Bump (the stocks, not the internet reminder)

Note the rain on the hill. Slopes pointing many directions. Anyone or all directions may/can be slippery.
May or may not be related to hunting, depends on perception(unless one is all knowing)
Kind of a metaphor - probably a stupid idea........
slipperyslope.jpg.
 
“Trump administration moves to ban bump stocks”

I distinctly remember being told by the NRA that if I voted for Hillery this would happen.
 
Funny shit right there.^^
Kinda funny like Obummer giving us the ability to us carry guns in National Parks.
Things just don't want to be simple..................
 
Republican administration makes executive order infringing on 2A after campaigning for the opposite? Delicious irony or Special Needs POTUS? 2 for 1? How much did NRA contribute to his campaign?
 
Often I think shooter's are their own worst enemy! The bump stock deal is a good example. Few people seem to find any use for them at all but don't want them prohibited, why is that? all it seem's to do is give shooter's a black eye. We don't give in on anything, period! Well from what I read, the bump stock pretty much turns a semi auto rifle into full auto! But we'd rather mince words here and call the rifle a semi auto. Suppose someone decided to market new rifle's as semi auto but they come with a bump stock. Are they semi auto or full auto. I'm all for making them illegal! Now I have no use at all for one of the black AR type rifles but, they are semi auto rifles. Not gonna say much bad about them other than they are ugly as hell and I wouldn't own one. But keep in mind I have no intention of being seen with a bolt action rifle with a plastic stock either, terminal ugly! But the bump stock? Do us all a favor and wave good bye to it. Those that have been in the service should know the difference between an M1 Carbine and an M2 Carbine. M1 is a semi auto and the M2 is exactly the same rifle with a disconnector lever that allow's it to be fired full auto! An AR 15 with a bump stock is exactly the same rifle as the reg AR 15 but with a stock that let's if fire full auto, quit playing with words!
 
the444shooter said:
And yet that's exactly what we see going on in the UK. Moreso, we're not a country based on societal merit, we're *supposed to be* a country based on freedom. Freedom to drink large sodas, smoke cigarettes, own the same weaponry as the people assigned to police and govern us.....

That may be a very simplified way to put it, and I could very well be off-base, but that's how I view it.
Click to expand...

As a libertarian-leaning person, I appreciate the sentiment underlying your response, but I am not sure it was ever really the case. At the beginning there were 14 constitutions (13 states and 1 federal), 13 bodies of state legislative law, countless local government laws/regulations and the overarching adoption of generalized English common law - each a social construct in its own right, none of them providing anything resembling universal or uniform liberty/freedom. While "more free" than the European continental monarchies, it was a freedom highly constrain by recognized social norms, and in any event was largely reserved for land-owning white males over the age of 21 - not so much for the other 80% of humans in the land. And all kinds of things were regulated in the 1780s, including laws against loaded weapons in personal residences in some jurisdictions, local alcohol bans in others, and religious freedom was merely the right to practice the predominant christian faith variant of your township.

Laws always have been and always will be merely social constructs, guided by aspirational but ill defined concepts like freedom, liberty, equality, natural law and security -- each concept being subject to many different personal views on how to apply those concepts in real world settings. I too hate the "nanny state" approach to the issues you point out, but in the end, the winning answer is battling each on its merits, picking your battles and not taking too much comfort in the view that either side of the political spectrum owns an unwavering "truth".
 
The biggest problem I see with the bump stock ban is it was in my understanding declared a machine gun under the NFA. I don't see how this could be considering it does not meet the standards of a machine gun. If that is the case I could see the ruling being reversed in court. Has anyone else heard this?
As for trying to keep one and it being regulated as an NFA item you can do that I damn sure wouldn't take that chance. Serious no no right there. Might as well go find you a fully auto and take your chances of not registering that and throw that bump stock in the trash. I have zero need for either in my life and fully support their regulation.
 
Don Fischer said:
An AR 15 with a bump stock is exactly the same rifle as the reg AR 15 but with a stock that let's if fire full auto, quit playing with words!
Click to expand...
I disagree with this. The bump stock is the spinner wheel of the gun industry. It is a gimmicky add on the shoots real quick, sometimes. I could care less about their legality, but am definitely opposed to forced destruction or confiscation of a legally purchased item.
 
Play stupid games win stupid prizes. Bump stocks are a stupid attempt to make an AR into something it isn’t. Why flaunt stupidity.
 
Wow I'm just amazed this thread didn't derail in the first 10 minutes.
 
Seriously tho I'm pretty frustrated the Republicans didn't make any headway on suppressors when they had the chance. Going to be a while before they control the government again.
 
BucksnDucks said:
I disagree with this. The bump stock is the spinner wheel of the gun industry. It is a gimmicky add on the shoots real quick, sometimes. I could care less about their legality, but am definitely opposed to forced destruction or confiscation of a legally purchased item.
Click to expand...

From what I saw in the video I watched, as long as the trigger was pulled, the thing kept firing. With a semi auto rifle you either pull the trigger for every shot or it doesn't fire again. My opinion is the bump stock turns a semi auto into full auto and we don't need the hassle! Gun owner's should have rejected it soon as it came out! Now we sat around and let the anti's use it to discredit us!

Opposed to confiscation or forced destruction of a legally purchased item? Well you can legally purchase an Mi carbine but not an M2. But you can purchase an M1 and add a disconnection lever and what is it then? Legally purchased M2? Get serious. All gun owner' don't necessarily care about your right's, only what they can get away with!
 
Last edited:
Never had much desire to get one. The sheer cost of ammo turned me off. Sure, it would be fun to see what it did. But I would pass. As far as being "full auto", nope. You actually pull the trigger every time. You just use the recoil and the "bump" action to do it instead of actually moving your finger every time. In my mind, it's NOT a machine gun. It pretty much is the same kind of gimmick as the old crank lever that fit inside the trigger guard that turned a semi into sort of a Gatling gun. Couldn't hit crap with that, either.
 
Dave N said:
Never had much desire to get one. The sheer cost of ammo turned me off. Sure, it would be fun to see what it did. But I would pass. As far as being "full auto", nope. You actually pull the trigger every time. You just use the recoil and the "bump" action to do it instead of actually moving your finger every time. In my mind, it's NOT a machine gun. It pretty much is the same kind of gimmick as the old crank lever that fit inside the trigger guard that turned a semi into sort of a Gatling gun. Couldn't hit crap with that, either.
Click to expand...

You don't move your finger to pull the trigger every time and you call it a semi auto? Your splitting a mighty fine hair there! I'm calling it full auto!
 
VikingsGuy said:
I would object to the banning of bolt action hunting rifles on the merits. Their societal pros and cons, of which there are both. But in no case would I argue that they are a step on a slippery slope towards banning pocket knives (or whatever less threatening weapon you might choose by way of example).
Click to expand...

But they won't ban your bolt action hunting rifle. They'll be banning your "sniper rifle". And yes, it is a step on the way toward banning your "concealable assault blades". It's all about the words. Bump stocks are stupid, undeniably. But they were officially approved by BATFE a few years back, people bought them in good faith, now they must destroy them without compensation or become felons. That is a taking under any reading of the law. If it stands, it becomes a precedent for future actions on the next fringe product. So we shouldn't fight this? Would you rather fight it after your "sniper rifle" has been declared illegal, and dozens of precedents have been set when they confiscated magazines, suppressors, night vision scopes, .50 cal rifles, AK-47s, handguns, automatic knives, machetes... and you didn't object because none of those were in your safe either? Sure, slippery slope arguments can be carried to the point of absurdity, but there are real dangers here. How much do we give up before we decide enough is enough, and who will be left to stand with us when we do? No, I don't want a bump stock, and I will never buy one. I prefer, though, that some pencil-neck in Washington doesn't make that decision for me.
 
Might be nit-picking, but isn't that what we all do at times? LEGALLY, a semi-auto requires a trigger to be pulled for every shot. TECHNICALLY, this does that. The bump stock moves your finger for you. Sure, it ACTS like full auto but still fits the true definition of semi. Not trying to open a can of worms here, just giving my 2 cents worth. Isn't that why we're discussing this in the first place?
 
I generally try to stay out of this sort of thing, but I'll go ahead and venture an opinion.

First off, I tend away from the slippery slope argument. If something should be banned it should be banned.

About the bump stock itself. like most, I don't have or want one. Its just not something that I have any interest in. I guess the whole argument about banning it is really about keeping it out of the hands of crazies and terrorists. Mass shootings are a ever present in our collective thinking these days. I can say that I understand they make your semi-auto rifle very inaccurate, but how much accuracy does one need to spray 30 rounds into a densely packed crowd? Not much.

I listened to the audio of the Law Vegas shooting and went away with 2 thoughts: 1) that was a hell of a lot of bullets hitting people. 2) although I realize that was technically a semi-auto with a bump stock, it would take a very trained ear to distinguish that from a full-auto. I certainly couldn't tell the difference. Does that mean it should be banned? I guess I don't know. I have trouble with broadstroke banning something a legitimate hobby-shooting enthusiast might use because we're concerned wackos might break already-existing laws with it.

Another thought: when someone is spraying into a concert crowd from an elevated position, how much did the bump stock actually increase the body count as opposed to using the same rifle without it? Probably not much; maybe none at all.

And from a law enforcement perspective, if I were caught facing a guy down a hallway with an Kalashnikov, and me only with my Glock 22, I would prefer he HAVE a bump stock on it, as its the guy takes a second to actually ain his weapon that generally wins the gunfight. A bump stock is literally good for only 2 things. Having fun on the range blowing up watermelons 20yds away, and pumping large volumes of lead randomly into a crowd. Thats about it.
 
Like most here I don't see the point of a bump stock. The problem I have with the whole registration thing is that a Bureaucracy made a law that turned people into criminals. That isn't how it is supposed to work. When the government took away our fourth amendment rights they at least rolled it up into a neat little package, called the "Patriot Act", and voted on it. The power the bureaucracy in this country holds is way out of line.
 
VikingsGuy said:
Laws/regulations change all the time, and there is no requirement that regulators/legislatures "grandfather" or reimburse those who have value destroyed by the law/regulation.
Click to expand...

Yeah, but that's coming. They tried in Colorado this year "Colorado Amendment 74, Compensation to Owners for Decreased Property Value Due to State Regulation Initiative (2018)"
 
ATF announcement:
Acting Attorney General Matthew Whitaker announces that the Department of Justice has amended the regulations of ATF, clarifying that bump stocks fall within the definition of "machine gun" under federal law.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

A207X2
Goldenrod gun safe dehumidifier questions
Replies
5
Views
777
DRS
DRS
Hams42
Hot Feet! On The Hunt For New Boots
Replies
10
Views
1K
MT_Chad
MT_Chad
P
Realistic shooting distances
2 3
Replies
48
Views
5K
dgc1963
D
E
Lessons learned: hunting partners
2
Replies
36
Views
5K
tormenter
T
Hockaday2017
"WHAT SHOULD I CARRY IN MY FIRST AID KIT?" - ANSWERED PART #2
Replies
10
Views
1K
brocksw
B
GOHUNT Insider

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
111,003
Messages
1,943,289
Members
34,956
Latest member
mfrosty6

Share this page

Back
Top