iH8DemLibz
When All Else Fails.
Every word about you having a warehouse full of bump stocks was in jest.
But the joys of the water cooler are only two posts away.
Comradery and butterfly farts lie within.
Bump Stocks to be Banned Nationwide
- Thread starter TexDefender
- Start date
The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast
Member Benefits:
No ad networks! Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership Discuss anti-gun legislation Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses Discover free outdoor shooting areas View up to date on firearm-related events Share photos & video with other members ...and so much more!
Member Benefits:
Every word about you having a warehouse full of bump stocks was in jest.
But the joys of the water cooler are only two posts away.
Comradery and butterfly farts lie within.
buellsfurn
Ultimate Member
I see what you did their
TexDefender
Ultimate Member
- Feb 28, 2017
- 1,572
danb
dont be a dumbass
BREAKING: President Trump Directs Justice Department to Ban Bump Fire Stocks
That is the headline over at TTAG: http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/20...mp-direct-justice-department-ban-bump-stocks/
those evil progressives over at TTAG.
Totally inaccurate clickbait, obviously...
That is the headline over at TTAG: http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/20...mp-direct-justice-department-ban-bump-stocks/
those evil progressives over at TTAG.
Totally inaccurate clickbait, obviously...
Apologize one more time, and you'll get in the WC. Seems like a reasonable price for penance!
namrelio
Ultimate Member
- Feb 19, 2013
- 18,751
Lots of luck making a Billionaire miserable. That rarefied air isn't comprehendable to we mortals.
- May 22, 2005
- 122,879
40 posts removed, infractions issued for personal insults.
Carry on.
Carry on.
- Nov 14, 2010
- 20,274
Breitbart.com - But, read past the headline ...
Trump: I’ve Directed AG ‘to Propose Regulations to Ban All Devices That Turn Legal Weapons Into Machine Guns’
It may be wishful thinking on my part, but given the 'legal' NFA definition of machine gun and the fact that ATF has already cleared bump stocks and other such devices by the exact same definition, proposing and enacting versus surviving a challenge in SCOTUS may take more than a bit of legal language legerdemain.
Trump: I’ve Directed AG ‘to Propose Regulations to Ban All Devices That Turn Legal Weapons Into Machine Guns’
It may be wishful thinking on my part, but given the 'legal' NFA definition of machine gun and the fact that ATF has already cleared bump stocks and other such devices by the exact same definition, proposing and enacting versus surviving a challenge in SCOTUS may take more than a bit of legal language legerdemain.
buellsfurn
Ultimate Member
tkd4life
Ultimate Member
I know who he is. That doesn’t justify the tone. Don’t cut down newbies in anger, it’s just like hitting your kids right? Isn’t that an internet rule somewhere?
buellsfurn
Ultimate Member
He bleeds 2 a, not saying you do not but i think its fair to say he saw the same news alert and it pissed him off . Then you and I posted in dif. threads I think his first thought was to put water on the coals before the fire starts. Water under the bridge my new friend. edit oops I thought you where op edit edit Im sure you've said something in anger before i have and no CHILDREN where hit
tkd4life
Ultimate Member
SCV/SAR Patriot
UNRECONSTRUCTED
Squaregrouper
Kragaphile
I guess my "Gentlemen calm down" post being deleted was Norton's way of telling me to stay out of this thread- so I will.
Okay, we all know about bumpstocks.
I don't think a lot of people realize what's significant about this mess.
After years, nay, decades of insisting that guns/inanimate objects don't kill people, the NRA (and later Trump) said that hey, this inanimate object is dangerous!
This is a significant (and very dangerous) concession to the anti-gun side. It may be being made mistakenly in the belief that if we just jettison these evil icky full auto simulators, everything will be fine again.
That's wrong. Because now the anti-gunners can cite these statements by first, the NRA and then later by Trump; in court cases as evidence that certain items are unusually dangerous and should be banned/regulated heavily.
Basically, this is the definition of a short-lived tactical victory, but a long term strategic defeat.
I don't know where we're gonna go from here, but it's not pretty -- because if you can say that things with a "too fast" rate of fire are too dangerous for the general public to own; then what's to stop you from defining the maximum effective range of easily available publicly owned weapons?
A quick google search for
"average deer hunting range"
results in:
https://www.fieldandstream.com/science-shooting-deer-wayne-van-zwoll-on-long-range-shots
as the top result.
Think about what could happen if they decided that anything with "excessive" energy beyond that distance constituted a "sniper round", because that's on their hitlist at some point in the indefinite future -- once they've achieved what they really want in the "assault weapon" business -- the legal backing to arbitrarily define something as "too dangerous" to own for the general public.
That was also their Modus Operandi in the 1960s-1980s with the "Saturday Night Special" stuff -- they wanted to be able to define what was acceptable for a weapon -- the last attempt (Brady II) defined "Saturday Night Special" in such a way as to ban all polymer bodied pistols or modern compact pistols.
I don't think a lot of people realize what's significant about this mess.
After years, nay, decades of insisting that guns/inanimate objects don't kill people, the NRA (and later Trump) said that hey, this inanimate object is dangerous!
This is a significant (and very dangerous) concession to the anti-gun side. It may be being made mistakenly in the belief that if we just jettison these evil icky full auto simulators, everything will be fine again.
That's wrong. Because now the anti-gunners can cite these statements by first, the NRA and then later by Trump; in court cases as evidence that certain items are unusually dangerous and should be banned/regulated heavily.
Basically, this is the definition of a short-lived tactical victory, but a long term strategic defeat.
I don't know where we're gonna go from here, but it's not pretty -- because if you can say that things with a "too fast" rate of fire are too dangerous for the general public to own; then what's to stop you from defining the maximum effective range of easily available publicly owned weapons?
A quick google search for
"average deer hunting range"
results in:
https://www.fieldandstream.com/science-shooting-deer-wayne-van-zwoll-on-long-range-shots
as the top result.
Think about what could happen if they decided that anything with "excessive" energy beyond that distance constituted a "sniper round", because that's on their hitlist at some point in the indefinite future -- once they've achieved what they really want in the "assault weapon" business -- the legal backing to arbitrarily define something as "too dangerous" to own for the general public.
That was also their Modus Operandi in the 1960s-1980s with the "Saturday Night Special" stuff -- they wanted to be able to define what was acceptable for a weapon -- the last attempt (Brady II) defined "Saturday Night Special" in such a way as to ban all polymer bodied pistols or modern compact pistols.
He cleaned house in this thread.
mferrari
Member
I would imagine there are a lot of states with bills regarding bump stock bans. I am curious if a national bill would affect states moving forward with their own bills...
Right now Maryland's proposed bill the way I read it would also ban trigger upgrades and binary triggers. That is a far worse ban then just bump stocks I would say.
Right now Maryland's proposed bill the way I read it would also ban trigger upgrades and binary triggers. That is a far worse ban then just bump stocks I would say.
Users who are viewing this thread
Forum statistics
Latest threads
-
‘Why is nothing being done?’: Concerns grow about drug use, fighting in Montgomery Co. school bathrooms (17 Viewers)- Started by RFBfromDE
- Replies: 6
-
-
-
-
-
-
Hair-trigger posting... please include more than just the "headline" (1 Viewer)- Started by Mr H
- Replies: 13