Wednesday, December 12, 2018

Bump Stocks

They do not meet the letter of the machinegun law (because there is only one trigger pull per shot) but they certainly meet the spirit of the law.  If BATF does ban them, I think that they are likely within the intent of the law. 

I used to own a BMF Activator, a crank device that mounted in your trigger guard with a cam against the trigger.  Turn the crank and you could easily fire 300 rounds per minute.  Machine gun?  As much as a bump stock, but unlike a bump stock, utterly useless unless your rifle was clamped down.  Even on a Ruger 10/22, it made a lot of noise and was completely uncontrollable.  Perhaps the perfect gang weapon, most shots would hit bystanders, not targets.  How typical that the Obama Administration, in spite of their enthusiasm for gun control, approved bump stocks.

Now, how that is regulated matters a lot.  There are ways to make almost any part change unlawful.  That must be resisted.

10 comments:

StormCchaser said...

At the range a few days ago I heard what I thought was a low cyclic rate machine gun, or perhaps a very reliable bump-stock.

It turned out to be a guy who was just firing an AR-15 very rapidly - one trigger pull per round. I'd guess he was getting a cyclic rate of 300 or so. He was doing this to diagnose a problem with the action.

Eskyman said...

This is the camel getting his nose into the tent; it isn't anything to do with safety.

A long time ago I met a guy at the range who showed me how to put my thumb through my beltloop & then if you hold your trigger finger rigid, you can fire off a lot of shots "auto fire" just like the bump-stocks do. It's not entirely unaimed fire, it's shooting from the hip, but it was fun to try; no one should expect MOA accuracy tho!

Next on the gun-banner's Christmas list: banning beltloops!

Clayton Cramer said...

Eskyman: not at all driven by safety concerns, but like a machine gun, capable of putting a lot of bullets downrange in a very short time. This makes it well suited to crimes like in Las Vegas. I am skeptical the machine gun law adopted in 1934 had any rational basis, but in a society that refuses to lock up dangerous crazies, you can see why it is a popular "solution."

Will said...

It doesn't appear to have been used in Vegas. That was NOT bumpstock firing that was heard by numerous people and recorders. So much wrong about that whole incident. NOTHING from any of the .gov/media groups was truthful. Total bull.

Clayton Cramer said...

Will: How can you tell from audio if something is full auto or bump stock?

Eskyman said...

Clayton, it's too difficult to discuss this here, but when this terrible event happened I watched literally hundreds of video clips to try and understand what had happened. I failed; the facts don't match the narrative.

I still have not seen ANY video showing gunflashes from the 32nd floor, out of all the videos taken that night. I found multiple discrepancies between the official story and the facts, as did many others. There was a video on YouTube, which has since been removed, showing exactly the sound difference between an automatic weapon firing and a bump-stock firing the same caliber cartridges; most agreed that the weapon used was a belt-fed M240, which fires 600rmp, as this video shows:
https://youtu.be/rqYlQOagcQI

In short, the only people who should believe the official narrative of this shooting are the people who watch CNN and believe what they see there; for my part, I'd believe Michael Bellesiles' "Arming America" before I'll believe the official account of this!

Clayton Cramer said...

Eskyman: There is much about this incident that smells like a coverup, but until I have reviewed those videos, it sounds too much like the crowd claiming that the various school mass murders were staged events. I have seen many videos that make claims that I have not found persuasive.

Will said...

Clayton,
TPTB have said very little about Vegas, and nothing that has been reported stands up to even cursory examination. The more one looks, the greater the divergence. It seemed like they were going through the motions, but not caring enough to bother with actual facts.

I'm not experienced enough to say that I recognize specific weapons by sound, but I know what the real thing sounds like. I've been around them enough. I have trigger time on quite a few, and training. There were a lot of non-government people doing their best to back up the narrative being pushed. It seemed as if they couldn't believe the reality, so they put lots of effort to make it work, but it doesn't add up. So many excuses to attempt to hide the facts. Sad.

Clayton Cramer said...

Eskyman: Did anyone download that video https://youtu.be/rqYlQOagcQ before it was removed? The only distinctive sound of a firearm, except at close range, is the report of the cartridge. Example: a 7.62x39mm is very noticeably different from 5.56mm; if the shooter was using a bump stock on a 7.62mm NATO semiauto rifle, how would it sound different from an M240?

Clayton Cramer said...

Eskyman: This may be it: https://youtu.be/ZtCfAHPttXk