-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
NRA, Democrats and White House for regulation on bump stocks, GOP on the fence
- Thread starter Tovarisc
- Start date
Ill take it. Call it what you will, its still a compromise that will save lives.
I dont care if they blame Obama or whoever, just get these stocks off the shelves.
Hickbilly Deluxe
Banned
Eh, im okay with this. Id even turn mine in if required, its a novelty item at best. Fun for wasting money real fast at the range, but not much else.
I feel like this is the NRA walking into a trap, frankly. They spend all their time screaming about how any regulation is a violation of our sacred rights, now they propose a regulation. They get the regulation passed, and mainstream gun owners (e.g., not the crazies) realize that the sky didn't fall just because congress regulated firearms, and they'll wonder "well, why not have more of these common-sense regulations?"
You're never going to get Australian-style gun control to happen here, but you could certainly clamp down on straw buying, gun shows, maybe something like affirmative licensing for ownership (like in Japan where you have to specifically prove that you are mentally well to own a gun, while here the onus would be on the state to prove you were unwell to take it away).
You're never going to get Australian-style gun control to happen here, but you could certainly clamp down on straw buying, gun shows, maybe something like affirmative licensing for ownership (like in Japan where you have to specifically prove that you are mentally well to own a gun, while here the onus would be on the state to prove you were unwell to take it away).
Agent_ShortBus
Member
You don't need a bump stock to make it shoot rapidly. I've seen my friend bump fire his AR using his belt loop on his jeans just like this guy.... https://youtu.be/hI86T8RghWY
Mr_Antimatter
Member
They sacrifice a few bump stock makers if it keeps hands off semi-autos, which are the real problem.
plagiarize
Banned
A common argument I hear about things like this, is that they don't do anything that you couldn't manually do with enough practice and ability.
Which, you know, sounds like a good argument against regulation, until you remember that taking something like full auto fire rates, and ensuring that only a few highly skilled firearm operators can do them, vs any moron, is still a big improvement.
The problem with saying your want to ban "assault rifles" is you have to define exactly what those are in order to develop legislation around it. What makes an AR-15 or AK-47 an assault rifle but not a Ruger Mini 14 or an SKS? The only real differences between them are aesthetic.
My cousin bought one literally to use at a range exactly one time and then complained about ammunition pricing for the rest of the week. Yeah no shit you just burned through your ammunition, what the fuck do you think would happen?
Well, the point I'm making is that maybe we should get rid of the things that don't need the extra accoutrements to be so deadly.
Rentahamster
Rodent Whores
How many people didn't know what a bump stock was or how easy it is to acquire before Sunday? If anything, one of the more dangerous aspects of the shooting and its subsequent news coverage is the dissemination of information of how easy (relatively) this kind of thing can be.
Duxxy3
Member
I'd qualify it as a long barrel gun that can accept a large capacity magazine.
Agreed. They've been around for years, been featured on the biggest YouTube shooting channels, etc and everyone acts surprised by their existence. Most pro-gun politicians had no idea they even existed.
Well, that effectively bans every semi-auto rifle and shotgun on the market that uses a detachable magazine. That's unlikely to get through the courts. It's worth keeping in mind that we've limited magazine capacity before, and mass shooters (Columbine, Virginia Tech) just got around it by using more magazines.
They know precisely what theyre doing. They get to pat themselves on the back for agreeing to a solution to the problem and it pushes the conversation away from other topics about gun regulation.
Air Zombie Meat
Member
They're seeing a spike in sales now too which I guess is inevitable if people are talking about bans.
They're willing to lose bump stocks in exchange for National right-to-carry.
Pretty much my first thought.
There are bolt action rifles that fit your description that no one would call an assault rifle.
Marty Chinn
Member
Yep, that stuck out to me too because it's a situation where guns being banned might have stopped this compared to common sense gun regulation which I don't think would have prevented it.
Mr_Antimatter
Member
Now, to be fair while the SKS may shoot the same ammo as an AK, there is one big difference, and that's the magazine. By default, an SKS's mag isn't detachable, so you have to load ether lose rounds or use a stripper clip.
So really, what you want to do is declare an assault weapon to be any semi-auto rifle with a detachable magazine that fires center fired ammunition. That would take care of about 90% of what seem to be the troublemakers, while sparing the pure plinking guns.
A detachable magazine can easily be added to an SKS. I don't think a ban on centerfire semi-auto rifles would ever happen. But I do think it's reasonable for all semi-auto handguns and rifles to be considered Class III NFA items that you can't just pick up at a local Wal-Mart. The ATF would have to be greatly expanded to meet demand, however.
Mr_Antimatter
Member
Easily yes, but then it would fall under assault weapon by my definition. The goal would be to limit it to greater concern weapons, and not those that load from en-bloc or stripper clips by default.
I'm actually greatly in favor of moving semi autos to Class III NFA status. This would be paired with ether an increase of the transfer tax from 200 to 1000 USD, or closing the registry after the reclassification.
Likewise, any mag with 10+ rounds would be a NFA item, with a separate transfer tax per. Maybe $200 for the mags and $1000 for rifles or something.
Duxxy3
Member
ChainedMaster
Banned
Well they are useless for 99.999% of gun owners. Just because one person found a use for them doesn't stop them from being useless. They are dangerous however.
Mr. Poolman
Member
BackLogJoe
Member
These people are making their retirement right now with the increased sales this is going to drive.
Air Zombie Meat
Member
You make it sound like the increased fire rate is an unintended side effect when it's the whole point of them. There's a reason automatics are banned. I know what you're trying to say but I wouldn't call a device doing what it's intended to do useless. And apparently they sold these things in walmart? Seems crazy to me.
This is such a farce. The NRA pretends to be against bump stocks, a super niche mod for guns, while Republicans push legislation to allow for easier access to silencers and armor piercing rounds.
They're distracting us with one hand and stabbing us with the other.
Meanwhile, bump stock sales are going through the roof. It's a win/win/win for gun nuts.
They're distracting us with one hand and stabbing us with the other.
Meanwhile, bump stock sales are going through the roof. It's a win/win/win for gun nuts.
ChainedMaster
Banned
The point of an automatic is not just rate of fire. Automatics would be useless if they were as accurate as bump fire stocks. Obviously when they say useless they're referring to any practical value. It doesn't help with sporting, or self-defense or hunting. Hence useless.
http://www.cnn.com/2017/10/05/politics/gun-laws-magazines-las-vegas/index.html
"Whether a state has a large capacity ammunition magazine ban is the single best predictor of the mass shooting rate in that state, " said Michael Siegel, a community health science professor at Boston University, who conducted the analysis. These states are associated with a 63% lower rate of mass shootings, according to his analysis."
NeoGold123
Member
Fuck that the NRA has any say in gun laws whatsoever. That's such fucking horseshit from step one.
Even the US military rarely uses the burst mode on a M16/M4 as it decreases the accuracy of your shots.
I was in for 12 years and only got to shoot in burst mode once.
What? After reading the OP I thought to myself, "Dems want it, now the NRA, which would lead to more Republicans for it. Trump is going to back it and say, "I've done something the last 2 administrations could not achieve after a mass shooting. Gun legislation."
I scroll down to your post and think what a dumb fuck. He doesn't even want the pathetic smaller w's. He loves the L's.
EDIT; I'm watching the video now and that's not exactly what was meant. Misleading actually. She said they want to focus on leading and unifying the country, but then says they want to be a part of the conversation and open to it.
Air Zombie Meat
Member
So do you think automatics would be legal if they were as inaccurate as a bump stock? I thought the point of them being illegal was the amount of damage you can do in a short time with that rate of fire. Accuracy doesn't really matter if you're firing indiscriminately into a crowd.
Honestly, they are for it because its an accessory/add on. Its not the firearm you purchase, so they can get away with this. Either way, its hard for me to imagine that psycho could of killed and injured as many people as he did without it. If we can get rid of it, we should.
ChainedMaster
Banned
I don't know. But I do know if bump stocks we're useful the military would use them. Automatics obviously have their place in the military.
lol
Wasn't it that they supported it wholeheartedly when the technology was totally infeasible to actually implement it and they knew it, but as soon as computers became a thing and it actually could be done, they abruptly changed their stance?
Man that NRA statement is disgusting. A few crocodile tears sandwiching bullshit talking points about freedom to protect your family. ridiculous.
This isn't a great argument. Any amount of extra time spent changing magazines is time that could potentially save lives.
This isn't a great argument. Any amount of extra time spent changing magazines is time that could potentially save lives.
The military rarely shoots full auto to begin with.
The AR-15 is a civilian model of the M-4, with the main difference between the two being the M-4 has a burst mode that shoots 3 bullets with one pull of the trigger.
A M-4 in semi is the exact same firearm as an AR-15.