Can you articulate an advantage of a bump stock?

TXAZ · March 25, 2018, 11:26 AM

Other than improving the backlog of ammo manufacturers, I see no advantage for any sporting purpose other than wasting ammo.

Can anyone articulate one?

deserted · March 25, 2018, 11:29 AM

It lets you make empty cases faster so you can then reload them. What's not to like?

zukiphile · March 25, 2018, 11:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TXAS

Other than improving the backlog of ammo manufacturers, I see no advantage for any sporting purpose other than wasting ammo.

If your sport is emptying your magazine, a slide fire stock seems like a wise purchase.

jmr40 · March 25, 2018, 11:38 AM

They're toys and not worth the negative press! I know some guys like them, but I could never understand how they were legal in the 1st place. We'd be better off if they were determined to be illegal by the ATF when they were introduced.

Nodak1858 · March 25, 2018, 11:42 AM

They are fun.

Sharkbite · March 25, 2018, 11:47 AM

With the crazy prices of full-auto firearms, some folks like to experience a similar shooting experience. Not quite the same...but close enough while staying legal at a reasonable price.

Do they have a real purpose... no. Thats not the point. We should not have to prove a “legitimate sporting purpose” for the guns/accessories we want to own.

Sharkbite · March 25, 2018, 11:52 AM

Quote:

but I could never understand how they were legal in the 1st place.

Because the written law says a machinegun must fire more then ONE shot per trigger pull. A bumbstock still only fires ONE shot per pull. It just allows the trigger to be pulled faster then a person nomally could.

This countries legal system is based on codified (written) laws that explicitly spell out what is illegal. The written law is clear on this issue, hence BATFE saying the stocks were legal under current law. They must now change the law to include these devices.

NoSecondBest · March 25, 2018, 12:02 PM

A small percentage of gun owners are going to keep at it long enough to have all our rights taken away. Bump stocks are a prime example. We aren't "all in this together" , we have a sub group than seems bent on proving points that just aren't worth proving. What will come out of the current differences, and it will be clear to everyone, is what one vote per person can do. It's sad to say that I think responsible gun owners will be the losers when it's all said and done.

Wyosmith · March 25, 2018, 12:05 PM

"Can you articulate an advantage of a bump stock?"

Uhhhh. NO!

But I could say the same thing about lawn ornaments or flower beds.
They are for the enjoyment of those that own them and the federal government has no rightful say-so as to who should have them and why.

Read the 9th and 10th amendment (Which AMENDED the so-called "supremacy clause"

THE · March 25, 2018, 12:08 PM

I will beg to differ on your definition . With a bump fire stock the operator only pulls the trigger once and the gun / recoil does the rest. The recoil is now pulling the trigger. The bump fire stocks were just a way to skirt the intent of the law. I am not suggesting they be banned. I just disagree with your definition.

How many here have shot full auto weapons? It is fun and interesting for an afternoon, but it will cost hundreds of $$$$ for an afternoon of fun.

I can`t afford to feed guns like that.

zukiphile · March 25, 2018, 12:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nosecondbest

A small percentage of gun owners are going to keep at it long enough to have all our rights taken away. Bump stocks are a prime example. We aren't "all in this together" , we have a sub group than seems bent on proving points that just aren't worth proving. What will come out of the current differences, and it will be clear to everyone, is what one vote per person can do. It's sad to say that I think responsible gun owners will be the losers when it's all said and done.

You recognise that universal suffrage is a problem for minority rights, but then blame people who argue for principled application of existing law?

The nearest cause of additional arms restrictions will be people who argue for those restrictions, followed by those who preemptively fold in the face of a challenge. Kids who over-pay for a stock that helps them send more bullets in the general direction of the back stop aren't hurting anyone.

It's as if some people are up nights worrying that someone with a bayonet lug and a slidefire stock might casually enjoy himself.

Quote:

Originally Posted by THE

I will beg to differ on your definition . With a bump fire stock the operator only pulls the trigger once and the gun / recoil does the rest. The recoil is now pulling the trigger.

I believe you've misdescribed the function of these stocks.

The recoil doesn't pull the trigger. The force for the next trigger pull is supplied by the shooter pressing the rifle forward with his support arm.

Sharkbite · March 25, 2018, 12:19 PM

Quote:

I will beg to differ on your definition . With a bump fire stock the operator only pulls the trigger once and the gun / recoil does the rest.

Again, that is not TECHNICALLY correct, and the law is a technical thing. The trigger moves forward and resets... it is then pulled BY THE SHOOTERS FINGER for each additional shot. That conforms to the law. The stock allows that single manipulation to occur rapidly.

A machine guns trigger is held to the rear and continues to fire until released. A subtle difference, but the legal definition is clear and a bump stock does not make a machinegun, until the law is changed.

MarkCO · March 25, 2018, 12:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by THE

I will beg to differ on your definition . With a bump fire stock the operator only pulls the trigger once and the gun / recoil does the rest. The recoil is now pulling the trigger. The bump fire stocks were just a way to skirt the intent of the law. I am not suggesting they be banned. I just disagree with your definition.

How many here have shot full auto weapons? It is fun and interesting for an afternoon, but it will cost hundreds of $$$$ for an afternoon of fun.

I can`t afford to feed guns like that.

Agree completely. Bump stocks fell into a loophole, as does the Franklin Armory "not a rifle". Lawyers write the laws and they are for the most part ignorant of the engineering principles. I testified as an expert in more than one case, the magazine capacity ban in CO most recently, regarding engineering principles as they relate to design intent. The primary intent of binary triggers, bump stocks, the Franklin, yes even the "pistol braces" was to drive through the loophole created by imprecise language. If the same amount of effort and angst would be channeled into measures which would be of benefit to the 2nd Amendment community, we would be ahead. Profit off of a loophole that makes us all look like idiots...will eventually be our own downfall. "Eat our own" has often been said about the Firearms and Hunting community as a whole, and sadly, it is true.

Under the 2nd Amendment, FA should not be infringed, but it is. Maybe fight that before you fight the loophole. Fighting the loophole basically affirms that you agree with the infringement in the first place.

Erno86 · March 25, 2018, 12:36 PM

The bump fire stock, allows an untrained or trained shooter to shoot rapid fire. The disadvantage...is that it will not teach an untrained shooter to shoot (non bump fire) rapid fire with a semi auto rifle or carbine.

T. O'Heir · March 25, 2018, 12:36 PM

They're toys and they're fun. That's what toys are for. Mind you, shooting SMG's and any other MG is fun too. Way more fun when somebody else is buying the ammo though.
"...Under the 2nd Amendment, FA should not be infringed..." No mention of FA in your 2nd Amendment. Don't believe there's any mention of you having the right to own any kind of property other than a firearm either.
"...Lawyers write the laws..." No they don't. Unless they're elected to office.

**44 AMP** · March 25, 2018, 12:55 PM

Quote:

No mention of FA in your 2nd Amendment.

No, there isn't. Nor is there any mention of printing presses, typewriters, computers or the Internet in the First Amendment.

Some of us take "keep and bear arms" to mean ALL arms. Others take it to mean "only those arms we approve of". That's why we have gun control, because of those folks opinions, and their ability to get laws made and passed supporting those opinions.

Bump stocks (why is it the press simply cannot use the correct name -in this case "bump fire stock" and instead must use their version, which, by simple repetition becomes the defining term in popular use???)
are "toys" as stated. A fun shooting accessory that allows people to do something they enjoy, without having, or needing a practical use.

Because someone mis-used them, and the press fixated on that, they now want them banned (or restricted to the point of a practical ban).

If all the bigots wanted was to take "bump stocks" and then would go away, for good, I'd let them have them, gladly. That is not, however, the case.

and, never has been....

hdwhit · March 25, 2018, 01:21 PM

Quote:

TXAZ asked:
Can you articulate an advantage of a bump stock?

Yes, they waste ammunition at such a rate that they are likely to bankrupt anyone who uses them on a regular basis.

hdwhit · March 25, 2018, 01:27 PM

Quote:

MarkCO wrote:
Under the 2nd Amendment, FA should not be infringed, but it is.

According to the Constitution, the document says what the (now) Nine Old People on the Supreme Court say it says. What MarkCO might happen to think it says is meaningless. And the Supreme Court has ruled (repeatedly) that certain restrictions on modern weapons do not "infringe" on the 2A.

NoSecondBest · March 25, 2018, 01:32 PM

Quote:

You recognise that universal suffrage is a problem for minority rights, but then blame people who argue for principled application of existing law?

The nearest cause of additional arms restrictions will be people who argue for those restrictions, followed by those who preemptively fold in the face of a challenge. Kids who over-pay for a stock that helps them send more bullets in the general direction of the back stop aren't hurting anyone.

It's as if some people are up nights worrying that someone with a bayonet lug and a slidefire stock might casually enjoy himself.

It's a shame you're not capable of understanding what I said.

Nodak1858 · March 25, 2018, 02:04 PM

I think the issue with banning bumpstocks is the precedence it sets. A person can bump fire a rifle with no modifications from the shoulder, take a look at all the videos on line. Some of the people are very good at it. So if they ban stocks but people still do it, it must mean the rifle itself is a machine gun due to the recoil moving the gun. Even though it's still one pull one round it's bump firing. Whether it's by a stock, a thumb through a belt loop or just a loose grip on your trigger side hand.
So where does it stop? There was a fellow who said you don't "need" an AR for home defense, just use your double barrel and fire into the air.
It's nothing about need or purpose.

Bartholomew Roberts · March 25, 2018, 02:27 PM

The idea that the Second Amendment exists to seeve a sporting purpose should die. Sporting purpose has nothing to do with the Second Amendment, despite ATF opinion to the contrary.

The only reason bumpstocks exist is because of unjust restrictions on full auto weapons - which despite requiring legislation, obscene waiting periods and taxes and practically every "common sense gun law" we are told is necessary, were still forced down the throats of legal gun owners.

There are way too many gunowners in this forum suffering from Stockholm syndrome and concerned with placating people who don't want them to exist at all.

zukiphile · March 25, 2018, 04:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bartholomew Roberts

There are way too many gunowners in this forum suffering from Stockholm syndrome and concerned with placating people who don't want them to exist at all.

Indeed. I attribute this to naivete. Some people read a gun control argument that, say, no one needs a 30 round magazine, barrel shroud and bump stock equiped weapon of war to hunt dear and credulously conclude that gun control advocates are only confused by defectives who will thoughtlessly endanger people. The faulty reasoning is that if criticized behavior could just be prohibited, then the impulse to abridge the right further would just evanesce.

People who shoot recreationally aren't opponents of the right. People who argue for preservation of the right aren't opponents of the right.

Txhillbilly · March 25, 2018, 04:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jmr40

They're toys and not worth the negative press! I know some guys like them, but I could never understand how they were legal in the 1st place. We'd be better off if they were determined to be illegal by the ATF when they were introduced.

X2

Bill DeShivs · March 25, 2018, 04:15 PM

There is no such thing as a "loophole."
Something is either legal, or it isn't.

JeepHammer · March 25, 2018, 04:36 PM

Bump stocks are popular with the armchair Rambo bunch,
Not enough man to serve in the military,
Not qualified to own a legal full auto,
Not bright enough to aim...

It's a 'Tacti-Cool' accessory, goes great on that $299 farm store AR clone they paid $1,000 for, fits right in with the espresso cup holder, rear view mirror, selfie stick, aircraft landing lights, fidget spinner & tide pod dispenser cobbled onto the rifle.
Ranks right up there with bayonets on handguns & armor plated canteens...

There are some things you see and you know you are dealing with an idiot, bump stocks & tide pod stained faces are two of those things...

March 25, 2018, 11:26 AM	#1
TXAZ Senior Member Join Date: September 5, 2010 Location: McMurdo Sound Texas Posts: 4,322	Can you articulate an advantage of a bump stock? Other than improving the backlog of ammo manufacturers, I see no advantage for any sporting purpose other than wasting ammo. Can anyone articulate one? __________________ Cave illos in guns et backhoes

March 25, 2018, 11:38 AM	#4
jmr40 Senior Member Join Date: June 15, 2008 Location: Georgia Posts: 10,805	They're toys and not worth the negative press! I know some guys like them, but I could never understand how they were legal in the 1st place. We'd be better off if they were determined to be illegal by the ATF when they were introduced. __________________ "If you're still doing things the same way you were doing them 10 years ago, you're doing it wrong" Winston Churchill

March 25, 2018, 11:42 AM	#5
Nodak1858 Senior Member Join Date: September 7, 2009 Location: N. Dakota Posts: 435	They are fun. __________________ We've all heard that a million monkeys banging on a million typewriters will eventually reproduce the entire works of Shakespeare. Now, thanks to the Internet, we know this is not true.

March 25, 2018, 12:36 PM	#14
Erno86 Senior Member Join Date: September 22, 2012 Location: Marriottsville, Maryland Posts: 1,739	The bump fire stock, allows an untrained or trained shooter to shoot rapid fire. The disadvantage...is that it will not teach an untrained shooter to shoot (non bump fire) rapid fire with a semi auto rifle or carbine. __________________ That rifle hanging on the wall of the working class flat or labourer's cottage is the symbol of democracy. It is our job to see that it stays there." --- George Orwell

March 25, 2018, 12:36 PM	#15
T. O'Heir Senior Member Join Date: February 13, 2002 Location: Canada Posts: 12,453	They're toys and they're fun. That's what toys are for. Mind you, shooting SMG's and any other MG is fun too. Way more fun when somebody else is buying the ammo though. "...Under the 2nd Amendment, FA should not be infringed..." No mention of FA in your 2nd Amendment. Don't believe there's any mention of you having the right to own any kind of property other than a firearm either. "...Lawyers write the laws..." No they don't. Unless they're elected to office. __________________ Spelling and grammar count!

March 25, 2018, 11:29 AM	#2
deserted Senior Member Join Date: October 18, 2015 Posts: 103	It lets you make empty cases faster so you can then reload them. What's not to like?

March 25, 2018, 11:47 AM	#6
Sharkbite Senior Member Join Date: November 4, 2013 Location: Western slope of Colorado Posts: 3,679	With the crazy prices of full-auto firearms, some folks like to experience a similar shooting experience. Not quite the same...but close enough while staying legal at a reasonable price. Do they have a real purpose... no. Thats not the point. We should not have to prove a “legitimate sporting purpose” for the guns/accessories we want to own.

March 25, 2018, 12:02 PM	#8
NoSecondBest Senior Member Join Date: December 7, 2009 Location: Western New York Posts: 2,736	A small percentage of gun owners are going to keep at it long enough to have all our rights taken away. Bump stocks are a prime example. We aren't "all in this together" , we have a sub group than seems bent on proving points that just aren't worth proving. What will come out of the current differences, and it will be clear to everyone, is what one vote per person can do. It's sad to say that I think responsible gun owners will be the losers when it's all said and done.

March 25, 2018, 12:05 PM	#9
Wyosmith Senior Member Join Date: December 29, 2010 Location: Shoshoni Wyoming Posts: 2,713	"Can you articulate an advantage of a bump stock?" Uhhhh. NO! But I could say the same thing about lawn ornaments or flower beds. They are for the enjoyment of those that own them and the federal government has no rightful say-so as to who should have them and why. Read the 9th and 10th amendment (Which AMENDED the so-called "supremacy clause"

March 25, 2018, 12:08 PM	#10
THE Member Join Date: November 6, 2017 Posts: 35	I will beg to differ on your definition . With a bump fire stock the operator only pulls the trigger once and the gun / recoil does the rest. The recoil is now pulling the trigger. The bump fire stocks were just a way to skirt the intent of the law. I am not suggesting they be banned. I just disagree with your definition. How many here have shot full auto weapons? It is fun and interesting for an afternoon, but it will cost hundreds of $$$$ for an afternoon of fun. I can`t afford to feed guns like that.

March 25, 2018, 02:04 PM	#20
Nodak1858 Senior Member Join Date: September 7, 2009 Location: N. Dakota Posts: 435	I think the issue with banning bumpstocks is the precedence it sets. A person can bump fire a rifle with no modifications from the shoulder, take a look at all the videos on line. Some of the people are very good at it. So if they ban stocks but people still do it, it must mean the rifle itself is a machine gun due to the recoil moving the gun. Even though it's still one pull one round it's bump firing. Whether it's by a stock, a thumb through a belt loop or just a loose grip on your trigger side hand. So where does it stop? There was a fellow who said you don't "need" an AR for home defense, just use your double barrel and fire into the air. It's nothing about need or purpose. __________________ We've all heard that a million monkeys banging on a million typewriters will eventually reproduce the entire works of Shakespeare. Now, thanks to the Internet, we know this is not true.

March 25, 2018, 02:27 PM	#21
Bartholomew Roberts member Join Date: June 12, 2000 Location: Texas and Oklahoma area Posts: 8,462	The idea that the Second Amendment exists to seeve a sporting purpose should die. Sporting purpose has nothing to do with the Second Amendment, despite ATF opinion to the contrary. The only reason bumpstocks exist is because of unjust restrictions on full auto weapons - which despite requiring legislation, obscene waiting periods and taxes and practically every "common sense gun law" we are told is necessary, were still forced down the throats of legal gun owners. There are way too many gunowners in this forum suffering from Stockholm syndrome and concerned with placating people who don't want them to exist at all.

March 25, 2018, 04:15 PM	#24
Bill DeShivs Senior Member Join Date: April 7, 2006 Posts: 10,981	There is no such thing as a "loophole." Something is either legal, or it isn't. __________________ Bill DeShivs, Master Cutler www.billdeshivs.com

March 25, 2018, 04:36 PM	#25
JeepHammer Junior member Join Date: February 27, 2015 Posts: 1,768	Bump stocks are popular with the armchair Rambo bunch, Not enough man to serve in the military, Not qualified to own a legal full auto, Not bright enough to aim... It's a 'Tacti-Cool' accessory, goes great on that $299 farm store AR clone they paid $1,000 for, fits right in with the espresso cup holder, rear view mirror, selfie stick, aircraft landing lights, fidget spinner & tide pod dispenser cobbled onto the rifle. Ranks right up there with bayonets on handguns & armor plated canteens... There are some things you see and you know you are dealing with an idiot, bump stocks & tide pod stained faces are two of those things...