NavyVet1959
Curmudgeon Extraordinaire
The NRA really screwed the pooch on this one. The NRA wasn't originally a pro-2nd-Amendment group and in fact, they helped craft a lot of anti-2nd-Amendment legislation over the years. In recent years, that had supposedly changed and a lot of us were feeling better about the NRA, but here they come and screw it up. They will not be getting anymore of my money. I suspect the GOA will be more appreciative of my money.
I don't own a bump-fire stock and in fact don't even have a desire to own one, but I find it extremely repulsive that the NRA would basically call for their regulation by saying that the ATF "should re-examine them". I reload my own ammo, so I don't particularly want to have a spray-and-pray type device that would allow me to shoot in *minutes* what might have taken *hours* to cast and load. Still, it's the *principle* of the thing.
There are some leftist idiots who think that if we just had yet another law, it would have prevented this incident. We already have a law against murder and if the person (or persons) responsible for this incident didn't care about that law, what makes these leftist idiots think that the shooter(s) would care about breaking one more law? If these leftist idiots want another law, I'll give them one... How about this:
"It is hereby illegal for anyone to use a hammer to break out the window of their 32nd floor hotel room and shoot at a crowd of 20,000 people listening to a C&W concert."
Surely *that* would have prevented this shooting, right?
For what they do, bump-fire stocks are overpriced and inaccurate. They only way that he managed to hit as many people as he did while using one was because the people were packed so tight that it was probably difficult to miss. If you are shooting an AR, the recoil is so light that if you have the muzzle supported (bipod or whatever), it would be entirely possible for a person to shoot two rifles at the same time and given the distance and crowd density, be just as effective.
I'm an engineer and even though I'm not a gunsmith or involved in that sort of business, I can see a much easier way of increasing the fire rate of a semi-auto rifle that does not rely on a bump-fire stock. It would be much cheaper and pretty much any person of marginal mechanical ability would be able to build one as long as they are not concerned with the legalities of it. All they really need is a small motor with a disk that is bored off-center enough that when it rotates, it would alternately press and release the trigger. Depending upon the rate of fire desired and the small motor chosen, you might need to gear it down a bit. I suspect that you could build one for about $5. Not exactly rocket science, ya' know?
I don't own a bump-fire stock and in fact don't even have a desire to own one, but I find it extremely repulsive that the NRA would basically call for their regulation by saying that the ATF "should re-examine them". I reload my own ammo, so I don't particularly want to have a spray-and-pray type device that would allow me to shoot in *minutes* what might have taken *hours* to cast and load. Still, it's the *principle* of the thing.
There are some leftist idiots who think that if we just had yet another law, it would have prevented this incident. We already have a law against murder and if the person (or persons) responsible for this incident didn't care about that law, what makes these leftist idiots think that the shooter(s) would care about breaking one more law? If these leftist idiots want another law, I'll give them one... How about this:
"It is hereby illegal for anyone to use a hammer to break out the window of their 32nd floor hotel room and shoot at a crowd of 20,000 people listening to a C&W concert."
Surely *that* would have prevented this shooting, right?
For what they do, bump-fire stocks are overpriced and inaccurate. They only way that he managed to hit as many people as he did while using one was because the people were packed so tight that it was probably difficult to miss. If you are shooting an AR, the recoil is so light that if you have the muzzle supported (bipod or whatever), it would be entirely possible for a person to shoot two rifles at the same time and given the distance and crowd density, be just as effective.
I'm an engineer and even though I'm not a gunsmith or involved in that sort of business, I can see a much easier way of increasing the fire rate of a semi-auto rifle that does not rely on a bump-fire stock. It would be much cheaper and pretty much any person of marginal mechanical ability would be able to build one as long as they are not concerned with the legalities of it. All they really need is a small motor with a disk that is bored off-center enough that when it rotates, it would alternately press and release the trigger. Depending upon the rate of fire desired and the small motor chosen, you might need to gear it down a bit. I suspect that you could build one for about $5. Not exactly rocket science, ya' know?