NRA tosses us under a bus

[cajun_64]

... You wouldn't feel this way if you spent more time at the Capital. We had a lot of success the past few years. Ever session we gain, hold, or lose ground. She. We lose ground we do our best to lose as little as possible... while the sidelines/peanut gallery only takes the time to criticize when things aren't going perfectly.

 

[thperez1972]

That's some pretty scary language, or lack thereof. A lot left up interpretation.

I agree...but we can just add buffer springs to the list of NFA items and it'll be all good.

 

[Sulzer]

I agree...but we can just add buffer springs to the list of NFA items and it'll be all good.

Well then, thank God for hydraulic AR buffers, no spring.

 

[DaSouthernYankee]

My opinion is the bump stock and a binary trigger are not the same thing. From Slide Fire's How It Works page, "Maintaining a light and consistent forward pressure will continue the firing sequence." It can be argued you take one deliberate action and "maintain" that one action in order to have multiple rounds leave the chamber. With a binary trigger, the pulling and the releasing of the trigger are distinct actions, each resulting in one round leaving the chamber. With rapid semi-auto fire, each round requires its own distinct action.

I believe the language of the law is one round per action of the trigger specifically. Since the trigger is still being pulled it is good to go and that is why it was approved. Multiple times if I remember right.


Sent from an unidentified bayou mobile device

 

[thperez1972]

I believe the language of the law is one round per action of the trigger specifically. Since the trigger is still being pulled it is good to go and that is why it was approved. Multiple times if I remember right.

You are right. In a letter from the ATF (see below), the binary trigger is legal because it allows "only a single shot to be fired with each movement of the trigger." The ATF does not seem to mention the deliberate action of the shooter.

The ATF defines a machinegun, in part, as "any weapon which shoots, is 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." I believe the Akins Accelerator was determined to be illegal due to the spring that returned the parts to their original location and causing the trigger to be moved to the rear, firing another shot without a manual reloading. I would guess the removal of the spring and using the forward force of the shooter was enough to be seen as manual reloading. I would guess it is in this area a redefining could affect the bump stock.

Personally, the problem I have with the bump stock is the shooter fires multiple rounds while keeping reward pressure on the trigger. From the ATF: "The term 'Rifle' means a weapon designed or redesigned, made or remade, and intended to be fired from the shoulder and designed or redesigned and made or remade to use the energy of the explosive in a fixed metallic cartridge to fire only a single projectile through a rifled bore for each single pull of the trigger." The shooter is pulling the trigger once and keeping pressure to fire multiple rounds. That is consistent with an automatic rather than a semi-automatic. I believe that is a loophole in the law. If you want to argue for making automatic rifles legal, I'm for it. I would love to put a 3 round burst on some of my rifles. But as it stands, I don't know if I can agree with viewing the Slide Fire as semi-automatic fire.

 

[MyTFAL]

I couldnt give two shits if ATF bans bump stocks, I would gladly trade them for the hearing protection act. I dont need a bump stock to bumpfire.

 

[wcweir3]

I think y'all may be making some assumptions, we'll see how it plays out. However, this is how I read that statement:



The NRA knows that bump stocks do not meet the definition of a machine gun because they do not fire more than one round per trigger pull. The ATF has already reviewed the items and made a decision they are legal. Without changing the definition of a machine gun, bump stocks could not qualify. The NRA knows this and knows what the result of the "immediate review" should be.



Again, in order for a semi-automatic rifle to function like a fully-automatic rifle the device would need to make it possible to fire more than one round by a single function of the trigger. A bump stock or binary trigger does not do that and therefore would not be what the NRA considers a device needing additional regulation. So, while they are backing the ban on new production machine guns which is a whole other conversation, they are not saying that fast semi-auto fire should be illegal. This is the NRA making a show to the public, this is not them stating they back a ban on bump stocks.

This is also my take on this and I also think that the bump stock in a waste of money.
My 2
Wingate

 

[Sulzer]

The shooter is pulling the trigger once and keeping pressure to fire multiple rounds. That is consistent with an automatic rather than a semi-automatic. I believe that is a loophole in the law.

With a bump stock, or bumpfiring in general, the shooter is pulling the trigger every time. I you were to hold down the trigger on an AR, shoot, and keep the trigger depressed, the disconnector will catch the hammer and keep it from firing another round. It is not until you release the trigger and it resets that you are able to fire again. The bump stock just helps you accomplish this "pull, release, pull" motion faster. This is even present in a select fire version of the rifle where the auto sear catches the hammer and the bolt it what releases it once it has returned to battery to fall and fire another round. This keeps the hammer from out running the bolt. The difference between an auto sear and bump firing is that the former allows the trigger to only be pulled once and the gun fires itself until you release the trigger, the latter you still have to pull the trigger everytime. Again, if the bump stock had a post that actuated the trigger instead of your finger doing the pulling, you could make your argument that the "pull forward" is a single motion "pull of the trigger". In that scenario the post on the stock would be serving a similar function as the bolt releasing the hammer in a select fire rifle. But as it's designed, it just helps you pull the trigger, that resets every time, really fast.

 

[thperez1972]

With a bump stock, or bumpfiring in general, the shooter is pulling the trigger every time. I you were to hold down the trigger on an AR, shoot, and keep the trigger depressed, the disconnector will catch the hammer and keep it from firing another round. It is not until you release the trigger and it resets that you are able to fire again. The bump stock just helps you accomplish this "pull, release, pull" motion faster. This is even present in a select fire version of the rifle where the auto sear catches the hammer and the bolt it what releases it once it has returned to battery to fall and fire another round. This keeps the hammer from out running the bolt. The difference between an auto sear and bump firing is that the former allows the trigger to only be pulled once and the gun fires itself until you release the trigger, the latter you still have to pull the trigger everytime. Again, if the bump stock had a post that actuated the trigger instead of your finger doing the pulling, you could make your argument that the "pull forward" is a single motion "pull of the trigger". In that scenario the post on the stock would be serving a similar function as the bolt releasing the hammer in a select fire rifle. But as it's designed, it just helps you pull the trigger, that resets every time, really fast.

In order for the bump fire to work as advertised, the shooted must pull and keep pressure with his trigger finger. He is not pulling the trigger multiple times. He is pulling once. The design of the stock is pushing the trigger onto a finger that is being maintained in the pulled position. The trigger is cycling once for every bullet that is fired but to say the shooter is pulling the trigger every time is not being honest. From the same how to page as mentioned above: "Place your trigger finger across the trigger, and seat the tip firmly on the rest." The rest is connected directly to the buttstock that is held firmly into your shoulder. So there is no movement of the butstock, rest, or finger. There's no pulling of the trigger in the literal sense. The trigger is pushed into the finger. How do I know this? From the directions. "Use your support hand to apply a light forward pressure to the rifle. This will force the trigger into your finger causing a round to be fired." There is no pull, release, pull from the shooter. Why do I say this? I read the directions. "Maintaining a light and consistent forward pressure will continue the firing sequence." Going from pull to release is a change. The directions instruct the shooter to push the trigger into the shooter's finger with unchanging pressure.

Again, I think full auto should be much less regulated if it's even regulated at all. But as the laws stand right now, the Slide Fire, in my opinion, creates an automatic weapon or close enough that a reasonable person would see it as such.

 

[mxracer72]

The legislation they've already set in motion to try and pass says "anything that changes the rate of fire" of the rifle... so it may include any and all of the triggers, cranks, stocks, etc. that assist.

Good point. I guess that means no lightening of internal components like BCGs. So now the AR-15 design (as opposed to the M16 design) would also be illegal? Lol. What a joke, but one we'll have to contend with nonetheless.

 

[cyclone1970]

The NRA would much rather loose the sidefires in an ATF ruling than have a general gun debate and have new gun laws in Congress. This way we only loose slide fires. An emotional Congress with elections coming up after a disaster is unpredictable, and the NRA will have to spend a lot of money to influence it.

I was a college student when the 1968 Gun Control Act was signed. I had been a shooter since I my dad gave me a BB gun when I was 7 years old and this was difficult to experience. I firmly believe the NRA's political expertise is very valuable and strongly support them. Be very concerned about what emotional politicians will try to do! We need people in DC who know how to handle them.

If you want a sense of that time after President Kennedy was killed, here are some of LBJ's comments that he made at the signing. "Congress adopted most of our recommendations. But this bill--as big as this bill is--still falls short, because we just could not get the Congress to carry out the requests we made of them. I asked for the national registration of all guns and the licensing of those who carry those guns. For the fact of life is that there are over 160 million guns in this country--more firearms than families. If guns are to be kept out of the hands of the criminal, out of the hands of the insane, and out of the hands of the irresponsible, then we just must have licensing. If the criminal with a gun is to be tracked down quickly, then we must have registration in this country."

Unfortunately none of this is new

 

[Sulzer]

You are literally pulling the trigger everytime. That's all that matters. That's why bump stocks were approved. We'll just have to agree to disagree and wait to see how it plays out. I hate being in a position where I have to defend bump stocks because I have always thought they belong in the same class as grip pods.

 

[thperez1972]

You are literally pulling the trigger everytime. That's all that matters. That's why bump stocks were approved. We'll just have to agree to disagree and wait to see how it plays out. I hate being in a position where I have to defend bump stocks because I have always thought they belong in the same class as grip pods.

Have you seen the "how it works" page? According to the company, you aren't supposed to pull the trigger. You hold your finger still and push the trigger into your finger. And you don't have to defend the stocks, not from me at least. I'm not attacking them. I think they should be legal. I just can't view its use in accordance with the company's directions as semi-automatic firing. Perhaps you're using it according to a different set of directions. I'll be happy to look at those.

 

[Sulzer]

I am familiar with how they work, but pushing your finger into the trigger is how you pull a trigger. It doesnt mattetrhow its accomplished, one round per trigger pull = not a machine gun. If it were a machine gun it would not have made it past the ATF tech branch as not a machine gun. They've reviewed this device multiple times against the definition on the books and decided it is not a machine gun.

 

[#1bambam]

I couldnt give two shits if ATF bans bump stocks, I would gladly trade them for the hearing protection act. I dont need a bump stock to bumpfire.

Truth!

 

[thperez1972]

I am familiar with how they work, but pushing your finger into the trigger is how you pull a trigger. It doesnt mattetrhow its accomplished, one round per trigger pull = not a machine gun. If it were a machine gun it would not have made it past the ATF tech branch as not a machine gun. They've reviewed this device multiple times against the definition on the books and decided it is not a machine gun.

The instructions tell you to "place your trigger finger across the trigger, and seat the tip firmly on the rest." At that point all movement is done with your off hand. You're not pushing your finger into the trigger. You're pushing....nevermind. It's obvious you know more than the company that makes the product. I'll write them an email and ask them to get in touch with you and fix their directions.

 

[Sulzer]

No, I know nothing about the company. I just know the ATF tech branch OK'ed the product and never called it a machine gun. I don't know of another authority better qualified to make that claim. So you can rationalize it whatever way you want, but the fact is the people who decide what is and isn't a machine gun did not agree with your theory in their previous reviews.

 

[thperez1972]

No, I know nothing about the company. I just know the ATF tech branch OK'ed the product and never called it a machine gun. I don't know of another authority better qualified to make that claim. So you can rationalize it whatever way you want, but the fact is the people who decide what is and isn't a machine gun did not agree with your theory in their previous reviews.

I've acknowledged they are legal. I've explained why they are legal. Heck, I even posted the letter from the ATF showing where and why they don't classify it a making a machine gun and supported their legality even if they were determined to convert a weapon to a machine gun. I then guessed where, if anywhere, I believed the ATF (or someone else) will work to make them more regulated. And I've explained why by using a previous ATF ruling where they ruled a very similar product made a weapon a machine gun. I then went on to explain why I would agree with classifying the thing as converting a weapon to auto. You don't agree with my opinion and that is fine. And you're welcome to not justify why you disagree if you'd rather not provide the justification. We're not entitled to anything from you. Posting here is your choice. But when you post information that shows my opinion to be wrong and that information contradicts the information presented by the company you are supporting, you must understand I'm not going to let it just slide by.

 

[Nathan Hale]

x

 

[Wolfgang1952]

The NRA still has to many old farts that think anything that is not a bolt action or leaver action can’t be used for hunting.