NRA opposes 'bump fire stocks' bills in Congress
 

LOL - What bullshit.

The NRA came out in support of laws against "bump fire stocks" but now that it might just happened they suddenly back tracked. Heaven forbid should they allow a gun law to be passed.

NRA opposes 'bump fire stocks' bills in Congress

When I hunt deer I want to be able to dump a 30 round clip into bambi real fast and make sure that dangerous animal is dead ... :upsidedow

Gee why doesn't Trump just sign an EO over it...

That's just brilliant.

They don't ban just bump fire stocks.

The ban would be on any modification that increases the factory rate of fire.

Thats good right ?

Assault rifles are made to kill people.

For any reasonable home defense scenario; Two 10 round magazines with semi automatic fire is adequate. If you cannot kill 3 men with 20 rounds you are not qualified to use that weapon.

You going to war with an army or what?

You never know, which is why we have the right to guns. Keeps the gov in check.

Assault rifles are highly regulated in the US and will usually cost $10,000+.

U can score an AR 15 pretty cheap. Not tech an assault rifle but really the same difference.

You don't need a bump stock for a fully automatic military type assault rife -- so what is your point?

Imitation toy solider rifles -- is that better? LMAO

Couple of things, first do you really think that you can pass a law to stop crazy ?? Cause I bet that a crazy millionaire would not have any issues finding someone to modify the guns he had, had he not been able to buy a $40 bump stock :2 cents: And if you really think so, then what about a rubber band, cause I've seen youtube videos where they can do the same thing with a thick rubber band as the bump stock. You can't legislate away crazy people so stop trying !!!

Secondly, if your really concerned about the general population of where ever it is that you live, and you think passing gun laws will make you safer. Then you should also pass laws against "Big Mac's" "Whoppers" and "Coke" cause they kill like 83 times more people each year than guns, so let's focus on all the things that kill people and stop putting our heads in the sand every time some nut job falls off the wagon :Oh crap

look if everybody at that concert had a rocket launcher things would have been different...the USA should pass a law to classify lepoard tanks as hunting ATV-s...look how stylish it is in desert camo:

https://i1.wp.com/fighting-vehicles....6-HEL-Tank.jpg

also...this home rocket launcher protection system is a must have:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...T813_army2.JPG

and how stylish would this look for open carry:

https://i.ytimg.com/vi/fiDlIe0VzJU/maxresdefault.jpg


fucking awesome if you ask me...

Truly pathetic arguments.

No, its people thinking that they can legislate stupidity out of the population that is pathetic.

You people only scream at the wind when some nut job does something stupid, you could care less that hundreds of thousands of people die each year from heart attacks, strokes and nutrition related causes. But your making it safer to live on the earth by stopping people from buying bump stocks, again something that a 10 cent rubber band will do also.

I wasn't making arguments for or against getting rid of "bump stocks" I was simply pointing out that you can't fix stupid :1orglaugh

:thumbsup

When your government listens to what the NRA wants to this extent. you know the people have no power.

so the left wing can go against the government as soon it is right wing and vise versa ?

that´s a great idea and a very good reason to own a tank or maybe a baby-nuke-missile.

i am glad that americans feel safe in a country where every idiot can buy a gun.

welcome to the self destruction war!

Oddly enough accidental death in the USA has been dropping for a hundred years. So, yeah, you can fix stupid.

Paddock bought an arsenal legally over a very short period and no one detected it. People do not buy these type of weapons in these quantities because they need them for sporting or home defense.

So the way that we control gun sales is badly broken.

We are debating the wrong thing here.

Guns are not in our constitution for sporting or home defense. They are there to protect the people if the Untied States of America from the government becoming to powerful.

If you dont like the constitution then change it because Im sure our forefathers forgot to put in there a mass tragedy clause lol

Big talk -- if you really think you can defeat the US Military with your toy soldier guns you really are nuts.

Remember, we watched you get arrested on youtube it's not like you won't be the first to be rounded up. They have your address if you legally bought your guns and if you have moved since the address is probably in some database if you have a bank account or drivers license -- senseless talk.

The constitution was written before armoured vehicles and drones and autonomous fighting vehicles...


What's an ar15 gonna do against a tank? Or drone?

Them Boston dynamics robots are one modification away from becoming terminators...

Thats an even more pathetic excuse than the last one.

The constitution when written also allowed you to own people as well as guns. Look where that ended up.

Fucking idiots that act as if it was written down by God and you must follow it or be condemmed to eternal damnation.

Truly pathetic. Ya?ll just like owning guns and shooting stuff.

:1orglaugh

bump stocks aren't needed

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/las-veg...ise-red-flags/

The ATF didn't know as it turns out, much to my surprise (or they are lying), the gun registration forms are just to be retained by the licensed firearms dealer.

As this report says: I am wrong. The registrations just sit and gather dust.

An AR 15 is an assault rifle. Period. It's the same exact rifle I trained with at Paris Island.

Don't tell me the rate of fire makes a difference. In the Marines they taught us to fire one round at a time.

If you take the Z rated tires off of a Ferrari, it's still a Ferrari.

I think we need a firearms census of sort and the compilation of a federal firearms registration database.

Legit owners of firearms have no reason to object. They own those firearms legally and for legal purpose.

With today data storage and data mining software you could then red flag and verify every owner of more than $X firearms making sure they are for lawful purpose. If you collect hunting firearms then there is no problem. If you have a rack of 20 assault type weapons without a good reason and a body armor suit in the closet -- then there is probably some issue.

lol keep telling yourself that. You aren't keeping jack shit in check! They are keeping you in check by letting you think your collection of weapons will keep you safe. Meanwhile they are slowly taking rights away from the citizens, but it's all good as long as they don't mess with the 2nd amendment


You're delusional to think you can stop them if things go bat shit crazy. If they want you all they have to do is send a drone or bunker busting bomb to get you

They tried this in Canada with long guns and it went from costing a few hundred million to 2 billion and was then completely scrapped.

Then start if from today -- forget the archive.
5 years from now it will work
However, Google scanned how many books and indexed them? at what cost?
I think it is technologically feasible -- in what year did Canada try and how?

^^^ This

You really don't know much of anything about anything and should just keep your stupid fucking, racist-ass sewer hole shut.

^^^ This

He's trying to pretend he's a gun expert.

eat lead ........:helpme :upsidedow

Ten "assault rifles" per crate. $4,000.

https://www.classicfirearms.com/yugo-sks-for-sale

Those accept 30 round mags and fire the same round as the AK47.

So you think people should be prohibited from buying that crate?

What I said was a fact.

The assault rifle version of the AR-15 is going to cost you $20,000 to $25,000. Perhaps more.

Examples:
http://www.gunbroker.com/item/703274699
http://www.gunbroker.com/item/705120190
http://www.gunbroker.com/item/705119979

The US military is prohibited by the constitution from conducting operations within the USA. But let's just assume the country fell to pieces. Do you really think members of the military are going to fight against their own kind?

A more logical scenario for this would be the federal government dissolving and the threat coming from local entities who don't have F-22 planes to do bombing runs on neighborhoods.

THINK before you speak.

This is something I do not understand in any way, shape, or form.

The United States military is prohibited from conducting operations in the USA. Yet how many Marines do we have working disaster relief in Puerto Rico right now? Are they not using military ships and planes in support of relief efforts in Puerto Rico? When Japan attacked Hawaii in 1941, did the United States stationed there not fire back? Did they say "We are not allowed to conduction operations in the USA?" and just do nothing? (Keep in mind Hawaii wasn't a US state then.)

Have you applied for your American citizenship yet? Or have you decided to immigrate to Russia?

Think about this....the Republican element of our government is the paid bitch of a right wing fringe group. They can't take a shit without the NRA's permission. The NRA should be raided, the organization dismantled and the headquarters brought to the ground with TNT. They're a fucking terrorist group.

Well I can not think of any good reason for people not being able to buy a cheap crate of AK-47...nothing wrong with that at all LOL

Actually, we can own military vehicles if we want, including tanks. They just can't have functioning guns.

Although I haven't seen modern tanks out there but there are lots of ww2 and 70s/80's era tanks in private collections.

They even let us have those in Canada. Ours are limited to 5 rounds though. The Yugo ones are hard to find here but the Russian and Chinese ones can be bought for less than $250 Canadian each at Canadian Tire lol.

They do not want a law. A law is much harder to change or amend it to be powerless.

They want it done through executive order. They might be able to do that but the first challenge to it will dismiss it in a federal or supreme court. The same stuff they were accusing Obama of... legislating from the executive branch.
Much the same way they want to legislate though the supreme court.
But the ATF does not have the power to 'create' regulation. Just enforce what congress passes. So congress will have to authorize them to create rules. Which they are not going to do because the next POTUS could quickly end it all together and create more stringent rules without congressional approval.

Some segments of the executive branch (presidents enforcement dept folks) have been given the authority to create regulation. Like the Food and Drug Admin. & the EPA. And only with some things for the FAA & FCC. Everyone who has authority has a very defined limited scope to work within.

So that is why you see congress always tries to keep a tough budget battle... so they can limit the funding to those agency's that have the authority to create regulation.
And in effect be powerless to enforce any of it from the lack of funds.


So if they create no law...
Those congressmen don't have to answer to their constituents next election.
And the measure can be softened at will by executive order when nobody is watching or cares.

And we have our constitution turned upside down. Nobody wants to do the job they ran for and was elected to do.

The act stated: "Whoever, except in cases and under circumstances expressly authorized by the Constitution or Act of Congress, willfully uses any part of the Army or the Air Force as a posse comitatus or otherwise to execute the laws shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both."

Soldiers defending the nation are not executing the civil laws neither are soldiers rendering aid to civilians.

Soldiers acting as policemen (enforcing civil laws) is my understanding of the posse comitatus prohibited acts. There is an allowed use of soldiers to cure civil insurrection or riots.

Good stuff...
But, who gets to determine civil insurrection or riots by definition since it is not provided ?

I have never seen a crowd of people leveled with a WHOPPER in a few minutes that volunteered for the experience unaware of the dangers.

"These bills are intentionally overreaching and would ban commonly owned firearm accessories."

I am wondering how you can say that because they have not allowed one to come to the floor for a discussion, Let alone a vote. They fear that they will pass so they use house procedure rules to keep them from coming to the floor in the first place.