Sorry for the long reply, but I have a valid point, so bare with me, no matter how much you think you may disagree with me, I assure you, you'll agree in the end.

In other words, Sessions is going to do the job, unlike his Marxist predecessors?
I hate conspiracies, I really do, but when sooo many officials were warned about this freak and did absolutely nothing?
But it's what they did do that bothers me more and creates the air of conspiracy. They seemed to go to great lengths to avoid interfering with the path this kid was on.

As to Bump Stocks, I have no issue with doing away with a worthless novelty, something akin to a louder muffler for your car, or cards in your spokes as a kid, solely for the sake of attention.
It, in no way, improves the performance of the machine, be it car or gun, in fact, a bump stock in the hands of the average shooter will waste 90% of the ammo fired.
Bare with me, I have an actual point here, and no, none of this is based on an emotional thought, I don't play that shit.

If you've never been in a firefight, you can't possibly begin to understand just how important every round is.
Whether you have 6, 9 or 99, you are in a moment of complete concentration, all distracting thoughts are gone, you are focusing on staying alive first and foremost, secondly, you are thinking about your surroundings, thirdly, and most importantly, once you've secured your location, you become myopic in nature.

The most important issue left, is taking out the threat, and let me tell you, having bullets dancing willy-nilly all around your target, is the last thing you want.
Let me describe the moment, (let's say, 15 to 50 yards out) you're being fired upon, you have selected what you think is the best and safest position, you're pretty comfortable with the belief that your target/s are in one location in front of you, so the mind takes the eyes into a tunnel vision of sorts, (this is fight or flight, and you chose to fight) literally, like looking through a paper towel roll, with everything on the outside, a total blur.
Now think about that, you have a small area you're able to concentrate on, you want to kill your threat, the question is, do you want to intimidate and scare the crap out of him, shower the area with lead, possibly hitting innocents, or do you want to put an end to this crap and go home alive?

The last thing any of us wants is to live with the fact we maimed an innocent, or worse yet, killed someone.
Fact is, we all know, there is no case to be made for bump stocks. But with all that said?

MORE~~~~

https://conservativehardliner.com/sessions-concessions-bump-stocks-ban

The bump stock is goofy, for people with young minds who like to do pointless, noisy stuff.

No loss for anybody, and possibly a good PR move for the right to give up something tangible, that we don't care about anyway.

You really can't justify "my right to make my gun fire basically automatic".  If you try, you make it clear that you don't have any interest in real safety controls.  Which makes you NOT a sensible gun owner.

I also KNOW that left lives on incrementalism, but I'm willing to let this one go as not worthy of worrying about.  Not really an increment.

By the way, a big hat tip to whatfinger for headlining my article on their site.
It had the first placement at the top yesterday until more news pushed it down.
Check out https://conservativehardliner.com/sessions-concessions-bump-stocks-ban
There are a lot of comments you might find interesting in the Discuss section following the article.


Sessions Concessions, Bump Stocks Ban
Conservative Hardliner


http://www.whatfinger.com/

It has been illegal to possess a fully automatic firearm in this country for many decades.  Furthermore, it has been illegal to alter the mechanism of any semi automatic firearm making it function as a fully automatic.  (this can be done with alterations to the sear on some semi automatic rifles and handguns, although it is tricky and can result in the firearm not functioning at all or functioning in an unsafe manner).  Knuckleheads do attempt to convert semi autos to full automatics and such firearms become illegal under current law and the person who attempts the conversion is also committing a felony.

Having said all this, I have no problem with outlawing bump stocks.  It was the Obama Administration who determined that this alteration of the stock which affected the semi auto to operate in a manner similar to full auto, did not 'technically' violate existing law.  It was the same Obama Administration which had the FBI delete the records of 500,000 fugitives from the NCIC data base, because they have no way of knowing whether such wanted persons have crossed state lines.  Now these wanted criminals can buy guns. Brilliant!
https://conservativetribune.com/obama-admin-gun-background/?utm_source=push&utm_medium=westernjournalism&utm_content=2018-03-16&utm_campaign=manualpost

Where is the requirement for discipline Mr President? Receivers, Short Barrels, AR-15s, machine guns. Hand Guns, High Capacity Magazines, suppressors, scopes, bump stocks. All these are items that increase the efficiency of self-defense and home-defense. When such items are introduced into the civilian market, each of them present a set of disciplinary standard that require to be fulfilled/achieved by individuals who desire to use them. The fulfillment of said standards will increase the efficiency of an individual's ability to defend themselves and their home. It is said that Parkland Shooter used a bump stock which gave his AR-15 the firing rate of a machine gun. Sir, I know this is  a painful matter and I have no intention of being or sounding callous. The bump stock was not used for its intended purpose. In the hands of a disturbed individual, the bump stock was used to destroy life. The discipline required to handle such an item is not cheap. It has the capacity to give a semiautomatic rifle the lethal force of an automatic rifle. I believe that it not be viewed as a plague. However it should be viewed as an invaluable asset in self defense and home defense in case of multiple armed assailants. We should not fear this item, Mr. President. Instead we should learn how to responsibly use such a device by fulfilling its disciplinary obligations. This is an opportunity for discipline, Sir, I don't believe that anyone thought that such a device was important before it was used. This is evidence of lack of discipline. Curiosity concerning the device was stirred up only after the shooting had happened. And when the capacity of the device was noted, cries for its immediate ban erupted. It is a shameful thing that the first time we take such a device seriously was when it was in the wrong hands and being used for destructive ends. Calling for the immediate ban of such a device does not eradicate lack of discipline. Instead it hinders the opportunity to practice discipline. The practice of discipline is the only way to provide countermeasures that will repel any and all disturbed individuals whose intent is to cause harm. And there is no need to vilify the NRA. In the United States suicides account  for 2/3 of all gun deaths. Mass shootings account for 1% of all gun deaths in America. And 0% of all NRA members have participated in these mass killings. This should be an indication of the disciplinary requirements enforced by the NRA. An item that increases the efficiency of a firearm requires the fulfillment of a higher standard of discipline in its utilization. To fulfill such a standard while training in self defense and home defense gives life a higher value. Let the standards of discipline be set according to the value of life. Any item that increases the operational efficiency of a firearm requires a higher standard of discipline which when practiced, gives life a higher value. So the voices that claim you don't need this or that in self defense are lying.

Quote from: Bowman1 on March 31, 2018, 10:56:38 PM
Where is the requirement for discipline Mr President? Receivers, Short Barrels, AR-15s, machine guns. Hand Guns, High Capacity Magazines, suppressors, scopes, bump stocks. All these are items that increase the efficiency of self-defense and home-defense. When such items are introduced into the civilian market, each of them present a set of disciplinary standard that require to be fulfilled/achieved by individuals who desire to use them. The fulfillment of said standards will increase the efficiency of an individual's ability to defend themselves and their home. It is said that Parkland Shooter used a bump stock which gave his AR-15 the firing rate of a machine gun. Sir, I know this is  a painful matter and I have no intention of being or sounding callous. The bump stock was not used for its intended purpose. In the hands of a disturbed individual, the bump stock was used to destroy life. The discipline required to handle such an item is not cheap. It has the capacity to give a semiautomatic rifle the lethal force of an automatic rifle. I believe that it not be viewed as a plague. However it should be viewed as an invaluable asset in self defense and home defense in case of multiple armed assailants. We should not fear this item, Mr. President. Instead we should learn how to responsibly use such a device by fulfilling its disciplinary obligations. This is an opportunity for discipline, Sir, I don't believe that anyone thought that such a device was important before it was used. This is evidence of lack of discipline. Curiosity concerning the device was stirred up only after the shooting had happened. And when the capacity of the device was noted, cries for its immediate ban erupted. It is a shameful thing that the first time we take such a device seriously was when it was in the wrong hands and being used for destructive ends. Calling for the immediate ban of such a device does not eradicate lack of discipline. Instead it hinders the opportunity to practice discipline. The practice of discipline is the only way to provide countermeasures that will repel any and all disturbed individuals whose intent is to cause harm. And there is no need to vilify the NRA. In the United States suicides account  for 2/3 of all gun deaths. Mass shootings account for 1% of all gun deaths in America. And 0% of all NRA members have participated in these mass killings. This should be an indication of the disciplinary requirements enforced by the NRA. An item that increases the efficiency of a firearm requires the fulfillment of a higher standard of discipline in its utilization. To fulfill such a standard while training in self defense and home defense gives life a higher value. Let the standards of discipline be set according to the value of life. Any item that increases the operational efficiency of a firearm requires a higher standard of discipline which when practiced, gives life a higher value. So the voices that claim you don't need this or that in self defense are lying.

Welcome to the forum.

You make a very sane argument as to why we should not let "The camel's nose under the tent". Your use of the word "discipline" reflects the problem we currently have in our society. Our society is sorely lacking in discipline and this has been evolving for fifty or so years. I remember back in high school there were disagreements between folks. Many of those folks had guns or rifles in their car. However, these were never used as the involved folks would just have an old fashioned fist fight. That was a form of discipline. I wish I had an answer, but I think the causes and answers are too complicated for me to figure out.

Well stated. Sorry, I had to clean it up to read it, dyslexia and all.

QuoteWhere is the requirement for discipline Mr President? Receivers, Short Barrels, AR-15s, machine guns. Hand Guns, High Capacity Magazines, suppressors, scopes, bump stocks.
All these are items that increase the efficiency of self-defense and home-defense. When such items are introduced into the civilian market, each of them presents a set of disciplinary standard that is required to be fulfilled/achieved by individuals who desire to use them.
The fulfillment of said standards will increase the efficiency of an individual's ability to defend themselves and their home. It is said that Parkland Shooter used a bump stock which gave his AR-15 the firing rate of a machine gun. Sir, I know this is a painful matter and I have no intention of being or sounding callous. The bump stock was not used for its intended purpose. In the hands of a disturbed individual, the bump stock was used to destroy life. The discipline required to handle such an item is not cheap. It has the capacity to give a semiautomatic rifle the lethal force of an automatic rifle. I believe that it not be viewed as a plague. However, it should be viewed as an invaluable asset in self defense and home defense in case of multiple armed assailants. We should not fear this item, Mr. President.

Instead, we should learn how to responsibly use such a device by fulfilling its disciplinary obligations. This is an opportunity for discipline, Sir, I don't believe that anyone thought that such a device was important before it was used. This is evidence of lack of discipline. Curiosity concerning the device was stirred up only after the shooting had happened. And when the capacity of the device was noted, cries for its immediate ban erupted.
It is a shameful thing that the first time we take such a device seriously was when it was in the wrong hands and being used for destructive ends. Calling for the immediate ban of such a device does not eradicate lack of discipline. Instead, it hinders the opportunity to practice discipline.

The practice of discipline is the only way to provide countermeasures that will repel any and all disturbed individuals whose intent is to cause harm. And there is no need to vilify the NRA. In the United States suicides account for 2/3 of all gun deaths. Mass shootings account for 1% of all gun deaths in America, and 0% of all NRA members have participated in these mass killings.
This should be an indication of the disciplinary requirements enforced by the NRA. An item that increases the efficiency of a firearm requires the fulfillment of a higher standard of discipline in its utilization.
To fulfill such a standard while training in self defense and home defense gives life a higher value. Let the standards of discipline be set according to the value of life. Any item that increases the operational efficiency of a firearm requires a higher standard of discipline which when practiced, gives life a higher value. So the voices that claim you don't need this or that in self defense are lying.

Quote from: Solar on April 01, 2018, 05:59:47 AM
Well stated. Sorry, I had to clean it up to read it, dyslexia and all.

I thought these Liberals claimed to be smarter/better educated then us Conservatives?

It's like one of those freight trains with a hundred railcars; it just keeps going and going and going.

Someone needs Grammarly.

Howdy do.  Happy Easter.  Rest of family is napping, thought I'd check in some old stomping grounds.

Anyway.

Bump stocks.

Point one:  The idea that full-auto fire is essentially ineffective because a person firing a machine gun - or bump-stock equipped semi-auto - is not going to be able to control the weapon well enough to hit where they are aiming, does not account for the true purpose of full-auto fire. In a combat situation, the purpose of full-auto fire is not, nor ever has been to shoot more people faster.  Full auto fire is used to force the enemy to keep their head down and spoil their ability to shoot back effectively. It's called "covering fire", which allows for friendlies to do things like maneuver, find cover, take up new positions, etc.  If one finds themselves facing multiple hostiles, the ability to force them to duck and run for cover may be the factor that saves one's life as those few seconds allow the defender to find themselves more effective cover, or prevent themselves from being flanked by superior numbers. And, who knows, they might actually hit a couple of the baddies in the process.

Now I. personally, have neither the cash for ammunition, nor the inclination to zip off 30 rounds in 2-3 seconds. But for those who do, I fully support their constitutionally enumerated liberty to choose to do so. "The right of the PEOPLE to keep and bear arms SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED."

Point Two: Freedom is not about what government or anyone else thinks we "need" within a particular right.  If a person wants to spend the money on ammunition to go out and play Rambo in their local shooting range, what skin is it off our noses?  The fact that some moron uses any firearm, or any particular firearm enhancement for criminal purposes is not a valid reason to ban it.  The exact same argument for banning bump stocks can be AND IS BEING used to ban semi-automatic rifles (re: Dufus Hogg), standard capacity magazines, and literally ANYTHING ELSE criminals use to do harm to others. Britain is, as we speak, beginning to enforce bans on knives and other sharp implements, because the sharp increase in stabbings has put London ahead of New York in per-capita murders.
https://conservativetribune.com/london-police-tweet-guns-banned/?utm_source=Email&utm_medium=conservativebyte&utm_campaign=dailypm&utm_content=libertyalliance

Banning a tool used by criminals is not going to prevent crimes using that tool. We all know that. (or darned well should.) So why even allow the .gov types - whose real concern is NEVER for the People, but only about their own wealth and power over our lives - to even SUGGEST more limits on a liberty that is not supposed to have any infringements in the first place?  Defend liberty for the sake of liberty, because you never know when a liberty you DO care about is next.

Quote from: zewazir on April 01, 2018, 04:26:36 PM
Howdy do.  Happy Easter.  Rest of family is napping, thought I'd check in some old stomping grounds.

Anyway.

Bump stocks.

Point one:  The idea that full-auto fire is essentially ineffective because a person firing a machine gun - or bump-stock equipped semi-auto - is not going to be able to control the weapon well enough to hit where they are aiming, does not account for the true purpose of full-auto fire. In a combat situation, the purpose of full-auto fire is not, nor ever has been to shoot more people faster.  Full auto fire is used to force the enemy to keep their head down and spoil their ability to shoot back effectively. It's called "covering fire", which allows for friendlies to do things like maneuver, find cover, take up new positions, etc.  If one finds themselves facing multiple hostiles, the ability to force them to duck and run for cover may be the factor that saves one's life as those few seconds allow the defender to find themselves more effective cover, or prevent themselves from being flanked by superior numbers. And, who knows, they might actually hit a couple of the baddies in the process.

Now I. personally, have neither the cash for ammunition, nor the inclination to zip off 30 rounds in 2-3 seconds. But for those who do, I fully support their constitutionally enumerated liberty to choose to do so. "The right of the PEOPLE to keep and bear arms SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED."

Point Two: Freedom is not about what government or anyone else thinks we "need" within a particular right.  If a person wants to spend the money on ammunition to go out and play Rambo in their local shooting range, what skin is it off our noses?  The fact that some moron uses any firearm, or any particular firearm enhancement for criminal purposes is not a valid reason to ban it.  The exact same argument for banning bump stocks can be AND IS BEING used to ban semi-automatic rifles (re: Dufus Hogg), standard capacity magazines, and literally ANYTHING ELSE criminals use to do harm to others. Britain is, as we speak, beginning to enforce bans on knives and other sharp implements, because the sharp increase in stabbings has put London ahead of New York in per-capita murders.
https://conservativetribune.com/london-police-tweet-guns-banned/?utm_source=Email&utm_medium=conservativebyte&utm_campaign=dailypm&utm_content=libertyalliance

Banning a tool used by criminals is not going to prevent crimes using that tool. We all know that. (or darned well should.) So why even allow the .gov types - whose real concern is NEVER for the People, but only about their own wealth and power over our lives - to even SUGGEST more limits on a liberty that is not supposed to have any infringements in the first place?  Defend liberty for the sake of liberty, because you never know when a liberty you DO care about is next.

Yes, that was true in WWII with a slow Tommy Sub, but not with the M-16, I could blow through a full clip in 3 seconds, so forget trying cover fire on full auto. It was hard enough containing three rnd burst with a single trigger pull.

I saw that about the knife murders in the UK, a lot of good a ban on knives did.
Wanna bet there wouldn't have been as many murders if people were still allowed to pack actual heat? But we both know it was never about public safety, well, with the exception of the elites, they knew they'd eventually be a target of those they oppress.

Happy Easter.

Quote from: Solar on April 01, 2018, 05:48:07 PM
Yes, that was true in WWII with a slow Tommy Sub, but not with the M-16, I could blow through a full clip in 3 seconds, so forget trying cover fire on full auto. It was hard enough containing three rnd burst with a single trigger pull.

Well, the way I learn't it, covering fire is provided by people staying in place, while their buddies move. Then they stay in place providing covering fire while you move. (Can't count the hours spent doing cover-and-maneuver drills; and me being an intel weinie REMF.)

Cover fire while moving is taught too, but only as last resort; mainly reserved for the Rambo spec ops types. (For whom I have a TREMENDOUS amount of respect!!)

Besides, you hear the sound of rapid fire coming from the enemy position, you gonna take a peak to see how accurate it is?  I don't think the average bunch of untrained street thugs are going to either. They're gonna be too busy trying not to slip on the crap rolling down their legs.

Quote from: zewazir on April 01, 2018, 06:46:49 PM
Well, the way I learn't it, covering fire is provided by people staying in place, while their buddies move. Then they stay in place providing covering fire while you move. (Can't count the hours spent doing cover-and-maneuver drills; and me being an intel weinie REMF.)

Cover fire while moving is taught too, but only as last resort; mainly reserved for the Rambo spec ops types. (For whom I have a TREMENDOUS amount of respect!!)

Besides, you hear the sound of rapid fire coming from the enemy position, you gonna take a peak to see how accurate it is?  I don't think the average bunch of untrained street thugs are going to either. They're gonna be too busy trying not to slip on the crap rolling down their legs.

Yeah, I was taught cover fire as well and also why we trained with 3 rnd burst, you just can't pack 3000 rnds, we also understood told that's what an M-60 machine gunner was for and why every platoon was assigned one.
We all trained with it, at roughly 100 rnds per min, one could easily stay low and do burst fire for several minutes, leaving the individual soldier to save what little ammo he had in his possession.
Not quibbling, just pointing out cover fire was easier in WWII when nearly every soldier had a semi-auto M-1, one had a BAR, one had a Tommy etc, but today, the M-16 was just too quick to spray and pray, you couldn't pack enough ammo if you played that way.

Quote from: Solar on April 02, 2018, 07:01:01 AM
Yeah, I was taught cover fire as well and also why we trained with 3 rnd burst, you just can't pack 3000 rnds, we also understood told that's what an M-60 machine gunner was for and why every platoon was assigned one.
We all trained with it, at roughly 100 rnds per min, one could easily stay low and do burst fire for several minutes, leaving the individual soldier to save what little ammo he had in his possession.
Not quibbling, just pointing out cover fire was easier in WWII when nearly every soldier had a semi-auto M-1, one had a BAR, one had a Tommy etc, but today, the M-16 was just too quick to spray and pray, you couldn't pack enough ammo if you played that way.

We trained with M16-A1s, which didn't have the burst option. Quick bursts were the standard we were trained to aspire to.

8 - 30rd mags, 4 each in two belt pouches, plus the starter mag.  Anyone who ran out of ammo before end-X got to run 5 extra laps around the track (880 yds) while the rest of us cheered them on.

Since we were not technically combat units (HHC-, heavy separate brigade), we didn't have 60s to back us up. Stressful, but I actually enjoyed the fire and maneuver drills almost as much as I enjoyed playing OpFor against battalion scouts.

Quote from: Solar on April 02, 2018, 07:01:01 AM
Yeah, I was taught cover fire as well and also why we trained with 3 rnd burst, you just can't pack 3000 rnds, we also understood told that's what an M-60 machine gunner was for and why every platoon was assigned one.
We all trained with it, at roughly 100 rnds per min, one could easily stay low and do burst fire for several minutes, leaving the individual soldier to save what little ammo he had in his possession.
Not quibbling, just pointing out cover fire was easier in WWII when nearly every soldier had a semi-auto M-1, one had a BAR, one had a Tommy etc, but today, the M-16 was just too quick to spray and pray, you couldn't pack enough ammo if you played that way.

I remember when i was a SAW gunner and went to a fire and maneuver range for the first time i was stunned by how quickley i blew thru my ammo and i had to learn to do controlled bursts to save it. I think the SAW nutsacks had 100rds and i had several of those tho still not quite 1000rds. Ya ammo goes quik when u hold down the trigger.

Quote from: T Hunt on April 03, 2018, 01:22:22 AM
I remember when i was a SAW gunner and went to a fire and maneuver range for the first time i was stunned by how quickley i blew thru my ammo and i had to learn to do controlled bursts to save it. I think the SAW nutsacks had 100rds and i had several of those tho still not quite 1000rds. Ya ammo goes quik when u hold down the trigger.

And Ammo is HEAVY !

Lead & Brass

Here's betting very few of those Politicians who have banned Hi-Capacity Magazines have ever carried one.