View Full Version : NRA supports bump-stock regulations...........
Dan Shapiro
10-05-2017, 12:37
Smart move on their part. Earlier Nancy Pelosi was pushing for a ban on them, even admitting it was 'hopefully a slippery slope to more gun control regulations'.
Why would she say that? To put Republicans off of supporting the ban. Then the Democrats could scream and yell that the NRA and Republicans want everyone to have a machine gun. Now the NRA has called her bluff, tying a bump-stock ban WITH recognition of a national CCW reciprocity.
Looks like the ball is now back in Pelosi's court. Will Democrats refuse to support such a bill?
https://twitter.com/NBCPolitics/status/916004277025366016
S.A. Boggs
10-05-2017, 01:26
The national CCW will most likely be dropped, "For the safety of society" the new catch phrase replacing, "For the sake of the children!"
Sam
Sandpebble
10-05-2017, 01:33
The national CCW will most likely be dropped, "For the safety of society" the new catch phrase replacing, "For the sake of the children!"
Sam
Well Sam.... you agreed with the banning of beer in a hurricane zone "for the safety of society" ... didn't you ?
If you feel I'm a threat to society for buying a six pack .... why wouldn't others feel you are a threat with your guns ?
Dan Shapiro
10-05-2017, 01:40
The national CCW will most likely be dropped
Then it would be time to drop Ryan and McConnell.
S.A. Boggs
10-05-2017, 01:44
Well Sam.... you agreed with the banning of beer in a hurricane zone "for the safety of society" ... didn't you ?
If you feel I'm a threat to society for buying a six pack .... why wouldn't others feel you are a threat with your guns ?
By the way, did you ever fulfil your need for ethanol? One is too many and 10,000 is not enough. With your constant remarks on my opinion you continue a pattern that I have seen too often.
Sam:hello::banana100:
Sandpebble
10-05-2017, 01:52
By the way, did you ever fulfil your need for ethanol? One is too many and 10,000 is not enough. With your constant remarks on my opinion you continue a pattern that I have seen too often.
Sam:hello::banana100:
LOL.... a pattern you've seen too often ..... and as usual like a smart man you deftly swerve from the real point of the discussion .... man with a six pack is bad.... man with a gun is OK in your book ?
S.A. Boggs
10-05-2017, 02:00
LOL.... a pattern you've seen too often ..... and as usual like a smart man you deftly swerve from the real point of the discussion .... man with a six pack is bad.... man with a gun is OK in your book ?
An inebriated person in control of ANY object that can be lethal is never good. Swerve from the point of discussion, apparently at times this is not within your limited conscious context...
Sam:hello::banana100:
blackhawknj
10-05-2017, 02:29
Get invited to the table, have a big say in the wording of the regulations...what do you think Wall Street has done all these years ?
Sandpebble
10-05-2017, 02:32
An inebriated person in control of ANY object that can be lethal is never good. Swerve from the point of discussion, apparently at times this is not within your limited conscious context...
Sam:hello::banana100:
OK there ya go again Sam.... now I gotta call you out Bro.
You, as did some of the others here seemed quite fine with the Government stepping in to ban alcohol sales in a hurricane zone for the safety of the general public...
You did, right?... yes... or no ? .... be carefull now as what you wrote is still on the forum.
Have you explained why you think that particular Government intrusion is OK, yet any infringement on buffoons obtaining bumpstocks and the like are not. Permit me to remind you we are talking about the shooting of 520 Americans in a ten minute period. Thats explanation is what I'm looking for.... an explanation that you seem incapable of delivering. .....
It's simple.... man with a six pack is dangerous to the general public.... man with a bump stocked AR and multiple 30 round mags is within his constitutional rights .... there fore no threat.
Just looking to see how you discern the difference.... though it seems you can't
Sorry Sam, but you put here on a public forum an analysis of me based on a 15 sentence mini diatribe and tried to back it up with a claim of higher education {with honors}. And you've been slick enough to keep using that to get around questions you can't answer....
.... I'm coming to the conclusion that your analytical experience comes from being on the "other side " of the couch ..... know what I mean?
S.A. Boggs
10-05-2017, 02:45
OK there ya go again Sam.... now I gotta call you out Bro.
You, as did some of the others here seemed quite fine with the Government stepping in to ban alcohol sales in a hurricane zone for the safety of the general public...
You did, right?... yes... or no ? .... be carefull now as what you wrote is still on the forum.
Have you explained why you think that particular Government intrusion is OK, yet any infringement on buffoons obtaining bumpstocks and the like are not. Permit me to remind you we are talking about the shooting of 520 Americans in a ten minute period. Thats explanation is what I'm looking for.... an explanation that you seem incapable of delivering. .....
It's simple.... man with a six pack is dangerous to the general public.... man with a bump stocked AR and multiple 30 round mags is within his constitutional rights .... there fore no threat.
Just looking to see how you discern the difference.... though it seems you can't
Sorry Sam, but you put here on a public forum an analysis of me based on a 15 sentence mini diatribe and tried to back it up with a claim of higher education {with honors}. And you've been slick enough to keep using that to get around questions you can't answer....
.... I'm coming to the conclusion that your analytical experience comes from being on the "other side " of the couch ..... know what I mean?
:eusa_shhh::hello::banana100:
Sam
They are inaccurate, unsafe, and serve no practical purpose other than to show off, ruin barrels, and lay down suppressing fire.. I know of no ranges in my area that will even allow you to use one at their facility, so whats the point? I don't see the need, never did, don't care that they ban them.
JB White
10-05-2017, 03:10
Smart move on their part. Earlier Nancy Pelosi was pushing for a ban on them, even admitting it was 'hopefully a slippery slope to more gun control regulations'.
Why would she say that? To put Republicans off of supporting the ban. Then the Democrats could scream and yell that the NRA and Republicans want everyone to have a machine gun. Now the NRA has called her bluff, tying a bump-stock ban WITH recognition of a national CCW reciprocity.
Looks like the ball is now back in Pelosi's court. Will Democrats refuse to support such a bill?
https://twitter.com/NBCPolitics/status/916004277025366016
I think the NRA overstepped. The national CCW reciprocity should have waited for another day as it should not have been attached to the LV tragedy. Emotions are running high on both ends and the initial "call to review" should have stood alone. Adding those lines in that release only added more fuel and blame to the left's knee-jerk hatred.
S.A. Boggs
10-05-2017, 03:13
They are inaccurate, unsafe, and serve no practical purpose other than to show off, ruin barrels, and lay down suppressing fire.. I know of no ranges in my area that will even allow you to use one at their facility, so whats the point? I don't see the need, never did, don't care that they ban them.
Have you read the California Senator's bill, as written it could imply other restrictions. How about a 25lb trigger pull for instance? Remember, Congress writes the bill, BATF{E} writes the regulations. We need to be careful of what we ask for...we might get something else!
Sam
S.A. Boggs
10-05-2017, 03:14
I think the NRA overstepped. The national CCW reciprocity should have waited for another day as it should not have been attached to the LV tragedy. Emotions are running high on both ends and the initial "call to review" should have stood alone. Adding those lines in that release only added more fuel and blame to the left's knee-jerk hatred.
Sometimes the best thing to have is silence.
Sam
Dan Shapiro
10-05-2017, 03:20
JB
Democrats will never let a national reciprocity agreement pass as a stand-alone. The suppressor bill might pass on it's own. The Democrats would be hard-pressed to bring forward a "victim" of a suppressor.......and these are the same people who think a "flasher hider" hides the flash from the victim.
.... I'm coming to the conclusion that your analytical experience comes from being on the "other side " of the couch ..... know what I mean?
What a complete idiot. He claims the Iraqi war happened so Halliburton stock holders would get rich. He pisses on the flag, the anthem, and every veteran that gave his life to defend this country. He kneels with the NFL and is a fan of Ashley Judd.
He doesn't know (or care) for example, these laws were passed years ago for emergency actions in case of hurricanes, riots, disasters, etc. If the Governor, Mayor, or etc. invokes those laws they must invoke the entire law and cannot pick and choose which part to enforce and ignore the others. So Democrats in 1936, passed a emergency law in respect to natural disasters, riots, rebellion, and etc. Selling alcohol was one of the things they banned.
NEWS FLASH... NEWS FLASH... Sam Boggs was not responsible for it!!!!
This is not a new law, Sam Boggs didn't pass it and it matters not a whit if he agrees with it or not. It doesn't matter whether or not the Governor agrees with it... it was a serious disaster and he invoked the laws that were already on the books. If you missed your daily six pack, I am very sorry but it is over now and you can go back to your safe room and cry.
BTW.. As I understand it you are a Florida resident... How come it is only now you are offended??? Why weren't you out there campaigning against these laws 15 years ago????
i find it disturbing that anytime something happens, guns or parts of guns have to be banned for our betterment. somehow we've seen trucks filled with fertalizers and fuel used as bombs, pressure cookers used as bombs, vehicles driven into crowds, yet ive never seen the outcry to ban any of these, none of which are rights in the constitution. might be we should ban the construction of buildings more than 3 stories tall, outlaw the gathering of more than 50 people in any one place at any one time. we have seen box cutters used to hijack airplanes, airplanes used for the murder of thousands, yet no cry to ban them. in the end even so called supporters of the 2nd, just roll over and quit. hope your all happy with your daisy red ryders, because that all the anti gun people want you to have, and they are not going to stop at stocks, triggers, nor magazine capacity!
JB White
10-05-2017, 04:45
Everything you mentioned has a useful purpose in society. No comparison to bump stocks.
Everything you mentioned has a useful purpose in society. No comparison to bump stocks.
useful purpose, but not a right! because possibly you find one gun accessory or another not useful, does not mean someone else does not. the 2nd amendment is not about useful, it is about the people being able to defend themselves against the gvmnt, so called "useful" has nothing to do with it.
Bump firing is the act of using the recoil of a semi-automatic firearm to fire shots in rapid succession, which simulates the ability of a fully automatic firearm. Many semi-automatic firearms can be "bump fired" in their original configuration and without specially designed stocks, triggers or other devices. Some are more receptive to the technique than others........most notably the .30 Cal M1 rifle designed by John C. Garand and the .30 Cal M1 Carbine whose short stroke piston was developed by David "Carbine" Williams; both of which are classified as curios and relics by the BATFE. The semi-automatic .45 Mac and 9mm Mini Mac pistols can also easily be bump fired.
"No amount of legislation will ever strip the evil from an immoral man."
Sandpebble
10-05-2017, 05:34
What a complete idiot. He claims the Iraqi war happened so Halliburton stock holders would get rich. He pisses on the flag, the anthem, and every veteran that gave his life to defend this country. He kneels with the NFL and is a fan of Ashley Judd.
He doesn't know (or care) for example, these laws were passed years ago for emergency actions in case of hurricanes, riots, disasters, etc. If the Governor, Mayor, or etc. invokes those laws they must invoke the entire law and cannot pick and choose which part to enforce and ignore the others. So Democrats in 1936, passed a emergency law in respect to natural disasters, riots, rebellion, and etc. Selling alcohol was one of the things they banned.
NEWS FLASH... NEWS FLASH... Sam Boggs was not responsible for it!!!!
This is not a new law, Sam Boggs didn't pass it and it matters not a whit if he agrees with it or not. It doesn't matter whether or not the Governor agrees with it... it was a serious disaster and he invoked the laws that were already on the books. If you missed your daily six pack, I am very sorry but it is over now and you can go back to your safe room and cry.
BTW.. As I understand it you are a Florida resident... How come it is only now you are offended??? Why weren't you out there campaigning against these laws 15 years ago????
Hey... ahole.... shouldn't I be on your ignore list ?
learn some reading comprehension... then come on back
clintonhater
10-05-2017, 06:48
They are inaccurate, unsafe, and serve no practical purpose other than to show off, ruin barrels, and lay down suppressing fire..
You left out the very most important purpose: MAKE YOU-TUBE VIDEOS!!! if YT bans such videos (as they probably will now) the market for this gadget will probably collapse.
They are inaccurate, unsafe, and serve no practical purpose other than to show off, ruin barrels, and lay down suppressing fire.. I know of no ranges in my area that will even allow you to use one at their facility, so whats the point? I don't see the need, never did, don't care that they ban them.
inaccurate, how so? ive seen people use them and can put rounds on targets over 100yds very effectively. unsafe? how are they, just like any other gun part they dont fire on their own. if you set one on the table it wont just start firing. as for supressive fire, the purpose of the 2nd ammendment is to enable the people to defend themseves against an out of control gvmnt. now that large portions of the police drive around with machine guns in their vehicle, is it unreasonable for some to want to be able to lay down suppressive fire? the same exact reasons you've given are what the anti's believe about guns with pistol grips, magazines that hold more than a few rounds, etc, etc. dont be so fast to give up your RIGHTS just because you dont personally feel the need for something. the next thing they come for might be something you think is necessary. dont forget what reagan and the NRA gave up in the 80's, and what clinton did in the 90's with his ban. i dont think the next ban will have a sunset clause in it, nor will they grandfather stuff in, and i dont believe you'll see 10rnds as the limit next time. it is not about NEED, it is about RIGHTS!
Marty T.
10-05-2017, 07:20
Hang in there lefty.
inaccurate, how so? ive seen people use them and can put rounds on targets over 100yds very effectively. unsafe? how are they, just like any other gun part they dont fire on their own. if you set one on the table it wont just start firing. as for supressive fire, the purpose of the 2nd ammendment is to enable the people to defend themseves against an out of control gvmnt. now that large portions of the police drive around with machine guns in their vehicle, is it unreasonable for some to want to be able to lay down suppressive fire? the same exact reasons you've given are what the anti's believe about guns with pistol grips, magazines that hold more than a few rounds, etc, etc. dont be so fast to give up your RIGHTS just because you dont personally feel the need for something. the next thing they come for might be something you think is necessary. dont forget what reagan and the NRA gave up in the 80's, and what clinton did in the 90's with his ban. i dont think the next ban will have a sunset clause in it, nor will they grandfather stuff in, and i dont believe you'll see 10rnds as the limit next time. it is not about NEED, it is about RIGHTS!
On accuracy I found them lacking myself. Any decent cheekweld led to me at least getting single or doubles. Any long stream was directed/suppressive fire at best. I never praticed it but a friend can do the belt loop trick with his AK. Looks impressive if you don't pay attention to where the bullets are going. Once again maybe I'm jaded because I shot plenty of 3 round burst and full auto pin it till bolt lock guns. I think bump fires are usueless. The only way to get them to somewhat works was to put single stag lighttriggers in them. Just my opinion.
clintonhater
10-05-2017, 08:16
now that large portions of the police drive around with machine guns in their vehicle, is it unreasonable for some to want to be able to lay down suppressive fire?
Unreasonable? Crazy is more like it.
Hang in there lefty.
thanks for the encouragement!
They are inaccurate, unsafe, and serve no practical purpose other than to show off, ruin barrels, and lay down suppressing fire.. I know of no ranges in my area that will even allow you to use one at their facility, so whats the point? I don't see the need, never did, don't care that they ban them.
You guys are killing me -
You are so willing to give in and legislate a "part" ----- Couldn't the above statement be said about semi-auto shotguns? I don't see a need for one - therefore ban them
You guys do realize that once you give in, your goose is cooked. It may take a while - - - - but what the heck, I don't have "insert evil feature here" therefore - give it away.
I am extremely disappointed in the attitude here - you guys are part of the problem - divide & conquer.
Ohhh the government will save us ---- 1 nut and 350 million people get legislated ---- just wait until the next one - then what is going to be deemed "no practical purpose"
Steve
Unreasonable? Crazy is more like it.
Bingo.
You guys are killing me -
You are so willing to give in and legislate a "part" ----- Couldn't the above statement be said about semi-auto shotguns? I don't see a need for one - therefore ban them
You guys do realize that once you give in, your goose is cooked. It may take a while - - - - but what the heck, I don't have "insert evil feature here" therefore - give it away.
I am extremely disappointed in the attitude here - you guys are part of the problem - divide & conquer.
Ohhh the government will save us ---- 1 nut and 350 million people get legislated ---- just wait until the next one - then what is going to be deemed "no practical purpose"
Steve
Why make anything illegal, is that the argument? Why can't a guy have as much firepower as he wants? Surely you agree that a line gets drawn somewhere, for the good of civilization, yes?
Cramming 22,000 people in a 2 acre lot to hear a concert outside is not necessarily a good thing to do. What you end up with is a solid block of meat inviting someone as crazed as this shooter to see how many he can take out since he couldn't possibly miss and one bullet could injure or kill several at one time. If the same concert were to be held inside or in a football field this more than likely would not/could not occur because everyone and what they carried in could be seen. As we continue to allow too many people to enter America legally and illegally we continue to lose our freedoms simply due to overpopulation. Then there are those who enter with the intent to change our laws to meet their liking.
I for one would not miss not being able to buy a bump fire stock any longer if outlawed but if you give the democrats an inch they will take a yard. There will be a lot of talk about gun control from now on even though the gun was not the cause of the massacre. There will be no mention of crowd control (size) and other subjects that made this incident an accident waiting to happen. If some other means of killing had been used it could have been much worse. Bombs (of any type), exploding vans, suicide vest and the like would have been the norm for what is happening in Europe now.
GunBroker is pulling listings of bump stocks. Management decision.
clintonhater
10-06-2017, 06:31
As we continue to allow too many people to enter America legally and illegally we continue to lose our freedoms simply due to overpopulation...
Yes of course, but that's a different issue!
clintonhater
10-06-2017, 06:42
GunBroker is pulling listings of bump stocks. Management decision.
The manufacturers, if they had any brains, would be liquidating their stock as soon as they could, as well as selling off their real estate and all other personal property that isn't easily transportable, and heading with the proceeds to some foreign country without an extradition treaty with the US, because they're going to be overwhelmed by a tsunami of civil lawsuits. Immaterial if they "win" in court, because their legal defense costs will ruin them.
Yes of course, but that's a different issue!
Not really. My point was that we can't do what we used to do. In past years having mass crowds was not so much of a safety issue as it is now. Some people will use any means possible to commit murder whether it be a weapon with a bump stock, a pressure cooker bomb or throwing bricks. Can't blame the gun. Can't blame the bricks but that's the easy "fix". Because of too much diversity and numbers we lose freedoms.
S.A. Boggs
10-06-2017, 07:28
Perhaps restricting how many people can be in a given arena, this is already done in Ohio by the Fire Marshal on room occupancy. This is something to think about, have X number of tickets for Y available square yardage...Great thinking on crowd control/size.
Sam
change the scenario of what happened a bit, same place and time, but put a half decent shooter up in that room with a couple of deer hunting rifles. 4-500yds is a chip shot with one if your any good at all. give the same 10 minutes. maybe there would be less wounded, except those who were injured by the stampede, but with a good rifleman up in that room the death toll would be well over what it was. now they wouldnt be wanting some oddball stock, they would be after your super deadly deer rifles, except they would call them sniper rifles. be careful of what your willing to just give up without a fight, because the liberals dont just want a stock, they have said it over and over, they want it all!
USMilitaryGuy
10-06-2017, 11:20
change the scenario of what happened a bit, same place and time, but put a half decent shooter up in that room with a couple of deer hunting rifles. 4-500yds is a chip shot with one if your any good at all. give the same 10 minutes. maybe there would be less wounded, except those who were injured by the stampede, but with a good rifleman up in that room the death toll would be well over what it was. now they wouldnt be wanting some oddball stock, they would be after your super deadly deer rifles, except they would call them sniper rifles. be careful of what your willing to just give up without a fight, because the liberals dont just want a stock, they have said it over and over, they want it all!
Yes.
We gave up selective-fire weapons, when he used a revolver.
We gave up bayonet lugs, when he used a pistol.
We gave up 30 round magazines, when he used pipe bombs.
He used "this". We gave up "not-this".
Please note.
Generally, we didn't "give up" anything.
As I remember, they took it from us.
Some of us were pleased that is all they took.
Some of us didn't care what they took, because we didn't use them anyway.
Some of us just woke up the next morning and said "What happened?"
Sandpebble
10-06-2017, 11:59
Perhaps restricting how many people can be in a given arena, this is already done in Ohio by the Fire Marshal on room occupancy. This is something to think about, have X number of tickets for Y available square yardage...Great thinking on crowd control/size.
Sam
So... Allen and Sam... permit a polite question. Should we happen to follow that thought, where does it end? ...
Do we keep restricting crowd size ... and our "right to congregate" ... until we can only have small public groups . Do we disallow some of our populations right to enjoy an outdoor event without fear because we can't step on the rights of Rambo Wannabes ?
After Timothy McVeigh bombed Oklahoma some very stringent laws came into effect regarding the purchase of large amounts of fertilizer ..... why was that ?..... was the fact that my "right" to purchase large quantities of nitrates was curtailed a justified move on the Governments part?.... I mean, I could have used those nitrates to insure I'm not oppressed by an out of controll Government, right?
Please spare me "nitrates weren't mentioned in the Constitution" crap.
So... where do we go with this ?.... small crowds only in enclosed venues ?... smaller public schools would mean fewer targets for a bump stock owner too... right?
How "free" would we all feel then ?
here, the guy doesnt have a fancy stock, and is in total control of the rifle. so are we going to ban fingers, or what?https://youtu.be/7Wq3PZZYB9I
better cut this guys hands off https://youtu.be/Vvr0rSaFgZE
outlaw fingers https://youtu.be/eauD4tvk4MY
swampyankee
10-06-2017, 12:17
here, the guy doesnt have a fancy stock, and is in total control of the rifle. so are we going to ban fingers, or what?https://youtu.be/7Wq3PZZYB9I
No just keep showing things like that and they'll ban AR's or all semi autos.
No just keep showing things like that and they'll ban AR's or all semi autos.
they are going to anyways if we dont stand against idiotic bans that do nothing to reduce crime.
So... Allen and Sam... permit a polite question. Should we happen to follow that thought, where does it end? ...
Do we keep restricting crowd size ... and our "right to congregate" ... until we can only have small public groups . Do we disallow some of our populations right to enjoy an outdoor event without fear because we can't step on the rights of Rambo Wannabes ?
After Timothy McVeigh bombed Oklahoma some very stringent laws came into effect regarding the purchase of large amounts of fertilizer ..... why was that ?..... was the fact that my "right" to purchase large quantities of nitrates was curtailed a justified move on the Governments part?.... I mean, I could have used those nitrates to insure I'm not oppressed by an out of controll Government, right?
Please spare me "nitrates weren't mentioned in the Constitution" crap.
So... where do we go with this ?.... small crowds only in enclosed venues ?... smaller public schools would mean fewer targets for a bump stock owner too... right?
How "free" would we all feel then ?
Like I said. With overpopulation we lose freedoms. We can't do what we used to do in some cases. This many people surrounded by tall buildings with no means of security is asking for trouble in today's society.
Since you seem to be fascinated with fertilizer it is my understanding that I can still buy small quantities of it. If buying it by the truck load I have to show a license proving that I operate a farm.
Bump stocks? I saw many of them for sale on GB before the listings were pulled. Many of them were used and listed as "only used once". I feel the owners weren't too impressed with them. I've just never had any desire to own one or a crank trigger for the Ruger 10/22-as hard as they are to load I don't want to blow out the ammo any faster than I need to. I don't want to see any kind of ban or regulation in the firearm industry at all because the barbaric liberals will make it a "hey day" and want to ban every thing.
DRAGONFLYDF
10-06-2017, 01:20
I am a NRA life member and am really pissed at this. The NRA is throwing us under the bus, AGAIN. I just got off the phone with the NRA and told them to quit sending me letters for donations, or support as I will no longer be giving ANY money to them, any money I donate will be going to Gun Owners of America, or JPFO.
Sandpebble
10-06-2017, 01:33
Like I said. With overpopulation we lose freedoms. We can't do what we used to do in some cases. This many people surrounded by tall buildings with no means of security is asking for trouble in today's society.
Since you seem to be fascinated with fertilizer it is my understanding that I can still buy small quantities of it. If buying it by the truck load I have to show a license proving that I operate a farm.
Bump stocks? I saw many of them for sale on GB before the listings were pulled. Many of them were used and listed as "only used once". I feel the owners weren't too impressed with them. I've just never had any desire to own one or a crank trigger for the Ruger 10/22-as hard as they are to load I don't want to blow out the ammo any faster than I need to. I don't want to see any kind of ban or regulation in the firearm industry at all because the barbaric liberals will make it a "hey day" and want to ban every thing.
Was happy to read your reply Allen.... but I'm not fascinated with fertilizers, it was merely an example ... but.. "Barbaric Liberals" ?
Like everyone here... I love my guns. But as its a fact that more Americans have died within the US borders from gunshot since the 60's than all the wars in our history combined.... we need to understand why others may not love our guns.... and we need to understand that they have the power of vote... and that is what America is all about...... according to The Constitution .
Without concessions.... we could lose it all.... and sad as it sounds, thats a simple fact....
clintonhater
10-06-2017, 01:48
I am a NRA life member and am really pissed at this...
I'm a Benefactor member and am relieved NRA showed enough common sense to recognize that defending these stocks was a loosing proposition.
change the scenario of what happened a bit, same place and time, but put a half decent shooter up in that room with a couple of deer hunting rifles. 4-500yds is a chip shot with one if your any good at all. give the same 10 minutes. maybe there would be less wounded, except those who were injured by the stampede, but with a good rifleman up in that room the death toll would be well over what it was. now they wouldnt be wanting some oddball stock, they would be after your super deadly deer rifles, except they would call them sniper rifles. be careful of what your willing to just give up without a fight, because the liberals dont just want a stock, they have said it over and over, they want it all!
Amen... great post. Aimed fire is always more effective than spray and pray. For example Charles Whitman in the Texas tower killed 18 people and wounded 31. He had perhaps dozens of targets... not hundreds and certainly not the 22,000 gathered together in a shooting gallery. Neither did he have a full auto or a bump fire device.
Speaking of bump fire devices... you can essentially do the same thing with a folded piece of cardboard and some rubber bands. How are they going to prohibit that?
Speaking of bump fire devices... you can essentially do the same thing with a folded piece of cardboard and some rubber bands. How are they going to prohibit that?
Good question. Let's hope the bill writers (maybe with NRA help) are on their game. I know people say these things are uncontrollable and therefore useless, but controllability is an engineering problem that can be solved, especially for the 5.56mm cartridge. The in-line recoil of the AR pattern is already a giant step in the right direction. As people have wisely said, semi-autos could be at stake if this isn't fixed.
I'm a Benefactor member and am relieved NRA showed enough common sense to recognize that defending these stocks was a loosing proposition.
lapierre has started backpedalling!
USMilitaryGuy
10-06-2017, 02:14
Was happy to read your reply Allen.... but I'm not fascinated with fertilizers, it was merely an example ... but.. "Barbaric Liberals" ?
Like everyone here... I love my guns. But as its a fact that more Americans have died within the US borders from gunshot since the 60's than all the wars in our history combined.... we need to understand why others may not love our guns.... and we need to understand that they have the power of vote... and that is what America is all about...... according to The Constitution .
Without concessions.... we could lose it all.... and sad as it sounds, thats a simple fact....
"But as its a fact that more Americans have died within the US borders from gunshot since the 60's than all the wars in our history combined...."
Please, please, pretty please provide a source for this statement.
Like everyone here... I love my guns. But we need to understand that they have the power of vote...
Well, we had a recent presidential election and guess who won? You and I aren't the only ones who love our guns.
Was happy to read your reply Allen but "Barbaric Liberals" ?
I have obviously offended you and your employer. Give me an example of when a liberal does NOT fit this description.
Sandpebble
10-06-2017, 02:21
"But as its a fact that more Americans have died within the US borders from gunshot since the 60's than all the wars in our history combined...."
Please, please, pretty please provide a source for this statement.
More Americans killed by guns since 1968 than in all U.S. wars, columnist Nicholas Kristof writes _ PunditFact
Politifact has an example of all the statistics
Sandpebble
10-06-2017, 02:35
here, the guy doesnt have a fancy stock, and is in total control of the rifle. so are we going to ban fingers, or what?https://youtu.be/7Wq3PZZYB9I
Leftyo.... that is an example of a "Rambo wannabe"..... just a boy playing with a toy. Believe it or not.... he ain't no Minute Man thats gonna protect us all from an oppressive regime ...
Know what I'm saying.. ?
Leftyo.... that is an example of a "Rambo wannabe"..... just a boy playing with a toy. Believe it or not.... he ain't no Minute Man thats gonna protect us all from an oppressive regime ...
Know what I'm saying.. ?
i suppose if i posted a video of jerry miculek or some other fast competitor running just as fast and making groups that some people cant do slow fire you would say the same thing. didnt like that video go down, one guy is moving while rapid firing, and putting pretty good hits on target. i suppose since you probably cant do anything like it, its no good for everybody, am i right? the simple fact is that the bump stocks are just a tool, and banning them will do ZERO good for anyone. you would think that some day it would be illegal to kill people. silly isnt it?
Sandpebble
10-06-2017, 02:56
i suppose if i posted a video of jerry miculek or some other fast competitor running just as fast and making groups that some people cant do slow fire you would say the same thing. didnt like that video go down, one guy is moving while rapid firing, and putting pretty good hits on target. i suppose since you probably cant do anything like it, its no good for everybody, am i right? the simple fact is that the bump stocks are just a tool, and banning them will do ZERO good for anyone. you would think that some day it would be illegal to kill people. silly isnt it?
thats where we differ Leftyo.... its not a tool... tools are for creating something positive ... that thing is a toy. And just for general BS... I'm quite proficient with numerous full auto firearms
the guns in those video's are just semi auto AR 15's, no fancy stocks or anything else. this whole thing is not really about some dang stock, its about the anti's wanting guns, all guns. those kinds of video's are all over, and what do you think the anti's are going to be screaming about once the stocks are gone, thats right the guns themselves! tool's, they only do what they are made to do, be it positive, or negative!
swampyankee
10-06-2017, 03:09
I can't believe intelligent gun owners are willing to go to the mat for a cheap piece of plastic crap that I would bet they have never heard of until this week, have never seen one and have no interest in ever buying one. It has no purpose as a self defense weapon and you would get killed if you think this would give you a fighting chance in a real fire fight in your SHTF scenario. The NRA is smart enough to know you have to pick and choose your battles, and this is a losing battle. The vast majority of the people in this country don't understand a bump stock and think it's a machine gun. Try to defend it in a public forum and you will lose. Let the idiots ban it and they can say they did something and it goes away. Americans have a very short memory.
its not about the stock! thinking the dems/anti's have a short memory is ludicrous. i should add, what are you going to give up next?
swampyankee
10-06-2017, 03:41
its not about the stock! thinking the dems/anti's have a short memory is ludicrous. i should add, what are you going to give up next?
Yes it is about the stock. Don't try to make it more than it is. Nobody is giving up anything because nobody cared about this stupid stock a week ago, didn't even know it existed. I said the public has a short memory not politicians, don't change my words.
Sandpebble
10-06-2017, 03:43
Yes it is about the stock. Don't try to make it more than it is. Nobody is giving up anything because nobody cared about this stupid stock a week ago, didn't even know it existed. I said the public has a short memory not politicians, don't change my words.
Thats right Swampy ... its called concessions. We make them.... or lose. As Togor aptly put it ... give up a domino
Dan Shapiro
10-06-2017, 03:48
So people are OPPOSED to "giving up" what many of us were totally unaware of just one week ago.
Hmmmmmm...............and the left, for some reason, is no longer obsessed with statues this week. Like they were two weeks ago.
Yes it is about the stock. Don't try to make it more than it is. Nobody is giving up anything because nobody cared about this stupid stock a week ago, didn't even know it existed. I said the public has a short memory not politicians, don't change my words.
i didnt change your words, i disagree'd with your words. its not about the damned stock! people are very short sighted to think it is. while they may have given up on statues, the dems have been after all things gun for over 50yrs, and havent given up. they may have taken a few pauses, but they have not stopped.
Sandpebble
10-06-2017, 04:33
So people are OPPOSED to "giving up" what many of us were totally unaware of just one week ago.
Hmmmmmm...............and the left, for some reason, is no longer obsessed with statues this week. Like they were two weeks ago.
Even you can't overlook the fact that 59 dead and 520 wounded in one ten minute period creates an awfull lot of awareness...... can you?
And please explain how you could even imagine why those 59 dead and 520 wounded wouldn't draw attention away from... statues...
A point my daughter made is that for the number dead and wounded, there are many more who were there and experienced being under fire. Whether or not they bear witness to that when they return home, and to what end, remains to be seen. But it is different than other shootings in the sheer number of people targeted.
I read reports that he was wanting tracers, presumably for the usual reason, and that he took some potshots at the jet fuel tanks. It's as though this guy cooked up the ultimate plan to wreak havoc through legally acquired means.
USMilitaryGuy
10-06-2017, 05:17
More Americans killed by guns since 1968 than in all U.S. wars, columnist Nicholas Kristof writes _ PunditFact
Politifact has an example of all the statistics
Thanks for the reply.
For those that don't want to have to look it up - http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2015/aug/27/nicholas-kristof/more-americans-killed-guns-1968-all-wars-says-colu/
OK. They had numbers. I have a calculator.
From 1968 until 2015 is 47 years. (Their cut-off date, not mine.) They used the year of Robert F. Kennedy's assassination. He was actually assassinated in June, but I gave them the whole year in order to lower the daily death count. With an average of 365 days per year (because I did not want to calculate leap years), is a total of 17,155 days.
1,516,863 deaths (their number) divided by 17,155 days equals a little more than 88 deaths per day - everyday of the year - for 47 years.
Statistics - you gotta love them.
You would think 88 gun deaths per day - everyday - for 47 years would be . . . ummmm . . . common knowledge? I guess you can learn (or at least read) something everyday.
Thanks, again for the info.
A point my daughter made is that for the number dead and wounded, there are many more who were there and experienced being under fire. Whether or not they bear witness to that when they return home, and to what end, remains to be seen. But it is different than other shootings in the sheer number of people targeted.
I read reports that he was wanting tracers, presumably for the usual reason, and that he took some potshots at the jet fuel tanks. It's as though this guy cooked up the ultimate plan to wreak havoc through legally acquired means.
Tracers work both ways. Does anyone know if he actually used them or just tried to buy them. Have seen both versions in print stories.
Tracers work both ways. Does anyone know if he actually used them or just tried to buy them. Have seen both versions in print stories.
have not heard anything about him using tracers or attempting to buy them. tracers arent hard to get, so my guess is if he wanted them, he would have gotten them.
Sandpebble
10-06-2017, 05:38
Thanks for the reply.
For those that don't want to have to look it up - http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2015/aug/27/nicholas-kristof/more-americans-killed-guns-1968-all-wars-says-colu/
OK. They had numbers. I have a calculator.
From 1968 until 2015 is 47 years. (Their cut-off date, not mine.) They used the year of Robert F. Kennedy's assassination. He was actually assassinated in June, but I gave them the whole year in order to lower the daily death count. With an average of 365 days per year (because I did not want to calculate leap years), is a total of 17,155 days.
1,516,863 deaths (their number) divided by 17,155 days equals a little more than 88 deaths per day - everyday of the year - for 47 years.
Statistics - you gotta love them.
You would think 88 gun deaths per day - everyday - for 47 years would be . . . ummmm . . . common knowledge? I guess you can learn (or at least read) something everyday.
Thanks, again for the info.
And I thank you Sir for a polite response on what is typically a very hostile forum towards any viewpoint not wanted to be heard....
Even as a gun lover I have think hard about those stats ...... even if a lot of them "were only" suicides
S.A. Boggs
10-06-2017, 05:39
Thats right Swampy ... its called concessions. We make them.... or lose. As Togor aptly put it ... give up a domino
Why do "we" have to make concessions or is it like waving a signed paper, "Peace in our time!"...does the name of British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlin ring a bell? To compromise is to loose, Pelosi has already stated what the National Socialists want in the way of total control. Some of you guys are so bright that you can't see the forest for the trees! Listen to Sandpebble and he will lead your guns directly to the ovens with this appeasement talk. Sandpebble is one of "them" not one of "us" haven't you figured this out by now? Himmler [who was head of the German secret police and SS] said that if German's wanted to have a gun then they should join the Waffen SS! Pebbles is pushing EXACTLY what the other National Socialists of 80 years ago did and people are buying into it. :hello::banana100:
Sam
Sandpebble
10-06-2017, 05:42
Why do "we" have to make concessions or is it like waving a signed paper, "Peace in our time!"...does the name of British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlin ring a bell? To compromise is to loose, Pelosi has already stated what the National Socialists want in the way of total control. Some of you guys are so bright that you can't see the forest for the trees! Listen to Sandpebble and he will lead your guns directly to the ovens with this appeasement talk. Sandpebble is one of "them" not one of "us" haven't you figured this out by now? Himmler [who was head of the German secret police and SS] said that if German's wanted to have a gun then they should join the Waffen SS! Pebbles is pushing EXACTLY what the other National Socialists of 80 years ago did and people are buying into it. :hello::banana100:
Sam
To compromise is to lose you say ...... 59 dead 520 injured in ten minutes...... thats not losing ?:banana100::banana100::banana100:
Dan Shapiro
10-06-2017, 05:48
And please explain how you could even imagine why those 59 dead and 520 wounded wouldn't draw attention away from... statues...
Evidently they weren't that "hot" on statues to begin with. I can hardly wait to see what the liberal "cause de jure" will be next week.
As I noted in another thread, the NRA just screwed Democrats, by saying they had no problem with regulations on "bump stocks". Some are "indignant". Why? Most of us had never even heard of "bump stocks".
Why make anything illegal, is that the argument? Why can't a guy have as much firepower as he wants? Surely you agree that a line gets drawn somewhere, for the good of civilization, yes?
I am all in favor of people having the freedom to purchase as much firepower as they want.
I have ideas about what is good for civilization - and it doesn't include the government as the solution to all problems.
So willingly give up your rights - beg a bureaucrat for permission to purchase items - I'm just sorry I have to go down with the ship along with you.
Steve
To compromise is to lose you say ...... 59 dead 520 injured in ten minutes...... thats not losing ?:banana100::banana100::banana100:
you know what losing is... thinking that banning a gun part would have prevented a nut job form committing mass murder, that is losing!
S.A. Boggs
10-06-2017, 05:55
To compromise is to lose you say ...... 59 dead 520 injured in ten minutes...... thats not losing ?:banana100::banana100::banana100:
Something you are familiar with, the CDC says in an "average" year 88,000 people die from ethanol issues and it costs the U.S. about $2.05 per drink. More people are killed with your beloved ethanol then my firearms. Sad as the factors at Vegas are they do not compare to what happens on the nation's roads on a daily basis. Ever work an accident scene, I have. Ever watch a 19 year old girl die from a drunk driver, I have. I attended more accident scenes the shootings WHAT AGOUT YOU? Know what it is like to extract a victim from a DUI, I do. Ever clean up a back board that had blood and brains on it, I did. I wish I could say that I didn't but I can't. You know that burnt human flesh smells like burnt bacon? I am so sick and tired of people dying because of other people. I just wish that the human race could live by the "Golden Rule" and we don't. God gave us a beautiful place to live, why do we continue to screw it up?
Sam
Sandpebble
10-06-2017, 05:59
Something you are familiar with, the CDC says in an "average" year 88,000 people die from ethanol issues and it costs the U.S. about $2.05 per drink. More people are killed with your beloved ethanol then my firearms. Sad as the factors at Vegas are they do not compare to what happens on the nation's roads on a daily basis. Ever work an accident scene, I have. Ever watch a 19 year old girl die from a drunk driver, I have. I attended more accident scenes the shootings WHAT AGOUT YOU? Know what it is like to extract a victim from a DUI, I do. Ever clean up a back board that had blood and brains on it, I did. I wish I could say that I didn't but I can't. You know that burnt human flesh smells like burnt bacon? I am so sick and tired of people dying because of other people. I just wish that the human race could live by the "Golden Rule" and we don't. God gave us a beautiful place to live, why do we continue to screw it up?
Sam
now I know you are full of xxxx.... because it doesn't smell like bacon
S.A. Boggs
10-06-2017, 06:06
now I know you are full of xxxx.... because it doesn't smell like bacon
Go away pebbles, you have no idea of what I went thru...I am tired, I was there, I saw the horror of the gasoline fire and the man burnt from head to toe. I helped pick him off the ground and gently put his body on our stretcher, yes he was still alive but not for long. Pebbles, you tire me and bring back memories that I buried long ago and for what, your arsine and obtuse ravings? I am like Vern, I don't have to prove a damn thing to you or anyone else on this board!:icon_redface:
Sam
Dick Hosmer
10-06-2017, 06:07
Want bump-stocks? Fine - no problem - just classify them as what they in fact are, under the NFA. That should weed out a LOT of the wanabees.
S.A. Boggs
10-06-2017, 06:16
Want bump-stocks? Fine - no problem - just classify them as what they in fact are, under the NFA. That should weed out a LOT of the wanabees.
How about the any other weapon category and cost?
Sam
Sandpebble
10-06-2017, 06:19
Go away pebbles, you have no idea of what I went thru...I am tired, I was there, I saw the horror of the gasoline fire and the man burnt from head to toe. I helped pick him off the ground and gently put his body on our stretcher, yes he was still alive but not for long. Pebbles, you tire me and bring back memories that I buried long ago and for what, your arsine and obtuse ravings? I am like Vern, I don't have to prove a damn thing to you or anyone else on this board!:icon_redface:
Sam
I call Bullsh#t Doctor .... because you wouldn't be braggin those memories here on a friggin internet forum if they were that painfull !
go away boggs.... bullxxxxter
Starting to get mean here, again . . . .
S.A. Boggs
10-07-2017, 04:31
Starting to get mean here, again . . . .
Yes, some can't tell the difference between recalling a memory and bragging. Why would one brag about seeing other's die, that make no sense unless one is an anti-social.
Sam
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.