Jump to content

You don't need a bump stock

Rattler
 Share

Recommended Posts

Moho81 Mentor

Moho81

Posted
Posted

Cover Fire? 

Outside of our Military fighting overseas and maybe the occasional SWAT team here state side( I think this is even a stretch) do you really think that you will ever have to lay down some cover fire? 

I can not picture in my mind a single time that as an individual one would have to lay down some cover fire. It's absurd. 

Now I don't want to see this device banned because I am with the majority here and say if they start with this whats next to get banned and when does it end. I just think if your argument to keep this is "cover fire" you better get a better argument.  

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Buckmaster7600 Mentor

Buckmaster7600

Posted
Posted
Cover Fire? 
Outside of our Military fighting overseas and maybe the occasional SWAT team here state side( I think this is even a stretch) do you really think that you will ever have to lay down some cover fire? 
I can not picture in my mind a single time that as an individual one would have to lay down some cover fire. It's absurd. 
Now I don't want to see this device banned because I am with the majority here and say if they start with this whats next to get banned and when does it end. I just think if your argument to keep this is "cover fire" you better get a better argument.  

Now for that device I agree with you, however cover fire in a day to day situation is very possibility.

What if there’s a group of people cornered in a mass shooting situation. Someone with a firearm that can start sending bullets in bad guys direction to get the others to cover or out of the area is a very real thing. That’s actually the entire reason I carry a spare magazine on a day to day basis. If there’s ever a scenario that I need more than 12 rounds in the first mag to shoot bad guys I’ll never draw my pistol to begin with. However if I have to use a mag to keep bad guys head down to get me and mine out of the spot I don’t want to be without ammo afterwards.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Moho81 Mentor

Moho81

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Buckmaster7600 said:


Now for that device I agree with you, however cover fire in a day to day situation is very possibility.

What if there’s a group of people cornered in a mass shooting situation. Someone with a firearm that can start sending bullets in bad guys direction to get the others to cover or out of the area is a very real thing. That’s actually the entire reason I carry a spare magazine on a day to day basis. If there’s ever a scenario that I need more than 12 rounds in the first mag to shoot bad guys I’ll never draw my pistol to begin with. However if I have to use a mag to keep bad guys head down to get me and mine out of the spot I don’t want to be without ammo afterwards.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I'll give you that a mass shooting situation could happen as you described and yes cover fire could be used to escape but I would have to put the percentage very very low of it ever happening like a 1% chance. The problem I see is more than likely you would be with non military trained people and getting them up to run while you lay down cover fire would be slim to none. They would more than likely be frozen in fear and unwilling to move. 

Now if its you and say your spouse or child yeah OK I can see them escaping with you as they would have faith in you and would trust your judgement that this is the only way out. Again its 1% chance of it ever happening 

I still say if the argument for this devise if "cover fire" there needs to be a better argument. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Deleted Account Newbie

Deleted Account

Posted
Posted (edited)
19 minutes ago, Moho81 said:

I'll give you that a mass shooting situation could happen as you described and yes cover fire could be used to escape but I would have to put the percentage very very low of it ever happening like a 1% chance. The problem I see is more than likely you would be with non military trained people and getting them up to run while you lay down cover fire would be slim to none. They would more than likely be frozen in fear and unwilling to move. 

Now if its you and say your spouse or child yeah OK I can see them escaping with you as they would have faith in you and would trust your judgement that this is the only way out. Again its 1% chance of it ever happening 

I still say if the argument for this devise if "cover fire" there needs to be a better argument. 

I'm fairly certain that in a mass shooting situation you're not going to casually be toting your Mini-14 and happen to have this "tool" hanging around in your pocket. Sure, argue cover fire with your cc all you want, but a bump stock or whatever this thing is, is totally impractical.

Therefore, the only use for this or any rapid triggering device is for combat (which there are many better options available to legitimate militaries), amusement, or shooting large amounts of people. If amusement is your thing, so be it, but if these were to be banned with other rapid fire accessories, I wouldn't shed a tear in the name of liberty. Las Vegas drove home that one for me.

I am in agreement, using cover fire as an argument for these things is not enough to win me over.

Edited by Splitear_Leland
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rattler Newbie

Rattler

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Cover fire isn't the case for this.  What people own and for what reason, is nobody else's business.  That's the case.

Demanding approval from the govt for exercising a right is not what free men do.  We expect prosecution of people who abuse the right, not prosecution of people the govt thinks might abuse the right.

Anyone really think the Vegas BS was really just one man going nuts?  If so, the govt loves you.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Deleted Account Newbie

Deleted Account

Posted
Posted
14 hours ago, Rattler said:

Demanding approval from the govt for exercising a right is not what free men do.  We expect prosecution of people who abuse the right, not prosecution of people the govt thinks might abuse the right.

 

 

This is the most persuasive argument I have seen you make, in my opinion at least. It doesn't persuade me that anyone needs a rapid triggering device, but I won't be signing any petitions to have them banned. Thanks for the thought Rattler, this one resonated with me.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rattler Newbie

Rattler

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)

Jerry, we should start another thread on it, because a lot of questions have never been answered. 

Where's the hotel video evidence?  Why no video in the room where he had cams set up?  Wife was Muslim and fled to the middle east with lots of cash.  Islamists took credit for the attack.  Why did he have a car in back of the hotel for an escape and authorities were stopped from talking about it?  Why does much cell phone video and audio, as well as patrolman body cam footage,  talk about multiple gunman and shots from different directions and locations?  Why different gun shot sounds and fire rates?  Why so many rifles and convenient use of bump stocks for the first time, when anti-gun lunatics just recently started a fear mongering campaign about them?  Why was the man's past sealed by authorities?  He had some involvement with the CIA according to some reports and those reports were suddenly classified.  Many, many more unanswered questions and it's hard not to notice how it all just dropped off the grid suddenly.  How long did we hear about Columbine and Sandy Hook?  What took the police so long to respond and why the different stories and timelines on all the police reports?

This seems as if there was a lot more going on here then the public was told about.  Either the govt covered up a direct attempt to alter gun laws, or they decided to use it to tell a lie and hide the truth for the govt's benefit.  Either way, no way one lunatic did what they want us to believe he did.

 

As far as the founders never knowing what would be available in the future, they were more about freedom, self defense and punishment for people who abused it.  They despised "preventative law".  More likely they would not want the govt to have nukes or be as big as it is today.

Edited by Rattler
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Moho81 Mentor

Moho81

Posted
Posted
44 minutes ago, Robhuntandfish said:

I am generally against new gun laws and regulations but I do also wonder if the founders had any idea that things like this would be around. .... Lol

giphy.gif

I wouldn't mind trying either one out. the gun and the girl. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
moog5050 Mentor

moog5050

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Splitear_Leland said:

This is the most persuasive argument I have seen you make, in my opinion at least. It doesn't persuade me that anyone needs a rapid triggering device, but I won't be signing any petitions to have them banned. Thanks for the thought Rattler, this one resonated with me.

I respect someone who can agree to disagree and even acknowledge a fair point on the other side.   

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Chef Grand Master

Chef

Posted
Posted
There's something about the way she smiles when she makes the big gun go off! This is probably where I should be told to get my mind out of the gutter...

Lol we all know she’s dripping from that it’s ok I’ll be the one to say it


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Marion Proficient

Marion

Posted
Posted
I am generally against new gun laws and regulations but I do also wonder if the founders had any idea that things like this would be around. .... Lol
giphy.gif.a2982b015339b708daf743a110a1cd53.gif
Actually there were automatic guns back then when the Constitution was written

Sent from my SM-G988U using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...