Ammo For Sale

« « Awakening | Home | And another thing » »

We must ban springs

Remember way back in 2012 when David Gregory, clearly breaking DC law, held up an AR-15 magazine and showed it to the NRA’s Wayne LaPierre. He held it as though it had some magical killing power. It’s a box with a spring in it. Yup. All the righteous indignation over a box with a spring in it.

Well, the story is the same now only replace box with tube. Bumpfiring is an effective way of turning money into noise. It’s ineffective at shooting accurately. These bumpfire gizmos are basically tubes that go over some part of the gun. And some have springs in them. They’re simple. The loon in Vegas had 12 bumpfire stocks.

So, obviously we must ban them. That law was written by someone who knows absolutely nothing about guns or gun laws. Are we going to ban rubber-bands too? How about shoestrings? A lot of folks can bumpfire without the assistance of a device. It’s not hard. Just takes some practice.

Sounds silly. But ATF has already banned springs, to an extent. Conversion device rules are generally silly.

Now, of all the proposed gun laws the democrats and press (but I repeat myself) are going on about out there, I think this one is most likely to pass due to the hysteria from those ignorant of how these things work. And if it does, the pro-gun side damn well better get something in return. Or the Republicans will lose a lot of voters.

19 Responses to “We must ban springs”

  1. beatbox Says:

    If you use a shoestring to make semi auto go boom rapidly, then it is illegal. Same thing for springs.

    The vegas shooter found the one scenario where a bump fire stock could increase the damage during a shooting as opposed to it being a dumb toy the other 99.999 percent of the time.

  2. SayUncle Says:

    That’s kind of the point. Behavior not objects is the problem.

  3. Paul Says:

    If they ban them , will they grandfather the ones already out there? If they do , how do they prove if it was made before or after the ban ? Kind of like the “high capacity” magazine issue . Would be a lucrative business for someone with a few molds etc for the black market they made.

    And do they not realize that with a few parts costing less than $20 anyone can make a bump stock from a standard adjustable stock? Or that people like me don’t even need to use an accessory to bump fire?

    Let us not forget that 3D printers are getting better and cheaper .

  4. Stretch Says:

    Since some of that information comes from CNN I’ll discount it. I’ll wait for the inevitable “Junk On The Bunk” display by LVPD/CCSD

  5. Huck Says:

    “That law was written by someone who knows absolutely nothing about guns or gun laws.”

    Aren’t they ALL written by morons who don’t know anything about firearms?

  6. Mike V Says:

    Doubt theyll be grandfathered. Id trade bumbfire stocks for Share and National Reciprocity but nothing less.

  7. ben Says:

    I would trade bump stocks for silencers in a heartbeat. Ban em out right for silencers off NFA.

  8. Dittybopper Says:

    Remember, if they ban them, they have to buy them per the 5th Amendment.

  9. Kasper Says:

    No reason to ban them, just put them on the NFA and remove suppressors…

  10. JTC Says:

    The Artist of the Deal said there can be discussion with the banners “as time goes on”. Bet he could give ’em these bum stocks for normalized mufflers and nat’l reciprocity right now, and they’d think they won.

  11. Rivrdog Says:

    Mixed feelings. Ready for this conflict, but I’ll be damned if I want to take point to save gun-derp.

  12. Tirno Says:

    Keeping in mind Lawdog’s excellent account of how we arrived where with are, now would be an excellent time to do some clawback. In exchange for bumpfire being put on the NFA (as an AOW, be the way), we should get the whole SHARE Act and National Right To Carry Reciprocity with teeth.

    The compromise position is to add bumpfire stocks as machine guns rather than AOW, but to facilitate the existing possession, the NFA background check process is turned over to the NICS system, the Hughes Amendment is to be explicitly revoked (i.e. any item that the federal government will not accept payment of the tax for is not covered by this title), and existing possessors get their stamp without having to pay.

  13. Paul Koning Says:

    The notion of getting something in trade, or the notion that confiscation requires payment, is based on the notion that the people pushing this stuff are honest. That’s obviously a false assumption. We’ve known so for decades.

  14. Paul Says:

    Not sure why people are willing to trade off one portion of a right to reclaim another . I personally am not willing to give up any more that what has already been taken . Instead I would like to push forward to reclaim the rights that should never have been taken in the first place .

    Btw , the people that are ok with banning bumpfire stocks remind me of the ones like Zumbo who was against people having AR15s because HE saw no use for them . Willing to give up anothers right hoping to be safe that their own doesn’t get looked at .

    “first they came for……” well , you get the picture

  15. Jake Says:

    And the NRA is not only not going to try and fight this, they’re actively encouraging it.

    Despite the fact that the Obama administration approved the sale of bump fire stocks on at least two occasions, the National Rifle Association is calling on the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATFE) to immediately review whether these devices comply with federal law. The NRA believes that devices designed to allow semi-automatic rifles to function like fully-automatic rifles should be subject to additional regulations.

  16. JTC Says:

    To me NRA’s statement means they’ve already talked with Trump. They, he, and we know a “ban” is unenforceable and just means they won’t be mass-produced and sold as what they are. That’s a fine trade for fast-tracking what is already defacto approved and acknowledged as beneficial and inevitable, mufflers and reciprocity. Let the admin and nra jump on this pre-emptively and catch the other side flat-footed. Good job if they push the trade-off.

    And comparing this to Zumbo? Please. Incidentally, my first awareness of Tam was when old Xavier linked to her saying “On Friday evening, a gunwriter who was apparently tired of his 42-year career put his word processor in his mouth and pulled the trigger.” All else aside that shit still gives me chills.

  17. Odysseus Says:

    In the age of 3D printers banning something that consists of a piece of plastic and a spring is about as useful as pissing on a forest fire.

    Then again the same applies more and more to all arms.

  18. KevinM Says:

    Opening position: Suppressors and SBRs off NFA, to get bumpstocks on. then let the dealmaker work his magic.

  19. 1 With A Bullet Says:

    Has it even been confirmed that a bump stock was used in the attack? Just because he had them doesn’t mean he used them. Also, when I listen to the audio I know that I’ve never heard a bump stock sustain fire with that regular of a cadence. I’m sure this is just a red herring.

    (Plus the whole “criminals don’t follow laws” thing, “this only punishes the law abiding”, etc.)

Remember, I do this to entertain me, not you.

Uncle Pays the Bills

Find Local
Gun Shops & Shooting Ranges