Department to ban gun modifications

[grayghost668]

well here we are the first step in the banning of the AR 15,,,,,,,

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/p...d-in-las-vegas-massacre/ar-BBJnGfk?li=BBnb7Kz

WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump says he's signed a memo directing the Justice Department to propose regulations to "ban all devices" like bump stocks used in last year's Las Vegas massacre.

The president is making the announcement to curb the use of the rapid-fire devices during a ceremony recognizing bravery by the nation's public safety officers.

Trump is responding days after the shooting deaths of 17 people at a Florida high school. He's pointing to the need to propose regulations to ban the device that was used in the October shooting deaths of 58 people in Las Vegas.

White House officials say the president will be meeting with students, teachers and state and local officials to discuss ways of providing more school safety and address gun violence. Past efforts to address gun violence in Congress have failed.

 

[grayghost668]

I told all of you the bump stocks were going to go the way of the dodo bird

 

[Arcticdude]

Better get your bump stock on order now, if it's not too late already.

 

[grayghost668]

Better get your bump stock on order now, if it's not too late already.

II have no need for a bump stock,so the loss will not bother me,,,,but I know a lot of people are gong to be pissed

 

[Brent S]

Other than for killing lots of people in a crowd I don’t see why anyone would want one. A terrible waste of ammo and loss of accuracy. I think they should be banned.

 

[TexasFreedom]

Other than for killing lots of people in a crowd I don’t see why anyone would want one. A terrible waste of ammo and loss of accuracy. I think they should be banned.

I have to 100% disagree... and I'm sure nobody is surprised. Read the words of the 2nd amendment. "A well armed militia." That is exactly why the bump stock should remain available.

And if we surrender on this point, what is next? And after that? Never surrender.

 

[grayghost668]

I have to 100% disagree... and I'm sure nobody is surprised. Read the words of the 2nd amendment. "A well armed militia." That is exactly why the bump stock should remain available.

And if we surrender on this point, what is next? And after that? Never surrender.

I have to agree that they ban one item,they will not stop there,I doubt it will get to the point that they will go door to door but the sale of the AR 15 may one day be only the sale of what is already out on the streets,and it may well become a permitted weapon

 

[Arcticdude]

Other than for killing lots of people in a crowd I don’t see why anyone would want one. A terrible waste of ammo and loss of accuracy. I think they should be banned.

There are many gun accessories that I don't particularly care for, but I would never want to ban anything. It's strictly a personal choice.
If a person doesn't trust himself to have a firearm that is capable of rapid fire, then by all means they shouldn't own one. But they don't need to be banned. Just where do you think this banning will stop? We all know that it won't.

 

[Brent S]

There are many gun accessories that I don't particularly care for, but I would never want to ban anything. It's strictly a personal choice.
If a person doesn't trust himself to have a firearm that is capable of rapid fire, then by all means they shouldn't own one. But they don't need to be banned. Just where do you think this banning will stop? We all know that it won't.

I don’t see it becoming a total ban ever, as it is in the constitution. I don’t see a problem with some restrictions, and espechially better background checks though. I just saw a school on the news that spent 400k on security measures directly for a shooter scenario. I think it would be cheaper to do background checks than to spend that on every school in the nation. I am all in for armed staff at schools though. Purely volunteer, with training provided....

 

[TexasFreedom]

Brent,

"Naive". Look at England. Look at Australia. They 'interpret' words to mean what they want.

 

[Kevin L]

Other than for killing lots of people in a crowd I don’t see why anyone would want one. A terrible waste of ammo and loss of accuracy. I think they should be banned.

I agree with you.

Full-auto is a waste anyway. The vast majority of people could never use full-auto effectively, it's hard on the gun, it wastes ammo, it's unsafe for the shooter since it can cause cook-offs, if a squib round gets jammed in the barrel, the shooter won't have time to fix it before bullets get piled up behind it and burst the barrel...possibly killing the shooter.

And so on.

I'm glad they're being banned.

 

[Kevin L]

I also think that people are afraid that banning bump stocks may be interpreted as a first step in banning all guns.

I disagree, as this is called 'The Slippery Slope Fallacy', or sometimes the 'Excluded Middle' fallacy.

There are times and occasions when moderation is better than total abstinence and total immersion.

Two glasses of red wine a day will make you healthier than total abstinence, but drinking five bottles of wine a day will kill you from alcoholism, for example.

I see the situation with guns in a similar way. No gun regulations may turn everything into an apocalyptic, wild-west mess, while absolute regulations with no guns may turn us into a nanny state where we're dependant upon the government for everything.

Instead, there is a healthy middle ground that we need to explore and define.

I think that banning bump stocks is part of that healthy middle ground, and even if I may disagree with some of what those teens are trying to do with banning semiauto guns, I do admire and respect them.

I admire that they're getting off their asses and doing something positive rather than sitting back passively and complaining for the sake of complaining.

 

[drt4lfe]

The 2nd Amendment has No Restriction that I read. Will we ban Baseball Bats ? Knives ? Fists ? they all kill more each year than AR15's do....How about we Ban Cars, Ladders, Bicycles, Motorcycles, Tree Stands, All buildings over 8 ft. high, Cranes, Dump trucks......how about PTR91 rifles ? are they not semi-auto high capacity death machines ? Ruger 10/22's, you can get 50 round drum magazines for them....maybe Ruger Mini 14's ? you can get 50 round drum magazines for them.....or how about we enforce the Laws already on the books ?

 

[drt4lfe]

Those same kids did what in getting off their asses and making sure the right people knew the shooter was dangerous ? they did not speak loudly enough when they needed too and now they think everyone should listen....

 

[Kevin L]

Those same kids did what in getting off their asses and making sure the right people knew the shooter was dangerous ? they did not speak loudly enough when they needed too and now they think everyone should listen....

People contacted law enforcement multiple times, and said this guy was threatening a mass shooting and had an AR15.

The FBI admits that it fumbled the ball.

Please note that I said that I disagreed with what the survivors are doing by pushing for a ban on semiauto, but I still admire them for doing it. I can respect and admire someone that I disagree with, and it doesn't mean that I'm being a hypocrite.

They survived something that's utterly horrible, and I don't judge them because I'm not in their shoes.

And, just so you know, I am a gun owner and I do have semiautos.

 

[TexasFreedom]

Let me explain how liberals and conservatives thing:

Liberals: if a liberal is against something, or doesn't see a need for it, they want to ban it from anybody being able to have it or use it.

Conservatives: A true conservative lives as he/she sees fit. And if they agree or disagree with something, they think other people can do what they want within their own walls as long as someone else isn't hurt.

Examples:
1. Guns. Liberals hate them & want to ban everyone from having them and lock up anyone who disagrees. A Conservative whether they are for or against them recognize their place.

2. Gays. Liberals love them and want to force everyone to support it directly. Doesn't matter if it's a true "marriage license" or a baker that they force to bake a gay-wedding-cake. A Conservative is likely against the gay lifestyle, but is ok if they do it in their own home. But a Conservative isn't going to abuse "marriage" by calling a gay union the same thing. It isn't. You can call it something else. But a Conservative doesn't want to lock up gays because of their choices.

Think about this.

 

[Kevin L]

Let me explain how liberals and conservatives thing:

Liberals: if a liberal is against something, or doesn't see a need for it, they want to ban it from anybody being able to have it or use it.

Conservatives: A true conservative lives as he/she sees fit. And if they agree or disagree with something, they think other people can do what they want within their own walls as long as someone else isn't hurt.

Examples:
1. Guns. Liberals hate them & want to ban everyone from having them and lock up anyone who disagrees. A Conservative whether they are for or against them recognize their place.

2. Gays. Liberals love them and want to force everyone to support it directly. Doesn't matter if it's a true "marriage license" or a baker that they force to bake a gay-wedding-cake. A Conservative is likely against the gay lifestyle, but is ok if they do it in their own home. But a Conservative isn't going to abuse "marriage" by calling a gay union the same thing. It isn't. You can call it something else. But a Conservative doesn't want to lock up gays because of their choices.

Think about this.

I agree with some (but not all) of what you've said.

There are extreme conservatives and moderate conservatives, and extreme liberals and moderate liberals.

All I'm advocating for is moderation. I equate an extreme position as a kissing cousin to fanaticism.

I probably fall in a reasonable middle when it comes to a lot of issues.

I tend to be an environmentalist because (here in Florida) I've seen how the coral reefs, wetlands, etc. have been destroyed over the past 30 years.

I support gun ownership (I have a CCW), but I don't support bump stocks, and I think law enforcement should crack down on ghost sales.

I think that the government should crack down on drug traffic, but I think reefer should be legalized.

I don't believe in socialized medicine, but I think it's very bad that crazy people have access to guns, yet they don't have access to healthcare.

And so on.

All I've said is that I'm a moderate, and I think a healthy middle ground is better than an extreme.

This doesn't mean that I'm a spineless jellyfish who doesn't want to take a stand--I believe in healthy compromise as an alternative to fanaticism.

After all, if I really believe in my position...then how does listening to a different point of view with an open mind really threaten me?

 

[Gazrok]

I can see both sides here...on one side, give em an inch, they take a mile, on the other, there really only is ONE purpose for a bump stock anyhow.

Personally, I think it's a prudent concession, as long as it curtails any further intrusion on rights.

Of course, by 2024, I expect this will all be a moot point, as by then, there would have been more than enough of these incidents to all but ban firearms completely.

 

[Kevin L]

I can see both sides here...on one side, give em an inch, they take a mile, on the other, there really only is ONE purpose for a bump stock anyhow.

Personally, I think it's a prudent concession, as long as it curtails any further intrusion on rights.

Of course, by 2024, I expect this will all be a moot point, as by then, there would have been more than enough of these incidents to all but ban firearms completely.

Thank you.

I disagree that there will be a total ban, however, if only because of the money involved.

The NRA is, politically, an 800 pound gorilla. Also, the gun industry in the U.S. is a multibillion dollar portion of our economy.

Tobbacco should have been banned decades ago, but money talks and politicians are whores.

 

[Gazrok]

Here's how it will happen. The NRA will be no match for a completely pissed off populace of moms and dads. Even politicians normally in their pocket will find themselves unelectable if they don't bend.

As concessions, more and more legislation is passed. To restrict things like weapon types, ammo capacity, and even more subtle legislation that impacts the supply line for gun manufacturers.

This will cause another crunch on ammo supply, as many stock up, and the factories need to retool to channel production into "allowed" items. This and further legislation drives all but the big manufacturers out of the business.

Meanwhile, small gun shops, unable to keep stock, pay rent, etc. fold.

The big manufacturers that still have military contracts, are the ones still existing. Meanwhile, they scale down on private weapons manufacturing.

These steps will APPEAR to work, as they (the ones behind this) scale down the incidents. Eventually, a complete ban is really only an afterthought, because by 2022, it would be virtually impossible to buy a gun or ammo for it anyhow.

Now, I WANT to be WRONG, I really do...but we'll see. I wanted to be wrong in November too, when I said an incident like this would happen at LEAST once a month. So far, they are not proving me wrong, sadly.