LA crowds protest an officer's actions, I disagree

[Patranus]

You charge at police with a knife, you get shot.
Pretty simple.

He deserved to be shot if all is as described.

But isn't this why they invented tasers? At least in theory... whether they are useful for it or not is another topic entirely.

You have to remember, the "progressives" want to take the Tazer off the cops tool belt.

 

[Zebo]

Sounds like a target rich environment to round up illegals - get on it O.

 

[MotF Bane]

The thing is that the police's conduct in other areas, such as pursuing lawsuits against people who videotape police behaving badly, and using force unnecessary, has lessened the public's trust in them. Ordinarily, the police officer would be praised for making the right decision, difficult though it probably was. Now though, his profession is in disrepute after so many stories about corruption and cronyism in the force. Doesnt make the protest right, but it means the police need to clean up their act otherwise the public will never trust or respect them.

This is a definite factor. But also, LA scum are just looking for an excuse to riot. :awe:

 

[HumblePie]

Lol? If I recall correctly some police department issue handguns use heavier triggers, something like 7-8lb vs the normal 5ish. I have a 3.5lb trigger in my Glock and it doesn't just "pop off" two rounds when you pull the trigger once. That would be a defective trigger and actual fall under the NFA as an automatic.

Yah, but some people screw with their triggers. Some do so for shooting tournaments. Ever been to one?

Even then, I've seen heavier triggers fire twice to one squeeze. There was an incident I remember about 8 years ago at a range where someone standing behind a berm was shot in the head because of the double shot. First round went on target, but the recoil kicked up the gun and a second shot came out and went over the berm. Struck someone in the parking lot in the head and killed them. The gun was also stock and it just happened. Fluke, but happens.

 

[waggy]

Yah, but some people screw with their triggers. Some do so for shooting tournaments. Ever been to one?

Even then, I've seen heavier triggers fire twice to one squeeze. There was an incident I remember about 8 years ago at a range where someone standing behind a berm was shot in the head because of the double shot. First round went on target, but the recoil kicked up the gun and a second shot came out and went over the berm. Struck someone in the parking lot in the head and killed them. The gun was also stock and it just happened. Fluke, but happens.

yeah i remember reading about that.

 

[Daedalus685]

You charge at police with a knife, you get shot.
Pretty simple.



You have to remember, the "progressives" want to take the Tazer off the cops tool belt.

Well... I am one of these dirty liberals that you seem to fear/hate...

But a Tazer was supposed to replace guns in situations like this, at least in Canada. I don't often here that this is the case though as the only mention of a Tazer is to replace more mundane things in an unarmed conflict.

I want police to have tazers... but also to be trained (this is the missing piece it seems) to use them as a replacement for a gun in some situations (they are still lethal just orders of magnitude less so)... not a tool to be lazy.

 

[Fern]

He deserved to be shot if all is as described.

But isn't this why they invented tasers? At least in theory... whether they are useful for it or not is another topic entirely.

On the news reports I heard, it was said the police officers were bicycle cops. They don't carry tasers, batons etc, just a handgun, presumably because of the extra weight/bulk.

Fern

 

[alphatarget1]

First thing that came to mind was... why wasn't this guy tazed? Maybe the cop wasn't armed with a taser.

If anything this sounds pretty reasonable to me. It wasn't like a cop shot an unarmed guy laying on the floor like what happened in Fruitvale BART station.

 

[Daedalus685]

On the news reports I heard, it was said the police officers were bicycle cops. They don't carry tasers, batons etc, just a handgun, presumably because of the extra weight/bulk.

Fern

Ah I see. It is the opposite in many cities in Canada. Cycling officers often are sans firearm.

 

[xj0hnx]

Yah, but some people screw with their triggers. Some do so for shooting tournaments. Ever been to one?

Several, and it's illegal to modify a trigger, sear, locking block, trigger bar/spring to fire more than a single round with a single pull of the trigger unless you are a class II SOT, and selling to the military, or police department. If you modify a trigger group and the weapon goes cyclic it becomes a machine gun by definition, and is illegal (without the proper paper work), I don't see a weapon being police issue that has the kind of use it takes to "just happen", and depending on which firearm it was even less.

Anecdotal stories aside, the more likely scenario is that he fired a double tap.

 

[Daedalus685]

First thing that came to mine was... why wasn't this guy tazed? Maybe the cop wasn't armed with a taser.

If anything this sounds pretty reasonable to me. It wasn't like a cop shot an unarmed guy laying on the floor like what happened in Fruitvale BART station.

Aye, he deserved the level of force applied... but I was wondering the same thing as this level of force (immediate threat, no ranged weapon) is exactly where a tazer was supposed to fit in order to replace a gun.

 

[HumblePie]

Several, and it's illegal to modify a trigger, sear, locking block, trigger bar/spring to fire more than a single round with a single pull of the trigger unless you are a class II SOT, and selling to the military, or police department. If you modify a trigger group and the weapon goes cyclic it becomes a machine gun by definition, and is illegal, I don't see a weapon being police issue that has the kind of use it takes to "just happen", and depending on which firearm it was even less.

Anecdotal stories aside, the more likely scenario is that he fired a double tap.

True, and that is what I originally said. I also stated that if he didn't there is a chance that there is another reason for the double shot. Either way, it's justified. But also, modifying a trigger for a bounce shot is not making it into a machine gun. Nor is it illegal except in some places.

 

[xj0hnx]

But also, modifying a trigger for a bounce shot is not making it into a machine gun. Nor is it illegal except in some places.

"Bounce shot", are you referring to bump firing? There's no modfications needed for bump firing, and yes, modifying a trigger group to fire more than one round per pull of the trigger is illegal unless you are a Class II Special Occupational Taxpayer and making firearms for law enforcement, or military.

 

[HumblePie]

"Bounce shot", are you referring to bump firing? There's no modfications needed for bump firing, and yes, modifying a trigger group to fire more than one round per pull of the trigger is illegal unless you are a Class II Special Occupational Taxpayer and making firearms for law enforcement, or military.

No, I'm referring to this. The ATF has ruled that the pulling of a trigger is one action, and the releasing of a trigger is another, therefore that a trigger that fires once upon the pressing of the trigger, and once upon the release, is NOT a machine gun.

You can legally modify a weapon to shoot two rounds per single trigger pull without it being designated as a machine gun.

I've heard it being referred to as a speed trigger, rebound trigger, bump trigger, or bounce trigger.

 

[xj0hnx]

No, I'm referring to this. The ATF has ruled that the pulling of a trigger is one action, and the releasing of a trigger is another, therefore that a trigger that fires once upon the pressing of the trigger, and once upon the release, is NOT a machine gun.

You can legally modify a weapon to shoot two rounds per single trigger pull without it being designated as a machine gun.

No, you can't, at least according to the NFA that I've read a few times when I made my SBR.

Do you know how a trigger works? Can you show me an example of this mechanism? And a link to the ruling where the BATFE has said that it's ok?

I've heard it being referred to as a speed trigger, rebound trigger, bump trigger, or bounce trigger.

Are you maybe talking about paint ball guns?

Machine guns - this includes any firearm which can fire more than 1 cartridge per trigger pull. Both continuous fully-automatic fire and "burst fire" (i.e., firearms with a 3-round burst feature) are considered machine gun features.

 

[HumblePie]

bleh,

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20090910174127AAr2UeP

here is someone else asking about a gun they were trying to buy that had BATF approval and didn't realize it was legal. And no, it's not a paintball gun.

and here's a thread talking about it.

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=169646

where people were porting over reactive triggers from paintball guns to regular guns. Technically the trigger action is still one shot per action, but it is basically more than that. It is also legal. I'm not saying the officer had his gun modified this way to fire two shots at all. The only reason I'm even bring this up is because you decided to argue that it wasn't legal to modify the trigger action and it is. You are right you can't modify the trigger action to be full auto or a "machine gun" and I never said you could. I said you could modify it to fire two shots though legally and you can.

There's also a review of the GAT trigger where a guy was saying he could modify his AR to should 1200 rounds a minute if he wanted to. The rate of fire is not what determines semi from full auto.

 

[xj0hnx]

bleh,

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20090910174127AAr2UeP

here is someone else asking about a gun they were trying to buy that had BATF approval and didn't realize it was legal. And no, it's not a paintball gun.

Random people from Yahoo Answers isn't quite what I was looking for. The ad on Gunbroker is gone now, so can't really see what they were talking about. But you don't get a letter, the firearm is put on a Form 1 (manufacture) with a tax stamp on it,and the transfer is on a Form 4.

 

[HumblePie]

Random people from Yahoo Answers isn't quite what I was looking for. The ad on Gunbroker is gone now, so can't really see what they were talking about. But you don't get a letter, the firearm is put on a Form 1 (manufacture) with a tax stamp on it,and the transfer is on a Form 4.

Read the edit I did to my post.

 

[xj0hnx]

and here's a thread talking about it.

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=169646

where people were porting over reactive triggers from paintball guns to regular guns. Technically the trigger action is still one shot per action, but it is basically more than that. It is also legal. I'm not saying the officer had his gun modified this way to fire two shots at all. The only reason I'm even bring this up is because you decided to argue that it wasn't legal to modify the trigger action and it is. You are right you can't modify the trigger action to be full auto or a "machine gun" and I never said you could. I said you could modify it to fire two shots though legally and you can.

I think you need to re-read the thread, and what they are talking about. It IS illegal to modify a trigger to fire more than one cartridge per trigger pull. The pneumatic device they are talking about porting over from paintball to real firearms doesn't do that, it simply use gas pressure to actuate the trigger repeatedly. The OP in the article is asking about an external device that pulls the trigger rapidly, things like the Hellfire.

 

[HumblePie]

I think you need to re-read the thread, and what they are talking about. It IS illegal to modify a trigger to fire more than one cartridge per trigger pull. The pneumatic device they are talking about porting over from paintball to real firearms doesn't do that, it simply use gas pressure to actuate the trigger repeatedly. The OP in the article is asking about an external device that pulls the trigger rapidly, things like the Hellfire.

Here, found it..

http://www.atf.gov/publications/download/p/atf-p-5320-8/atf-p-5320-8.pdf

and in that on page 21.

2.1.6 Machine guns.

It specifically states per single function of the trigger.

Pull and release are two separate functions of the trigger. You can modify a gun trigger to fire a shot with a pull, and a release of the trigger. It is legal.

This is why there is release triggers and pull triggers that fire on the release or pull. You can modify a gun to fire for both though since each is a separate function of the trigger movement and actuation.

Good day.

 

[xj0hnx]

Here, found it..

http://www.atf.gov/publications/download/p/atf-p-5320-8/atf-p-5320-8.pdf

and in that on page 21.

2.1.6 Machine guns.

It specifically states per single function of the trigger.

Pull and release are two separate functions of the trigger. You can modify a gun trigger to fire a shot with a pull, and a release of the trigger. It is legal.

This is why there is release triggers and pull triggers that fire on the release or pull. You can modify a gun to fire for both though since each is a separate function of the trigger movement and actuation.

Good day.

You need to re-read that section.

“designed to shoot automatically more than one shot without manual reloading by a single function
of the trigger”

Reloading is the release you are talking about, we call it trigger reset.

2.1.6 Machinegun. Firearms within the definition of machinegun include weapons that shoot, are
designed to shoot, or can be readily restored to shoot, automatically more than one shot without manual
reloading by a single function of the trigger.

Included within the definition of machinegun is any part designed and intended solely and exclusively,
or combination of parts designed and intended, for use in converting a weapon into a machinegun. This
portion of the machinegun definition addresses what are commonly referred to as conversion kits. The
“any part designed and intended solely and exclusively” language refers to a part that was produced for
no other reason than to convert a weapon into a machinegun. Illustrated below are examples of such
parts.

I'd still like you to explain how a trigger group is going to fire another round during reset, and if possible show me an example of such a firearm.

 

[HumblePie]

You need to re-read that section.

“designed to shoot automatically more than one shot without manual reloading by a single function
of the trigger”

Reloading is the release you are talking about, we call it trigger reset.

2.1.6 Machinegun. Firearms within the definition of machinegun include weapons that shoot, are
designed to shoot, or can be readily restored to shoot, automatically more than one shot without manual
reloading by a single function of the trigger.

Included within the definition of machinegun is any part designed and intended solely and exclusively,
or combination of parts designed and intended, for use in converting a weapon into a machinegun. This
portion of the machinegun definition addresses what are commonly referred to as conversion kits. The
“any part designed and intended solely and exclusively” language refers to a part that was produced for
no other reason than to convert a weapon into a machinegun. Illustrated below are examples of such
parts.

I'd still like you to explain how a trigger group is going to fire another round during reset, and if possible show me an example of such a firearm.

I did read it. That's why it's defined as a single trigger function, not a trigger pull only. Pulling a trigger is one function, and releasing the trigger is another function. Both are separate actions. A gun can be modified to fire a shot on each of these functions legally.

Okay, now that I proved you wrong, you want me to spend more time looking up how people have achieved this? Damn man, do your own google searching. It has been done, but not often. It is a pain in the ass trying to find people that modify this shit to real guns because 99% of the results from google are paintball crap. I don't want to wade through that like I waded through it before just to find the answer to prove you wrong on being able to fire two shots legally with a trigger pull and release. Do it your damn self.

Here's a thread about it though.

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=467402

 

[HumblePie]

Hey xj0hnx, not even an "Ooops, my mistake?"

 

[DucatiMonster696]

Well... I am one of these dirty liberals that you seem to fear/hate...

But a Tazer was supposed to replace guns in situations like this, at least in Canada. I don't often here that this is the case though as the only mention of a Tazer is to replace more mundane things in an unarmed conflict.

I want police to have tazers... but also to be trained (this is the missing piece it seems) to use them as a replacement for a gun in some situations (they are still lethal just orders of magnitude less so)... not a tool to be lazy.

Tazers are also preferable to clubbing someone down to the ground or having a officer engage in pyhsical combat against a violent suspect.

 

[spidey07]

Hey xj0hnx, not even an "Ooops, my mistake?"

I still don't quite buy it. There's that story of a guy with an AR15 that had a true double tap at the range and got a nasty federal felony and many years for it even though it was truly a malfunction. I personally wouldn't risk it at all, I value my right to own firearms.