Search found 3 matches

by Soccerdad1995
Fri Oct 06, 2017 12:42 pm
Forum: Gun and/or Self-Defense Related Political Issues
Topic: The problem with the potential "bump fire" ban
Replies: 12
Views: 1328

Re: The problem with the potential "bump fire" ban

BBYC wrote:The best way to slow down the rate of fire is banning civilian ownership of semiautomatic firrarms. A bolt action rifle is fast enough for hunting deer. Why does anybody need an AR15 any more than they need a bump fire device or a magazine that holds more than five rounds. You guys need to be willing to compromise on reasonable restrictions.
I'm assuming this post is intended to be sarcastic, but since you are new to the site, you might want to clarify that.

At any rate, this is exactly the type of argument that the gun grabbers will try to make.
by Soccerdad1995
Fri Oct 06, 2017 12:00 pm
Forum: Gun and/or Self-Defense Related Political Issues
Topic: The problem with the potential "bump fire" ban
Replies: 12
Views: 1328

Re: The problem with the potential "bump fire" ban

crazy2medic wrote:My son can take my JRC carbine and bump fire it, no modifications, no special stock, it's just the way he holds it, he can dump 29rds out of it in a blink, so what or how do they propose to ban a technique?
It's the rate of fire they are worried about. And the only way to slow down his rate of fire is to limit mag capacity, or require that gun manufacturers modify their weapons to intentionally slow down the potential rate of fire somehow. Either that, or ban such guns entirely. This is precisely the type of logic path that Pelosi and her good friend Hillie will try to sieze upon once enough people are on record that no one needs a gun that is capable of firing "hundreds of rounds a minute".
by Soccerdad1995
Fri Oct 06, 2017 10:42 am
Forum: Gun and/or Self-Defense Related Political Issues
Topic: The problem with the potential "bump fire" ban
Replies: 12
Views: 1328

The problem with the potential "bump fire" ban

Here is the problem with the potential "bump fire" ban, IMHO. Others may disagree.

Bump firing is a technique, not a gun part. There are many, many, things that a person can use to facilitate the bump fire technique. Any investigation into a ban on one or two potential devices will quickly get to the discovery that you can't keep the technique from happening by banning a few after market gun parts. Rather, given the inate ability of a semi-auto rifle to be bump fired, the only way to effectively prohibit this evil technique is to ban semi-auto rifles completely. The Republicans and the NRA will likely get bothered enough at that point to push back against this new "bump fire" ban that effectively is AWB 2. A compromise might be to ban magazines that hold more than X rounds, and possibly limit the total number of magazines that one person can legally own at one time. The idea being that since there is no way to "ban" bump firing without banning semi-autos entirely, the rate of fire can be limited by making it necessary to frequently change magazines.

Once we open this Pandora's box, it ain't gonna stop at bump stocks.

Return to “The problem with the potential "bump fire" ban”