My brother was asking me about the 10/22 I have, he wants one for vermin extermination around the house. I told him I bought the Ruger 10/22 because it was infinitely customizeable, has been around forever, and though I use it for same reason he wanted his right now, that you can certainly have a lot of fun with them. For example, I told him, I have an in-law who installed a hand crank on his along with a 100-round drum and turns it basically into a machine gun. When looking to prove that statement with something cool, I stumbled on the above video. Yeah, for some reason it never occurred to me that, well, duh! Of course they'd do the same thing with a .223 (those super duper deadly dangerous omg black guns everyone is scared about right now), and probably with AKs, AR-10s, and probably a bunch of other variants of the GAT trigger system (that crank system) as well. Yet no one is up in arms - pardon the pun - trying to ban these GAT systems, because those who are afraid of them don't know anything about guns, and those who know even a little about guns know that banning this kind of thing is pointless anyway.
Im pretty sure the latest round of laws banning bumpstocks has included wording for "devices" like this.
I've always thought things like this are pointless. I mean, I get it. For someone who has never fired a fully automatic weapon, it's a neat gimmick. But beyond the novelty, automatic fire is fundamentally useless (and expensive) to a law abiding gun owner. Most people don't realize that assault rifles aren't built around their automatic fire capabilities. They are "one shot, one kill" rifles that have the option of automatic fire for situations where an actual machine gun is either damaged or not present, and suppressive fire is needed to fight the enemy. That's why it bugs me when people refer to a semi-auto only civilian rifle as an assault rifles, just because it resembles one with full-auto capabilities. Either way, I'm fine with banning bump stocks and crank triggers. If you really need to get it out of your system you can find a range where a machine gun event is taking place and shoot something that was meant for automatic fire.
I agree the usefulness of bumpstock and cranks are low. I see it opposite though that in reality there is very little difference between fully automatic and semi auto ARs. Beyond the minor mechanical differences they are the same gun. Though I have no problem with civilians having either. I wish they’d open up the registry so full auto prices weren’t retarded. I never liked the fact that bumpstock flouting the letter and spirit of the law. The YouTube videos and such were a middle finger to the opposition. I agreed with the stance the NRA on bump stocks as they as being hardline over everything will not work out in the end when you live in a representative republic. Hardliners have a point that allowing this inch just gives the ground that even semi autos can be just as dangerous and it will eventually creep to a full semi auto ban. You see states already with detachable mags and mag limit bans. It will come to that next step fairly easily.
Basically. Rapid fire is almost impossible to control and it’s only real purpose on shoulder fired rifles outside of making Rambo look cool is for suppressive fire. That’s why even troops only shoot in bursts of a few rounds if they’re using it. Bump stocks are at least a little more accurate and potentially more safe, in theory, than a belt loop or a shoe string, which you can’t outlaw.
M16's have been 3-round burst since the A2's came out way back in the day. I've been out of the military for over a decade, so they may have changed that since then, but it was a good way to keep morons from wasting ammo and turning their gas tubes red.
Yes, that’s from Sinclair buying up most of the local news stations and doing things like requiring there to be 9 Boris Epshteyn segments a week of pro-Trump editorials. Another thing we can thank Ajit Pai for after approving the buy-out of Tribune when they already had extensive reach.
FCC, and it's this specific case because the combined Sinclair/Tribune would pass a threshold that had previously been prohibited to pass. Congressional limits prevent any single provider from having a reach of more than 39% of the national audience. Prior to the Tribune deal, Sinclair reached 38%. Pai revived a rule that effectively undercounted certain stations when computing this number, allowing Sinclair to reach 70%+ of the market while still coming in under the 39% cap on paper.
Bad day to work at YouTube. http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-youtube-shooter-20180403-story.html
Meh... it's a campus of 1,000 over multiple buildings. Sounds like a murder/suicide that went "wrong". Don't really see why it's big fucking news.
I can only hope it was one of the official SJW types at YouTube that classify "objectionable" videos that results in them getting demonetized... and she took exception to being told to "lighten up on the shooting videos". (In case you've been out of the loop, YouTube killed off a ton of very informative, educational shooting channels because "GUNS!", and they've since lightened up their stance after quite a backlash).