Bump Stock Ban is in Effect

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

kage69

Lifer
Jul 17, 2003
26,967
35,580
136
Just another excuse by Obama for inaction. If it wasn't related to creating instability through race baiting, Obama had no stomach to do anything difficult.

Do you ever get tired of making a fool out of yourself, bullshit?

Obama tackled healthcare you utter moron.
 

Genx87

Lifer
Apr 8, 2002
41,095
513
126
Thats sort of what I was talking about. Issue appeared under Obama, the ATF wanted direction if they should go with these. Obama floated the idea of a ban and got the typical "your gunna take our GUNS!" then dropped the discussion.
President Trump being a Republican can do such an order with minimal push back. Good for Trump getting this done.

I hadn't heard of any plans to ban bump stocks in 2010. That is when these things started showing up. I am not sure this was even on Obamas radar back then. This to me seems like an ATF decision based on looking at the mechanism. It is cosmetic. But it also circumvents the spirit of the automatic weapons ban. IMO if the ATF squashed this in 2010 I doubt anybody would really care. These things were fringe. Sounds like from the articles I have read the court challenge fizzled out in Feb when a judge tossed the complaint. Unless congress takes it up this ban will be permanent. And I as a fanatical 2nd amendment support don't care.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Fanatical Meat
Feb 4, 2009
34,494
15,729
136
I hadn't heard of any plans to ban bump stocks in 2010. That is when these things started showing up. I am not sure this was even on Obamas radar back then. This to me seems like an ATF decision based on looking at the mechanism. It is cosmetic. But it also circumvents the spirit of the automatic weapons ban. IMO if the ATF squashed this in 2010 I doubt anybody would really care. These things were fringe. Sounds like from the articles I have read the court challenge fizzled out in Feb when a judge tossed the complaint. Unless congress takes it up this ban will be permanent. And I as a fanatical 2nd amendment support don't care.

Good man, it’s good to have a consensus on even one gun issue.
 
  • Like
Reactions: herm0016

KB

Diamond Member
Nov 8, 1999
5,394
383
126
I know some people who voted Trump because they thought he would be best for gun rights. I rib them now as Trump passed more gun bans in 2 years than Obama did in 8 years.
 
Feb 4, 2009
34,494
15,729
136
I know some people who voted Trump because they thought he would be best for gun rights. I rib them now as Trump passed more gun bans in 2 years than Obama did in 8 years.

Ha true & funny
Regardless it’s the right thing to do. Nearly nobody disagrees. After the Vegas shooting I think the polls were like 92% agreed with a ban and like 88% of gun owners agreed.
 

Greenman

Lifer
Oct 15, 1999
20,278
5,053
136
That is good. Glad we have something we can give props to the orange man for.

I mean the main gist is that automatic weapons have always been banned for any average US Citizen from getting a-hold of. This device basically turned semi-automatics into a make-shift automatic thereby circumventing the ban. I agree it should be outlawed in full.

EDIT: What annoys the shit out of me though is why crap like this takes so long - and only as a reactionary step instead of a proactive one.
In this case, it's really just a bit of grandstanding. Bump stocks are a novelty, and the exact same effect can be achieved with a good quality rubber band.
 
  • Like
Reactions: IJTSSG

Zorba

Lifer
Oct 22, 1999
14,449
9,834
136
In this case, it's really just a bit of grandstanding. Bump stocks are a novelty, and the exact same effect can be achieved with a good quality rubber band.
Yeah, that is why at least half a million were sold, including to many people I know. And why a mass murder chose to use bump stocks and not a rubber band.

Really, the regulation should be a minimum force on the trigger that would make both impossible and would maybe also help keep little kids from shooting themselves as often. (And even better, banning semi-auto guns).
 

Greenman

Lifer
Oct 15, 1999
20,278
5,053
136
Yeah, that is why at least half a million were sold, including to many people I know. And why a mass murder chose to use bump stocks and not a rubber band.

Really, the regulation should be a minimum force on the trigger that would make both impossible and would maybe also help keep little kids from shooting themselves as often. (And even better, banning semi-auto guns).
I never thought about a minimum trigger force, though I assume it would be simple to defeat.
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,681
136
Yeah, that is why at least half a million were sold, including to many people I know. And why a mass murder chose to use bump stocks and not a rubber band.

Really, the regulation should be a minimum force on the trigger that would make both impossible and would maybe also help keep little kids from shooting themselves as often. (And even better, banning semi-auto guns).

Every ammosexual in America just had to have one. Couldn't live without it. What they really crave is full auto capability. You know, like Rambo.
 

Fenixgoon

Lifer
Jun 30, 2003
31,491
9,816
136
I never thought about a minimum trigger force, though I assume it would be simple to defeat.

converting from semi auto to full auto is easy from a technical standpoint (...not so much legally). and no one in their right mind wants to get caught with an illegal full auto. that's some baaaaaad juju.

minimum trigger force is honestly a pretty interesting way regulating firearms. doesn't prevent the existence of a semi auto from a mechanical standpoint, but definitely reduces the rate of fire (or at least sustained RoF). I've shot pistols with hair triggers and rifles that require decent pull. would be interesting to find out what the variation in force is like across different firearms.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Zorba
Feb 4, 2009
34,494
15,729
136
converting from semi auto to full auto is easy from a technical standpoint (...not so much legally). and no one in their right mind wants to get caught with an illegal full auto. that's some baaaaaad juju.

minimum trigger force is honestly a pretty interesting way regulating firearms. doesn't prevent the existence of a semi auto from a mechanical standpoint, but definitely reduces the rate of fire (or at least sustained RoF). I've shot pistols with hair triggers and rifles that require decent pull. would be interesting to find out what the variation in force is like across different firearms.

But people with severe arthritis or disabilities wouldn’t be able to fire a gun
That was the stated purpose of bumpstocks
 

Greenman

Lifer
Oct 15, 1999
20,278
5,053
136
Every ammosexual in America just had to have one. Couldn't live without it. What they really crave is full auto capability. You know, like Rambo.
Full auto is fun for five seconds, after that it's an expensive joke. The only reason most people want it is that they can't have it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Fenixgoon

Luna1968

Golden Member
Mar 9, 2019
1,200
677
136
Full auto is fun for five seconds, after that it's an expensive joke. The only reason most people want it is that they can't have it.

a .22 AR with a bumpstock is extremely fun and wont break the bank. night fire with tracers is so much fun. PEW PEW PEW!!!
 
  • Like
Reactions: IJTSSG

Luna1968

Golden Member
Mar 9, 2019
1,200
677
136
So what is the idea trigger pull for someone with arthritis or weak hand grip?

i dunno. I guess what feels best to the shooter would be my answer. a friend of mine has a match .22 pistol. the trigger is so light its scary, due to such a light trigger pull it is accurate. I can go through hundreds of rounds with that match 22 with no fatigue and still have very tight groupings.
 

hal2kilo

Lifer
Feb 24, 2009
23,326
10,230
136
Chris Rock-



There are rules for GOP politicians. Don't cross the NRA is one of them.
Hell, I'll give Trump credit for this. It's like only Nixon could go to China. But, the whinning about this is already deafening.
 

whm1974

Diamond Member
Jul 24, 2016
9,460
1,570
96
i dunno. I guess what feels best to the shooter would be my answer. a friend of mine has a match .22 pistol. the trigger is so light its scary, due to such a light trigger pull it is accurate. I can go through hundreds of rounds with that match 22 with no fatigue and still have very tight groupings.
Yeah I'm wary about very light triggers myself. I would certainly will not have a hair trigger put any that gun I own. Even Glocks make me uncomfortable as I was used to shooting DA Revolvers in DA mode. Even the S&W Model 22A that I used to owned didn't have too light trigger and I comfortable with that.
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,681
136
Full auto is fun for five seconds, after that it's an expensive joke. The only reason most people want it is that they can't have it.

Check the reply immediately below your own. One of the most lethal combat infantry weapons ever developed is also a great toy, especially with a bump stock! Feel the Freedumb!
 

whm1974

Diamond Member
Jul 24, 2016
9,460
1,570
96
Check the reply immediately below your own. One of the most lethal combat infantry weapons ever developed is also a great toy, especially with a bump stock! Feel the Freedumb!
From some reading about bump stocks, the Rate Of Fire although increased is much lower then then real Full-Auto. Low enough to have a great deal of control.