Looks like the bumpstock ban is about to become real

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • worddoer

    Master
    Rating - 100%
    42   0   1
    Jul 25, 2011
    1,664
    99
    Wells County
    Hotrod29.....you are so silly...look at you.

    Just ask many of the wise and all knowing NRA supporters here on INGO.

    This cannot happen you know. Unpossible it is! The NRA has it all under control. They got our back. They are playing 3D chess while everyone else is playing checkers.

    And even though the NRA still has a statement to this very day on their website that "The NRA believes that devices designed to allow semi-automatic rifles to function like fully-automatic rifles should be subject to additional regulations", nothing bad will happen. But I guess when you are playing 3D chess, that makes it opposite day. So to stop gun control, you need to support gun control. Right???

    Link to the quote below, please reference the 7th sentence in the paragraph.

    https://home.nra.org/joint-statement

    I would like to know how that 3D chess is working for them. Seems to me they were honest about their intentions and we will soon see the results of those intentions.

    Not
    Real
    Activists

    If these are the people who are supposed to support our 2nd amendment rights, who needs enemies?
     

    Beowulf

    Master
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    66   0   0
    Mar 21, 2012
    2,880
    83
    Brownsburg
    This is horse**** and needs to be fought vigorously in court. Seat Kavanaugh and run it up to SCOTUS.

    Yeah, I wouldn't count on good old Brett "Warrantless Wiretapping is Constitutional" Kavanaugh to be big help when it comes to civil liberties. That alone makes him unqualified for the Supreme Court.

    But unfortunately, everyone in the Dems and the GOP are ignoring that because they are too busy trying to adjudicate a 36+ year old sexual assault allegation for political gain.

    Now, granted, I wasn't particularly impressed by any of Trumps final four really. I guess Hardiman seemed the strongest on 2nd Amendment, but even there, not strong as I would like. We should be pushing for justices that are willing to challenge the 1968 Gun Control Act, the 86 Hughes Amendment, and hell, the NFA itself. Instead, we are expected to count maintaining status quo, or losing just a little bit of our liberty, as a victory. What a load of nonsense.
     

    BehindBlueI's

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    29   0   0
    Oct 3, 2012
    25,890
    113
    Huh. I thought Trump wasn't really trying to get this done and it was some "push it until everyone forgets it 3D chess" stuff. I know, "But Hillary..."

    It's a small loss, but it's a loss none the less, and frankly it's one that's harder to fight because the person pushing it isn't "them." I wonder how much louder the outcry and how much stronger the push back would be if But Hillary was the one signing it. Worse, it's a pointless loss, and for no offsetting gain. No movement on suppressors, for example. No movement on national reciprocity.
     

    T.Lex

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    15   0   0
    Mar 30, 2011
    25,859
    113
    Kinda ironic that Trump appears willing and capable of meeting the very literal promise he made on banning bumpstocks, but everything else is negotiation.

    Its almost like he isn't really a full 2A supporter....
     

    DNS

    Marksman
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Aug 28, 2013
    190
    16
    Northern IN
    It's setting the stage for the next anti-gun President to ban all magazines over 10 rds. without going through congress.
     

    GodFearinGunTotin

    Super Moderator
    Staff member
    Moderator
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    Mar 22, 2011
    50,582
    113
    Mitchell
    Everytime something happens and "common sense" gun measures are in the air, everytime they start calling for banning "assault weapons", and you hear/read people go on about full autos already being illegal or people claim no one is calling for making machine guns legal, it further cements the idea that these types of guns should be regulated as they are. We all probably know people, people that are otherwise pretty good on the 2A, that are in agreement with keeping full auto guns out of average peoples' hands.

    I realize there are times when we should be wise in picking our fights but in my observations, it appears a ever widening consensus that full autos are justifiably regulated as they are.
     

    Hohn

    Master
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    Jul 5, 2012
    4,444
    63
    USA
    Huh. I thought Trump wasn't really trying to get this done and it was some "push it until everyone forgets it 3D chess" stuff. I know, "But Hillary..."

    It's a small loss, but it's a loss none the less, and frankly it's one that's harder to fight because the person pushing it isn't "them." I wonder how much louder the outcry and how much stronger the push back would be if But Hillary was the one signing it. Worse, it's a pointless loss, and for no offsetting gain. No movement on suppressors, for example. No movement on national reciprocity.

    Exactly ^^. This is a giveaway and for what? Holy unforced errors batman.
     

    Ggreen

    Person
    Rating - 100%
    49   0   0
    Sep 19, 2016
    3,686
    77
    SouthEast
    Everytime something happens and "common sense" gun measures are in the air, everytime they start calling for banning "assault weapons", and you hear/read people go on about full autos already being illegal or people claim no one is calling for making machine guns legal, it further cements the idea that these types of guns should be regulated as they are. We all probably know people, people that are otherwise pretty good on the 2A, that are in agreement with keeping full auto guns out of average peoples' hands.

    I realize there are times when we should be wise in picking our fights but in my observations, it appears a ever widening consensus that full autos are justifiably regulated as they are.

    Regulating firearms is a direct infringement of our 2a rights. Only reason short barreled shotguns got regulated initially is that they had no "military use" and therefore were not protected by the 2a. Right, but now people seem to think that militia's are hunting groups who should only be allowed to use muskets and somehow hunting will ensure the security of a free state. Fudds, friends or family I will not let this kind of nonsense be spoke around me. Sure I know and am related to some real dipsticks that tell me "well they will never come take your hunting rifles, just those military rifles" and that is why I have a little pocket constitution in my car, one from Revere's Riders and one from LaRue. I say F anyone who after reading the words of the 2a and still tells me that full auto's should be regulated. Most people that I actually show them the 2a in ink had no idea what it actually said and very few disagree after being confronted with the actual ink on page. Still going to be some Fudds, and there are a lot of NRA Democrats who are just fine hopping along with Pelosi as long as she doesn't come for their 870's and 1911's...
     

    Route 45

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    92   0   0
    Dec 5, 2015
    14,884
    113
    Indy
    I realize there are times when we should be wise in picking our fights but in my observations, it appears a ever widening consensus that full autos are justifiably regulated as they are.

    I cannot see any modern politician, regardless of party, adopting deregulation of full automatic firearms as part of his or her campaign platform.
     

    GodFearinGunTotin

    Super Moderator
    Staff member
    Moderator
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    Mar 22, 2011
    50,582
    113
    Mitchell
    I cannot see any modern politician, regardless of party, adopting deregulation of full automatic firearms as part of his or her campaign platform.

    One of the reasons I was hoping Austin Petersen would win the senate primary in Missouri.
     

    T.Lex

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    15   0   0
    Mar 30, 2011
    25,859
    113
    I cannot see any modern politician, regardless of party, adopting deregulation of full automatic firearms as part of his or her campaign platform.

    It doesn't need to be a platform issue. It can be a target of opportunity.

    This bumpstock issue is a perfect example. Trade bumpstocks as auto-fire devices for suppressors not being on the naughty list.

    Sure, some people will get ticked off, but incrementalism works.
     

    Floivanus

    Sharpshooter
    Rating - 100%
    2   0   0
    Dec 6, 2016
    612
    28
    La crosse
    It doesn't need to be a platform issue. It can be a target of opportunity.

    This bumpstock issue is a perfect example. Trade bumpstocks as auto-fire devices for suppressors not being on the naughty list.

    Sure, some people will get ticked off, but incrementalism works.
    Nobody needs a firearm muffler, outright ban them, trade them for six guns.

    shouldn’t trade a single thing away, ever.
     

    dukeboy_318

    Master
    Rating - 100%
    12   0   0
    Jan 22, 2010
    1,648
    38
    in la la land
    meh. They don't do a thing for me. I dont have one, don't want one. Im a vet, 14 years, many as the squad gunner. FA fire does little to excite me these days after firing literally tens of thousands of FA rounds through various platforms.

    That said, I don't think they should be banned outright, or even really regulated as I do not think appropriate language could be found without putting semi-autos in jeopardy period.

    i am curious though, what will they say/do about the bumpstocks already in circulation? Confiscation would set up HUGE court battles I believe that would end in the Supreme Court, not that I fully trust them.
     
    Top Bottom