- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Bump/Slide stocks are flying off the shelves
Posted on 10/4/17 at 9:44 am to swamplynx
Posted on 10/4/17 at 9:44 am to swamplynx
quote:
Have you paid any attention to Iraq and Afghanistan? Not saying that we lost/are losing, but they are doing a mighty fine job giving us some fits with their Ak47s against all of our state of the art equipment.
1. Fully auto AK-47s
2. They also have plenty of other soviet era weapons at their disposal, from RPGs to heavy machine guns.
2
Posted on 10/4/17 at 9:56 am to Jester
Iraqis with semi automatic AKs can't hit crap much less full auto ones 
Posted on 10/4/17 at 9:58 am to Jester
the slide-fire stock is i think the only time i've ever looked at a firearm product and said "how on earth is this legal to sell?"
its a semi-auto workaround regardless of the marketing and/or intended use. yes you can bump fire any semi-auto rifle, but usually only from the hip, and without much in the way of accuracy. the slide fire stock allows simulated full auto discharge from the shoulder to the target.
like someone else said, common sense has to come into play at some point.
its a semi-auto workaround regardless of the marketing and/or intended use. yes you can bump fire any semi-auto rifle, but usually only from the hip, and without much in the way of accuracy. the slide fire stock allows simulated full auto discharge from the shoulder to the target.
like someone else said, common sense has to come into play at some point.
Posted on 10/4/17 at 10:18 am to cgrand
quote:
the slide-fire stock is i think the only time i've ever looked at a firearm product and said "how on earth is this legal to sell?"
You've clearly never seen tannerite.
Posted on 10/4/17 at 10:21 am to choupiquesushi
quote:
So was the guy on the 32nd floor.
58 counts of murder say otherwise.
Posted on 10/4/17 at 10:22 am to jdavid1
quote:
You've clearly never seen tannerite.
forgot about that one!
in fairness though its not a firearm product although it requires a firearm to ignite
Posted on 10/4/17 at 10:42 am to swamplynx
quote:
Have you paid any attention to Iraq and Afghanistan? Not saying that we lost/are losing, but they are doing a mighty fine job giving us some fits with their Ak47s against all of our state of the art equipment.
Have you paid attention? Talk to a member of the Republican Guard. Ask them how they fared when the US brought the full might of our military technology to bear against them. I can promise you they won't use language like, they "gave us some fits". It was an arse whipping of the highest magnitude. And they had a lot more firepower at their disposal than just AKs. Oh wait. You can't talk to the RG because they're all dead!
quote:
You can draw the line where ever you desire, but a ban on bumpstocks (which this thread is about) would not have resulted in any less carnage that if he didn't have one. He had the time, firepower and desire to do as much damage as he did if he was using only 10 round magazines. He was literally shooting fish in a barrel.
No, he was shooting human beings, not fish. Fathers, mothers, sons and daughters of people like us. My reply to the OP was only asking that he have some sensitivity for the feelings of those who lost loved ones. I felt it was just too soon to talk about buying bump stocks because they were flying of the shelf. Not once did I mention banning bump stocks.
My last post was in reply to someone who apparently believes the only way to assure our freedom is to arm up to the same level as our military. So that we are prepared to defend ourselves against our own military. Which in my opinion is an invalid 2nd amendment argument. Why? Because I can't afford F-18s and Bradley fighting vehicles. Please. If you are going to argue the 2nd amendment, don't sound like a fool. That only gives the other side more ammunition.
As a side note, Cabela's has their tin foil hats on sale. And they're flying off the shelves! God help us.
Posted on 10/4/17 at 10:44 am to redneck
quote:
gun nuts are just as bad as the people who want to ban all guns IMO
Amen.
Posted on 10/4/17 at 10:47 am to jimbeam
quote:
Iraqis with semi automatic AKs can't hit crap much less full auto ones
Yet we lost many good men to the business end of AKs in that war.
Posted on 10/4/17 at 10:50 am to go ta hell ole miss
quote:
So was the guy on the 32nd floor.
58 counts of murder say otherwise.
past tense.. WAS
Posted on 10/4/17 at 11:24 am to cgrand
quote:
its a semi-auto workaround regardless of the marketing and/or intended use. yes you can bump fire any semi-auto rifle, but usually only from the hip, and without much in the way of accuracy. the slide fire stock allows simulated full auto discharge from the shoulder to the target.
like someone else said, common sense has to come into play at some point.
The question will be how do you write the law up to say it is illegal? By definition it isn't a fully automatic fire control group. Can the ATF just ban a product that fits within all of the confines of the current NFA laws because it wants to? Or will the NFA have to be amended/changed? Then how specifically do you change the verbiage to make a bump fire stock illegal?
Lets say you write it up as to make it illegal to have a stock that allows the inertia of the recoil of the rifle to reset the trigger while maintaining pressure on the trigger to instantly fire the rifle as the trigger resets. Job is done right?
Well you could easily design around that by making it a grip that does the same thing. Or maybe a hand guard. OK the law is too specific so lets say any device attached to a rifle that allows the inertia of the rifle to reset the trigger is illegal. Job is now done.
But wait, the device doesn't have to attach the the rifle to bump fire. You could make a bump fire board. You could tie L shaped stick to your shoulder and use that to bump fire. In fact you don't even need anything you can just use your finger and bump fire without anything but the human body interacting with the rifle.
Do you make the act of bump firing illegal? What kind of slippery slope is that? Is that even possible? Would it even be enforceable? What if you accidentally bump fire are you now a felon?
Then you have devices like the GAT trigger. Do you write it up as any device attached or unattached to the gun that allows rapid fire of the gun simulating full auto fire. Who defines rapid fire? Does this now make those high quality custom triggers with short resets and no over travel now illegal because you can shoot much more rapidly with them? Maybe I just have a fast finger is my skill illegal?
ATF is fully aware of bump fire stocks. If getting rid of them was easy without setting dangerous precedents that NRA would fight against I'm sure they would have been banned a long time ago.
Posted on 10/4/17 at 11:31 am to swamplynx
quote:
was literally shooting fish in a barrel.
Exactly, the faster he can get off rounds, the more people he can kill/injure. I normally am one to argue that a FA gun is no more deadly than being effecient with shots in semi auto, but in this case with 22k people packed so dense, FA (or bump stock loophole FA), it really was just about getting off as many rounds as you can, as fast as you can
Posted on 10/4/17 at 11:33 am to DeoreDX
quote:
If getting rid of them was easy without setting dangerous precedents that NRA would fight against I'm sure they would have been banned a long time ago.
The NRA will fight against anything short of full deregulation. They are dinosaurs with little to no regard for general safety of the populace.
Posted on 10/4/17 at 11:36 am to DeoreDX
quote:
ATF is fully aware of bump fire stocks. If getting rid of them was easy without setting dangerous precedents that NRA would fight against I'm sure they would have been banned a long time ago.
lets be honest
the NRA and gun lobby is going to fight tooth and nail against ANY restriction on firearm or firearm products, saying "it sets a dangerous precedent"
whether you agree with that stance or not (i don't, its a free country), lets not act like they pick and choose. its a blanket "no restrictions" lobbying stance that ignores common sense
again, i said as much...you can bump fire any semi auto rifle without the handy-dandy $99 slide fire. the stock just makes it easier and more accurate in doing so. i am not a lawyer, legislator or lobbyist. just a regular dude with common sense who can identify a dangerous product.
shite...they outlawed lawn darts. does that mean nobody can make their own?
no...it just means you cant buy lawn darts at walmart
Posted on 10/4/17 at 11:37 am to redneck
quote:
redneck
FUDD alert x2
Posted on 10/4/17 at 11:38 am to BTRLSU5
quote:
FUDD alert x2
Posted on 10/4/17 at 11:59 am to cgrand
quote:
regular dude with common sense who can identify a dangerous product.
Posted on 10/4/17 at 12:05 pm to Jester
You guys do know that he could have made a lighting link out of some spare metal and it would have been full auto?
To think any law will stop this is absurd. I'm sorry but it is part of living in this country as harsh as it is to say. I would much rather us have extremely lax gun laws then to have heavy regulation for perceived safety.
To think any law will stop this is absurd. I'm sorry but it is part of living in this country as harsh as it is to say. I would much rather us have extremely lax gun laws then to have heavy regulation for perceived safety.
Posted on 10/4/17 at 12:37 pm to ChatRabbit77
quote:
You guys do know that he could have made a lighting link out of some spare metal and it would have been full auto?
To think any law will stop this is absurd. I'm sorry but it is part of living in this country as harsh as it is to say. I would much rather us have extremely lax gun laws then to have heavy regulation for perceived safety.
Maybe he could, or maybe he isn't technically inclined enough to do so. Also, can he build 17 of them? Sorry, not sorry. Controlling the wide spread of bump stocks =/= taking your guns away. Same with suppressors. They're cool and all, but you don't need suppressors.
Page 5 of 12
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News