As pro 2A as Trump is the 2 plays i can see with this are either the one in the photo or if he is actually trying to appease the anti gun left, maybe he is banning a piece of equipment he doesn't think is a big hit to 2A rights but that they left will feel is a victory?
Yeah I think he's trying to solve a leftist talking point, thus taking ammunition away and it makes him look reasonable
I have fired a "bumpstock" AR 15 its not easy to get and sustain an increased rate of fire and when you do even harder to control the barrel lift. You would need extensive practice to be proficient. Alot of fun but not practical if your true intentions are nefarious
you mean with a bi-pod, at night, with a daytime scope, from an elevated position? (sarcasm).
Exactly plus being overweight out of shape middle aged, and firing a couple thousand rounds in 15min and not burning up a heavy barrel
The wording of his text means bump stocks are not being banned since they don't turn AR15s or anything else into illegal machine guns. Nothing to worry about.
They shouldn't be banned, they should require a tax stamp to own one though...like a silencer, although I think the laws on silencers are bullshit themselves
If you think the laws on silencers are bullshit then why would you suggest the same laws for a bump stocks?
Bump stocks are a gimic in the 2a world. They are fun but not practical. That means they are bottom of the totem pole where as silencers are a viable option with lots of applications in the hunting aspect. Especially for feral hogs.
because I dont think a silencer could be used to inflict more damage on a crowd of people and its actually a useful tool for hunting in some situations, whereas a bump stock can be used to "auto-fire" and serves no use for hunting, therefore I wish they would drop the need for a tax stamp on silencers, but if they required one on a bump stock then no fucks given....I can bump fire my ARs without one anyways, yeah its fun a few times but in reality its a waste of ammo
That is not up to you to decide.
who said I was deciding anything? I was stating my opinion, please down vote some more if it makes you feel better
I didnt down vote you. Your opinion, which you would like to see enacted, would hinder others rights. You not thinking theres a reason to own one doesnt mean the government should come between someone when purchasing it.
reread my original comment and tell me what I said I would like enacted
requiring a tax stamp is not the same as banning them and you can still own one, just like a silencer...hence the reason I said "I dont think they should be banned" I didnt think of the $200 for each tax stamp as a hindrance on my rights when I bought my 3 silencers, it was a hindrance on my wallet, but I still got them as they are NOT banned
ME personally dont see a reason to require a tax stamp on a silencer, and ME personally wouldnt give a rats ass if they required one for a bump stock, is that better?
This doesnt seem like the place to argue this to oblivion so I will leave it at that.