AOC wants to ban bump stocks

I agree with her.

If only that fat slob Trump would do something!

He won't because he is not governing in the best interest of the nation, only for the 30 percent who SHD.

He signed the bill to ban bumpstocks in December 2018, the ban went into effect in March of 2019. Seems you are wrong, again, even after the fact!
Something I disagree with him on. PRIVATE PROPERTY IS A PROTECTED RIGHT.
 
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez on Twitter

How many of you liberals are with her on this???


Go AOC go AOC go go go AOC!!!

What's the purpose of a bump stock?

Fire AT a large group of people quickly and not very accurately?


Wrong. I bump stock is for doing may dumps. That's all. It just turns a gun into a bullet hose. They suck, and it's because they suck that the Vegas shooter stopped when he did. A bump stock enables one to "bump fire" an AR15. This is not hard to do after watching a 1:30 min video on YouTube. This is a meaningless nothing Kent to energize nobody's.
 
STILL waiting for a respnse

Assuming the shooter was committed to the particular shooting he perpetrated - from that room, into that crowd, firing at an area target rather than point target - and was unable to get a bump stock, what alternative(s) did he have?

Q. unable to get a bump stock, what alternative(s) did he have

A. Save the time, the carnage and bullets by turning the gun on himself.

How fast can a person pull a trigger if they are not aiming at any one in particular?
Very fast.
In fact, its pretty trivial to put an electric motor or crank into the trigger guard to pull the trigger faster than a bump stock.
Most firearms also want to go full auto and there are mechanisms added to prevent that, which are easily removed.
Every bolt action rifle can easily be made full auto by just removing the locking lugs and adding more springs and weight to the bolt. They make kits in WWI to turn bolt action rifles into machineguns. Its called the Pederson Device.
The Pedersen Device: Turning a WWI Bolt Gun Into a Semi-Auto

But Paddock was wealthy and successful, so there never was much of a case for him to be committing suicide at all, much less senseless mass murder. The whole case is very suspicious. Remember, no one actually saw the shooter at all. Paddock may have been the first one killed for all we know.
 
Q. unable to get a bump stock, what alternative(s) did he have
Any number of them, including...

48925-2.jpg
 
Q. unable to get a bump stock, what alternative(s) did he have
Any number of them, including...

48925-2.jpg

While an electric version is regulated, the hand crank version is not.
He had the means to legally buy either.


That is a good point, that someone like Paddock could afford any sort of license he wanted.
That is why he still does not seem to fit any profile of who would do something like that.
 
Q. unable to get a bump stock, what alternative(s) did he have
Any number of them, including...

48925-2.jpg

Editing my post it dishonest, not that I ever have found you to be honest, so it was not unexpected.

You posted only the question. not my answer.

A. Save the time, the carnage and bullets by turning the gun on himself.


Your answer did not make any sense.
Not that the whole event made any sense.
Paddock was wealthy, healthy, and successful.
I don't buy that he harmed anyone else or himself.
I think he was killed first, before any other shots were fired.

But the POINT is that there is no proposed law, like a bumpstock ban, that could have prevented this from happening.
Since he could easily have afforded the license for a real machinegun, he was not at all dependent on a bump stock.
And in fact, he could easily have made his own, modified a gun into a machine gun, bought an illegal machinegun, etc.
There is no reason to believe an addition law like this would do any good at all.
 

Forum List

Back
Top