Page 7 of 8

Re: Future of bump fire devices?

Posted: Thu Oct 12, 2017 1:34 pm
by Jonathanw
N4KVE wrote:
Thu Oct 12, 2017 1:12 pm
N4KVE wrote:
Thu Oct 12, 2017 1:10 pm
To be sure I understand, you are for new automatic weapons being made as long as the licensing requirements to own one remain the same.
Boy will that piss off the thousands of current owners who paid $10,000 - $50,000 for their class III guns. GARY
They don't have to worry, it'll never happen unfortunately for us common folk, but you can at least buy entry level FA for around $5000 or so

Re: Future of bump fire devices?

Posted: Thu Oct 12, 2017 3:28 pm
by captain steinbrenner
That backstabbing Carlos Cuntelo introduced a new bill that is pretty f#;.,/g much a Trojan Horse.
Out of the 7 sponsors 2 are from Florida, the other one is that bitch Ross Lethinen, both Cuban RINOs.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Re: Future of bump fire devices?

Posted: Thu Oct 12, 2017 4:10 pm
by cubanstang50
captain steinbrenner wrote:
Thu Oct 12, 2017 3:28 pm
That backstabbing Carlos Cuntelo introduced a new bill that is pretty f#;.,/g much a Trojan Horse.
Out of the 7 sponsors 2 are from Florida, the other one is that bitch Ross Lethinen, both Cuban RINOs.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Incredible that a f#;.,/g cuban would be ok with this! Bitch must have forgotten where she came from!

Re: Future of bump fire devices?

Posted: Thu Oct 12, 2017 4:27 pm
by Cloaked Dagger
cubanstang50 wrote:
Thu Oct 12, 2017 4:10 pm
captain steinbrenner wrote:
Thu Oct 12, 2017 3:28 pm
That backstabbing Carlos Cuntelo introduced a new bill that is pretty f#;.,/g much a Trojan Horse.
Out of the 7 sponsors 2 are from Florida, the other one is that bitch Ross Lethinen, both Cuban RINOs.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Incredible that a f#;.,/g cuban would be ok with this! Bitch must have forgotten where she came from!
Miguel Diaz de la Portilla was of Cuban descent, born in Miami though. Isn't Flores also of Cuban descent? Also born in Miami though.

Re: Future of bump fire devices?

Posted: Thu Oct 12, 2017 4:31 pm
by Jonathanw
The NRA will be finally helping fight this bill, which is a good thing. Despite much back tracking , I think they did listen to the backlash from many of the big names in the industry that called them out, and I think their first stance contributed to this bill being created with this much support from republicans.

Some may say strategy, I think it was just a knee jerk reaction by throwing the blame on the atf and attempting to make a sacrificial lamb out of an accessory. I still don't agree atf should reclassifiy anything but I'll retract my very harsh statements for the time being . I hope they get their stuff together and take out this bill, along with GOA and others

Re: Future of bump fire devices?

Posted: Thu Oct 12, 2017 6:29 pm
by Cloaked Dagger
Jonathanw wrote:
Thu Oct 12, 2017 4:31 pm
The NRA will be finally helping fight this bill, which is a good thing. Despite much back tracking , I think they did listen to the backlash from many of the big names in the industry that called them out, and I think their first stance contributed to this bill being created with this much support from republicans.

Some may say strategy, I think it was just a knee jerk reaction by throwing the blame on the atf and attempting to make a sacrificial lamb out of an accessory. I still don't agree atf should reclassifiy anything but I'll retract my very harsh statements for the time being . I hope they get their stuff together and take out this bill, along with GOA and others
It occurs to me that maybe the NRA did this all very thoughtfully and purposefully as a way to spot and weed out some RINOs. Somehow I doubt they are that clever though given their track record locally. What do you all think?

Re: Future of bump fire devices?

Posted: Fri Oct 13, 2017 5:30 am
by molivo
The NRA back peddling ? Im shocked...shocked i say...

Re: Future of bump fire devices?

Posted: Fri Oct 13, 2017 7:08 am
by Augdawg
Cardboard_killer wrote:
Thu Oct 12, 2017 8:35 am
Augdawg wrote:
Thu Oct 12, 2017 8:25 am
For Starters: Gun Control Act of 1968, Firearm Owners Protection Act of 1986, Assault Weapons Ban 2004 (eventually sunsetted), requirements for some FFLs to report multiple long gun sales in certain States.
So are you in favor of the repeal of the prohibition of automatic firearms to the general public? I'm against it myself.
Yes. Laws are for law abiding citizens and not the criminals. They could care less. For others on the board, I worked in the gun industry for 10 years and retired from the military. I believe in our Constitution and especially our bill of rights. Once there are limitations placed upon them, it opens our country up to divisiveness we are now seeing. If you have to ask why then you are truly an ostrich with its head in the sand. I respect everyone's right to express their opinion. Take care all, God Bless America.

Re: Future of bump fire devices?

Posted: Fri Oct 13, 2017 7:16 am
by Rentprop1
You know there's boys that are now using the girls bathroom right.....

With preaching like that, it almost seems like you've been out of touch for 40 or 50 years ...there's been a lot of changes in the wrong direction.

Re: Future of bump fire devices?

Posted: Fri Oct 13, 2017 8:07 am
by wizard78
molivo wrote:
Fri Oct 06, 2017 10:50 am
Tectir, the problem with them is you give them an inch theyll take a mile...i could care less about bump stocks. But you know it doesnt stop there. Then itll be "Well why does someone need more then a 5 round magazine?" "Why does someone need to fire a semiautomatic?". The shane is 99 percent of the country had no idea WTF a bump fire stock was until this event. If we set the precedent of banning something everytime its misued for the wrong purpose we are going to be in a world of hurt 5-10 years from now.

The bill being proposed is so open ended that it would allow BATF to BAN almost anything.

(sorry if this has been brought up already but I haven't read every post on this thread.)
[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sCLoIorYguU[/youtube]

Re: Future of bump fire devices?

Posted: Fri Oct 13, 2017 8:46 am
by Cardboard_killer
Augdawg wrote:
Fri Oct 13, 2017 7:08 am
Yes. Laws are for law abiding citizens and not the criminals. They could care less.
So, you support free sale without background checks for automatic firearms. Do you support unfettered access to rifle propelled grenades and anti-tank missile sales? I'm against selling those to the public, too, if that makes a difference.

Re: Future of bump fire devices?

Posted: Fri Oct 13, 2017 9:29 am
by jjk308
Cardboard_killer wrote:
Fri Oct 13, 2017 8:46 am
Augdawg wrote:
Fri Oct 13, 2017 7:08 am
Yes. Laws are for law abiding citizens and not the criminals. They could care less.
So, you support free sale without background checks for automatic firearms. Do you support unfettered access to rifle propelled grenades and anti-tank missile sales? I'm against selling those to the public, too, if that makes a difference.
The 2nd amendment gives you a right to keep and bear arms FOR SELF DEFENSE. Machine guns, grenades, rockets, nukes are not useful for that purpose, having the potential for a lot of collateral damage. There's a substantial legal theory that 2nd Amendment rights include any weapon in common use, which would include autoloaders but not the rest of the list. Bump stocks got a pass from the ATF because both they and the people who wrote the NFA were idiots, infringing on many of our rights in deference to newspaper headlines and stupid bureaucratic processes, for no useful purpose.

Re: Future of bump fire devices?

Posted: Fri Oct 13, 2017 9:37 am
by Taco
Cardboard_killer wrote:
Fri Oct 13, 2017 8:46 am
Augdawg wrote:
Fri Oct 13, 2017 7:08 am
Yes. Laws are for law abiding citizens and not the criminals. They could care less.
So, you support free sale without background checks for automatic firearms. Do you support unfettered access to rifle propelled grenades and anti-tank missile sales? I'm against selling those to the public, too, if that makes a difference.
I think much of the board is... The whole shall not be infringed thing. I had an argument with someone that when people have been arrested and are currently in jail they should be disarmed. Bill A... Someone... Disagreed-no disarming until conviction, even in jail awaiting trial.

Perhaps you can make a new topic with a poll?

Re: Future of bump fire devices?

Posted: Fri Oct 13, 2017 9:51 am
by Augdawg
I have my beliefs and so do the rest of you. Just because I support something doesn't make me bad or if you disagree it makes you bad. That's what makes us diverse. If I sounded like I'm preaching, forgive me. I've been around this board a few years and no matter what the topic is, nobody agrees 100 percent. I absolutely support the 2nd Amendment.
Rentprop1, I'm not out of touch and haven't used the little girls room since me and you had our sex change operations [smilie=cheers1.gif]

Re: Future of bump fire devices?

Posted: Fri Oct 13, 2017 10:08 am
by Cloaked Dagger
jjk308 wrote:
Fri Oct 13, 2017 9:29 am
Cardboard_killer wrote:
Fri Oct 13, 2017 8:46 am
Augdawg wrote:
Fri Oct 13, 2017 7:08 am
Yes. Laws are for law abiding citizens and not the criminals. They could care less.
So, you support free sale without background checks for automatic firearms. Do you support unfettered access to rifle propelled grenades and anti-tank missile sales? I'm against selling those to the public, too, if that makes a difference.
The 2nd amendment gives you a right to keep and bear arms FOR SELF DEFENSE. Machine guns, grenades, rockets, nukes are not useful for that purpose, having the potential for a lot of collateral damage. There's a substantial legal theory that 2nd Amendment rights include any weapon in common use, which would include autoloaders but not the rest of the list. Bump stocks got a pass from the ATF because both they and the people who wrote the NFA were idiots, infringing on many of our rights in deference to newspaper headlines and stupid bureaucratic processes, for no useful purpose.
Yes it's for self defense but also includes both self and national/state defense against invading armies and even against a tyrannical federal, state, or local government. Hence the well regulated militia clause. Thus the 2nd amendment applies to arms in common use by infantry military units, as the Supreme Court had already ruled. This is why short barrel shotguns can be regulated according to them, because they didn't serve a military purpose. Select fire definitely does fall under the 2nd amendment and I would argue so do RPGs and other man portable weapons you would see a simple rifle platoon carrying.
Taco wrote:
Fri Oct 13, 2017 9:37 am
Cardboard_killer wrote:
Fri Oct 13, 2017 8:46 am
Augdawg wrote:
Fri Oct 13, 2017 7:08 am
Yes. Laws are for law abiding citizens and not the criminals. They could care less.
So, you support free sale without background checks for automatic firearms. Do you support unfettered access to rifle propelled grenades and anti-tank missile sales? I'm against selling those to the public, too, if that makes a difference.
I think much of the board is... The whole shall not be infringed thing. I had an argument with someone that when people have been arrested and are currently in jail they should be disarmed. Bill A... Someone... Disagreed-no disarming until conviction, even in jail awaiting trial.

Perhaps you can make a new topic with a poll?
Considering for anything but the worst of crimes you can bond out and walk free that argument almost makes sense. Of course you get taken to jail first until bond can be set and then someone has to post the bond, the point of all of this is to make sure you show up to court when the time comes instead of fleeing while also not unreasonably imprisoning you without due process. Usually bond conditions are that you need to surrender or transfer your weapons to someone who isn't charged. Also regardless of if you bond out you have a right to file for a speedy trial which puts a deadline on completing your trail, I think it's 30 or 90 days or something like that, but that's usually not to your advantage because the prosecution usually had its case together against you before you have your defense case.

Re: Future of bump fire devices?

Posted: Fri Oct 13, 2017 10:08 am
by Rentprop1
Taco wrote:
Fri Oct 13, 2017 9:37 am

Perhaps you can make a new topic with a poll?
FOR CHRIST'S SAKE .....NO !...." Yoda voice " .........the stupid runs strong with this
.
Image

Re: Future of bump fire devices?

Posted: Fri Oct 13, 2017 10:52 am
by Taco
Rentprop1 wrote:
Fri Oct 13, 2017 10:08 am
Taco wrote:
Fri Oct 13, 2017 9:37 am

Perhaps you can make a new topic with a poll?
FOR CHRIST'S SAKE .....NO !...." Yoda voice " .........the stupid runs strong with this
.
Image
Do you really want another 7 pages on the bump stock thread having nothing to do with bump stocks?

Re: Future of bump fire devices?

Posted: Fri Oct 13, 2017 12:26 pm
by Rentprop1
isn't that what this sh!t fest turned into ](*,)

Re: Future of bump fire devices?

Posted: Fri Oct 13, 2017 3:41 pm
by molivo
Geeze, I step away for 5 minutes...

Re: Future of bump fire devices?

Posted: Fri Oct 13, 2017 6:05 pm
by Cardboard_killer
jjk308 wrote:
Fri Oct 13, 2017 9:29 am
The 2nd amendment gives you a right to keep and bear arms FOR SELF DEFENSE. Machine guns, grenades, rockets, nukes are not useful for that purpose, having the potential for a lot of collateral damage.
I don't think nukes are useful for that purpose, but automatic weapons, grenades and RPGs are very much useful. "Potential" for collateral damage is the very reason those against guns are coming after semi-automatic weapons, so that is he slipperiest slope yet.