Military court rules "Bump Stocks," are not machine guns.....duh.....

[M14 Shooter]

I have a Class III M-16. I bought it in the early 70s.

I put aside the original parts but use the stripped lower with modern parts and upper.

You need one of those belt-fed uppers.

 

[Flash]

You need one of those belt-fed uppers.

The problem is finding belt ammo. It was available back in the 1980s but hard to get nowadays.

 

[M14 Shooter]

The problem is finding belt ammo. It was available back in the 1980s but hard to get nowadays.

M249 links are reasonably cheap.

 

[Flash]

M249 links are reasonably cheap.

I was talking about ammo being sold in links.

Not every belt fed upper will take the M-27 linked ammo. Good quality belt fed uppers can be expensive. Like $5k.

The problem with having a belt fed upper on a F-A is that you need a really good military grade barrel. Those things heat up fast.

When I shoot my F-A I usually limit it to four 30 rd mags.

Even using low velocity loads the barrel gets hot. Africa hot!

In the decades I've had my M-16 I have worn out several barrels.

If the SHTF I don't think I would want to use the F-A unless it was absolutely necessary. Ammo goes fast on F-A and ammo would be limited.

My SHTF ARs are the Colt 6920s. I view my M-16 as a range toy and an investment.

 

[woodwork201]

And?

Military court rulings have no bearing on civilian courts, no bearing on state and local governments, no bearing on the Federal government.

Trump’s bump-stock ban remains in place.

But they're smart, educated, legal experts who, unlike virtually every other legal expert in the country, knows what actually IS a machine gun.

 

[woodwork201]

I had a binary trigger for one of my ARs.

One hundred times more accurate and more reliable than a bump stock.

However, still nothing more than a range toy.

It could put a lot of rounds down range. Almost as fast as full auto. However, it could never be a serious tactical weapon.

I am an experienced shooter. I could get the pull shot on target but the release was always way off. Like 8-10 inches at 100 yds off.

If you were using it for suppression fire then it would work but unless you practiced a whole lot you were never going to do double taps with it.

I probably shot close to a thousand rounds trying to develop the skill to control the release shot and was never successful. I'm sure there are some people who could do it but I don't think a normal shooter could.

The Las Vegas shooter would have been much more deadly from his position if he used a binary trigger instead of a bump stock.

That's the problem with the police having M16s. They're made for suppressive fire or sweeping an area. There is no case where the police should be doing that against civilian targets. Given a revolution or civil war, the Army could conceivably need that against Americans but never the police.

 

[Wild Bill Kelsoe]

Bump stocks are amusing toys for the most part. Most people recognize you can't aim whatsoever with one.
Having said that, it can be used to provide devastating mass injury if firing into a crowd as the shooter in Las Vegas did by killing 9 people in under 30 seconds and a total of 58 dead with 411 injuries.
Bump stocks are and should ALWAYS continue to be strictly forbidden.
And I am a gun supporter with 3 guns in my home.

You don't need a bump stock to bump fire a semi automatic rifle.

Check it...

 

[Wild Bill Kelsoe]

You sir, are full of shit.
And to be clear, I'm a proud gun owner.
So beat it

You're a Fudd

 

[Wild Bill Kelsoe]

Why is this even an argument?
You guys seriously want Bump stocks to be legal??
And if you have absolutely no interest in one, like all normal people, than why do you care?
Slippery slope maybe?

Absolutely a slippery slope. They won't be satisfied with banning bump stocks. They want to ban everything.

 

[Wild Bill Kelsoe]

What idiot is equipping our military with that crap?

The M2 machine gun is basically a bump fire weapon. It's one of the best weapons ever.

 

[Wild Bill Kelsoe]

That's the problem with the police having M16s. They're made for suppressive fire or sweeping an area. There is no case where the police should be doing that against civilian targets. Given a revolution or civil war, the Army could conceivably need that against Americans but never the police.

It's illegal for cops to use automatic fire on US citizens anyway.

 

[Wild Bill Kelsoe]

That was the point of my post. Instead of trying to determine every way possible to make a gun fire that fast, we need to just ban guns that are capable of rapid fire at that level. If it can fire that fast, by whatever means, it should be banned. Of course, existing guns would probably have to be grandfathered in, just like machine guns were, but any future manufactured guns would have to limt the rate of fire.

So, you want to ban semi automatic firearms. Go figure

 

[Crepitus]

The M2 machine gun is basically a bump fire weapon. It's one of the best weapons ever.

A. WW1 technology.

B. It's primitive recoil mechanism was not a bump stock.

 

[BULLDOG]

So, you want to ban semi automatic firearms. Go figure

No. I have no problem with semi automatic guns that aren't capable of such a high rate of fire. A design that limits how fast the gun can fire. Similar in function to a rev limiter on a car.

 

[2aguy]

No. I have no problem with semi automatic guns that aren't capable of such a high rate of fire. A design that limits how fast the gun can fire. Similar in function to a rev limiter on a car.

You are a moron........simple as that.

These dumb ideas of yours would also apply to hand guns as well...and it is simply another stupid idea meant to irritate normal gun owners who do not use their guns for crime or violence.

You hate guns, you hate gun owners, so anything you can do to make their life more difficult makes you happy....you are sick.

If you really want to lower gun crime, lock up actual criminals who use guns.....stop letting them out of jail and prison over and over again...that solves the problem.....

 

[BULLDOG]

You are a moron........simple as that.

These dumb ideas of yours would also apply to hand guns as well...and it is simply another stupid idea meant to irritate normal gun owners who do not use their guns for crime or violence.

You hate guns, you hate gun owners, so anything you can do to make their life more difficult makes you happy....you are sick.

If you really want to lower gun crime, lock up actual criminals who use guns.....stop letting them out of jail and prison over and over again...that solves the problem.....

It would have no effect on guns being fired at a normal, lower rate.

 

[2aguy]

It would have no effect on guns being fired at a normal, lower rate.

Yeah...it would......

Again, dipshit...it isn't the gun, it is the target......

There is only one mass public shooting where the rifle had an advantage in the shooting, and that was Las Vegas, where the range was over 200 yards......but he was also firing into a tightly packed crowd of over 22,000 people, at night, from a concealed and fortified position.......with his initial shooting masked by the concert.



And if the crowd hadn't been trapped in that concert arena, he wouldn't have been able to kill as many since they would have run away or found cover.....since shooting at moving targets at hundreds of yards is almost impossible for all but expertly trained shooters...



At the range of every other mass public shooting a rifle has no advantage over pistols or shotguns.......



again.....at the range of a mass public shooting the AR-15 is no better than a pump action shotgun....as are 2 handguns......you idiot...



Boulder....used an AR-15 with magazines that held more than 10 bullets.. 10 killed.....



Virginia Tech...2 pistols, one with 10 round magazine..... 32 killed.



Do you see that the AR-15 killed fewer people than the 2 pistols?



Boulder...10 killed with an AR-15 rifle and regular magazines ( holding more than 10 bullets)



Luby's Cafe..... 2 pistols....24 killed.



Do you see that the 2 pistols killed more than the AR-15?



Do you know what the difference was between these attacks?



The cops immediately responded and shot at the attacker in boulder, causing him to stop shooting unarmed victims, and then he shot himself....



Virginia Tech and Luby's Cafe, the police didn't get there, and at Luby's Cafe, the one woman who could have shot and killed the attacker had to leave her gun in her car because of stupid gun free zone laws....



Boulder AR-15 with magazines that hold more than 10 bullets...you know, regular magazines..... 10 killed...



Kerch, Russia, Polytechnic school shooting.... 5 shot, pump action shotgun...which means it had 5 shells which is 5 less than 10........20 killed 70 wounded.



Do you see that the AR-15 killed fewer people than the 5 shot, pump action shotgun?



The difference? The Russian police station was 100 yards away from the school...and it still took them 10 minutes to get to the school...and he managed to kill 20 people with a 5 shot, pump action shotgun....10 more than the Boulder shooter with a rifle and a regular sized magazine...





So again.......in a mass public shooting the number of bullets in the gun magazine doesn't mean anything......the gun doesn't make the difference....



What makes the difference?



1) if the target is a gun free zone, more people get killed.



2) if someone starts shooting at the attacker, they commit suicide, or surrender, or runaway....



That is what you don't understand and don't care to understand since you simply have a mental issue when it comes to the AR-15 rifle.

That rifle had no special advantage in a mass public shooting.



We have 20 million AR-15 rifles in private hands in the U.S....



They were used for mass public shootings 4 times in 2019 killing a grand total of



41



Deer kill 200 people a year.



Ladders kill 300 people a year.



Lawn mowers kill between 90-100 people a year...

 

[2aguy]

It would have no effect on guns being fired at a normal, lower rate.

What is it with your mental illness that you don't want to actually keep known, repeat gun offenders locked up? You are fine with felons with multiple felonies for not only gun possession but for firing guns at people in public being released over and over again from prison...

Keeping them locked up would stop gun crime...........fucking around with guns they don't use doesn't do anything.....

These criminals use handguns, not rifles.

 

[Wild Bill Kelsoe]

No. I have no problem with semi automatic guns that aren't capable of such a high rate of fire. A design that limits how fast the gun can fire. Similar in function to a rev limiter on a car.

Any semi automatic rifle can be bump fired.

A semi automatic is designed to limit it's rate of fire. It's called on round per trigger pull...lol

 

[BULLDOG]

What is it with your mental illness that you don't want to actually keep known, repeat gun offenders locked up? You are fine with felons with multiple felonies for not only gun possession but for firing guns at people in public being released over and over again from prison...

Keeping them locked up would stop gun crime...........fucking around with guns they don't use doesn't do anything.....

These criminals use handguns, not rifles.

You keep claming I want people guilty of gun crimes released, when I have told you repetedly that is not the case. Are you capable of not lying?