Slide Fire Bump Fire Gun Stocks NOT an Automatic Weapon Says ATF

Slide Fire SSAR-15 SBS Bump Fire Stock
SlideFire Bump Fire Gun Stocks NOT an Automatic Weapon Says ATF
AmmoLand Gun News
AmmoLand Gun News

USA –  -(Ammoland.com)- The main stream media and Democratic gun banners are in a fever over Slide Fire Bump Fire gun stocks found in the hotel of the Las Vegas Mandalay Bay shooter. Unlike all other AR 15 Gun Stocks the Slide Fire stock allows the shooter to ride the trigger simulating fast

Unlike all other AR 15 Gun Stocks the Slide Fire stock allows the shooter to ride the trigger simulating fast gun fire, but with very little aiming control.

As with anything gun related the media and politicians don't know what they are talking about when they call the rifles with Slide Fire's bump fire gun stocks “automatic weapons”.

With just a simple internet search they would have found that Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) , as early as 2010, has made the legal determination that these style of stocks are NOT automatic weapons. They are just gun parts and do not fall under ATF jurisdiction, nor require any special stamps or permits or related “permissions”.

From the ATF letter below.

“Accordingly we find that the “bump-stock” is a firearm part and is NOT regulated as a firearm under the Gun Control Act or National Firearms Act.”

Slide Fire ATF Determination Letter 2010 ~ NOT an Automatic Weapon

  • 157 thoughts on “Slide Fire Bump Fire Gun Stocks NOT an Automatic Weapon Says ATF

    1. @WB
      These Self driven cars are so new there are not many laws yet. In New York you must have one hand on the steering wheel at all times. Since there is no driver and no hand on the steering wheel, all the tickets would probably go to the person in the back seat; or maybe they would just arrest the person and impound the vehicle. Not sure, I guess we will be seeing more and more on these cars and the poor victims that are killed or injured by the cars’ errors.

    2. @oldvet
      Speaking of experimental cars, about 3 blocks from the Indian Reservation on Long Island a “Self driven silver SUV” cut me off and almost caused an accident. I was at the stop sign first and had the right of way to go straight, the self driven car was making a left. It must have sensed that it had the right of way, I proceeded straight, and it sped into it’s left turn and almost caused me to crash into it. As I swerved and it passed I clearly saw into the full front seat that there was no driver (they have not been lawfully approved in New York, but the liberals want to allow a certain “test” number on the roads in New York approved within the coming state budget). A lot of corruption money being given to our federal and state legislatures to approve these cars. In fact, I heard recently instead of bringing up the long awaited Reciprocity Act (HR38) a new bill that was just introduced by the big car companies took precedence with our dirty liberal congress (as well as the Republican Senate that still works for the Chamber of Commerce and not the American People). These are dangerous cars and are going to kill people. But the left, and the people who will be killed by the errors of these cars are of no concern to them, only the money stuffed into their coffers.

      1. @ToJ How does one exchange insurance info with a self driven car? Or how does one arrest a hit and run self driven fleeing felon? I know! Shoot it until it is dead, and then overwatch the corpse to see who comes to claim it!

        1. @WB…Local golf course says their carts typically make two full rounds. They say they would feel comfortable with an eight to ten mile range. I do see some in some of the retirement communities .

          1. @OV, I’m thinking that if I could attach four solar panels to a golf cart, hooked in series, it could recharge any where, given time and sunshine. Attaching two solar panels to the roof would be easy, but in series it would only be 24v. I have to figure out how to attach two more solar panels, in series, attach a charge controller, and then connect that to the batteries. I should look like a real “prototype”, if I can figure out how to do it.
            I could park it by the house, attach an inverter, changing the volts to 120v and have a portable solar electric system big enough to actually be useful. That is the plan anyway. What do you think from an electricians perspective.

            1. @WB… You need 12 volts to charge 12 volt batteries. 10 or 15 amps should be sufficient to charge your batteries . Picture a water hose say 1 inch fastened to a barrel (to fill the barrel ) how long it takes to fill the barrel depends on how big the barrel is. The size of the exit hose (the motor) and the size of the barrel determines how long the motor will run . When you connect in series you add voltage , when you connect in parallel you increase the size of the barrel . (amperage) Amperage increases amount of work which can be done. Voltage provides power to do the work. Push, pull, drill etc. Converter from 120 volts to DC, Inverter to produce AC to DC An RV place may be able to help you with what you want . That’s basically the way an RV works.

            2. @OV, I knew what you meant. The charge controller is a limiting factor. They are 30 amps, but the solar panels put out 8 or 9 amps. So three solar panels, in series, are ok. Four solar panels, in series, produce to many amps for the charge controller. But three solar panels in series are 36 volts, not enough. Four solar panels in series are 48v, but too many amps for the charge controller. I have not figured this out yet.

            3. @WB…Google Patriot Power Generator They show a 1800 watt solar . they deal with home depot . They are showing one with a suit case package and looks like one panel , might do every thing you are looking for . About 1500. bucks. They may have already done the work for you . That might keep your cart running indefinitely .

            4. @OV, I researched the Patriot Power Generator. Not big enough. I think this is like anything else, if you want “it” done right you have to figure it out yourself, assemble the right stuff…yourself; and put it all together… yourself!
              Corporate America wants to sell something that has a nice fat profit margin. I want something for the day that the SHTF.

            5. @WB…I see where Dana Loesch has moved her family because of death threats, You have room don’t you ?

            6. I’ve often wondered the same thing you guys are. Another thing I’ve thought of is what would happen to the range of tho golf cart if you had multiple alternators driven by the wheels as they spun while driving hooked up to recharge the batteries. If they were over driven by gear ratios to spin even faster than the wheel speed they would be even more efficient. There is also no reason you can’t have more than one per wheel either. Could you ever get to the point that you matched the amount of electricity being used? What about using the battery to get moving and to make up the difference when wheel speed slowed enough to effect output but at full output the Voltage was put directly into the electric drive motor to try to drive the cart directly? With enough alternators could you get close to enough voltage to drive the electric motor? What if you also used solar to power a charger of some kind at same time? I know we are almost talking perpetual motion machine here but every electric motor requires a certain voltage and amperage to operate and with enough alternators being driven or over driven by the wheels as you move forward I would think you could get to that required amount to drive the electric motor. It might be even easier with fully charged batteries to take up low wheel speed slack and even easier still with a solar charger in the mix.
              I don’t known enough about electricity to do the math and I’ve always wanted to try it if I ever get enough money for the needed supplies. I was thinking of trying a small scale version with brushless r/c cars and lipo batteries to see if it would even just increase run time.

            7. @REPO My father-in-law was an engineer at Boeing he and I used to discuss using a motor to belt drive a generator , he said I was trying to invent a perpetual motion machine . He unfortunately no longer around to ask. He said what I was trying to do would run but slow down and not be able to recover because of mechanical loss. Now that was before solar generation so I don’t know if a solar boost would be enough to overcome . He was the engineer I worked utility which is totally different and also different from inside electricians and motors and gens, and controls.

            8. @OV I’ve heard the perpetual motion machine thought from others I’ve mentioned this to. I just wonder if you can add enough alternators and overdrive them enough to overcome the mechanical loss of driving the alternators? What if you rigged like 100 very efficient alternators to a very efficient brushless drive motor? At some point I think you could overcome the mechanical loss. Then if you started adding in solar panels who knows… I may have to get off my butt and try a small scale version with r/c cars

            9. @OV I agree solar might be the key but I still want to see if you can get to the point of efficiency being higher than the power loss caused by mechanical drag of the added alternators. At the very least I think you could extend the range considerably. If you got 10 miles out of just a full charge of the battery then each alternator added to the drive wheels should extend the range. If you use the most efficient alternator and drive motor and experiment with gear ratios and maybe even a constant velocity trans/pulley system to run the most efficient gear ratio on the final drive you could probably double and triple the range. Who knows how far you could get it to go with more altenators. Then you add the solar charger for the battery and maybe you never need to recharge outside of the solar charger.
              I do have alot of r/c cars and motors and all I need is a couple small solar panels to build a scale version and see how much longer it will run before killing the battery. I’m not set up to do it right now but I will try to be soon because I’ve wanted to try this for along time.

            10. @WB&Repo…I would say if you can get it done more power to you . You might be the next Billionaires !!! See you on the Shark Tank .

          2. @WB…As far as your four panels being to much voltage, you could install a resistor or voltage regulator to adjust the voltage to what you want it to be. If you have a hobby shop close by they could figure how big the resistor should be, in series it would reduce the voltage.

    3. Whos gonna have egg on their face when those who do not realize yet that ,,,, you can hook your thumb / finger on your belt loop and do the same thing (same principle) as the “slide fire”.. Check it out on “youtube.com”

        1. I wouldn’t be surprised to see them go after the AR. That would be a big problem because of all the people that own them. Besides, they are fun to shoot and the ammo is reasonable. I haven’t killed anyone with mine, has anyone here killed anyone with there’s.

    4. It is like anything else someone back has to ruin it for the good people. We can’t buy sinus pills that works because a meth head decide to use this pill for the bad. Just like this guy he used the bump stock for the bad. Don’t punish the good for what the bad does.

    5. Sure, it’s not an Automatic rifle but the amount of firepower, in fast succession is comparable. And as far as it’s accuracy is concerned, in most of these cases, it wouldn’t matter, as long as it’s in the general direction of the target crowd, it’s going to cause massive casualties with a sweeping motion.

      1. Would you allow the “RESPONSIBLE CITIZENs” TO HAVE NUCLEAR WEAPONS because after all “we are responsible citizens” the one bad apple theory is becoming passe’ whether we like it or not! Plus who really needs a frigging machine gun???????????????????

        1. Nuclear weapons are not bearable arms.. 2nd it wasn’t a machine gun and it’s not the 2nd amendment of needs. If I’m law abiding I will be with a bb gun, a machine gun,or a nuke. The problem with the nuke is you can’t use it for anything. You can’t target practice with it because you can’t sight it in when it obliterates the targets. You cant hunt with them becasuse the deer always come out overcooked and dry. And finally you can’t defend you house or property with them because no house or property left to defend after. On the plus side they are self cleaning and no criminal pieces to pick up or pesky blood stains on the carpet. Your neighbors might be pi$$ed that the neighborhood is glowing for the next 500 years but atleast criminals can’t sneak around in the dark anymore…

          1. single shot forks are kosher, but who needs an automatic reloading fork to eat a cake? ghost forks can reload 30 times in one second…

        2. @Debra B, Most nations can not afford nuclear weapons. No corporation or private individual can nuclear weapons. No private person could even afford the maintenance on a nuclear weapon. Thus the hypothetical is just foolish.

    6. How about that Traitor Paul Ryan? He said because of Las Vegas he is shelving indefinitely all NRA backed bills to include silencers and HR38 Reciprocity.

      1. Sure, you have no argument so you go with the largest dumbest question you can come up with…
        Who really needs anything other than food, waters & shelter?
        A bump stock does not equal a “machine gun” but there are many people that like to have fun shooting at paper targets…
        What do you do for fun than can be thought of as excessive fun to someone else?
        And who are you to take away freedoms of anyone?

    7. We can thank the media if another person uses a bumpstock the same way. They were a novelty that few people owned and even fewer could get them to work. Nevermind hitting a target with it. Now the are sold out everywhere and everone that never knew they existed will have one.. thank the media for the next one.

      1. When the hell are the going to address the real problem. MENTAL HEALTH. My mother committed suicide with pills. These people are sick, evil but mostly mentally not there. Spend the money on helping those people instead taking this stuff that does not good away. NOTHING in the laws would have stopped him. NOTHING. Now the democrats get one more feather in their cap. SHAME ON NRA. Give the an inch and soon it will all be gone.

    8. After reading all of the comments there is a conclusion that hasn’t been addressed. You cannot predict a transition from mental health to dysfunction with specificity and advance notice unless you own a functioning crystal ball. The gun laws we have and those added in response to tragedy have never consistently stopped a tragedy such as this. Enforce the laws we have, if see something say something, educate the public to be more aware of emotional/mental function changes in family members, and exercise your second amendment rights. More people have been protected by a licensed gun owner than harmed. There is a cost for freedom and when considering the big picture and avoiding becoming a replica of George Orwell’s 1984, Soylent Green, or Farhenheit 451. There is a childish notion from the Left that life is fair, Karma is at work, and we can control peoples’ thoughts and actions. The most we have ever done is provide a deterrent and only to those whose mental faculties and moral compasses are functioning.

        1. There are many ways to commit suicide. I would rather have someone off them self with a gun then drive a car head on into my family or someone else’s! That sounds cold I know but why should innocents pay the price? Here is a liberal cause for you; why not spend the money on mental health care vs. illegal immigrants?

        2. Guns don’t kill people, people kill people. I DARE ANYONE to put a fully loaded automatic weapon on a table with NO ONE Touching it and tell me how many people it kills.

          How many people are killed by motor vehicles each year by drunk drivers? How many people have been killed by airplanes each year? Thousands of people did in 9/11 because of airplanes – I think we need to ban airplanes. We should ban knives because of how many people die from stabbings. We should ban ALL pharmaceuticals because of how many people die from them. We should ban alcohol and motor vehicle because of how many people have been killed by drunk drivers. THINK OF THE CHILDREN!!!! How many have been killed because of alcohol and motor vehicles! We need to ban EVERYTHING that shows up on the FBI’s death index – think of how many people we cuold save if we banned all those things. But we shouldn’t stop there. We should ban all liberals and progressives including the black lives matter organization – look how many people they injure with their VIOLENCE!!! They are TERRORISTS just as bad as Paddock!

      1. More than 30,000 unborn children are butchered apart daily in the USA, and their body parts are sold off, like pieces from a junked car! Wake up America!

    9. And finally, ladies and gentlemen, we out another troll who, instead of coming forth honestly and admitting to being a Liberal and saying he disagreed with everything gun owners believed in, sneaked in like a thief and pretended to be a gun owner, trying to quote the Founders and finally, when confronted by several with his own contradictory statements and links (Salon etc) is outed for who he really is. I give you all the latest incarnation: Kurtis the troll.

    10. i used to be a fed. i saw the laws being encroached, twisted, abused and ignored. yet the supervisors just turned a blind eye. you can use a shoestring t do the exact same thing as a bumpfire stock and a stick as well. you are not going to pass laws and get rid of evil, if that were the case the democrat side of the aisle would be empty. look at how many people have abused the law and not been prosecuted, feinstein, mccain, maxine waters, both clintons, mel watts, etc.. on and on. the only thing the elite government wants is control, gun control is people control. i actually studied the constitution and had to use it in everyday life for years. the second amendment was almost not put in as the founding fathers thought there would never be any attempt to take citizens arms. arms means magazines, powder, lead, weapons. any attempt to regulate tax or restrict guns is actually illegal no matter what the quislings in the judicial dept say. any judge that says a man free man without a criminal record can have a restriction on arms is going against the us constitution that they took an oath to preserve and defend. in the older times, a man got out of prison he was handed his guns back, having served his times, a gun was necessary for life. now, with the commie/bernie supporters going out on the killing path, they are again necessary to strap on to protect those you love, or, even complete strangers.

      cars kill more people by far than guns do. so lets have everyone of the vehicle buyers go through a background check with the 30 questions asking the government to allow someone to buy a vehicle. this makes more sense than gun buyers as arms are protected by natural law and the constitution.

      bumpfire stocks are protected by the constitution and are not able to be regulated by the batfe, which is rife with corruption and needs dismantled and the alcohol and explosive division go to the irs. the tobacco division needs to go to the agriculture department. the rest needs folded and sent to other jobs or fired outright for the corruption.

      mob mentality is actually democracy, we, thank GOD, and our founding fathers, live in a republic. the founding fathers hated democracy with every ounce of their being. it is mob mentality that feeds antifa and their riots. it is fed by fear an demotions, not common sense. i read many of the trolls above trying to inject their hate for guns and those that exercise our God given constitution affirmed rights. grow up or go to some country where you have to actually ask permission to talk in a public square, post a bill, or speak your mind. everybody seems to love the commie/socialist countries, yet nobody is packing up to go to Venezuela or Cuba. so, try doing something constructive and give blood, like a few quarts next time at the red cross…

      1. Amen brother. As a brother LEO who saw how the Secret Police operated in Belize, when no one had the means to resist, I can say that you never want to be in that position.

    11. AmmoLand, All I want to do is order a Bump Stock for my AR. I am a responsible owner. The only shooting I do is target shooting.

      1. Donald: As someone who has one and has had it for years, don’t waste your money. Is it fun? Yes. Is it easy to use? No, it takes time and practice. Are they accurate? Not really any more than full auto fire is accurate. Full auto fire is used as suppressive fire or as a last ditch effort to repeal an overwhelming force. Right now they’re selling on Gun Broker for three to four times retail. Do I want them banned? Absolutely not. I want no gun laws at all. They have never worked and never will.

        1. My preference would be the binary/echo triggers. They function like a stock trigger but give you the ability for quick controlled pairs and with practice pretty quick repeat shots for some range fun if you want it. They seem to have a legitimate function,are still safe and accurate.

    12. You could put a bump stock in a fixed vice, put a zip tie around the grip and press in (1) direction against the fore grip to initiate rapid fire with one hand.

      It’s clever and circumvents the laws that regulate what mechanisms are “inside” the firearm by achieving rapid fire by adding a mechanism “outside” of the firearm.

      Full auto fire is never accurate or well aimed. It doesn’t need to be to cause a lot of casualties obviously.

      Slide fire bump stocks are a way to circumvent laws by adding external mechanisms to transfer the energy of a round and should be as illegal as internal mechanisms that allow rapid fire using the energy of the round.

      I have 3 rifles and a shotgun and am able to recognize the very unique threats that guns pose. Just like the unique threats of high voltage electricity are minimized in our homes by safety regulations. Knives, baseball bats and trucks at rest contain no potential energy. A loaded gun does. A moving truck looks very different from a parked truck. The danger is obvious. However, a loaded gun looks just like an unloaded gun.

      Comparing guns to knives, trucks, or any objects that contain no potential energy, is the argument of a simpleton and completely ignorant of the laws of physics.

      A 4 year old can apply enough force to a trigger to kill a grown man. There is no other common object that allows the strength of a toddler to move a fraction of an inch and instantly kill someone besides a gun.

      We need to recognize the uniqueness of the threats they pose and manage them like grown ups just as we do with electricity. They both introduce a unique, deadly risk to an environment they are introduced to but they can both be very useful tools if the threats are minimized. But neither are toys and neither should be treated that way.

      1. Manage firearms like electricity? Do you gey criminal background checks to purchase batteries? What about solar panels? You know how dangerous automatic power is. And solar radiation is very dangerous, deadly even. We need to regulate who’s allowed out and for how long.

        Trucks have no potential energy? Oh, that’s right, it’s the fuel inside them that has it.

        Regulate who can fly? That worked great on 9-11, right? You proved again it’s the person not the object.

        No law or regulation has ever prevented stupid people from doing stupid things. Back to regulating electricity… no laws prevented my idiot in-law from almost frying himself when he used pliers to disconnect a 220 line without cutting the power at the breaker first.

        Your citing of the death of the grandchild that was due to stupidity/negligence, just like my in-law’ stupidity with electricity, would not have been prevented by any law. Based on your beliefs, Prohibition worked, and we have won the War on Drugs.

      2. @Pete, the various governments have authority to regulate zip ties. The various governments are forbidden by the founding fathers’ document called the Constitution from so much as infringing on the People’s Second Amendment enumerated Civil Right have and carry arms.

    13. The “bump stock” is a device that adds a mechanism to the exterior of a gun’s firing mechanism that allows the energy of the round to assist in the rapid firing of the weapon by allowing the force to move the firearm in a direction that releases pressure from the trigger (which becomes just another lever in the mechanism). The pressure against the trigger (lever) is provided by the opposing hand pushing the firearm away from the shooter and the trigger into the fixed object (which in this case is a finger gripping the sliding stock). The finger could be replaced by another fixed object like a zip tie, or even duct tape for example. All that is required is pressure holding the stock in place and pressure pushing the weapon forward. The weapon itself becomes a link, transferring energy from the forward pressing hand to the trigger. The rapid fire action is driven by

      A. the pressure of the forward hand and
      B. the force of recoil.

      It simply adds a mechanism to the outside of the firearm, which transfers the requirement of pressure on a trigger, to pressure on a forward grip which is “reset” by recoil. Normally, direct pressure on the trigger is not reset by recoil as the finger moves back with the firearm and trigger as it recoils.

      The bump stock prevents the finger from moving back with the firearm during use since the stock is already back against the shoulder.

      You could put a bump stock in a fixed vice, put a zip tie around the grip and press in (1) direction against the fore grip to initiate rapid fire with one hand.

      It’s clever and circumvents the laws that regulate what mechanisms are “inside” the firearm by achieving rapid fire by adding a mechanism “outside” of the firearm.

      Full auto fire is never accurate or well aimed. It doesn’t need to be to cause a lot of casualties obviously.

      Slide fire bump stocks are a way to circumvent laws by adding external mechanisms to transfer the energy of a round and should be as illegal as internal mechanisms that allow rapid fire using the energy of the round.

      I have 3 rifles and a shotgun and am able to recognize the very unique threats that guns pose. Just like the unique threats of high voltage electricity are minimized in our homes by safety regulations. Knives, baseball bats and trucks at rest contain no potential energy. A loaded gun does. A moving truck looks very different from a parked truck. The danger is obvious. However, a loaded gun looks just like an unloaded gun.

      Comparing guns to knives, trucks, or any objects that contain no potential energy, is the argument of a simpleton and completely ignorant of the laws of physics.

      A 4 year old can apply enough force to a trigger to kill a grown man 100’s of feet away. There is no other common object that allows the strength of a baby to move a fraction of an inch and instantly kill someone 100 ft away besides a gun.

      We need to recognize the uniqueness of the threats they pose and manage them like grown ups just as we do with electricity. They both introduce a unique, deadly risk to an environment they are introduced to but they can both be very useful tools if the threats are minimized. But neither are toys and neither should be treated that way.

      1. You probably could have written what you wanted to say in one paragraph. Only thing is, I’m not sure that you know what it was you wanted to say.

        1. True, but there’s so many stupid, politically driven *arguments about guns it would take a novel to really address them all (plus my battery crapped out halfway through and kinda screwed me up).

          *For example, “Guns don’t kill people, People kill people”. Which implies (to millions of people whose logic does not go beyond bumper stickers) that guns, minus the intent to do harm are rendered harmless. When the fact is many are killed each year, including children, by irresponsible gun ownership or simply dropping a loaded weapon. It does not require any intent to harm. Sometimes all it takes is someone to be clumsy or curious and a person is dead. A lot of these deaths could be prevented by people recognizing that firearms are uniquely dangerous due to the potential energy they contain.

          Much like a grenade.

          Grown ups need to stop treating them like toys (which is why bump stocks exist). Guns are tools not toys, but youtube is full of videos by gun owners that indicate otherwise.

          1. Pete, and heroin is dangerous and deadly. Maybe we should regulate that, too? Oh, wait, we do. How is that working out?

            As far as bump stocks, if you were as knowledgeable as you try to appear, you’d know that you don’t even need an external device to get the same effect as you would with the bump stock. Plenty of videos showing how to do that, too.

            It seems that maybe we need to ban online videos and the Internet. Why should we stop at the 2A when we can save so many other lives by banning the First Amendment, too.

            After that we can suspend habeas corpus while we are at it. Oh, wait, the “Patriot” Act already does. Any other rights we should repeal to save lives?

            1. I remember that after the Murrah bombing there were many decrying the availability of “The Anarchist Cookbook.” It is all about “feels.”

            1. @OV I think that pete is more of a danger to me or at least my civil rights than any DOD issue munition. They do not go off of their own volition. But pete does.

            2. @OV, brings new meaning to the phrase “for pete sake” . For example: Explain in extreme detail and use little words, for pete’s sake!
              Hey, If I hooked up a solar panel to the roof of an electric golf cart could I keep the thing charged up? I am thinking that those four big 6 volt batteries are designed for deep deep discharge and then complete recharge regularly.

            3. @WB…Yep you would be correct. look at how those experimental solar powered cars are configured , light weight, as few wheels as possible , overly large panels, etc.

            4. @OV, I am thinking that if there were no electric grid systems, then a couple of solar panels hooked to a charge controller hooked to charge the golf cart batteries
              would be the transportation of the future. But I don’t know enough about electricity to figure out how to match up the solar panels to match up to the charge controller , and to match up to the golf cart batteries. Can a 12v and 8 amp solar panel hooked to a charge controller charge up a 48v (unknown amps) golf cart battery set?

            5. @WB…The voltage should be equal, but the amps could less . 10 -15 amps should charge your batteries but it would probably be very slow from panels. I’m just trying to learn about panels myself. Think of the range of the cart , a golf course is what 7000 yds. or there abouts I’m not sure the cart would get you back to the ranch. Don’t know how much you can get from panels or how large they would have to be.

            6. @OV, 1760 yds in a mile. 7000 yards is less than 4 miles. That would not serve my needs. Might be ok in a small to medium size city. Make a eight solar panel charging station at home. Attach a couple solar panels to the roof for a little on the road charging, might be ok for around town. Well, I guess pay the property tax or buy another rifle, instead!

            7. @WB…Not sure if the golf cart has an efficient enough motor. Those experimental cars that college students are testing have specially built motors and a lot of gearing to increase the tork to the wheels.

          2. @Pete, “A sword is but a tool… in the murderer’s hand.” All tools are inanimate. Guns, hammers, howitzers, wine bottle, a piece of wire don’t kill people. The proof is that none of these existed when Cain killed Able. The only common denominator between murder then and murder now is… the person that murders.

            1. @WB…You could add batteries connected in parallel to gain run time but more batteries equal more weight .

      2. A moving truck has plent of potential energy in it and you may be able to tell a parked truck from a moving truck but how do you tell when it’s being driven by someone that’s going to drive it up on the sidewalk before they do? I must have missed the post where people were advocating for arming 4yr olds because I’m only aware of it being a tragic accident when that happens but you sound like we want fisher price to make baby’s 1st handgun. The comparison to other devices that kill is to point out the hypocrisy of the antigunners. They claim it to be about if we save just one life it’s worth whatever we can do when it’s caused by a gun but please ignore those 39,000 corpses from car crashes or the 88,000 a year from alcohol or the 250,000 from preventable medical errors a year or the 64,000 from overdoses or the 2,800,000 a year from being FAT! That’s 2.8 million from being fat but we need to move heaven and earth to stop the 8000 gang on gang murders and the 2,000 actual murders of Reg citizens a year because they were committed by guns. I refuse to count suicides in the same group because a self inflicted gun injury or death is not the same as murder and should not be counted as it is. If you don’t see that there is an ulterior motive at work then I don’t think you can tell the difference between a parked truck and one about to run right over you.

        1. Sure there is an ulterior motive behind many people who want to ban all guns from all citizens. They are one extreme. The other extreme is that guns should have no regulation, and that includes automatic weapons and that guns are no more dangerous than a car or a hammer.

          Both extremes prevent rational choices to be made.

          This oversimplified, politically driven attitude is why many innocent people and children are killed seemingly every week if not every day. Name one other thing with comparable potential energy that we bring into our homes besides firearms. Electricity? Natural gas? We sure do. And they keep us warm and comfortable and we also take many, many steps to minimize the risk they pose to us and our families. Rules that are all the result of regulations. We regulate the s#@t out of electricity. Wiring gauge, junction boxes, fuses, etc. all have to meet code. Same with gasses. We regulate driving any vehicle, let alone large trucks, with age requirements, licensing requirements, speed restrictions, sobriety testing, general vehicle condition (lights, tires, etc.).

          People need to stop saying moronic things like “guns don’t kill people, people kill people” and “cars kill people, should we ban cars?”. Those are childish, simplistic arguments that ignore the responsibility we have, as gun owners, to minimize the risk our guns introduce to everyone around us.

          A 4 year old girl just ended her life with a self inflicted head shot in Florida, looking through her Grandma’s purse. Her Grandma probably thought that gun was keeping her and her Granddaughter safe. She wasn’t “pushing for a Playschool gun” or whatever you said. She meant no harm.

          Then, she heard a pop that ended a life. That’s not a “tragic accident”, that’s a completely avoidable killing caused by a person believing that guns DON’T pose a threat to their own family that needs to be minimized. She didn’t have bare, exposed 240 volt wires hanging on the walls of her home and she shouldn’t have had a loaded gun casually tossed into her purse, especially with a child in the home.

          1. You didn’t address that we have gun regulation right now . 20,000 + gun laws and counting. Automatic weapons are highly regulated. Every purchase thru a licensed FFL requires a background check in all 50 states and at gun shows. Private sales makes up a small amount of transfers and some states still require the transfer to go thru a FFL or govt agency. Until recently antigunners were claiming 40%of sales were done without a background check. In the past 2 months they have switched to 1 in 5 or 20% Still to high but why the sudden change with no mention of how wrong they were and really still are.
            Why no mention about only gun deaths are screamed about. We do try to lower the numbers but once suicides are taken out we are down to 10,000 deaths. You have to admit those are not gun violence and won’t be fixed by laws. The next number that needs to be looked at separately is gang on gang/drug related. Since the guns are from illegal sources on other criminals laws won’t work. That leaves about 2000 max random murders in this country annually with guns. Even if you leave gang on gang murders in we are at 10,000. Still not a huge number for a country with 321,000,000 people. Like I said it’s only gun deaths that people want to do anything they can to stop. If it was about saving every life they would be just as upset by the 88,000 deaths from alcohol, 35,000 from cars, and 68,000 from overdoses. I could list plenty more examples but you get my point. Dead is dead it’s a fair comparison. Why does the cause of death determine if it’s the price of living in america or has to be stopped at all costs. According to antigunners we need to do whatever it takes if it will save one more life but only if it’s caused by guns. The person was still killed but it’s ok if it’s not because of a gun.

          2. Pete, If you want to regulate firearms, you have to have a Constitutional bases. The Founders did not provide one. In fact, the founders went so far as to say that the Peoples’ Civil Right shall (meaning obligation) not be even so much as infringed on. You know fringe, like the edges.
            As to the little girl and grandma’s purse that is just scrounging around for some kind of vague moral justification to replace the nonexistent authority that we have already discussed.

          3. @pete…Tell you what pete before you come preaching to us , you stop all the death occurring by abortion , then come back and we’ll talk !!

      3. Pete, bla, bla, bla same old horsesh*t all you shills post. Oh, that is the memo you get from the high and mighty that jerks your chain. Go somewhere else and petal your far left crap.

        1. If you knew me, you’d know I’m not left, but if it makes you feel better about your views to think I’m a puppet and you’re the independent thinker, knock yourself out. It’s a free country.

          But don’t tell me where to go or where I can and cannot voice my opinion. You do not have that right.

          You sound like a fairly uneducated, angry person. I hope there aren’t any children around when you leave your guns in your purse.

          1. Just read your “plane comment”. What if he crashed a plane into the crowd. Well, I’d say we’d have to start regulating who can fly planes and what kind of planes and where they can fly them to help minimize risks.

            Oh wait. We already do. Otherwise he might have flown a plane into the crowd.

            1. I think his point was no law or regulation or background check would stop a private pilot from crashing their plane into a crowd if they wanted too.

          2. Pete, I didn’t get this old by being stupid. You are stupid and do not realize it because you have swallowed the anti-gun b.s. and march to the leftist beat.

            I won’t comment to you again because you are a waste of time and there is no changing your stance because you are not intelligent enough.

          3. @pete, Would it be alright with you if I suggest that you read the constitution and some case law? It is kind of like reading the directions on a can of soup. You would not make a can of soup without reading the directions, and expect it to come out right, would you?
            PS None of us are angry people, but we have all read the Bill of Rights, and know how things are supposed to come out. So when an amateur soup maker comes along and tells us how it is supposed to be, we get annoyed.

      4. @Pete …What you know about High Voltage Electricity you could put in a thimble and it would rattle like a BB in a box car. 220 volt is a low voltage used in some house hold appliances. It is not a single wire, and they reduce voltage to110 to protect Dumb Asses like you !! And yes you could fasten a slide fire stock in a vice with a wire tie on the grip and it would function as designed . The slide fire stock does not move to make it function . It is the upper receiver and barrel that moves and will only function if you are pushing the fore grip forward . Would advise you don’t try standing in front of the rifle and pulling on the fore grip!!!

        1. @pete …I misspoke every thing moves except the grip and the stock, the stock allows the buffer tube to slide inside the stock .

    14. A well regulated militia , being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

      The reason it’s the 2nd amendment is so the people, the people can protect their 1st amendment. Look a society that can’t protect itself from their government is a society that is at the mercy of that government.
      No laws would of stopped what happened. He would of found another tool.

    15. Neither side-fire or psychotic drugs mean much in that shooting in Las Vegas!
      Two problems stick out.
      1. The position of the festival in such a range of hotels is an extreme contravening of ethical conduct by organizers!
      NEVER, force anyone to require to think in such an action in post disaster situation there could ever be “primitive psychology reactionary rationale” that can explain such a massive.
      2. The rooms in such high rise places/positions need better screening .
      Hotels can be considered to be large population congregation areas not dissimilar to the sidewalks alike Boston Marathon and other gatherings (regardless and aside to the point of the festival in this instance as a gathering).

      So you can say the festival should not have been held where it was for noise pollution reasons, and neither the internals of the hotel or the festival in this instance were credibly safe, “because”, while the hotels are private there was not good screening of luggage to understand if there was a substantive quantity of metal by both weight and source detection.inside AND probably no laws distinguishing hotels as a large population gathering requiring safety from build-up of such weapons secretly by people that are not the permanent rightful accessing owners of the building.
      This last point could do with a system of screening for hotels and private public-handling operations by weight and probable metal detection mass to “request” to customers to choose to leave such luggage in the car or a safe room (alike a “cloak room” system) without access to the luggage until they leave but “never are allowed to actually take this type of material (whatever it is) inside the hotel”. (Needs special law changes for safety).
      Gross over-site to the mass shooter problem in every detail by that festival!

      1. AS I posted the other day there was an interview of another unnamed MGM “Security Guard ” “Regarding our High Roller VIP Guest we are not allowed to question, touch, or inspect their luggage” . You won’t be seeing it on any main news media.

    16. Hi,
      You put valuable information about fire gun AR-15. People should carry a stun gun, tactical knife, flashlight, pepper spray and keychain alarms, is a good idea for personal defense.
      DMA Inc. is offering a good range of tactical equipment’s, self-defense equipment’s, martial arts equipment’s, sports & hunting accessories. Connect with us bulk orders of gun parts, rifle accessories, sport and hunting weapons.
      Thank you for useful information.

      DMA, Inc. – https://dma-inc.net/
      Rammy

      1. I should hope the ATF paid close attention to the number of fatalities compared with the amount of time the shooter had available when considering this. This isn’t going to make the delicate happy, but let’s run the numbers. 72 minutes, 60 fatalities. That’s one fatality per 72 seconds, or a Rate of Fire of 0.83 Rounds per Minute. There were a whopping 527 injuries (plus 60 fatalities), or about 8.1 Rounds per Minute, one every seven seconds, somewhat competitive with an untrained English Longbowman at 35 lbs draw weight. The brown bess is about twice as slow at 3 shots in 46 seconds, and considerably slower than a break action or bolt action.

        My point is, the rate of fire of the shooter’s weapons would have made little difference given the amount of time available to shoot into a massive crowd. Bumpfire wasn’t the problem. The amount of time it took SWAT to get to the man was.

      2. Think carefully, i just found “the pot calling the kettle black” as usual !
        The following article from Australia (as any other monarchy or dictatorship) commits its usual self-profession of victory based only on it took what it wanted for its purpose and gave an excuse to the people!
        http://www.smh.com.au/comment/how-australia-beat-the-gun-lobby-and-passed-gun-control-20171003-gytvn4.html

        Here’s “some of” its (Australia’s)’ true identity to violence post 1997 gun ban !
        http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-05-13/murder-charge-womans-alleged-stabbing-frenzy-paddington/8523560
        http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-10-11/man-faces-multiple-attempted-murder-charges-car-into-funeral/7922050
        http://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-03-17/driver-to-face-multiple-attempted-murder-charges/2653578
        https://tenplay.com.au/news/national/june-2017/murders-charges-after-man-killed-on-his-birthday

        Australia is neither a democracy or a capitalism , “to wit” no real ability(rights) to defend EITHER commercial. or personal property critical to the economic well-being of the owner – worker.

    17. Everyone is focused on the guns. I can’t help but wonder why. The guns were the tool, not the killer. When a truck was used to mow down a crowd, does anyone here know the year, make, or model? What about the types of aircraft on 9/11? The real problem was the person behind the trigger in Las Vegas. I repeat what I often say in these situations, you can’t legislate morality or sanity.

      1. They made several changes to the airline industry after 9/11. Also changes have been made to reduce the possibility of using vehicles as weapons. The most obvious ones that come to mind are the restricted vehicle access to Federal government facilities and the complete ban of vehicle traffic on Pennsylvania Ave in front of the White House.

        As for the SFBFGS, I think it is a waste of energy to debate an agency definition, if it walks like a duck and talks like a duck. This argument can be applied to the manufacture of drugs in personal residences, such as bath salts, that are not defined as an illegal drug. If a chemical was really available in local smoke shops that killed a couple of hundred people a year efforts would be made to stop this drug.

        If the NRA was true to it’s original mission of promoting safe and responsible gun ownership it too would be questioning the need for this type of weapon for hunting or self protection to any one including blind people. But sadly just like the federal government, the NRA is bought and paid for buy the gun manufactures who make billions from fear and mis-information.

        1. You appear to be operating under the assumption that the NRA is the authority here. It is not, the Constitution is. The Second Amendment is not about hunting or target shooting. It’s about having the ability to resist a malevolent Government. In order to do that you need the same arms the government has, period. If you have a problem with law abiding citizens owning full auto firearms then you are part of the problem, not the solution. People who use ANY item in the commission of a crime are criminals and we have laws to deal with them. If you’re looking for a perfect world with no evil and no crime you’re on the wrong planet.

          1. Oh no, the NRA is as far out there as you are I am sure, but they do fight to put guns of all types in the hands of people who shouldn’t have them due to mental or competence issues. You need to read the constitution because the second amendment has nothing to do with using guns against the government. You probably picked that up at your last dooms day meeting. Are you still stuffing canned food and water in your crawl space?

            1. .”….but they do fight to put guns of all types in the hands of people who shouldn’t have them due to mental or competence issues….”

              So, you’d like to finally go down that road would you? I’ll be happy to oblige.

              Please cite to fact that assertion.

            2. The 2nd Amendment is NOT abut hunting, and only partially about self-defense – it is about arming the population against a tyrannical government. The NRA, btw, armed poor blacks in the south to protect them from Democrats trying to KILL them..Try some history. The NRA doesn’t put guns into anyone’s hands except the aforementioned.

            3. Sandy educate yourself then get back to us. To take your point seriously, we would need to accept that the framers were promoting possible revolution against the US government. a well regulated militia to protect the state not protect the people from the state..

            4. I knew this was coming, a “no, you first” and then you’ll divert from the topic etc. This took a while to flesh out but, finally, you’ve come out with pretty much what I expected. You don’t believe in either the Constitution or it’s accompanying Bill of Rights except when it suits your purpose. You’re not a Conservative. However, we do know what you are and that’s okay because we enjoy conversing with all. It would just be appreciated if you’d say upfront, “hey, I’m a Liberal and I’d like to have a reasoned discussion”. Instead you approach through deception and subterfuge. That is not appreciated. Adios.

            5. Well as you saw when you posted you adios I posted articles and video to back up everything I said here. I am a gun owner and don’t care about 99% of guns for sale today.

              You say adios and put your hate label on me because you know that you can win in this debate. You have been bested, i guess, so you turn your back and skulk away like a child that has been scorned.

              I did ask you to go first, as an adult you shouldn’t ask someone to do something you are not willing to do yourself. I provided sourced from various media sources, including a NRA produced video and your only response was to take your ball and go home.

              To quote POTUS “sad”

            6. I normally don’t reply once I’ve finished but, you posted articles and a video? Where? I see none here?

            7. I’m at a total loss. The link came through and just proved you wrong. Or are you saying you know more than Don Rasso and he’s not making sense but your, so far baseless, accusations are?

              As for the Founders and their intent, here’s a little reading for you:

              http://www.constitution.org/leglrkba.htm

            8. Ah yes, Salon. Just one question, what expertise in firearms, exactly, does the CDC have? What courses have they taken? What Instructor’s do they have? Answer to all of the above, none. Guns are inanimate objects and the CDC says they’re a disease. Your credibility rating is falling faster than the stock market during the depression. You say you’re a gun owner. I rarely say this, as a matter of fact this is only the second time, but I don’t believe you. Now it is goodbye, you’ve proved nothing.

        2. @Kurtis…As you just stated the additional protections were put in place for those in the swamp who already have paid armed guards !!!

    18. Look beyond the gun. It has been used for both good and evil. In this case the tool chosen was a gun. The shooter was evil. Therefore he did not need a gun to commit an heinous act. So for a moment let me take you to the liberal magical place where no one has a gun, nobody. They have never existed in this world! Everyone happy now?
      Back to the evil a**hole who sees 22,000 people compacted into about a half mile square area with little means of quickly escaping and wants to harm them. It has been reported that he has money, a pilots license, and owns his own plane. I am sure you know where I am going now. The scene is set (remember, no guns, never been invented). I will let you all imagine the outcome had he chosen this path. With a full tank of fuel and thousands of pounds of momentum I am positive the outcome would have been way worse. How is that magical gun free world working for you? Society has the issues, not the gun.

    19. You sound like a person who knows very little about firearms or the laws and regulations governing the industry. Even without a bump stock a semi-auto gun can be fired only a couple of seconds slower. New laws are not the answer. We already have enough laws on the books that if the government had the resources to enforce all of them would turn this country into a dictatorship.

      What does a person who is intent on killing care about a law? As far as access, people have forgotten what happened in France a couple of years ago were terrorist killed 130 and injured another 413 in a country that has much more stringent gun laws than the US. These laws didn’t stop the terrorist from acquiring AK47 and the material to make bombs. What the truck attack in France that killed 86 and injured another 458. Are we going to ban trucks and even with the government did would that stop somebody willing to kill worry about a law? No, people think that by piling one law on top of another is going to make them safe. A piece of paper is not going to make you safe. Has court orders barring an ex-boy friend or husband from coming close to a battered woman stopped them from killing them? Again no, we in this country and many others have been buying the line that by creating more laws and regulations that it is going to solve the problem.

      The politicians and organizations that are trying to sell you this line are nothing more than snake oil salesman. I grew up with guns and we even brought them to school were many of us went out hunting after school and some of my friends even put them in their school lockers. We even had show and tells sessions using guns. When kids had disagreements they were settled sometimes with fists or a wrestling fist combination. There were no instances or thought of grabbing a gun to settle our differences.

      What has changed over the years is that government, organizations, and the media has devalued life, respect and civility towards each other and no law is going to change that. The damage created by this devaluation over the decades is going to take time and the willingness of society to reverse this devaluation. I am not a religious person, but churches and schools used to teach the value of life, respect and civility. These organizations have been successfully been degraded but the media and governments has successfully degraded these organizations. What we worship know days is money and power.

    20. I am sorry, gentlemen, but I must part company with you on this. I have seen these firearms being fired. They have become, for all intents and purposes, fully automatic in performance. Anyone who has heard the sound of the gunfire on the video and audio of the shooting clearly understands what those firearms had become. I suggest you get out in front of this right now. Support legislation making components that allow a semi automatic to fire as rapidly as a fully automatic weapon unlawful to manufacture, sell or possess within the US. The joy and pleasure of shooting such arms is not commensurate with the amount of damage they can wreak. If you do not get in front of this and support federal legislation to do this a number of states, anxious to pass ever more restrictive controls, will initiate far more restrictive legislation in other areas of gun control and are likely to be successful.

      1. And, respectfully, opinions such as yours are the exact reason we have 22,000 + gun laws in this country today. Please explain to me why there should be any restrictions on law abiding citizens owning any types of firearms? Your very premise is that if we allow people to own them they will misuse them. That is now and alway has been the mantra of the gun control crowd and it is now and always has been false. Are their bad actors? Yes, they’re called criminals.

        Let’s stick with the facts: Since 1934 there has only been one confirmed report of a legally owned machine gun being used in a crime by its owner and that happened to be a police officer.

        Gun control has never been about controlling arms. The ultimate goal, for Liberals, has always been further control of the people by the government, cradle to grave; the government knows what is best for you always, just let them take care of you. The problem is you can’t control a people who have the will and means to resist. A Bump Fire stock, a machine gun, an AR15, ANY gun gives men and women the opportunity to remain free from assault and oppression. When you start chipping away at that you’re on the road to perdition.

        If the Liberals want a discussion let’s have one, but this time it’s on our terms and we make it very clear that the only discussion we’re having is which gun laws are we repealing first.

      2. Those laws to which you refer already EXIST…..BAD GUYS DON’T FOLLOW THE LAW……Bad guys can always get the guns. That was automatic fire as he changed the firing mechanism. So, why are you a liberal commenting on a firearms website? Do we have some info-ops going on here?

      3. @kevikins, you can depart all you want to but what if this crazy decided to fly his plane into the crowd. That is a bigger weapon and it would have slaughtered many more people. You are outrageously out of tune with reality .

      4. I take it you would have us all using single shot blunderbusses then? Or how about a bow and arrow? The Founders wanted the populace to have access to the same weaponry as the professional army has. Why? They were smart enough to know that standing armies are tools of the government and despots could wield them to the detriment of the people. They lived through that with the British. The government has been incrementally infringing on our right to be armed since 1934, and its always been the Progressive Socialists doing the infringing. FDR was a progressive! Stop with the weak assed reasoning and see that is the human mind in need of help, not the weapon. Until you can fix the human heart of its propensity to do evil, you will have people killing one another.

        1. “The Founders wanted the populace to have access to the same weaponry as the professional army has.” What constitution are you reading? The second amendment states that “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.” The founders, not the supreme court, intended for private citizens who were part of a militia to be able to keep and bear arms. And at the time they were single shot weapons.

          When freedom and democracy are threatened, a patriot knows to pick up his weapon. In times of peace a true patriot knows that his gun is the first thing he puts down.

          1. And we will now return to manual printing presses to adhere to your version of freedom of the press. Oh, no computers either.

            1. It is better to remain silent and though a fool that to post the above response and remove all doubt.

          2. A true patriot keeps his weapon well-oiled and ready. The militia, fyi, IS the people…try reading Mason in the Federalist papers. The 2nd Amendment is for keeping the government governed BY the people.

            1. Mine was a quote from Martin Van Buren and the second amendment has nothing to do with who runs the government as long as it is an American. Read it again Sandy, you may need to look up some of the bigger words.

            2. Kurtis does not of what he speaks

              The only refuge left for those who prophesy the downfall of the State governments is the visionary supposition that the federal government may previously accumulate a military force for the projects of ambition. The reasonings contained in these papers must have been employed to little purpose indeed, if it could be necessary now to disprove the reality of this danger. That the people and the States should, for a sufficient period of time, elect an uninterupted succession of men ready to betray both; that the traitors should, throughout this period, uniformly and systematically pursue some fixed plan for the extension of the military establishment; that the governments and the people of the States should silently and patiently behold the gathering storm, and continue to supply the materials, until it should be prepared to burst on their own heads, must appear to every one more like the incoherent dreams of a delirious jealousy, or the misjudged exaggerations of a counterfeit zeal, than like the sober apprehensions of genuine patriotism. Extravagant as the supposition is, let it however be made. Let a regular army, fully equal to the resources of the country, be formed; and let it be entirely at the devotion of the federal government; still it would not be going too far to say, that the State governments, with the people on their side, would be able to repel the danger. The highest number to which, according to the best computation, a standing army can be carried in any country, does not exceed one hundredth part of the whole number of souls; or one twenty-fifth part of the number able to bear arms. This proportion would not yield, in the United States, an army of more than twenty-five or thirty thousand men. To these would be opposed a militia amounting to near half a million of citizens with arms in their hands, officered by men chosen from among themselves, fighting for their common liberties, and united and conducted by governments possessing their affections and confidence. It may well be doubted, whether a militia thus circumstanced could ever be conquered by such a proportion of regular troops. Those who are best acquainted with the last successful resistance of this country against the British arms, will be most inclined to deny the possibility of it. Besides the advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation, the existence of subordinate governments, to which the people are attached, and by which the militia officers are appointed, forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition, more insurmountable than any which a simple government of any form can admit of. Notwithstanding the military establishments in the several kingdoms of Europe, which are carried as far as the public resources will bear, the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms. And it is not certain, that with this aid alone they would not be able to shake off their yokes. But were the people to possess the additional advantages of local governments chosen by themselves, who could collect the national will and direct the national force, and of officers appointed out of the militia, by these governments, and attached both to them and to the militia, it may be affirmed with the greatest assurance, that the throne of every tyranny in Europe would be speedily overturned in spite of the legions which surround it. Let us not insult the free and gallant citizens of America with the suspicion, that they would be less able to defend the rights of which they would be in actual possession, than the debased subjects of arbitrary power would be to rescue theirs from the hands of their oppressors. Let us rather no longer insult them with the supposition that they can ever reduce themselves to the necessity of making the experiment, by a blind and tame submission to the long train of insidious measures which must precede and produce it.

      5. “If you do not get in front of this and support federal legislation to do this a number of states, anxious to pass ever more restrictive controls, will initiate far more restrictive legislation in other areas of gun control and are likely to be successful.”
        See , there is your problem . States ALREADY do that . Now you just want the feds to join in . Do you seriously think states will back off if the feds enact stronger gun laws ? They won’t . it will embolden them though.
        Now , if you want to force laws because of potential harm to others , then we pretty much better drop everything and move back into caves . And no clubs or large stones allowed.

      6. @kevikens …What if he had flown his plane into the two large jet fuel tanks, you would be talking about 22,000 casualties !

    21. It’s time to be responsible and not shilly-shally around about technology that allows semi-automatic weapons to fire as fast as fully automatic weapons. The Vegas shooter had 12 of these bump stock devices and was able to kill and wound 600 people. That’s not OK and not what the founding fathers had in mind with the Second Amendment. Gun owners must act responsibly and sensibly to the needs of the public. If you want to fire automatic weapons, go to a facility that legally allows you to do so.

      1. So YOU were around when the Founding Fathers wrote the 2nd Amendment? You DO know that RIGHTS are God given; predate and are independent of ANY government(s) and are NOT subject to the whims of the ‘needs of the public’? What if the ‘public’ decides Jews should be sent to concentration camps to be thrown into gas chambers? What part of SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED don’t you understand? How old are you; twelve?

        1. I view the 2nd Amendment as a prohibition against government action…a complete ban against any attempt to wield a governmental power against the people’s existing right to arms. Government only has the powers transferred to it from the people; and the power to infringe upon our right to arms is expressly forbidden in the Constitution.

          The Government is powerless to act BY DESIGN.

        2. well just guessing from you comments and poor grammar if the “public” did decide to do that I am guessing you would be goose stepping your Jewish neighbors down to the local collection depots.

          God isn’t real.

          1. If God isn’t real then those Jews aren’t really Jews. People like you are so simpleminded I wonder how you make it through the day.

      2. I agree , Although I don`t know what specific restrictions other then a total ban would have prevented this latest massacre , I think it proves there is a need for some control over who can obtain these type of weapons . I do support the 2 nd. amendment and hope there is a way to control this madness . Pray for the family’s of those killed and the many that were wounded .

        1. No, there is no need for any restrictions whatsoever, unless of course you also support strict control over who can rent a truck so we can stop those pesky terrorists from killing 89 people and injuring 200 more? Or possibly really put the screws to anyone who wants to buy a pressure cooker? “Hey, you, Yeah you on isle 6, have you had a background check? Get away from those until you do!”. Now do you guys get the point? Geez I hope so before you let Liberals completely gut our freedoms.

          1. Hundreds of people were attacked and 56 killed by a deranged monster with dozens of modified assault weapons and you make these absurd comparisons . You sir and people like you who think every one , including nut cases , has the right to purchase as many machine guns ,hand grenades ,mortars and other assorted weapons designed for mass killing should have the right to purchase them with no restrictions . That thinking only goes to support those that would eventually take our right to exercise our rights under the 2nd. amendment .

            1. They’ve been on that road since 1934 and all we do is offer concession after concession. Exactly when do YOU, as a gun owner say no more? What is that point for you? When we’re down to bolt action rifles? Single shot rifles? What’s your “no more” point of no return? Do you even have one? History is a very good teacher and is replete with the failures of those who capitulate to mob mentality. We’ve learned a lot since 1938. At least some of us have.

            2. @Patrick – Hey dork boy. The dude bought all of his stuff LEGALLY! AND HE HAD NEVER BEEN CONVICTED OF A CRIME PRIOR TO THAT BECAUSE HE PASSED ALL OF HIS BACKGROUND CHECKS! So leemmeesee – you want stricter gun control – move to Paris, they have the kind that you guys want. Just remember to hoist the white flag when something violent happens and you’ll blend right in.
              The Gun Control Act of 1968 addresses every one of your concerns, and guess what? IT DOESN’T WORK! Plus every other stupid gun control law you can name doesn’t work.

              It’s called fixing the human psyche and heart – that’s what’ll stop the frequency of them, but you’re always going to have a knucklehead crawl out from under a rock sooner or later and do something. You can’t stop it, it falls under the heading of Sh*T Happens.
              Do us all a favor and stop going off of pure emotion like a whiny B&tch.

            3. @Patrick, Don’t forget the tanks, armored vehicles, and warplanes that Americans have the Civil Right to own! Hey, I can get you a good deal on a British Centurian, but the shipping is expensive.

      3. I’m an advid gun owner and hunter. I tend to agree there is no need for bump style stocks or binary triggers. I don’t think they should be regulated by ATF, but in everyday use for sport or hunting they are not standard equipment. I also believe every eligible person who can legally own a gun or have a CCL has the responsibility and duty to do so. Any gun free zones for public should be done away with. If everyone carried no one would be shooting each other.

        1. I just ordered my bin are trigger before they become illegal or triple in price. I think they are great for controlled pairs or small bursts or some range fun. I can see controlled pairs being beneficial in self defense but anytime you are spraying ammo you are wasting it and probably missing your target unless they are penned in a small area like the concert goers. I think a law abiding citizen should be allowed to have binary triggers,suppressors,and full auto rifles. If a criminal wants one they will steal,build or buy on black market and no law will stop them. Once they decide to break the law against shooting someone or being a criminal in possession of a gun no extra laws will all of a sudden make them change their mind.

          1. there were multiple shot weapons in that period…you are very vapid in your historical knowledge of anything to do with weapons.

          2. Ohhh vapid, that is like a $20 word. Since I am not trying to entertain you the word vapid doesn’t really apply here but I will give you a D+ for your effort. Yes, Yes there were some weapons that used cartridges but they were the exception and get you no were near the argument you are making that the framers had the AK-47 in mind when writing the second amendment. Let’s go big picture here.

            1. ah no, lib, if you have half-a-brain, it is quite easy to get a CDL. You are quite condescending in your historical remarks…ever read the Federalist Papers? You need to….the 2nd Amendment was put in place to avoid the very thing that started the Battles of Lexington and Concord – GUN CONTROL. What do you think had just happened when the Founders wrote it, hmmm?…ever hear of the Revolutionary War, which, was fought not only by the Continental Army but by the those people YOU would call…the peasantry….?? Funny how a rag tag group of “rustics” defeated the most powerful Army known to man at that time…and Washington gave Divine Providence the Glory…have you even ever fired a weapon in war, or, at all, or are you one of those simple-minded liberals who owns one but thinks the rest of us should be “regulated”?….probably.

      4. Yup, and I’m certain you support background checks before anyone can buy a car or truck, right? Or is it that you’re really not concerned with the number of people killed just what is used to kill them? That’s just a tad, shall we say, hypocritical.

        1. Yea Tim, you should be more like Vanns40. He doesn’t care about the number of people killed or what they were killed with. Maybe if more people carried these weapons we could be talking about the dozens of people shooting back at the hotel killing another 59 or so. Lets all get on board with Vanns40 and realize the only amendment that is out of line here is the right to free speech because that is the only way proponents of “automatic weapons” can win a national discussion, by not having one at all.

          1. The only discussion libs want to have is confiscation….and you are in company with Hitler, Mao, Stalin, Pol Pot, the Sandinistas, Fidel, and all the rest of the continuous conga line of morons that fell that, as BHO said in his acceptance speech, “we are the ones we have been waiting for”….you socialists simply practice the insanity of the past.

    Leave a Comment 157 Comments

    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *