Bump Stock Ban Blocked

Since bump stocks were mentioned in a different thread, bumping this.

The number of guns seized because of this is nebulous. But there were at least 60k bump stocks destroyed as a result.

That's without even looking at the buy-backs.

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/...n-takes-effect

Another account of their lawsuit identified just that manufacturer of destroying over 73k of their remaining inventory.

The whole bump stock thing is just a feel good measure that has no effect at all. I’d lay odds that more people died being attacked by a feral giraffe than were killed by someone with a bump stock equipped rifle. I don’t see anyone calling for a giraffe ban.

Besides that, it’s just plain stupid. You can’t hit the side of a barn using bump fire, or even with an actual fully automatic rifle. Nobody uses the fully automatic mode on a select fire weapon in a gunfight. Nobody. There’s not even training on it, other than where to flip the switch to turn it on. An m16/m4 and the AR civilian variants simply aren’t used for suppressing fire, that’s what the M249 is for.

Confirmation that the number of weapons seized was not, as one poster has claimed elsewhere, "Zero"

Photo is of a seized rifle. So the number must be "at least one"

https://theweek.com/us/1017196/supre...ump-stock-bans

Additional reporting confirming weapons seized.

https://www.cbs8.com/article/news/bu...1-36391bd949b2

Further confirmation of "non-zero"

That's the danger of absolutist language. Don't need to show a full accounting to prove those wrong.

The entire Las Vegas country music concert massacre was carried out courtesy of guns fitted with bump stocks, which led to trump banning them. But yeah, just a "feel good measure". Lol. Unreal how you just block out facts that don't jive with your deranged MAGA worldview.

That guy could’ve done just as much damage by repeatedly pulling the trigger, probably more. It’s called point fire. Spraying bullets is a highly ineffective way of putting down an enemy. That’s called suppressing or covering fire, which isn’t intended to actually hit a target.

If you think banning bump stocks is going to reduce the number of people killed with a gun in the US you’re either dumb, naive, or some combination of the two.

Edit: What makes you think I give AF what Trump’s opinion on the matter is? He folded like a pussy under pressure and took a meaningless action. I couldn’t give fewer shits about bump stocks, never owned one and never will. Not that you even need a special stock to bump fire. You don’t. I’m simply pointing out that the ban of them does absolutely nothing.

Confirmation that the number of weapons seized was not, as one poster has claimed elsewhere, "Zero"

Photo is of a seized rifle. So the number must be "at least one"

https://theweek.com/us/1017196/supre...ump-stock-bans

Additional reporting confirming weapons seized.

https://www.cbs8.com/article/news/bu...1-36391bd949b2

Further confirmation of "non-zero"
Originally Posted by HDGristle

It's cute that you try to come to the defense of your fellow leftist when he makes absurd, false statements

Sadly, you failed just like he did

Your first article makes no mention of any gun confiscated. I guess you don't understand the concept of stock images

Your second article does not claim the guns were confiscated due to the bump stock rule which is what your fellow leftist claimed. It states that they were seized from 3 people who were listed in the Armed Prohibited Persons System database or were suspected of engaging in illegally acquiring or possessing illicit weapons. Meaning these guns were seized because these 3 convicted criminals were not permitted to own any guns - not because of anything to do with the bump stock ban

You should try better reading comprehension if you want to answer the question

Show us the statistics with a link to a reputable source for exactly how many guns were confiscated due to the bump stock rule?

What makes you think I give AF what Trump’s opinion on the matter is? He folded like a pussy under pressure and took a meaningless action. I couldn’t give fewer shits about bump stocks, never owned one and never will. Not that you even need a special stock to bump fire. You don’t. I’m simply pointing out that the ban of them does absolutely nothing. Originally Posted by Jacuzzme

Be that as it may, I'm just pointing out that trump did more to "take yer guns away" than any Democrat you can name. It's a bullshit boogeyman scare tactic used by politicians. Unfortunately it's been working for 50 years and there's still no evidence it was ever true to begin with.

I don’t believe that to be true, but I’ll cede the point for matter of discussion. The only reason that democrats have not severely restricted gun ownership, or outright banned them, is because they’re hamstrung by the other party and the constitution. They call for it ALL THE TIME. Warning the people against it isn’t a scare tactic, it’s provable with their own words.

But when trump actually bans bump stocks it's just a "feel good measure" and no big deal. Lol. You'd be marching to DC with torches and pitchforks if Obama or Biden pulled the exact same move.

But when trump actually bans bump stocks it's just a "feel good measure" and no big deal. Lol. You'd be marching to DC with torches and pitchforks if Obama or Biden pulled the exact same move. Originally Posted by tommy156

Do you not understand that a bump stock is NOT a gun?

It ~is~ a feel good measure, regardless of who enacted it. That doesn’t mean I agree with it, or any other bullshit regulation. If it weren’t for citizens with military grade weapons, we’d still be under the British Crown.

It ~is~ a feel good measure, regardless of who enacted it. That doesn’t mean I agree with it, or any other bullshit regulation. If it weren’t for citizens with military grade weapons, we’d still be under the British Crown. Originally Posted by Jacuzzme

Since 1871, we are.

It's cute that you try to come to the defense of your fellow leftist when he makes absurd, false statements

Sadly, you failed just like he did

Your first article makes no mention of any gun confiscated. I guess you don't understand the concept of stock images

Your second article does not claim the guns were confiscated due to the bump stock rule which is what your fellow leftist claimed. It states that they were seized from 3 people who were listed in the Armed Prohibited Persons System database or were suspected of engaging in illegally acquiring or possessing illicit weapons. Meaning these guns were seized because these 3 convicted criminals were not permitted to own any guns - not because of anything to do with the bump stock ban

You should try better reading comprehension if you want to answer the question Originally Posted by berryberry

Open up the photo and look at the meta-data. Then prove it's a stock pic. Your word isn't currency here. They state its a seized gun. It's got a bump stock. This one's the beef.

As for the second one, dem guns were seized. Period. This is the gravy.

Non-zero confirmed. I get that you can't deal with it, but it is what it is.

If you want the cherry, I've been sandbagging you. Ajay Dhingra had his bump stock rifle seized in 2019. It made national news as the first federal case. He was arraigned before U.S. District Judge Gray Miller.

He fucked around and found out.

Open up the photo and look at the meta-data. Then prove it's a stock pic. Your word isn't currency here. They state its a seized gun. It's got a bump stock. This one's the beef.

As for the second one, dem guns were seized. Period. This is the gravy.

Non-zero confirmed. I get that you can't deal with it, but it is what it is.

If you want the cherry, I've been sandbagging you. Ajay Dhingra had his bump stock rifle seized in 2019. It made national news as the first federal case. He was arraigned before U.S. District Judge Gray Miller.

He fucked around and found out. Originally Posted by HDGristle

There you go lieing again. It is not a good look for you. I will repeat since you seem to have a hard time following simple facts

Your first article makes no mention of any gun confiscated.

Your second article does not claim the guns were confiscated due to the bump stock rule which is what your fellow leftist claimed. It states that they were seized from 3 people who were listed in the Armed Prohibited Persons System database or were suspected of engaging in illegally acquiring or possessing illicit weapons. Meaning these guns were seized because these 3 convicted criminals were not permitted to own any guns - not because of anything to do with the bump stock ban

And now your third example makes you a three time loser. While Ajay Dhingra, was indicted on firearms violations for having an installed bump stock, the only reason his actual gun would have been seized was because Dhingra had previously been committed to a mental institution and is prohibited by federal law of possessing a firearm or ammunition.

So no matter how much you repeat your lie, it is still a lie and the facts prove you wrong

I'm sorry sir. You've missed the point 3x.

The win was tallied for Tommy