Trump to Sessions: Ban Bumpstocks

Status
Not open for further replies.
I do get tired of everyone using Cyclic Rate of rounds per minute as meaning Rate of Fire of rounds per minute.

If a full auto has a cyclic rate of 600 rounds per minute, it can only achieve that rate of fire if it has a feeding device of 600 rounds. It would empty a 30 round magazine in three seconds. Removing the empty and replacing it with a full magazine takes time.

I have seen a sem-auto AK with a 75 round magazine emptied as fast as the trigger could be pulled and the wooden forearm was smoking and too hot to handle by the end. Even with a full auto AK,maximum practical rate of fire is about three 30 round magazines fired in bursts (trigger squeeze and release) in a minute. Rate of fire is much less than cyclic rate (the speed the mechanism cycles).
 
Last edited:
Yup- Life's good unless you happen to be a law abiding gun owner in the 18 - 21 age bracket who wants to purchase a semi-auto rifle. In my first eight months of being 18, I purchased three rifles, including a SKS and a MAK-90. I was even able to buy some 20 and 30 rd magazines (SCARRY) in the post-'94 AW ban world.

Gotta love a bunch of THR gray hairs deciding who's rights should be violated.
 
TTV2. I agree with you. Do you think congress and the vast American people would to?
If they're informed, yes. The problem is most Americans aren't. Thankfully the internet has helped educate a lot of people the past 10-20 years.

I'm as pro-2A as it gets, but I have no use for bump stocks and I'm over 21, so I don't care about them. What I know is if you have something people want very badly, you don't give it away for free.

Will average America look at suppressors and say yea/nay? Average America has seen every conceivable weapon in movies and TV and video games, but they have to be smart and realize entertainment isn't real. A suppressor isn't silent, it's a noise reducer. We should call them Reducers, not Suppressors/Silencers. Words have mental images and that's why silencer is the vernacular when it comes to such devices.

As for Reciprocity... it's only a handful of states that don't really have CCW, so there's not many people who'd oppose it. NJ, CA, MD, RI... their politicians are already largely Anti, so it's irrelevant. Unfortunately, the major media outlets are in NYC, and they'll make people believe an army from Texas is gonna be walking down their street acting like drunken cowboys.

When it comes to short rifles/shotguns, I think the average person is more concerned it's a gun, not so much the size of it. They won't care.
 
We are not getting suppressors out of this. Devils advocate here. “What if the Vegas shooter had a suppressor and you couldn’t hear where they shots were coming from?”
I hope we get reciprocity, armed guards in schools or cpl in present gun free zones. I hope NOT that we get an assault weapons ban and trumps out one term. Who would replace him? A Democrat? I do believe he’s doing the Nra thing and I’m cautiously optimistic watching as of now.
Yeah, that's why I ordered my new 6.5G upper, 12 hi-cap mags and 4K rds of ammo Sunday :(
 
Yup- Life's good unless you happen to be a law abiding gun owner in the 18 - 21 age bracket who wants to purchase a semi-auto rifle. In my first eight months of being 18, I purchased three rifles, including a SKS and a MAK-90. I was even able to buy some 20 and 30 rd magazines (SCARRY) in the post-'94 AW ban world.

Gotta love a bunch of THR gray hairs deciding who's rights should be violated.
The thing there is that being a certain age violates equal protection clauses, so I don't think they'd hold up in court. Even if they are held up, as long as it's semi-auto rifles that are centerfire, I wouldn't be opposed.

People currently have to wait until 21 to buy handguns, but there's no outcry about that.
 
When it comes to short rifles/shotguns, I think the average person is more concerned it's a gun, not so much the size of it. They won't care.

Since you can now shoulder the pistol braces, not sure it makes much of a difference. Sure would like to get a .300B Rattler with a suppressor without paying any tax stamps (also called giving up my rights).
 
I though he had our backs? :(

Hopefully he won't take the black powders. That'd one reason why I like them, they'd be the last to go.
 
I though he had our backs? :(

Hopefully he won't take the black powders. That'd one reason why I like them, they'd be the last to go.

He's going with the NRA, no worries. Everything he's mentioned the NRA has also mentioned (with some added vaguery on bump stocks).
 
I have a few too, but I guess not enough to cloud my judgement and accept blanket firearms restrictions that effect millions of Americans on a whim.
I’m sitting here at the ripe old age of 35. And honestly, I’m a little stunned by some of these comments as well. It appears that some THR members are fine with the actions of a few affecting millions. But it’s fine because it doesn’t affect them because they’re older. That’s NOT pro-2A. That’s pro-“ME”.
 
I’m sitting here at the ripe old age of 35. And honestly, I’m a little stunned by some of these comments as well. It appears that some THR members are fine with the actions of a few affecting millions. But it’s fine because it doesn’t affect them because they’re older. That’s NOT pro-2A. That’s pro-“ME”.

Well, you might check out the comments on bump stocks from the NRA:

https://home.nra.org/joint-statement
 
The way I see it is it’s never been more critical to get our pro gun based ideas out there on how to stop mass shootings. If not we will lose. This may seem hard to believe to us but there are a lot of people out there who generally don’t care about guns and dont see a problem with banning the “bad apples” of them since they’re offensive anyways and if it doesn’t work then we’ll figure out what else to do. That’s the slippery slope. The pro gun community needs to step out of the defense. The antis resist our ideas like cpl in gun free zones and especially armed guards in schools because if those ideas work (and our ideas should because they are logical ) then in halts there public disarmament goals. Let’s face it. They claim guns in schools could be accidents waiting to happen but are okay with proven failed laws while waiting for another mass shooting to occur.
 
I’m sitting here at the ripe old age of 35. And honestly, I’m a little stunned by some of these comments as well. It appears that some THR members are fine with the actions of a few affecting millions. But it’s fine because it doesn’t affect them because they’re older. That’s NOT pro-2A. That’s pro-“ME”.

That’s the second time today I’ve read that sentiment on this board (different post). And yeah. It disturbs me too.
 
Since you can now shoulder the pistol braces, not sure it makes much of a difference. Sure would like to get a .300B Rattler with a suppressor without paying any tax stamps (also called giving up my rights).
Shouldering braces is the exact reason the SBR/SBS laws are stupid anyway. AR pistols have been out there for many years and now have braces that people can buy, yet I think all of one AR pistol has been used in a shooting since 2004.

The facts are simple: short barrel rifles are not used in crimes and legally owned short barrel shotguns aren't either. The argument will be that removing them from registration will mean more deaths from them, but for shotguns, there's no skill involved in cutting the barrel and stock down. I'd be willing to bet lots of criminals use short barrel shotguns, but having a law that says it's illegal doesn't stop them.

It does stop good people like us though and we suffer as a result. Just like we would suffer if hi capacity magazines were banned, AR's were banned, etc.
 
And on the bump stock. My take is
1) The ban is goofey. It has no relevance at all in stopping mass shootings but I don’t like bans in any form including this one. This is America! However;
2) The stocks themselves are goofey. They have no place in sport or defense. They make a gun more like a (dangerous?)toy. I don’t care but I can see how that bothers other people on the fence. Trying to defend bump stocks for the sake of the second amendment seems counterproductive. Especially in the mass shooting crisis.
Protecting the ar15 is doable (and should be done). I think if we stick to its defensive and sporting advantages for law abiding citizens.
 
The way I see it is it’s never been more critical to get our pro gun based ideas out there on how to stop mass shootings. If not we will lose. This may seem hard to believe to us but there are a lot of people out there who generally don’t care about guns and dont see a problem with banning the “bad apples” of them since they’re offensive anyways and if it doesn’t work then we’ll figure out what else to do. That’s the slippery slope. The pro gun community needs to step out of the defense. The antis resist our ideas like cpl in gun free zones and especially armed guards in schools because if those ideas work (and our ideas should because they are logical ) then in halts there public disarmament goals. Let’s face it. They claim guns in schools could be accidents waiting to happen but are okay with proven failed laws while waiting for another mass shooting to occur.

IMHO Trump will, in his usual form, propose a 'bump stock' ban and strengthening NICS (not an 'expansion' since that seems to mean applying NICS to more folks) in return for Mental Health reforms and enhanced school security.

Now, IDK anything about what he'll do, of course, that's just my prediction based on previous behavior.
 
I’m sitting here at the ripe old age of 35. And honestly, I’m a little stunned by some of these comments as well. It appears that some THR members are fine with the actions of a few affecting millions. But it’s fine because it doesn’t affect them because they’re older. That’s NOT pro-2A. That’s pro-“ME”.
I don't think the three people who have used AR-15's the past few months for mass murder should result in everyone who is innocent being penalized. That's not who we are, that's not what we do, that's not what America stands for.

It's not right, but neither will high capacity mag restrictions or AWB's be right and those will be made law when the other side takes over in the future and when they take over, bump stocks and age restrictions will just be passed too. If we can get something out of bump stocks and age restrictions, do it.

If bump stocks and age restrictions are given away with nothing in return other than "feeling good"... I could not be more opposed to that than anyone else and if it's Trump and the Republicans in Congress, then every gun owning America should start a 3rd party because it will be obvious that the Republican party only supports the 2nd amendment and other issues so far as they can get re-elected.
 
I though he had our backs? :(

Hopefully he won't take the black powders. That'd one reason why I like them, they'd be the last to go.
Some of us tried to tell people otherwise, but we were repeatedly scolded and told his conversion was real and his past anti gun leanings were of no concern.... time will tell.


He's going with the NRA, no worries. Everything he's mentioned the NRA has also mentioned (with some added vaguery on bump stocks).

I’m a long time NRA lifer, I will eventually start monetarily supporting them again. But for right now I view them, frankly, as the enemy. The FACT is right now, today I have right to put a certain accessory on my firearm and the NRA of all people supports the government telling me I no longer have that right.

Sorry, but that doesn’t make me feel better.
 
Well, you might check out the comments on bump stocks from the NRA:

https://home.nra.org/joint-statement
Uhh...yeah. Thanks. I read that the day after it was originally posted. What’s your point? That the NRA was willing to sell our bumpstocks just like you are willing to do for 18-21 year olds?

So let’s classify a piece of plastic and a spring as a machine gun. Then after that, because bumpstocks can be duplicated by a couple rubber bands, it must be the gun that’s the problem, because it’s capable of faster fire. So let’s limit its capacity. Well that didn’t work. Now we have to restrict the gun itself. And viola... congrats. You just gave it away and spit on 18-21 year olds.
 
Holy heck, what are your solutions? What exactly do you think will happen if you keep your stance?

You do realize that politicians are working to get re-elected right ? or are you from some different planet?

erm, ok, let us know which political candidates meet your criteria in the upcoming elections (if history is correct the GOP will get tossed out in favor of a Demorat congress).

WIth a Demorat congress you can be assured there will be draconian gun controls with only Trump's veto stopping them!
 
Last edited:
I’m sitting here at the ripe old age of 35. And honestly, I’m a little stunned by some of these comments as well. It appears that some THR members are fine with the actions of a few affecting millions. But it’s fine because it doesn’t affect them because they’re older. That’s NOT pro-2A. That’s pro-“ME”.


Seems to be why we are in such a debacle the last 40 years
 
Uhh...yeah. Thanks. I read that the day after it was originally posted. What’s your point? That the NRA was willing to sell our bumpstocks just like you are willing to do for 18-21 year olds?
The difference is that getting something out of bumpstock bans or 18-20 age restrictions on rifles

So let’s classify a piece of plastic and a spring as a machine gun. Then after that, because bumpstocks can be duplicated by a couple rubber bands, it must be the gun that’s the problem, because it’s capable of faster fire. So let’s limit its capacity. Well that didn’t work. Now we have to restrict the gun itself. And viola... congrats. You just gave it away and spit on 18-21 year olds.
Capacity limits are not being scrutinized by Trump, Sessions, or the ATF and they never should be because hi capacity magazines are the best tools for self defense that a legal and innocent gun owner can use to defend themselves. If a hi capacity mag law ever gets floated, I'm never voting again.

I've also heard from a national radio host that AR's should have bullet buttons like in Cali, but that's a completely unfeasible option because there are millions of AR's in civilians hands. How do you enforce and justify having millions of AR's modified to do that? It's impossible and stupid.

You can't regulate rubber bands and springs no more than you can all the AR's out there now... unless UBC's and mass registration.
 
Uhh...yeah. Thanks. I read that the day after it was originally posted. What’s your point? That the NRA was willing to sell our bumpstocks just like you are willing to do for 18-21 year olds?

So let’s classify a piece of plastic and a spring as a machine gun. Then after that, because bumpstocks can be duplicated by a couple rubber bands, it must be the gun that’s the problem, because it’s capable of faster fire. So let’s limit its capacity. Well that didn’t work. Now we have to restrict the gun itself. And viola... congrats. You just gave it away and spit on 18-21 year olds.

If this were being called for by a Democrat there’d be a hellish outcry. Because the call for the ban is by someone who’s a cult of personality, THR now finds itself welcoming of gun control apologia. We have truly come full circle. Reminds me of the Fudds who were cool with the 94’ AWB since it didn’t impact their hunting.

Never thought I’d see the day where the buy-in to demagoguery would overshadow the things his fans ostensibly believe he stands for. Mark my words: this will set in motion the final death spiral of the 2a if it comes to pass. There will be no reciprocity and no SAFE act. What should there be, when the populist can remain so without follow-through?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top