No bump stocks have been turned in to Denver police after ban - Sensationalist Headlines

I'm not currently a gun owner because I'm going to school and very broke, but I go shooting with family a few times a year. Thanks for assuming things about me, though.

A bumpstock is not a full auto implement or conversion, it's a very very different, very very stupider thing.

Canada doesn't have the gun culture we have. Canada has no constitutional right to bear arms and guns are seen much more as tools, from what I've been made aware of. Which makes sense, more serious and experienced people are more likely to be gun owners up there. Since we celebrate the Second Amendment so much, people who are probably too stupid to be trusted with a gun become attracted to the idea of becoming a gun owner.

An implement for sure, but not for full auto fire. That would be a drop-in auto sear or whatever those can-opener-looking fuckers you can slap in a semi AR15 to make it go ratata are called. I'm sure you know what I'm talking about.

And the problem is no matter how much training you give someone they can still fuck things up. A good friend of mine who is like me put a .357 magnum into his thigh and almost died, all because he became complacent with his gun safety. I have signs all over my gun shop telling people to leave their guns in their holsters, but they still pull them out to show me anyway. I've seen fully trained Marines send negligent discharges up in the air, and personally I had one send a 3 round burst above my head at the rifle range. People are going to be stupid with anything, but that doesn't mean that it's right to strip the vast majority of responsible people from being able to defend themselves as they deem necessary.

Mechanically speaking, using a bump stock still fires one round per trigger pull. In my eyes that separates it definitively from being a true full-auto conversion.

I don't know maybe it's just me but it seems to be kind of a rule that releasing the trigger means no more shooting, not the other way around.

That, and gun-handling-speaking, the way you activate a bumpfire-stock is fairly detrimental to actually controlling your recoil and aiming your gun. Any rifle instructor will tell you to grasp the rifle firmly and pull it against your shoulder. To activate a bumpstock, you do the opposite, tugging the rifle away from your shoulder, which of course makes your control of the recoil and ability to hold the weapon steady a lot less uhh... Good, I guess. Fuck, it's late as heck here, don't expect me to use fancy words. You're all shooters, you know what I mean.

Well, the stock and pistol grip are one piece. To use the bump stock you still have the stock tucked tight into your shoulder since you're pulling back on the pistol grip while pulling forward on the rest of the gun. Control isn't great but I wouldn't say it's necessarily more dangerous than a real full auto. The safety issues with bump stocks are more to do with the possibility for out of battery detonations and stuff like that when you make a gun run faster than it was meant to.

You're not supposed to pull forwards on any part of a gun while shooting. Except like, maybe the slide or whatever on a pumpaction immediately after pulling it back to rack another shell into the chamber, I guess. Bumpstocks aren't more dangerous in the 'oh no a mass shooter' kind of dangerous, they're more of a 'oh no I didn't have proper hold of my gun and I shot cousin Jerry who for some reason were off to my side in the thigh!' kind of dangerous. For mass-shootings, I'd say the absolutely most dangerous would be semi-automatic fire, because that's your best hit-probability. None of my arguments against bumpstocks and binary triggers rely on their potential for practical use.

Nono, we're talking about the same kind of danger here. You are able to keep the gun pointed in the right direction with a bump stock. It's no harder than with a true automatic. Like I said, the safety issues have more to do with mechanical problems.

And I just realized you didn't talk about criminal use either. Woop. I'm a tired idiot. But eh, my point still stands. Release-trigger-goes-boom is a bad idea for obvious reasons, bumpstocks are bad ideas because you can't hit worth shit and you might hit shit not worth hitting.

Maybe. All the guns fitted with bump stocks I've fired have had vertical foregrips. Keeping the muzzle on target while pulling away wasn't a problem. I guess I didn't think about how that changes without a foregrip. By the way, I really don't like binary triggers. I think they're actually dangerous.

My point is, you're absolutely giving up a lot of control over your firearm in a situation where you absolutely do not want to give up control over your firearm. More gun control is better gun control, pun absolutely intended though not thought through to a point where it should be considered an actual political stance.

Heck, I've fired 7.62 in semi-auto and it kicks pretty darn hard. I was astonished at the difference between it and 5.56 in terms of recoil. That, or I just have really weak arms :c

Clearly you're not familiar with fire on release triggers in trap shotguns and precision target rifles then, which is also the reason why binary triggers are legal in the first place.

Just a quick question because I am actually not aware of trap shotgun mechanics, but do they also fire on the pull, or just the release?

It's effectively the same, but functionally entirely different. It's a clever mechanical assist to increase fire rate with relative ease, not an actual, real full-auto weapon where that motion of making the trigger do this little dance of /, \, and back to / for every shot is unnecessary.

Only upon release. When you're shooting pigeons, it's more important to have an extremely accurate shot than to be able to instantaneously ready your shot, and firing on release is more accurate than firing on pull.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kryIJIrD5eQ

See now that makes it a real poor argument for binary triggers, then. Because, you know, you still only fire one shot per trigger pull. Which is the word-of-the-law definition of semi automatic, far as I recall. Binaries still fire two shots.

if the american government wants guns to go it's gonna have to start taking them. roll a couple drones in and see what cletus thinks about his "Well-trained militia" then

That would literally be the worst decision the government could ever make.

thats why the trump government should do it. he could solve america's gun problem and do something good for his country, while destroying his approval rating by pissing off the only folks left who support him. no more guns AND trump gets impeached. two birds one stone.

That wouldn't solve America's gun problem. It would start a civil war that would end up enshrining the 2nd amendment because it would show that we need to protect ourselves from a government out to kill us, but it wouldn't solve the "gun problem", whatever that means.

taking people's guns away =/= trying to kill them the 2nd amendment is pointless. if a revolution needs to happen the people will get weapons regardless of what the government has to say about it. unrestricted firearms in the meantime only cause mass shootings, high levels of gang violence, etc. which is what you see in america

You said it right here: And here: You're saying to go after gun owners with drones and the government. That is trying to kill them. There is no arresting someone with a drone. Also, I'm going to need valid sources on the "unrestricted part", the "causes mass shootings" part, and the "causes high levels of gang violence" part. Not opinion pieces, not correlations, I'm talking about direct causations. If you want to make bold claims, back them up.

This is probably the first step toward Cletus actually trying to overthrow the government because they're oppressing citizens by threatening them with fucking drones.

This is so disingenuous that it hurts. Yeah, you're right, the cause of our mass shootings and gang violence are because of guns. There aren't a million other things like socioeconomic factors, mental healthcare, or irrational and ineffective wars against drugs that might make people violent criminals, no sir.