. Had he been more parallel to the ground firing into the crowd the already terrible casualties would have been much much more severe. As you point out multiple hits per round and so on.



/
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,642 Posts
Seems to me like he missed the majority of his shots. Almost 1200 shots discharged and only 58 dead? Even with a packed crowd where every bullet should have hit 2-3 people (through and through shots, ricochets, secondary missile damage), it seems to me like he hit pretty much everything but the crowd.

Grumpy
I realized that after I wrote it. I meant with a crowd that size at that range his odds were as good full auto as they were semi-auto aimed so it was about quantity since accuracy was not really an option. He would probably not been able to get off that many rounds with regular semi-auto. 58 dead but I believe he hit more like 160 people.

Also, a lot of those rounds were fired after the crowd dispersed.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
83 Posts
Discussion Starter #15
So you saw that on YouTube. And the commentator says she got it from FaceBook. And then you post it here. We definitely have a problem in this country. And then on top of all that the click bait thread title in all caps. Lack of critical thinking is what this countries problem is. Even down to the Parkland kids. No critical thinking thought process to figure stuff out on their own. But they are just manipulated kids. I won't be to hard on them just yet.

/
https://www.gunsamerica.com/l/66755...6B5C2809/o4R5W/20180330_FridayDigest_167g.htm

You can find the actual DOJ document in the aforementioned article. It’s 55 pages of great reading material. I know because I read the whole damn thing. You can make your Facebook and YouTube comments all you want but what’s happening is real and not only should you be concerned but you should get involved.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artic...es_Constitution#Section_9:_Limits_on_Congress

Unless what I was taught was mistaken.
Article 1, Section 9 of the Constitution
prohibits Congress from passing any ex post facto laws.

An ex post facto law is one which retroactively punishes someone for an act which was legal before the passage of the law.
 

·
Millennium Number 1143
Joined
·
1,715 Posts
https://www.gunsamerica.com/l/66755...6B5C2809/o4R5W/20180330_FridayDigest_167g.htm

You can find the actual DOJ document in this article. It’s 55 pages of great reading material. I know because I read the whole damn thing. You can make your Facebook and YouTube comments all you want but what’s happening is real and not only should you be concerned but you should get involved.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artic...es_Constitution#Section_9:_Limits_on_Congress

Unless what I was taught was mistaken.
Article 1, Section 9 of the Constitution
prohibits Congress from passing any ex post facto laws.

An ex post facto law is one which retroactively punishes someone for an act which was legal before the passage of the law.
It has been said that they get around the Ex Post Facto by giving you a time period to surrender / destroy the item/s.

Not sure I agree with that but it seems the NRA has not seen fit to challenge this basically exact same ban that passed into law for Florida just recently.
Anyone with a bumpstock/device in FL after X date (I think sometime in October?) if caught with one is going to be charged with a 3rd degree felony.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jay Mar

·
NRA Life Member
Joined
·
29,081 Posts
I foresee a large number of boating accidents and a larger number of sales of sealed cache systems.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,517 Posts
If this works, without being changed.
There will be no grandfather clause when they try to ban magazines. Like the first time.

All of you giving in because you don’t have a bump stock, take note.

Fight for anything, or lose everything


.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,118 Posts
If this works, without being changed.
There will be no grandfather clause when they try to ban magazines. Like the first time.

All of you giving in because you don’t have a bump stock, take note.

Fight for anything, or lose everything

.
Pick your fights, or get your a** kicked. JMO
 
1 - 20 of 92 Posts
Top