Poll: would you trade bump fire stocks for national reciprocity?

[gummy jones]

Bear with me if you're aware of the history, but if you really want to know my feelings about it, here it is.

So because the government decides 100 years ago that people can't be responsible enough to drink alcohol, crime related to Prohibition skyrockets. In response, Big Brother decides that guns = bad. Under the original NFA intention, they wanted to treat all pistols and revolvers the same as machine guns. Imagine that. Fortunately, people were successful in getting them excluded but that's how close we were to basically kissing all non-long-guns good bye. Someone decided a long time ago that more than one bullet per pull of the trigger was too much for us lowly common folks... and that becomes the new normal. They drew that arbitrary line in the sand and that line ended up where it did just because they couldn't get more at the time. I would hazard a guess that if they had been successful in including pistols and revolvers in the NFA, the common belief among all the rifle and shotgun owners of 2017 would be that pistols are somehow too evil, much in the same way that we just ACCEPT that machine guns are horrifically excessive but semi autos are fine and dandy.

It's all a slippery slope. Tell people something is what it is for long enough, even if it's not, and they will start to believe it. Machine guns are just commonly accepted as way over the line. Forget the fact that one of the primary points of the 2A is to allow the people to protect themselves from a tyrannical government... the same government that gets all kinds of full auto goodies that we peons don't get to touch in 2017.

The reason you think that maybe getting rid of bump fire stocks is, if I'm understanding you correctly, because they are designed to skirt the spirit of the NFA. As was pointed out by others, the NFA is just some bullshit piece of legislation that was passed to take shit away from the people. Now we are stuck with it. Even if we accept that it is the law of the land and we must abide by it (which we do as lawful gun owners), now we have to suddenly redefine what it says because maybe it wasn't specific enough? So we go from "1 pull / 1 bullet = okay" to now saying that "too many bullets too fast =/= okay"?

That's not a slippery slope, my friend... that's a goddamn cliff.

And there is really very little difference between banning bump fire stocks and banning pistol braces. Hell, what about banning bullpups? The Mossberg Shockwave? Probably should ban .410 revolvers like the Judge because the shallow rifling is all that is keeping them legal. And when we come right down to it... there is no difference between this and standard capacity magazines like you said... the bottom line is that someone who doesn't like guns and doesn't trust Joe Citizen with guns drew a line in the sand a long time ago. If that line has machine guns on one side and pistols on the other, that (as I pointed out previously) was just the luck of the draw... and now we all assume there was some higher wisdom and logic to the decision. In 1968, someone else redrew that line to create Federal licensing of dealers and stopping mail order sales... something that we today have become so accustomed to that we just figure that it makes logical sense. In 1986, someone else drew another line that basically was the nail in the coffin for full auto (all in the name of "compromise"). In 1993 someone else redrew that line to include magazines over 10 rounds and stupid shit like bayonet lugs and flash hiders. If that didn't sunset, we'd all have pretty much accepted by now that 10 round is okay and 11 rounds is the devil's work.

You have to stop letting them redraw the line. You certainly have to stop it from happening when the gun grabbers are back on their heels in all branches of the government. What is going on right now is an embarrassment. I have no doubt that people *think* that they are doing the best thing by throwing them a bone, but that's misguided bullshit.

Thanks for taking the time. I agree with everything you said for the most part. Not sure I completely feel your slippery slope example is the most logical to follow but gun grabbers certainly aren't informed or logical. I get it. Heck, I've had the same conversation about 50 times over the past couple days.

I guess my question is more along the lines of (don't give an inch arguments aside) does everyone really think a magazine and a surefire stock are the exact same category? Once again, as I stated, regardless I'm not suggesting throwing anyone a bone or that anything needs banned or would have prevented that lunatic. I'm just asking an honest question amongst like minded folk who suggest grips, cranks, lights, mags, barrel shrouds, etc are all the same. They just aren't to me (once again, don't read me suggesting they should be banned).

It's just hard for me to think a better trigger, different optic or bigger mag alters the function or is designed to alter the function in the same way as some of the range toys that are in the news.

It appears I am alone in that regard.

[Hodgie]

Okay so let's think about this for a quick minute. Right now slide fire stocks are are 100% approved by the ATF simply because they currently meet the THEIR definition of what a semi auto trigger is and what it is not. So when they "review" this it could very well mean they review their own definition of what a semi auto firearm is? Will one pull=1 bullet still apply? Will Jerry Miculek's trigger finger be outlawed because it's too fast?

Personally I think bump fire stocks are the antithesis of marksmanship or what it truly means to be a shooter. I never wanted one, still don't and I fully expect the dirt bags in DC on all sides to go after them so they can score themselves a big win with the average American idiot. That all being said I take huge exception to the NRA jumping on board with this and helping to create a avenue and a dialog that will lead to curbing rights and put small manufactures out of business.

The problem is with the contention with these things that emulate full auto, they comply with the damn law, someone misuses them, showing the law of prohibition doesn't work anyway, and every single time the left and progressives want to do more of the thing that doesn't work. Its never about reason nor safety, its always about control, we should be fighting this with everything we have, none of this "I don't like them anyway, they are pointless. I won't miss them", type thing, its not the thing they are prohibiting, its YOUR FREEDOM TO CHOOSE IT if wanted, because of the ill intent of someone else. That should never be acceptable as a 'compromise!

Lets be real here the NRA could propose, support, and draft up a bill for an AR15 ban and people like Pelosi , Bloomburg, and Clinton will continue to demand more. They are on a mission and just like them the NRA should be on one was well trying to stop them at every turn. What has working with them ever gotten a single gun owner other then the FUDD's?

History shows us that "compromise" with the federal government means we give and they take. When was the last time the Americans gun owners got a win on the federal level? Since 1934 we have given and here in 2017 they are still trying to take.

Given the opportunity she/they will take it all so their aint no way in hell in letting them take it without a fight.

Here are the exact words from Nancy Pelosi yesterday. Notice the last few lines and what she says vs her quote in the 1st paragraph. This is the two faced lair that is the American politician both Democrat and Republican. This is about control packaged in the illusion of public safety.

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D., Calif.) said "I certainly hope" voting on a bill regulating or banning "bump stocks" will be a slippery slope toward further gun restrictions.

According to the Washington Post, Pelosi asked House Speaker Paul Ryan (R., Wis.) to allow a vote on a Democratic bill banning the devices. Upon being asked if the bill was a slippery slope toward further gun restrictions, she said, "So what? … I certainly hope so."

Ryan and House Judiciary Committee Chairman Rep. Bob Goodlatte (R., Va.) said they would consider restrictions on bump stocks, a firearm accessory the Las Vegas killer used to accelerate his gunfire in Sunday night's massacre.

"Clearly that’s something we need to look into," Ryan said on MSNBC.

Goodlatte told the Washington Post, "We're going to look at the issue."

Pelosi and the Democrats have made gun control measures a cornerstone of their policy. This week, Pelosi published a letter she wrote to Ryan urging him to create a Select Committee on gun violence.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D., Calif.) unveiled a bill Wednesday to ban bump stocks and has 38 co-sponsors, all Democrats. Sens. Ron Johnson (R., Wis.), John Cornyn (R., Texas) and John Thune (R., S.D.) were among Republicans quoted as supporting or being open to the idea of banning them.

Last week, Pelosi criticized the Republican-sponsored SHARE Act that, among measures, deregulates silencers and furthers protections for interstate firearm transport. However, she insisted "we understand the Second Amendment exists."

"We respect the right of the people to have gun ownership," she said.

When it comes to firearms rights on the federal level the word "compromise" means we the people loose and get absolutely nothing in return. We should not be willing to compromise away our freedom, our right to choose. Remember these devices meet THEIR definition of what a semi auto is. Would anyone like them to revisit what they feel a semi auto should be? I know a few progressive liberals who would. How about 15-20lb triggers on all firearms constitutes a semi auto? Think it's out of their scope? If so then you all better think again.

Just look at the bill Feinstein already put in.

[tacticalreload]

Thanks for taking the time. I agree with everything you said for the most part. Not sure I completely feel your slippery slope example is the most logical to follow but gun grabbers certainly aren't informed or logical. I get it. Heck, I've had the same conversation about 50 times over the past couple days.

I guess my question is more along the lines of (don't give an inch arguments aside) does everyone really think a magazine and a surefire stock are the exact same category? Once again, as I stated, regardless I'm not suggesting throwing anyone a bone or that anything needs banned or would have prevented that lunatic. I'm just asking an honest question amongst like minded folk who suggest grips, cranks, lights, mags, barrel shrouds, etc are all the same. They just aren't to me (once again, don't read me suggesting they should be banned).

It's just hard for me to think a better trigger, different optic or bigger mag alters the function or is designed to alter the function in the same way as some of the range toys that are in the news.

It appears I am alone in that regard.

I get what you're saying. I guess basically (1) I don't care if it's the same thing as a magazine or not, (2) I feel like it's an arbitrary line in the sand and arbitrary lines can be drawn anywhere, and (3) the argument can be made that neutering something as big as a rifle my making it 5 shot or 10 shot (or not accept mags at all like in California) is altering the function in that it changes the usefulness of the item. The last point is obviously the most subjective, and I understand that you might disagree, which is fine. However, at the end of the day, points (1) and (2) should render point (3) moot.

I said in another thread that I am a Libertarian and (even though it might run contrary to the typical Conservative platform) I believe in gay marriage, legalization of marijuana, legalization of prostitution, and a number of other things... even though I'm not gay nor a pothead nor someone who pays hookers for sex. I have beliefs and principles and they center around the concept that, as long as you don't infringe on my rights or the rights of anyone else, I generally don't care what you do. Don't ask me to pay for it when your actions lead to bad consequences, but generally I live and let live. It would be hypocritical of me to say, just because I don't give a shit about bump fire stocks, that I'm okay with whatever happens if it keeps heat off my back or gets me something that I want (which it won't, btw). I don't care one bit what happens to bump fire stocks because it won't affect my life at all. However, I absolutely cannot stand by and allow the principle of what is happening just happen without calling it out for what it is. It's more gun regulations... regulations that we DON'T NEED.

The government polices us in a reactionary way. Someone crashes planes into buildings, then we have to go through 10 times more screening. Someone tries to blow up a plane with their shoe, and now we need to take off our shoes during screening. Someone tries to blow up his underwear, and now we get invasive full body scanning. Someone uses a bump fire stock and suddenly something that NO ONE gave a hoot about last week is suddenly the embodiment of evil. See it from where the gun grabbers see it... they saw an opening to gain some ground and they took it... and not only are we letting them do it, but we actually essentially paid the NRA to help get it done. If he used a suppressor, that would be target #1. If he used a binary trigger, that would be target #1. If he used green tip ammo, that would be target #1. It's a game they are playing... someone dies and let's see what we can get.

I feel like I woke up in some bizzarro world where Hillary won the election and LaPierre was her VP.

[tacticalreload]

Okay so let's think about this for a quick minute. Right now slide fire stocks are are 100% approved by the ATF simply because they currently meet the THEIR definition of what a semi auto trigger is and what it is not. So when they "review" this it could very well mean they review their own definition of what a semi auto firearm is? Will one pull=1 bullet still apply? Will Jerry Miculek's trigger finger be outlawed because it's too fast?

Personally I think bump fire stocks are the antithesis of marksmanship or what it truly means to be a shooter. I never wanted one, still don't and I fully expect the dirt bags in DC on all sides to go after them so they can score themselves a big win with the average American idiot. That all being said I take huge exception to the NRA jumping on board with this and helping to create a avenue and a dialog that will lead to curbing rights and put small manufactures out of business.

The problem is with the contention with these things that emulate full auto, they comply with the damn law, someone misuses them, showing the law of prohibition doesn't work anyway, and every single time the left and progressives want to do more of the thing that doesn't work. Its never about reason nor safety, its always about control, we should be fighting this with everything we have, none of this "I don't like them anyway, they are pointless. I won't miss them", type thing, its not the thing they are prohibiting, its YOUR FREEDOM TO CHOOSE IT if wanted, because of the ill intent of someone else. That should never be acceptable as a 'compromise!

Lets be real here the NRA could propose, support, and draft up a bill for an AR15 ban and people like Pelosi , Bloomburg, and Clinton will continue to demand more. They are on a mission and just like them the NRA should be on one was well trying to stop them at every turn. What has working with them ever gotten a single gun owner other then the FUDD's?

History shows us that "compromise" with the federal government means we give and they take. When was the last time the Americans gun owners got a win on the federal level? Since 1934 we have given and here in 2017 they are still trying to take.

Given the opportunity she/they will take it all so their aint no way in hell in letting them take it without a fight.

Here are the exact words from Nancy Pelosi yesterday. Notice the last few lines and what she says vs her quote in the 1st paragraph. This is the two faced lair that is the American politician both Democrat and Republican. This is about control packaged in the illusion of public safety.



When it comes to firearms rights on the federal level the word "compromise" means we the people loose and get absolutely nothing in return. We should not be willing to compromise away our freedom, our right to choose. Remember these devices meet THEIR definition of what a semi auto is. Would anyone like them to revisit what they feel a semi auto should be? I know a few progressive liberals who would. How about 15-20lb triggers on all firearms constitutes a semi auto? Think it's out of their scope? If so then you all better think again.

Just look at the bill Feinstein already put in.

I feel like you cut and pasted a while lot of stuff that I posted here and on the NRA's facebook page, right down to the part about Jerry Miculek's trigger finger. Don't get me wrong... I'm not accusing you of plagiarism... just saying that we are on the same page, and I agree 100%.

[gummy jones]

I used to be a libertarian but felt it is not realistic in a modern western world that keeps creeping closer to socialism.

Don't give an inch. I get it. In fact, I felt that would be the most common response and a reasonable one at that. "Ever heard of the constitution mf'er" would have also worked.

[Emptymag]

I get what you're saying. I guess basically (1) I don't care if it's the same thing as a magazine or not, (2) I feel like it's an arbitrary line in the sand and arbitrary lines can be drawn anywhere, and (3) the argument can be made that neutering something as big as a rifle my making it 5 shot or 10 shot (or not accept mags at all like in California) is altering the function in that it changes the usefulness of the item. The last point is obviously the most subjective, and I understand that you might disagree, which is fine. However, at the end of the day, points (1) and (2) should render point (3) moot.

I said in another thread that I am a Libertarian and (even though it might run contrary to the typical Conservative platform) I believe in gay marriage, legalization of marijuana, legalization of prostitution, and a number of other things... even though I'm not gay nor a pothead nor someone who pays hookers for sex. I have beliefs and principles and they center around the concept that, as long as you don't infringe on my rights or the rights of anyone else, I generally don't care what you do. Don't ask me to pay for it when your actions lead to bad consequences, but generally I live and let live. It would be hypocritical of me to say, just because I don't give a shit about bump fire stocks, that I'm okay with whatever happens if it keeps heat off my back or gets me something that I want (which it won't, btw). I don't care one bit what happens to bump fire stocks because it won't affect my life at all. However, I absolutely cannot stand by and allow the principle of what is happening just happen without calling it out for what it is. It's more gun regulations... regulations that we DON'T NEED.

The government polices us in a reactionary way. Someone crashes planes into buildings, then we have to go through 10 times more screening. Someone tries to blow up a plane with their shoe, and now we need to take off our shoes during screening. Someone tries to blow up his underwear, and now we get invasive full body scanning. Someone uses a bump fire stock and suddenly something that NO ONE gave a hoot about last week is suddenly the embodiment of evil. See it from where the gun grabbers see it... they saw an opening to gain some ground and they took it... and not only are we letting them do it, but we actually essentially paid the NRA to help get it done. If he used a suppressor, that would be target #1. If he used a binary trigger, that would be target #1. If he used green tip ammo, that would be target #1. It's a game they are playing... someone dies and let's see what we can get.

I feel like I woke up in some bizzarro world where Hillary won the election and LaPierre was her VP.

You and me both.

[Hodgie]

I feel like you cut and pasted a while lot of stuff that I posted here and on the NRA's facebook page, right down to the part about Jerry Miculek's trigger finger. Don't get me wrong... I'm not accusing you of plagiarism... just saying that we are on the same page, and I agree 100%.

Pure coincidence. I didn't read your posts only dealing with the stated topic. I can also also show you were I posted these exact statements yesterday evening under my YouTube account TheGreenMan time stamped on two different videos one by the Yankee Marshall and the other on the MAC.

I guess great minds think alike.

[tacticalreload]

I used to be a libertarian but felt it is not realistic in a modern western world that keeps creeping closer to socialism.

Don't give an inch. I get it. In fact, I felt that would be the most common response and a reasonable one at that. "Ever heard of the constitution mf'er" would have also worked.

While I would love to say that I am a hard core Libertarian without compromise, I understand that certain aspects of that would be bordering on anarchy and it relies too much on people actually taking personal responsibility for their actions and living with the consequences of the choices that they make, which would never work in the real world with the entitled idiots that we are breeding today. It doesn't mean, however, that I am abandoning the principles of it because it's firmly a part of my being. I didn't choose to think a certain way because a political party told me to... it just so happens to be that my believes align with libertarianism.

As for bump fire stocks, basically if the NRA would just keep their mouth shut and not voice an opinion at all, that would have been better than getting behind this. I just don't understand the end game here. They can't honestly expect to "trade" for something -- and they DEFINITELY can't do it after they have already just given away their only "leverage". The only thing that I can see as being the point is either they are a bunch of Fudds or they believed that Republicans were going to cave and vote for it anyway. Either way, it seems like a terrible miscalculation because regardless, it's not their job to support gun control with our money. We need to make that clear to them. We need to write to them. We need to call them. We need to tell them that they aren't going to get another penny if this is the way they are going to act. Quite frankly, I'm tired of the whole "but they are our biggest voice so we need to take the bad with the good since mostly it's good." That's how organizations get fat and lazy. It's why the latest Apple iPhone is filled with shit that was in Android phones three years ago and will sell out in seconds. It's why Glock's gen 5 is basically a gen 2 with a bumpy grip texture and people will keep buying them. We vote with our dollars because that's all that matters to large organizations... so tell them that they aren't going to get any more of your money until they fix themselves. Because right now, the NRA is NOT speaking for me even though they have my money... and that's not okay. I agree that they have the loudest megaphone so blowing it up and starting over is probably not the greatest tactic. But if that megaphone isn't sending the message that YOU want people to hear, then it's worthless to you. Remind them what happened in Cincinnati in 1977 and tell them that it can happen again. LaPierre has been there for TWENTY SIX YEARS, and he's gotten rich off our donations. Maybe it's time to drain a different swamp.

[Mitch10mm]

My question is could he have done as much or damn near as much with run of the mill ARs? Not that it matters. Because that’s the rub. Whenever this happens something needs to be banned or regulated. Let’s not just hold the asshole responsible but point at some object and say NO!

Drunk driving is a real problem. Where is the ban on pitchers of beer or tall glasses? Do away with six packs, three packs are all that is needed. Really drunk driving is treated as “Drive drunk, get arrested”. That’s how it should be. Not going after cars, car manufacturers, alcohol companies etc.

Texting and driving I can see following the same model as gun control. Somehow they are going to go after the phones. They’ll regulate features as in the use of an accelerometer or some such shit. Personal responsibility isn’t enough because the masses can’t be trusted. I know a lot of people are onboard with what pos people are. I agree but I also think that we should be free to make those mistakes and in doing so pay the price criminally. Not be “protected” by the government regulating objects or devices, tools that are neither good or bad. They are what we choose to do with them.

I have little interest in full auto. Hell yeah it would be fun at the range but that’s all at least for me. I should be able to own a bumpfire, brass knuckles, nunchaku and daggers without any legal ramifications. I’m not going to do any harm with them. Most people won’t. But again big brother has to protect us from the few. For safety sake. Again it’s a joke because criminals don’t care what they can lawfully possess or carry on their person.

Ugh. I think the whole this is a bad device is silly. It’s not good or bad

[normanvin]

The thing is he could have bought full auto. He could have bought hand grenades. He was not a person that was on the naughty list. He had the resources to pull this off using anything he wanted.

Why bumb stocks?