Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
You should definitely be able to purchase a bump fire stock.
Nobody says squat if you soup up your car to do twice the legally posted speed limit and go out and buy 24 cans of beer at one time. It's AFTER you mow down a few people in a DUI incident that the people become concerned. How can lives lost via a DUI be any less valuable than lives lost due to firearms?
Sensible people realize that if a drunk driver mows your loved ones down, it's not the car that is at fault. How come you suppose those same people won't realize that the gun is not at fault.
I said many times that the ONLY people committing mass shootings are those who are political jihadists and those on a schedule of drugs called SSRIs. Paddock was on SSRIs... and THAT is where you should place your concerns.
And YET -- you can't roll to the store in a track ready Indy/Nascar/NHRA vehicle to GET the brewskies. Can ya?
This is a "line" to draw between folks who appreciate high performance and feel the need and morons who don't like your choices.
I'm a staunch Civil Liberties guy. Top 1%. But the pain and misery from dealing with the naggers require these "lines". And the line that works for gun control is AUTOMATIC FIRE vs Semi-Auto.
You push past that line and the number of opposing morons goes up exponentially. BTW -- works in reverse for leftist desires as well on all their issues. Don't think that pedophilia and polygamy are part of "diversity" for example. That's part of the TOLERANCE that allows morons to placate opposing morons in a free country..
Nice try, but your analogy doesn't work. A bump stock does not make a firearm a fully automatic no more than painting your souped up car into an Indy performer.
Secondly, your analogy doesn't work because military arms are the most protected weapons under the Second Amendment - so the laws they have in place now are unconstitutional over-kill.
From what I've seen, this "trick" puts the weapon into the same general rate of fire --- IF you control the weapon and you are practiced at it and you TUNE the stock. Not anything that makes the weapon more precise tho. So you can spray like a Jihadi or stay semi-auto and get the same controlled bursts as a military weapon is GENERALLY used.
Asking for MORE in terms of firepower is a great ideal. It would work in a country where 60% of the adult population hasn't been on Prozac and is disciplined enough for the responsibility. That's NOT where this society is heading. I'm with you in spirit -- but in REALVILLE -- we have too many morons to GET more out this Amendment.
As a general rule, full auto fire is suppressive, not controlled. IF the shooter had been armed with a semi auto and had a good flash suppressor, he'd have been much more effective, but I won't debate that subject in a forum where I believe a nutcase or two might be lurking.
The Right to keep and bear Arms is not a right granted by the Constitution and it does not depend upon the Constitution. The RIGHT is above the law and if we don't defend it, we may as well become a socialist cesspool.
Yeah, we have nutjobs and it is there that we need to expend our efforts... NOT trying to dismantle the Second Amendment on the installment plan.
Yeah. Like I said, I'm all for the idealism and enthusiasm for freedom. But the society is SICK -- going on demented and you don't WANT more legal firepower right now. Not EVEN in the hands of every cop.
I predict in a decade or two, the whole field of neuroscience will allow us to actually MEASURE "mental capacity" and rational behavior. Until we can have psych doctors who USE those measurements, these folks are handing out psycho-active drugs like Halloween candy. TODAY -- we can't rely on them for diagnosis and monitoring. We'll have to fix that. Don't trust them to determine who can buy and possess.
Even this recent shooter is alleged to be under psych care and on anti-depressants. Which are ABSOLUTELY prone to invoking suicidal and anti-social behavior.
Suggest the focus be on CCW and taking illegal guns off the streets. And on strictly keeping the semi-auto capability against all challenges by the dumb-nuts who want to focus on how they look - rather than how they work.
And YET -- you can't roll to the store in a track ready Indy/Nascar/NHRA vehicle to GET the brewskies. Can ya?
This is a "line" to draw between folks who appreciate high performance and feel the need and morons who don't like your choices.
I'm a staunch Civil Liberties guy. Top 1%. But the pain and misery from dealing with the naggers require these "lines". And the line that works for gun control is AUTOMATIC FIRE vs Semi-Auto.
You push past that line and the number of opposing morons goes up exponentially. BTW -- works in reverse for leftist desires as well on all their issues. Don't think that pedophilia and polygamy are part of "diversity" for example. That's part of the TOLERANCE that allows morons to placate opposing morons in a free country..
Nice try, but your analogy doesn't work. A bump stock does not make a firearm a fully automatic no more than painting your souped up car into an Indy performer.
Secondly, your analogy doesn't work because military arms are the most protected weapons under the Second Amendment - so the laws they have in place now are unconstitutional over-kill.
From what I've seen, this "trick" puts the weapon into the same general rate of fire --- IF you control the weapon and you are practiced at it and you TUNE the stock. Not anything that makes the weapon more precise tho. So you can spray like a Jihadi or stay semi-auto and get the same controlled bursts as a military weapon is GENERALLY used.
Asking for MORE in terms of firepower is a great ideal. It would work in a country where 60% of the adult population hasn't been on Prozac and is disciplined enough for the responsibility. That's NOT where this society is heading. I'm with you in spirit -- but in REALVILLE -- we have too many morons to GET more out this Amendment.
As a general rule, full auto fire is suppressive, not controlled. IF the shooter had been armed with a semi auto and had a good flash suppressor, he'd have been much more effective, but I won't debate that subject in a forum where I believe a nutcase or two might be lurking.
The Right to keep and bear Arms is not a right granted by the Constitution and it does not depend upon the Constitution. The RIGHT is above the law and if we don't defend it, we may as well become a socialist cesspool.
Yeah, we have nutjobs and it is there that we need to expend our efforts... NOT trying to dismantle the Second Amendment on the installment plan.
Yeah. Like I said, I'm all for the idealism and enthusiasm for freedom. But the society is SICK -- going on demented and you don't WANT more legal firepower right now. Not EVEN in the hands of every cop.
I predict in a decade or two, the whole field of neuroscience will allow us to actually MEASURE "mental capacity" and rational behavior. Until we can have psych doctors who USE those measurements, these folks are handing out psycho-active drugs like Halloween candy. TODAY -- we can't rely on them for diagnosis and monitoring. We'll have to fix that. Don't trust them to determine who can buy and possess.
Even this recent shooter is alleged to be under psych care and on anti-depressants. Which are ABSOLUTELY prone to invoking suicidal and anti-social behavior.
Suggest the focus be on CCW and taking illegal guns off the streets. And on strictly keeping the semi-auto capability against all challenges by the dumb-nuts who want to focus on how they look - rather than how they work.
I respectfully disagree with your solution. EVERY mass shooter is either a jihadist / known political terrorist and / or a person on psychotropic drugs. Trump is working to get rid of Islamic terrorists and, instead of pissing our efforts away on incremental gun control, the time would be better spent mandating that the medical community be held accountable for the drugs they prescribe like candy.
Nice try, but your analogy doesn't work. A bump stock does not make a firearm a fully automatic no more than painting your souped up car into an Indy performer.
Secondly, your analogy doesn't work because military arms are the most protected weapons under the Second Amendment - so the laws they have in place now are unconstitutional over-kill.
From what I've seen, this "trick" puts the weapon into the same general rate of fire --- IF you control the weapon and you are practiced at it and you TUNE the stock. Not anything that makes the weapon more precise tho. So you can spray like a Jihadi or stay semi-auto and get the same controlled bursts as a military weapon is GENERALLY used.
Asking for MORE in terms of firepower is a great ideal. It would work in a country where 60% of the adult population hasn't been on Prozac and is disciplined enough for the responsibility. That's NOT where this society is heading. I'm with you in spirit -- but in REALVILLE -- we have too many morons to GET more out this Amendment.
As a general rule, full auto fire is suppressive, not controlled. IF the shooter had been armed with a semi auto and had a good flash suppressor, he'd have been much more effective, but I won't debate that subject in a forum where I believe a nutcase or two might be lurking.
The Right to keep and bear Arms is not a right granted by the Constitution and it does not depend upon the Constitution. The RIGHT is above the law and if we don't defend it, we may as well become a socialist cesspool.
Yeah, we have nutjobs and it is there that we need to expend our efforts... NOT trying to dismantle the Second Amendment on the installment plan.
Yeah. Like I said, I'm all for the idealism and enthusiasm for freedom. But the society is SICK -- going on demented and you don't WANT more legal firepower right now. Not EVEN in the hands of every cop.
I predict in a decade or two, the whole field of neuroscience will allow us to actually MEASURE "mental capacity" and rational behavior. Until we can have psych doctors who USE those measurements, these folks are handing out psycho-active drugs like Halloween candy. TODAY -- we can't rely on them for diagnosis and monitoring. We'll have to fix that. Don't trust them to determine who can buy and possess.
Even this recent shooter is alleged to be under psych care and on anti-depressants. Which are ABSOLUTELY prone to invoking suicidal and anti-social behavior.
Suggest the focus be on CCW and taking illegal guns off the streets. And on strictly keeping the semi-auto capability against all challenges by the dumb-nuts who want to focus on how they look - rather than how they work.
I respectfully disagree with your solution. EVERY mass shooter is either a jihadist / known political terrorist and / or a person on psychotropic drugs. Trump is working to get rid of Islamic terrorists and, instead of pissing our efforts away on incremental gun control, the time would be better spent mandating that the medical community be held accountable for the drugs they prescribe like candy.
Actually MOSTLY it's prescribed psycho-meds that are associated with these events. But also it's the heightened division and hate. If the neo-nazis and Antifa started to go after each other and upped the arms race to actual weapons -- we'd be in real bad spot. Already seen that in Dallas with black extremists.
We are going down hard as a society. And until some decency and responsibility shows up again, you CANNOT INCREASE the arms race.
Where are you getting the idea that ALL his guns were “dialed in to 330 yards”?Why not? There's no way to convince a rational person that a man that only had guns for 4 months..had 23 guns dialed in @ 330 yards and was firing with a bump stock and hitting targets.
Seriously, bump stocks are all over the place @ 25 yards, let alone 330 when there's bullet drop and wind.
Do I want want one? No. Should they be legal? Sure.
Where are you getting the idea that ALL his guns were “dialed in to 330 yards”?Why not? There's no way to convince a rational person that a man that only had guns for 4 months..had 23 guns dialed in @ 330 yards and was firing with a bump stock and hitting targets.
Seriously, bump stocks are all over the place @ 25 yards, let alone 330 when there's bullet drop and wind.
Do I want want one? No. Should they be legal? Sure.
Which one of the 20,000 was “THE target”?Where are you getting the idea that ALL his guns were “dialed in to 330 yards”?Why not? There's no way to convince a rational person that a man that only had guns for 4 months..had 23 guns dialed in @ 330 yards and was firing with a bump stock and hitting targets.
Seriously, bump stocks are all over the place @ 25 yards, let alone 330 when there's bullet drop and wind.
Do I want want one? No. Should they be legal? Sure.
The target was 330 yards away.
Which one of the 20,000 was “THE target”?Where are you getting the idea that ALL his guns were “dialed in to 330 yards”?Why not? There's no way to convince a rational person that a man that only had guns for 4 months..had 23 guns dialed in @ 330 yards and was firing with a bump stock and hitting targets.
Seriously, bump stocks are all over the place @ 25 yards, let alone 330 when there's bullet drop and wind.
Do I want want one? No. Should they be legal? Sure.
The target was 330 yards away.
But they weren’t all at 330 yards... if they were, all the bodies would be laid out in a line. Are you suggesting the bodies were moved to give the impression that they were struck a various distances from the shooter?Which one of the 20,000 was “THE target”?Where are you getting the idea that ALL his guns were “dialed in to 330 yards”?Why not? There's no way to convince a rational person that a man that only had guns for 4 months..had 23 guns dialed in @ 330 yards and was firing with a bump stock and hitting targets.
Seriously, bump stocks are all over the place @ 25 yards, let alone 330 when there's bullet drop and wind.
Do I want want one? No. Should they be legal? Sure.
The target was 330 yards away.
All of them @ 330 yards. Do you get the point yet? Ever shot a gun?
I see you've edited your post... Thanks for that. It shows even more clearly that not only do you not know much about ballistics; you also don't know the round the shooter used. Hint... It wasn't a. 22 lr, it was a 5.56, or. 223. Which have much different ballistics than the. 22 of which you have barely a passing casual knowledge of.Which one of the 20,000 was “THE target”?Where are you getting the idea that ALL his guns were “dialed in to 330 yards”?Why not? There's no way to convince a rational person that a man that only had guns for 4 months..had 23 guns dialed in @ 330 yards and was firing with a bump stock and hitting targets.
Seriously, bump stocks are all over the place @ 25 yards, let alone 330 when there's bullet drop and wind.
Do I want want one? No. Should they be legal? Sure.
The target was 330 yards away.
All of them @ 330 yards. Do you get the point yet? Ever shot a gun?
A .22 would be 1-3 feet low at that distance.
I see you've edited your post... Thanks for that. It shows even more clearly that not only do you not know much about ballistics; you also don't know the round the shooter used. Hint... It wasn't a. 22 lr, it was a 5.56, or. 223. Which have much different ballistics than the. 22 of which you have barely a passing casual knowledge of.Which one of the 20,000 was “THE target”?Where are you getting the idea that ALL his guns were “dialed in to 330 yards”?Why not? There's no way to convince a rational person that a man that only had guns for 4 months..had 23 guns dialed in @ 330 yards and was firing with a bump stock and hitting targets.
Seriously, bump stocks are all over the place @ 25 yards, let alone 330 when there's bullet drop and wind.
Do I want want one? No. Should they be legal? Sure.
The target was 330 yards away.
All of them @ 330 yards. Do you get the point yet? Ever shot a gun?
A .22 would be 1-3 feet low at that distance.
Now that we've dispensed with your armchair expertise... Let educate you a little bit about bullet drop. Heres a random ballistics chart for the. 223. Drop will vary a bit between brands, bullet weights, and barrel lengths; but this will give others a rough idea...
View attachment 152787
And if it we're a. 22 lr are it seemed you we're posting in your post... There would be no pass through shots at that distance as has been reported.
At 300 yards a. 22 lr is zipping along at roughly 850fps. Which puts lethality in the shitter. It can still kill. But the wound cavity will be minimized. Learn more, type less; and leave the educating to those will at least some knowledge, and experience.
You really have no idea how absurd you sound; or what a fool you're making of yourself do you?I see you've edited your post... Thanks for that. It shows even more clearly that not only do you not know much about ballistics; you also don't know the round the shooter used. Hint... It wasn't a. 22 lr, it was a 5.56, or. 223. Which have much different ballistics than the. 22 of which you have barely a passing casual knowledge of.Which one of the 20,000 was “THE target”?Where are you getting the idea that ALL his guns were “dialed in to 330 yards”?
The target was 330 yards away.
All of them @ 330 yards. Do you get the point yet? Ever shot a gun?
A .22 would be 1-3 feet low at that distance.
Okay, say this guy zeroed in at 100 yards (like most people do) and shot into the middle of the crowd, it would be hitting outside the wall of the venue.
I don't know much about ballistics? I can tell you don't even own or have never shot a gun.
Did I not just post I was popping clay pigeons with my .06 @ 200 yards?
I shot a banty rooster in the neck with it @ 100.
I used to shoot planes with a BB gun just to hear it go "tink"
You know exactly jack shit about guns and bullets.
I've knocked a bird flying in formation down from high overhead in the sky.
(That was a mistake, nastiest thing I ever ate)
No guy is going to acquire skills like that on 23 guns within 4 months.
1-2 guns maybe, each one shoots a bit differently. I bet the "ballistics" show there was an M249, .30 cal, or Russian-bloc machine gun.
You really have no idea how absurd you sound; or what a fool you're making of yourself do you?I see you've edited your post... Thanks for that. It shows even more clearly that not only do you not know much about ballistics; you also don't know the round the shooter used. Hint... It wasn't a. 22 lr, it was a 5.56, or. 223. Which have much different ballistics than the. 22 of which you have barely a passing casual knowledge of.Which one of the 20,000 was “THE target”?The target was 330 yards away.
All of them @ 330 yards. Do you get the point yet? Ever shot a gun?
A .22 would be 1-3 feet low at that distance.
Okay, say this guy zeroed in at 100 yards (like most people do) and shot into the middle of the crowd, it would be hitting outside the wall of the venue.
I don't know much about ballistics? I can tell you don't even own or have never shot a gun.
Did I not just post I was popping clay pigeons with my .06 @ 200 yards?
I shot a banty rooster in the neck with it @ 100.
I used to shoot planes with a BB gun just to hear it go "tink"
You know exactly jack shit about guns and bullets.
I've knocked a bird flying in formation down from high overhead in the sky.
(That was a mistake, nastiest thing I ever ate)
No guy is going to acquire skills like that on 23 guns within 4 months.
1-2 guns maybe, each one shoots a bit differently. I bet the "ballistics" show there was an M249, .30 cal, or Russian-bloc machine gun.
I'm all ears.
