Gun Control & RKBA
In reply to the discussion: Is this enough? 50+ dead, 200+ wounded. [View all]jimmy the one
(2,720 posts)krispos: Some of the guns have "bump-fire" stocks which allow him to shoot pretty rapidly. I mean, a person can shoot a semi-auto rifle pretty fast if he's not worrying about aiming too much, but the bump-fire stock will let him shoot a lot without getting a cramp in his trigger finger. Because, you know, that hurts.
I wrote on bump fire a few years back, as one way to determine whether a rifle could be classified as 'assault weapon/rifle', if it possessed bump fire capability.
But now I'm wondering which semi automatic rifles are able to be bump fired, or what (approximate) percentage of the total semi auto rifle stock is able to be bump fired, any idea?
Is there a qualification for a rifle to be bump fired? must it have a minimum recoil - related to muzzle velocity I would think.
I would think most all of the past classes of banned assault rifles in the several states would be able to be bump fired, including ar15 & ak47 & mk5, even with the ar15's relatively weak recoil.
But what about the standard hunting rifle? like any of these 10 most popular hunting rifles (seems #6 probable);
https://www.outdoorlife.com/blogs/hunting/10-best-deer-guns-hunting-today
krispos: This asshole would have done the same thing if he had only one or two rifles. Yeah, the body count almost certainly would have been less but it still would have been ENOUGH.
Serious gun control efforts never contended they could do away with all or even most all violent gun crime, or mass shootings or gun death, so 'almost certainly would have been less' as you put it, is too often the best to be hoped for - a reduction.
A marginal improvement is generally the best gun control efforts can expect. At least a marginal improvement is better than shoulder shrugging nra style, smirking inside, since they've already unleased their wolves & have little remorse for all the dead cattle the past 30 years. Is why background checks, high capacity magazine bans should be the least congress should stand for - republicans that is since most all dems do.
A bump stock ban should be a congressional knee jerk reaction 'yes'; I'm optimistic on this one - even the nra couldn't concoct a twisted reason for bump fire to proliferate unregulated. But banning bump stocks is such a drop in a big bucket, and it's so remote that any criminal would think one would be helpful in his crime, so as to want one.