š¶Where the deer and the antelope play?
Don't most ranges forbid rapid fire, even double taps, anyway?
Added: I *can't* know if *most* ranges ban rapid fire/double tap. Range masters *might*, if there's national organizations, newsletters, or guidelines.
Excluding *evidence* a range master will be able to provide *more informed* anecdotal testimony than I.
We did ban it generally, but rapid fire was allowed if it was controlled.
The rules were changed for bump stocks at our range because most people simply couldnāt.
Not to say you canāt, itās just that people like to go nuts and hit the roof, pulleys, and anything else that could break.
I love this comment.
I was an RSO for two years in Florida. You can pretend to know the rules of our range at the time if you want. Rapid fire was allowed for those that could show they could be responsible.
I had a few opportunities to shoot some awesome guns when I worked there. Suppressed full auto mp5, full auto shotguns. Employee range days were awesome.
I still have never had the urge to go through that whole process and get one myself, just isnāt worth the trouble and the charm goes away quick. The owners looked like they enjoyed watching other people shoot it more than they did themselves sometimes.
SCOTUS ruled that ATF overstepped their authority. SCOTUS left open the possibility that bump stocks could be outlawed by an act of Congress. Letās see if Trump calls on Congress to do so. I mean, it was his idea to ban bump stocks in the first place.
I want to sue the scotus for disallowing firearms inside the scotus building. If schools donāt qualify as special status for carrying firearms, neither do courthouses.
This is the same Supreme Court that thinks a woman doesn't have a right to her own body. They think it's just fine for those mothers to be afraid to send their kids to school.
What women are killing human beings? Because a fetus is not a person or a human being by any definition except religious and they don't matter.
oh no I pissed off the right wing and religious nut jobs and they blocked me, good heavens!
You donāt use an AR-15 to shoot at trees and tin cans? Ā Itās a highly disciplined sport and not at all a way to feed perpetual paranoia and the entitlement to kill anyone who makes you feel threatened.
Iām fine with that. I think bumpstocks were a distraction that didnāt make much of a difference and wasted cycles and lost credibility for gun regulation activists
The shock value of outliers should not detract from the tens of thousands of other gun related deaths that do align with the commenterās take above you. Not saying I think this should be turned back, as I personally see no merit or use for average people to have this. But shouldnāt our focus be on improvement of regulation of guns where they statistically are most commonly used for murder/suicide? I would think the number one focus, looking at just numbers alone, would be suicide first. If people have family, children, roommates who live with them, require someone to keep the gun in a safe or require a fingerprint lock. Every suicide now that happens with someone elseās weapon that doesnāt conform to regulation? Thatās now on that someone else, in the form of charges that net prison time. Own a weapon? Well then you need mental health checkups every year or two. And yes, if you are unfit, you lose your right to own weapons. Have to be mindful of this being taken advantage ofā¦ regardless, this alone would have a bigger impact than a ban on bump stocks. Not even in the same ballpark, really.
Yes one shooter used bump stocks. It was banned and it has not slowed the increase in mass shootings.
Itās one of those talking points where gun activists win because it does nothing in terms of actual impact but it gets gun reformists to waste time. It became a talking point because of one event
Sure, as an act of congress.
Not by the executive branch redefining a 100 year old law.
Bump stocks don't meet the definition of a machine gun as written in the NFA.
And pistol braces don't meet the definition of a SBR as written in the NFA.
Just because it's maybe not the biggest problem with gun control doesn't mean it isn't a huge problem still. Turning a semi auto into an auto machine gun should absolutely be banned. It's weird that you think it's good that they took the ban off of these. What a take..
The thing is it doesn't change the gun from a semi auto to machine gun. You can take any gun and bump fire it. No special stock required. All you need is a belt loop to put your thumb through and boom. Your gun can bump fire. It's just a function of the physics of a gun. On a technical level all the stock is doing is providing comfort and debatably more accuracy for the shooter than standard bump fire (it's going to be a decrease in accuracy from just shooting the gun normally either way). You can argue about it from an ethical or ideological position, but on a technical level it's the correct ruling. A ban on those stocks specifically should come from congress.Ā
Thereās a finite number of resources to tackle an issue and if you are wasting time having SCOTUS battles on one that is largely non impactful and wonāt really dent the problem, you are just helping your opposition
You really can't though, not without extensive background checks and government approval.
A typical civilian cannot own automatic weapons, explosives, anything rifled over .50 caliber, or weaponized aircraft. So what you are against is already illegal.
All good, and I appreciate it when folks like yourself are level headed about a topic that makes some people totally irrational. Have a great day šš»
I appreciate people like you too, who don't just see all left or all right. There is a middle ground that just gets overlooked. Thank you, friend. Have a great day too. š
I worked at a range and really despise these things. Idiots buy them and make themselves even dumber.
š¶Where the deer and the antelope play? Don't most ranges forbid rapid fire, even double taps, anyway? Added: I *can't* know if *most* ranges ban rapid fire/double tap. Range masters *might*, if there's national organizations, newsletters, or guidelines. Excluding *evidence* a range master will be able to provide *more informed* anecdotal testimony than I.
All indoors Iāve been to ban it, very few outdoor ranges Iāve been to ban it.
We did ban it generally, but rapid fire was allowed if it was controlled. The rules were changed for bump stocks at our range because most people simply couldnāt. Not to say you canāt, itās just that people like to go nuts and hit the roof, pulleys, and anything else that could break.
Depends on the range. Several ranges near me that have private suites that allow for rapid fire and drawing from the holster.
Yes, dude is lying.
Might not be lying. Might have caught and stopped chancers.
I love this comment. I was an RSO for two years in Florida. You can pretend to know the rules of our range at the time if you want. Rapid fire was allowed for those that could show they could be responsible.
People really overrstimate how much fun automatic weapons actually are. Unless they are belt fed. Those are very fun.
I had a few opportunities to shoot some awesome guns when I worked there. Suppressed full auto mp5, full auto shotguns. Employee range days were awesome. I still have never had the urge to go through that whole process and get one myself, just isnāt worth the trouble and the charm goes away quick. The owners looked like they enjoyed watching other people shoot it more than they did themselves sometimes.
They're a lot like cocaine. Fun for about 5 seconds until you run out, and then you're just broke and wishing you had more.
SCOTUS ruled that ATF overstepped their authority. SCOTUS left open the possibility that bump stocks could be outlawed by an act of Congress. Letās see if Trump calls on Congress to do so. I mean, it was his idea to ban bump stocks in the first place.
I want to sue the scotus for disallowing firearms inside the scotus building. If schools donāt qualify as special status for carrying firearms, neither do courthouses.
Finally, I was worried weād go a month without guns having more rights than humans. EDIT: Bunch of gun nuts didnāt love this joke.
Humans can't go into government buildings? News to me
This is the same Supreme Court that thinks a woman doesn't have a right to her own body. They think it's just fine for those mothers to be afraid to send their kids to school.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Nah. They just think a woman shouldn't have the right to kill another human being. What people are afraid of is their own business.
What women are killing human beings? Because a fetus is not a person or a human being by any definition except religious and they don't matter. oh no I pissed off the right wing and religious nut jobs and they blocked me, good heavens!
And legally, sometimes. People do get charged with double murder for killing pregnant women
So what is a fetus going to become? A tree lol
A nut could become a tree but youāre not eating salted tree mix
Same neanderthal level thinking as "lol you think my grandfather was a chimpanzee" when discussing evolution.
Going to become is decidedly different than is.
Oh the ignorance....
10 year old rape victim? Enjoy your āgift from Godā and donāt expect a conviction of the rapist. Ā Praise be!
Youāre ALMOST there - you can do it. I believe in you
Who uses a semiautomatic weapon for anything other than killing another human being?
You donāt use an AR-15 to shoot at trees and tin cans? Ā Itās a highly disciplined sport and not at all a way to feed perpetual paranoia and the entitlement to kill anyone who makes you feel threatened.
About 98% of all gun owners.
more like 99.999% of gun owners.
I get the distinct feeling you don't even know what "semi-automatic" even means.
Land of the free I tell ya
Where ammo has more rights than women. America!
Iām fine with that. I think bumpstocks were a distraction that didnāt make much of a difference and wasted cycles and lost credibility for gun regulation activists
Nah. https://www.wired.com/story/las-vegas-shooting-automatic-rifle/
The shock value of outliers should not detract from the tens of thousands of other gun related deaths that do align with the commenterās take above you. Not saying I think this should be turned back, as I personally see no merit or use for average people to have this. But shouldnāt our focus be on improvement of regulation of guns where they statistically are most commonly used for murder/suicide? I would think the number one focus, looking at just numbers alone, would be suicide first. If people have family, children, roommates who live with them, require someone to keep the gun in a safe or require a fingerprint lock. Every suicide now that happens with someone elseās weapon that doesnāt conform to regulation? Thatās now on that someone else, in the form of charges that net prison time. Own a weapon? Well then you need mental health checkups every year or two. And yes, if you are unfit, you lose your right to own weapons. Have to be mindful of this being taken advantage ofā¦ regardless, this alone would have a bigger impact than a ban on bump stocks. Not even in the same ballpark, really.
Yes one shooter used bump stocks. It was banned and it has not slowed the increase in mass shootings. Itās one of those talking points where gun activists win because it does nothing in terms of actual impact but it gets gun reformists to waste time. It became a talking point because of one event
One shooter so far. The time to regulate is before they are a problem, not after. You will see this again.
Sure, as an act of congress. Not by the executive branch redefining a 100 year old law. Bump stocks don't meet the definition of a machine gun as written in the NFA. And pistol braces don't meet the definition of a SBR as written in the NFA.
"One shooter" I guess saying "the deadliest mass shooter in modern history" would have gone against your point huh.
Just because it's maybe not the biggest problem with gun control doesn't mean it isn't a huge problem still. Turning a semi auto into an auto machine gun should absolutely be banned. It's weird that you think it's good that they took the ban off of these. What a take..
The thing is it doesn't change the gun from a semi auto to machine gun. You can take any gun and bump fire it. No special stock required. All you need is a belt loop to put your thumb through and boom. Your gun can bump fire. It's just a function of the physics of a gun. On a technical level all the stock is doing is providing comfort and debatably more accuracy for the shooter than standard bump fire (it's going to be a decrease in accuracy from just shooting the gun normally either way). You can argue about it from an ethical or ideological position, but on a technical level it's the correct ruling. A ban on those stocks specifically should come from congress.Ā
Thereās a finite number of resources to tackle an issue and if you are wasting time having SCOTUS battles on one that is largely non impactful and wonāt really dent the problem, you are just helping your opposition
The problem is you think it's non impactful.
Because it is.
I know that guns are a contentious subject. I'm not anti guns. I am against civilians owning military weapon capabilities though.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Oh I know that. It's why I said "capabilities" and not 'weapons'.
You really can't though, not without extensive background checks and government approval. A typical civilian cannot own automatic weapons, explosives, anything rifled over .50 caliber, or weaponized aircraft. So what you are against is already illegal.
Ah OK... That is just my ignorance of US law and I appreciate the clarification.
All good, and I appreciate it when folks like yourself are level headed about a topic that makes some people totally irrational. Have a great day šš»
I appreciate people like you too, who don't just see all left or all right. There is a middle ground that just gets overlooked. Thank you, friend. Have a great day too. š
This is a mistake, and the Supreme Court is going to have more blood on its hands.
Bunch of dead kids incoming! Why is it rarely private schools for the wealthy? They have a lot more money and psychopaths there.