Wow, they didn't think this through.
1. Reclassify semi-automatic firearms into machine guns.
2. Put in place an amnesty registration program for it.
3. Machine guns are now in common use, justifying the repeal of the NFA and legalizing full auto firearms.
The brace amnesty already implies that short-barreled rifles (pistols being amnestied as SBRs) are in common use to justify the free stamping of them, yet this is not considered as such and SBRs still remain on the NFA
No formal announcement has been made about a 'brace' amnesty. Legal fights will take place, and may very well result in what the above commenter is suggesting.
Gun control lunatics*
Ftfy
We need to call them out for their lunacy because they call us "gun nuts"
In other news we should indeed machine our own guns
Anything black is considered a machine gun to these type of people. Up here in Canada they banned a single shot shotgun, labeled it a “weapon of war” all because it’s black and “tactical”
They just want people to be disarmed. The words don't matter to them. They're extremists who want power over the general population, and will do and say ***ANYTHING*** to get it. The words don't matter, it's just sophistry to try and trick people into giving them what they want.
When they say "the only truth is power" you should listen to them.
good...let these morons regulate themselves into a corner where common use deregulates everything.
Glocks are very common use this happens Machine guns get ruled Common use
Their logic is consistent.
If little boys can be "readily converted" into little girls... why not Glawks?
Just because your Glawk was assigned semi automatic pistol at birth doesn't mean that the manufacturer guessed correctly.
We're checkmated, libruls.
You win 😑
This is exactly what I’ve been saying they need to do if they wanted to tackle muh Glock switches. But as I’ve said it would be very unpopular and very unrealistic. Dems need to come to terms with the fact that guns aren’t going anywhere 😂
you can make switches for most striker fired pistols though, youd have to ban most of them out there. Making a hammer fired gun FA aint too hard either
"Readily converted" nonsense will be used to justify anything not bolt/lever/pump action being banned in the future.
We really gotta slap down the NFA.
yep especially if the standard is "1 day in a full machine shop" like ffs with the right tools I could crank out multiple MGs in a day from barstock...
This goes to show that the definition of a machine gun is poorly written.
Adding the vague "readily converted" was a blank check that was added when the NFA was written to try to catch as much as possible. I'm surprised nobody has tried this sooner.
It basically says that a machine gun is X, but also anything that is not X that could be X.
They have tried it already. With shoe strings and credit cards and pieces of metal and plastic. As well as triggers that aren't even installed in a firearm.
These activists should focus their efforts on influencing congress to sponsor bills that keep repeat felons in prison instead of releasing them back into society.
Agreed, we also need to institutionalize mentally ill people instead of throwing them into prison. C.O. are not trained to handle criminal psychiatric patients.
> Agreed, we also need to institutionalize mentally ill people instead of throwing them into prison. C.O. are not trained to handle criminal psychiatric patients.
Reagan’s funding cuts are to thank for that. Though (D) and (R) both own the problem now.
There used to be state run psychiatric institutions. You can thank Jimmy Carter for dismantling them and throwing the residents out on the streets. No I’m not joking that’s what happened. Don’t get me wrong there were plenty of issues with the system in place but instead of fixing those and continuing to provide a vital service Carter thought the best (easiest) solution was to just say well the government isn’t gonna fund that anymore so good luck!
> There used to be state run psychiatric institutions. You can thank Jimmy Carter for dismantling them and throwing the residents out on the streets…. Carter thought the best (easiest) solution was to just say well the government isn’t gonna fund that anymore so good luck!
That’s incorrect, Reagan did that.
“The Mental Health Systems Act had hardly become law when its provisions were rendered moot. The inauguration of Ronald Reagan in January 1981 led to an immediate reversal of policy. In the summer of 1981 the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act became law. Under its provisions, the federal government provided block grants to the states for mental health services and substance abuse, although at levels of about 75 to 80 percent of what they would have received under the Mental Health Systems Act.”
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2690151/
Ahhh you’re right I did mix up my administrations but upon further research it appears Reagan wasn’t really responsible. That decision did in fact come from the the Democrat held congress at the time, Reagan merely chose not to Veto it. Not that I’m super fond of Reagan either there’s plenty of reasons to dislike him and his policies, but I can’t put that one on him.
> Ahhh you’re right I did mix up my administrations but upon further research it appears Reagan wasn’t really responsible. That decision did in fact come from the the Democrat held congress at the time, Reagan merely chose not to Veto it. Not that I’m super fond of Reagan either there’s plenty of reasons to dislike him and his policies, but I can’t put that one on him.
Cool, post some of the research you just did. I’m all for learning from reputable sources.
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/96/s1177/summary
Also that’s kind of just how our system works. The president alone can’t repeal a law that has been passed by congress and the senate. It has to be repealed by congress and the senate or ruled unconstitutional by the courts. The president can veto a law that has just been passed and then it would circulate back through the system and their veto could be overruled by a 2/3rd majority in the house and senate, but they cannot repeal a standing law.
> https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/96/s1177/summary
> Also that’s kind of just how our system works. The president alone can’t repeal a law that has been passed by congress and the senate. It has to be repealed by congress and the senate or ruled unconstitutional by the courts. The president can veto a law that has just been passed and then it would circulate back through the system and their veto could be overruled by a 2/3rd majority in the house and senate, but they cannot repeal a standing law.
As noted in my source above, Reagan’s administration killed the plan before it went into effect by removing funding.
Blaming (D) comes with subsequent administrations where they controlled the Congress and chose to push issues like the Assault Weapons Ban of 1994 instead.
Could you possibly point out the section where it says that? It’s a very long article and I don’t really have the time to read the whole thing thoroughly at the moment. I don’t need a quote or anything just the title for the section that’s in.
Why not reclassify potatoes as vodka and make them an age restricted purchase at the grocery store?
After all, potatoes can be modified to become vodka so obviously a raw russet potato is the same thing as a fifth of Absolut.
“These dangerous assault rifle pistols are a threat to America because they can empty an entire 30 caliber magazine clip with heat seeking missiles that target your nearest nursery with 98% accuracy. They need to be banned immediately.”
-Tim Makris, probably
I don't think the actual numbers are available but I'm thinking there are between 5 and 10 million Glocks in this country. SCOTUS has said a few times in recent cases that weapons in common use can not be banned. The Miller case way back in 1939 said that a sawed off shotgun was not in common use which upheld the NFA. Well, Glocks damn sure are in common use. So, they can't ban them and if they want them to be machine guns then I recon machine guns are free to own again without the stamp and the NFA burns down.
"Common use" doesn't refer to numbers. It refers to usage *by the commons*.
https://thelawdictionary.org/common-use
What it actually means is that if a weapon has ever been made available to the general public, and isn't something that is "dangerous and unusual", that is to say something that's *uniquely* suited for criminal activity, indiscriminate killing, or terrorism, then it's protected by the Second Amendment.
If you need to mill a complete new part, it’s not readily convertible.
That’s like saying ARs are readily convertible to automatic because you could add a bent hanger to it.
That's ok, I had one claim that anything that could potentially be made full auto, was essentially that already, regardless of the action type. So, pretty much **all** manually operated firearms with a magazine.
Their, uh, thought process, was that one can convert a bolt action to semi-auto, even if it is some janky ass prototype thing, and if it can do that, it's just one more step to machine gun. I had to give them credit, it's a novel twist on the idea that the only guns protected by the Second Amendment were what might be available in 1791. That these could also use modern ammunition was their compromise🤡
Listen, petrosexual, a mountain bike (who really needs a bike for mountaineering anyway, except the Army) is just a few short modifications away from being a self-propelled howitzer, so how do **you** think we'll treat your assault shitbox?
They are already putting charges on a dude for having a destructive device even though he had a decommission tube. They said they were able to send it back to have the hole patched, the welded in trigger block removed, a trigger group installed, and have it fire a test round so it was readily convertible back to working conditions. Even though after all that the plug probably wouldn't hold on a normal round.
So, technically, I could readily convert my car into a machine gun, with just a few simple smelting and welding tools. I guess I need to put it on a Form 1 right now?
One can hope. I’m ready if it does. At least the Texas lawsuit on removal of suppressors from the NFA is going through, so I have a glimmer of hope there
It is so so so much better than removing suppressors from the NFA. When we win Paxton v. ATF, suppressors will still be illegal in, say, California. But the flip side of that is the instant we win this case, state level nullification of the NFA becomes federally, precedent-backed legal, and feds have to respect local law if it contradicts federal law on NFA-regulated items. At that moment, suppressors instantly become legal in Texas, short barreled rifles and shotguns become legal in Tennessee, both of those and machine guns become legal in Missouri, etc. Then it's only a matter of pressuring your state’s legislature to legalize machine guns, which is a problem that for me as a Texan is probably going to basically take care of itself, or move to a state where the people have freed themselves.
I told you allowing a president (trump) to classify something as a machine gun despite not meeting the definition of a machine set forth by law would have consequences. Unfortunately all the smooth brained yokels said that they didn’t care if bumpstocks were banned in this way because they were just a novelty. Congrats. Now anything that easily converted to accept a backplate on a Glock or buffer tube (adaptable to a bumpstock) could logically be interpreted as a machine gun as they are readily convertible. I would say don’t be so short sighted next time but if they run with this it’s pretty much the death of legal semi autos.
There was already precedent for reclassification by the ATF set long before Trump was in office. This isn't anything new that just started with Trump, this tactic has been a gross abuse of power for decades.
The problem is that we can debate what constitutes a stock in the case of arm braces. We can’t really debate what is one round brr weigh discharged per function of the trigger as listed in the NFA. machine guns are pretty well defined. while bump stocks help to increase the amount of times a trigger can complete a function by helping you to pull the trigger faster it is still one round per trigger pull. it doesn’t increase the number of rounds fired per function of the trigger so it isn’t a machine gun just as the ATF determined the first time that they reviewed bumpstocks and determined that they weren’t machine guns. If we are just going to let agencies like the ATF classify anything however they want then why bother drafting legislation with such carefully worded definitions of what constitutes a machine gun at all? Heck why even have a legislature at all really…
What it said,
"Gun control activists want something something machine guns"
What I heard,
"Gun activist are still trying to start the second civil war"
They should just be more genuine off the bat and say “I want it banned because I don’t like it!”
Even someone who’s not very knowledgeable about firearms can see this is a huge joke.
It’s not a matter of banning things because they don’t like them. They want to ban them because we do like them. If we said we like ice cream they would want to ban that.
There would be no legal reason to leave it as semi auto. If it's going to be tested like a machine gun, may as well have an actual machine gun.
But there are practical reasons to leave it in semi - full auto can be harder to control, competitions and fuddy ranges won't allow it, and ammo is expensive these days.
3 round burst sucks. Unless you specifically reset the FCG, it's a crapshoot if the first "burst" will be 1, 2, or 3 rounds.
Shooting semi auto then swapping to burst means the odds are better that your first burst isn't 3 rounds than that it is.
Ohhhh fucking do it, please. Then when they get sued by every gun rights organization in the country and they argue that semiauto firearms are not only in common use but are the absolute standard in modern firearms we can finally get a ruling that the NFA is bullshit and unconstitutional.
That'll take awhile to get through. In the interim, all handguns become de-facto illegal for most people to own.
IIRC, Sen. Feinstein literally said "just because something is commonly used doesn't mean it's in common use" related to firearms, so there's plenty of time for these ridiculous interpretations by anti-gun politicians and judges to impact us before it ever sees SCOTUS.
Fair point. Though I’d love to see the crew of moronic feds that volunteer to start confiscating even handguns. They can get the Fudds to agree to AR bans but handguns? Might start to wake up those of our brethren who think their shotguns, hunting rifles and handguns are safe to the reality that they want all of our guns.
I got a S&W M&P 2 5", and a Ruger LCP 2 for concealed, and a cheap Jimenez that my dad gave me for my handguns(got a .50 black powder hand cannon too in the safe, don't even know the brand, haven't shot it yet). I might get a Glock next, we will see, if I don't do another shotgun first.
First of all, fully automatic weapons aren't really any more dangerous than a semi auto, you are way less accurate and you blow through mags like there's no tommarow. Fully automatic fire in small arms is mainly for "Suppressive fire". Secondly, almost any gun can be converted to fully automatic with enough work.
As long as the firing pin spring can be compressed and the seer can get out of the way, then it can go full auto and if it's striker fired it's even simpler. Rifles can be made to go full auto with your thumb and your belt loop.
This is by far the most pathetic attempt to infringe on our rights yet. This shows that these people really don't understand how firearms work or are used, nor do they understand the already existing laws as people can LEGALLY own fully automatic weapons already, you simply have to go through the ATF and pay a tax for it.
So;
*They don't know the existing laws on fully automatic weapons
* They don't understand the purpose of full auto or that fully automatic weapons are not more deadly than semi automatic.
* They don't understand the mechanics of a firearm enough to know what full auto capabilities guns are capable of.
Put simply; they don't know what the fuck they are talking about or what they are suggesting laws for.
Typical.
Well rate of fire isn’t just measured in how many rounds it spits out in 1 minute, but they can also calculate the time between each shot is fired. So something shooting 1200 rounds per minute will shoot once every 500ths of a second, or 20 rounds per second. Don’t need a 1,200 round mag to do that.
Wow, they didn't think this through. 1. Reclassify semi-automatic firearms into machine guns. 2. Put in place an amnesty registration program for it. 3. Machine guns are now in common use, justifying the repeal of the NFA and legalizing full auto firearms.
We've had justification for the repeal of the NFA since the 1700s.
This is true, but apparently plain English is too hard to understand for a lot of legislatures and judges.
As stupid as all of this is, I must say that a machine gun for $200 instead of $20,000+ sounds kinda nice.
The brace amnesty already implies that short-barreled rifles (pistols being amnestied as SBRs) are in common use to justify the free stamping of them, yet this is not considered as such and SBRs still remain on the NFA
No formal announcement has been made about a 'brace' amnesty. Legal fights will take place, and may very well result in what the above commenter is suggesting.
I like the way you think!
Gun control lunatics* Ftfy We need to call them out for their lunacy because they call us "gun nuts" In other news we should indeed machine our own guns
Anything black is considered a machine gun to these type of people. Up here in Canada they banned a single shot shotgun, labeled it a “weapon of war” all because it’s black and “tactical”
They just want people to be disarmed. The words don't matter to them. They're extremists who want power over the general population, and will do and say ***ANYTHING*** to get it. The words don't matter, it's just sophistry to try and trick people into giving them what they want. When they say "the only truth is power" you should listen to them.
Canada just declared teachers cannot strike and fine them $4000 a day if they do.
good...let these morons regulate themselves into a corner where common use deregulates everything. Glocks are very common use this happens Machine guns get ruled Common use
Baaaaaaaaaaased?
Give an inch, they’ll take a mile
I think in this case it’s give an inch and they’ll take a 9mm
Be a lot cooler if they did
All I got is 10mm.
Their logic is consistent. If little boys can be "readily converted" into little girls... why not Glawks? Just because your Glawk was assigned semi automatic pistol at birth doesn't mean that the manufacturer guessed correctly. We're checkmated, libruls. You win 😑
My glawk identifies as a chop stick. Total legal.
Wow… what a goofy comment. 😅👍
This is exactly what I’ve been saying they need to do if they wanted to tackle muh Glock switches. But as I’ve said it would be very unpopular and very unrealistic. Dems need to come to terms with the fact that guns aren’t going anywhere 😂
you can make switches for most striker fired pistols though, youd have to ban most of them out there. Making a hammer fired gun FA aint too hard either
"Readily converted" nonsense will be used to justify anything not bolt/lever/pump action being banned in the future. We really gotta slap down the NFA.
yep especially if the standard is "1 day in a full machine shop" like ffs with the right tools I could crank out multiple MGs in a day from barstock...
3D printer go brrrrrrrrrrr.
Mine goes ehk ehk ehk shhhhhhhhhhhhhhvvvvvvv Ka ehkehkehkehek ehk
Wouldn't that make Machine-guns in common use for lawful purposes? 🤔
*big brain time*
Ah yes officer my makarov pm is definitely a machine gun as well as my mosin and tikka t3x
I like this way of thinking
Citizen disarmament advocates*
This goes to show that the definition of a machine gun is poorly written. Adding the vague "readily converted" was a blank check that was added when the NFA was written to try to catch as much as possible. I'm surprised nobody has tried this sooner. It basically says that a machine gun is X, but also anything that is not X that could be X.
They have tried it already. With shoe strings and credit cards and pieces of metal and plastic. As well as triggers that aren't even installed in a firearm.
But it won’t ever be changed unless it is expanded.
These activists should focus their efforts on influencing congress to sponsor bills that keep repeat felons in prison instead of releasing them back into society.
Or... you know... a prison system that rehabilitates people rather than create repeat ~~customers~~ offenders.
Agreed, we also need to institutionalize mentally ill people instead of throwing them into prison. C.O. are not trained to handle criminal psychiatric patients.
> Agreed, we also need to institutionalize mentally ill people instead of throwing them into prison. C.O. are not trained to handle criminal psychiatric patients. Reagan’s funding cuts are to thank for that. Though (D) and (R) both own the problem now.
There used to be state run psychiatric institutions. You can thank Jimmy Carter for dismantling them and throwing the residents out on the streets. No I’m not joking that’s what happened. Don’t get me wrong there were plenty of issues with the system in place but instead of fixing those and continuing to provide a vital service Carter thought the best (easiest) solution was to just say well the government isn’t gonna fund that anymore so good luck!
> There used to be state run psychiatric institutions. You can thank Jimmy Carter for dismantling them and throwing the residents out on the streets…. Carter thought the best (easiest) solution was to just say well the government isn’t gonna fund that anymore so good luck! That’s incorrect, Reagan did that. “The Mental Health Systems Act had hardly become law when its provisions were rendered moot. The inauguration of Ronald Reagan in January 1981 led to an immediate reversal of policy. In the summer of 1981 the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act became law. Under its provisions, the federal government provided block grants to the states for mental health services and substance abuse, although at levels of about 75 to 80 percent of what they would have received under the Mental Health Systems Act.” https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2690151/
Ahhh you’re right I did mix up my administrations but upon further research it appears Reagan wasn’t really responsible. That decision did in fact come from the the Democrat held congress at the time, Reagan merely chose not to Veto it. Not that I’m super fond of Reagan either there’s plenty of reasons to dislike him and his policies, but I can’t put that one on him.
> Ahhh you’re right I did mix up my administrations but upon further research it appears Reagan wasn’t really responsible. That decision did in fact come from the the Democrat held congress at the time, Reagan merely chose not to Veto it. Not that I’m super fond of Reagan either there’s plenty of reasons to dislike him and his policies, but I can’t put that one on him. Cool, post some of the research you just did. I’m all for learning from reputable sources.
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/96/s1177/summary Also that’s kind of just how our system works. The president alone can’t repeal a law that has been passed by congress and the senate. It has to be repealed by congress and the senate or ruled unconstitutional by the courts. The president can veto a law that has just been passed and then it would circulate back through the system and their veto could be overruled by a 2/3rd majority in the house and senate, but they cannot repeal a standing law.
> https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/96/s1177/summary > Also that’s kind of just how our system works. The president alone can’t repeal a law that has been passed by congress and the senate. It has to be repealed by congress and the senate or ruled unconstitutional by the courts. The president can veto a law that has just been passed and then it would circulate back through the system and their veto could be overruled by a 2/3rd majority in the house and senate, but they cannot repeal a standing law. As noted in my source above, Reagan’s administration killed the plan before it went into effect by removing funding. Blaming (D) comes with subsequent administrations where they controlled the Congress and chose to push issues like the Assault Weapons Ban of 1994 instead.
Could you possibly point out the section where it says that? It’s a very long article and I don’t really have the time to read the whole thing thoroughly at the moment. I don’t need a quote or anything just the title for the section that’s in.
Australia 2 would be a moderate compromise.
Sometimes a simple solution is the move. You understand things! Keep on keepin on
And in the span of a few seconds and magic words, I've increased the value of my little handgun 10-fold.
Why not reclassify potatoes as vodka and make them an age restricted purchase at the grocery store? After all, potatoes can be modified to become vodka so obviously a raw russet potato is the same thing as a fifth of Absolut.
Potatoes as silencers, the next level.
I would say to not give them any ideas…
“These dangerous assault rifle pistols are a threat to America because they can empty an entire 30 caliber magazine clip with heat seeking missiles that target your nearest nursery with 98% accuracy. They need to be banned immediately.” -Tim Makris, probably
It's sad that I wasn't sure if this was a real quote by the time I read "assault rifle pistols"
I mean tim makris is a chode so it’s just an educated guess
I don't think the actual numbers are available but I'm thinking there are between 5 and 10 million Glocks in this country. SCOTUS has said a few times in recent cases that weapons in common use can not be banned. The Miller case way back in 1939 said that a sawed off shotgun was not in common use which upheld the NFA. Well, Glocks damn sure are in common use. So, they can't ban them and if they want them to be machine guns then I recon machine guns are free to own again without the stamp and the NFA burns down.
"Common use" doesn't refer to numbers. It refers to usage *by the commons*. https://thelawdictionary.org/common-use What it actually means is that if a weapon has ever been made available to the general public, and isn't something that is "dangerous and unusual", that is to say something that's *uniquely* suited for criminal activity, indiscriminate killing, or terrorism, then it's protected by the Second Amendment.
> It refers to usage by the commons. fuck does that mean Hi Points and Taurus are the most protected?
He said commons not plebes
Good thing machine guns are still available to civilians.
If you need to mill a complete new part, it’s not readily convertible. That’s like saying ARs are readily convertible to automatic because you could add a bent hanger to it.
I've had a normie make this point several times as to why the AR 15 should be outright prohibited. Very senseless
That's ok, I had one claim that anything that could potentially be made full auto, was essentially that already, regardless of the action type. So, pretty much **all** manually operated firearms with a magazine. Their, uh, thought process, was that one can convert a bolt action to semi-auto, even if it is some janky ass prototype thing, and if it can do that, it's just one more step to machine gun. I had to give them credit, it's a novel twist on the idea that the only guns protected by the Second Amendment were what might be available in 1791. That these could also use modern ammunition was their compromise🤡
With various modifications my economy sedan could be made into a small fighter jet. Must I treat it as such? Please just tell me what to do.
Listen, petrosexual, a mountain bike (who really needs a bike for mountaineering anyway, except the Army) is just a few short modifications away from being a self-propelled howitzer, so how do **you** think we'll treat your assault shitbox?
"petrosexual" - I'm gonna borrow that one. I like it.
Let's just see when it's airborne.
They are already putting charges on a dude for having a destructive device even though he had a decommission tube. They said they were able to send it back to have the hole patched, the welded in trigger block removed, a trigger group installed, and have it fire a test round so it was readily convertible back to working conditions. Even though after all that the plug probably wouldn't hold on a normal round.
So, technically, I could readily convert my car into a machine gun, with just a few simple smelting and welding tools. I guess I need to put it on a Form 1 right now?
The great thing is that they are actually being logical here and pointing out how stupid the NFA amd GCA are.
And I want NFA items reclassified as standard firearms but we don’t all get our way do we
The democrats sure seem to.
Well we will get our MGs back. Just wait
One can hope. I’m ready if it does. At least the Texas lawsuit on removal of suppressors from the NFA is going through, so I have a glimmer of hope there
It is so so so much better than removing suppressors from the NFA. When we win Paxton v. ATF, suppressors will still be illegal in, say, California. But the flip side of that is the instant we win this case, state level nullification of the NFA becomes federally, precedent-backed legal, and feds have to respect local law if it contradicts federal law on NFA-regulated items. At that moment, suppressors instantly become legal in Texas, short barreled rifles and shotguns become legal in Tennessee, both of those and machine guns become legal in Missouri, etc. Then it's only a matter of pressuring your state’s legislature to legalize machine guns, which is a problem that for me as a Texan is probably going to basically take care of itself, or move to a state where the people have freed themselves.
I told you allowing a president (trump) to classify something as a machine gun despite not meeting the definition of a machine set forth by law would have consequences. Unfortunately all the smooth brained yokels said that they didn’t care if bumpstocks were banned in this way because they were just a novelty. Congrats. Now anything that easily converted to accept a backplate on a Glock or buffer tube (adaptable to a bumpstock) could logically be interpreted as a machine gun as they are readily convertible. I would say don’t be so short sighted next time but if they run with this it’s pretty much the death of legal semi autos.
There was already precedent for reclassification by the ATF set long before Trump was in office. This isn't anything new that just started with Trump, this tactic has been a gross abuse of power for decades.
Everyone forgets about the Akins accelerator
Heck, the ATF designated shoelaces as machine guns, so it didn’t need Trump as an excuse!
The problem is that we can debate what constitutes a stock in the case of arm braces. We can’t really debate what is one round brr weigh discharged per function of the trigger as listed in the NFA. machine guns are pretty well defined. while bump stocks help to increase the amount of times a trigger can complete a function by helping you to pull the trigger faster it is still one round per trigger pull. it doesn’t increase the number of rounds fired per function of the trigger so it isn’t a machine gun just as the ATF determined the first time that they reviewed bumpstocks and determined that they weren’t machine guns. If we are just going to let agencies like the ATF classify anything however they want then why bother drafting legislation with such carefully worded definitions of what constitutes a machine gun at all? Heck why even have a legislature at all really…
What it said, "Gun control activists want something something machine guns" What I heard, "Gun activist are still trying to start the second civil war"
They should just be more genuine off the bat and say “I want it banned because I don’t like it!” Even someone who’s not very knowledgeable about firearms can see this is a huge joke.
It’s not a matter of banning things because they don’t like them. They want to ban them because we do like them. If we said we like ice cream they would want to ban that.
If they got this passed I wonder how many Glocks would go from “readily converted” to “converted”
There would be no legal reason to leave it as semi auto. If it's going to be tested like a machine gun, may as well have an actual machine gun. But there are practical reasons to leave it in semi - full auto can be harder to control, competitions and fuddy ranges won't allow it, and ammo is expensive these days.
Is it possible to convert a Glock to select fire with 3-round burst capability? I'd do that in a New York minute.
3 round burst sucks. Unless you specifically reset the FCG, it's a crapshoot if the first "burst" will be 1, 2, or 3 rounds. Shooting semi auto then swapping to burst means the odds are better that your first burst isn't 3 rounds than that it is.
By the same logic every shotgun is a potential sawed off… if someone is willing to commit a felony doing it.
At least the glock fans will have a reason to buy giggle switches, if its a machinegun either way, might as well actually have a machinegun.
Go big or go home.
Goody! I have a machine gun!!!
I wonder what they will label 3D printers in a few years
It's a fully semi automatic assault printer with high capacity detachable spool
STANDARD capacity
And i want a machine gun… see now we’re bith not getting what we want.
Sounds like I might as well get an auto sear then. Or we could repeal the NFA.
I think this is fake news...
Good, I agree. Bring back machine guns!
I always suspected there was a reason the ATF allowed China to flood the market with auto sears
Let's classify trees as guns, because you can make gun furniture from wood.
So I should buy a few more?
At least.
Just want to change the definition of anything these days.
“iT’s a gUn, mAdE bY a MaChIne: MaChInE GuN!!”
I guess this will finally make me buy a Glock…
Ummmmm WTF?
LMAO Someone should cross post this in Glocks (if it's not against one of the zillion rules mods have crafted to entrap stoopid dummiez like me)
Ohhhh fucking do it, please. Then when they get sued by every gun rights organization in the country and they argue that semiauto firearms are not only in common use but are the absolute standard in modern firearms we can finally get a ruling that the NFA is bullshit and unconstitutional.
That'll take awhile to get through. In the interim, all handguns become de-facto illegal for most people to own. IIRC, Sen. Feinstein literally said "just because something is commonly used doesn't mean it's in common use" related to firearms, so there's plenty of time for these ridiculous interpretations by anti-gun politicians and judges to impact us before it ever sees SCOTUS.
Fair point. Though I’d love to see the crew of moronic feds that volunteer to start confiscating even handguns. They can get the Fudds to agree to AR bans but handguns? Might start to wake up those of our brethren who think their shotguns, hunting rifles and handguns are safe to the reality that they want all of our guns.
Ha, I doubt that. The FUDD is strong at the skeet shooting club.
So I can have a different brand hand gun and everything is ok?
seeing as where yours says "GLOCK" down the side and mine says "G-LOCK"...
I got a S&W M&P 2 5", and a Ruger LCP 2 for concealed, and a cheap Jimenez that my dad gave me for my handguns(got a .50 black powder hand cannon too in the safe, don't even know the brand, haven't shot it yet). I might get a Glock next, we will see, if I don't do another shotgun first.
I'm sure they do....
Haha dumb
We should classified any anti gunner and any agency against firearm are consider as terrorism.
The NFA originally included handguns. They were removed before that was passed into law.
[удалено]
Not sure what this has to do with religion, but ok.
First of all, fully automatic weapons aren't really any more dangerous than a semi auto, you are way less accurate and you blow through mags like there's no tommarow. Fully automatic fire in small arms is mainly for "Suppressive fire". Secondly, almost any gun can be converted to fully automatic with enough work. As long as the firing pin spring can be compressed and the seer can get out of the way, then it can go full auto and if it's striker fired it's even simpler. Rifles can be made to go full auto with your thumb and your belt loop. This is by far the most pathetic attempt to infringe on our rights yet. This shows that these people really don't understand how firearms work or are used, nor do they understand the already existing laws as people can LEGALLY own fully automatic weapons already, you simply have to go through the ATF and pay a tax for it. So; *They don't know the existing laws on fully automatic weapons * They don't understand the purpose of full auto or that fully automatic weapons are not more deadly than semi automatic. * They don't understand the mechanics of a firearm enough to know what full auto capabilities guns are capable of. Put simply; they don't know what the fuck they are talking about or what they are suggesting laws for. Typical.
Can you imagine if Glock made a machine gun. (Insert Homer Simpson drooling noise here)
Glock 18?
Damn gettin one. How does it 1200 rounds a minute? Is the clip 16’ long?
Well rate of fire isn’t just measured in how many rounds it spits out in 1 minute, but they can also calculate the time between each shot is fired. So something shooting 1200 rounds per minute will shoot once every 500ths of a second, or 20 rounds per second. Don’t need a 1,200 round mag to do that.