Trump's bumpstock ban...

[Rod]

Wince is nothing but a well spoken retard. He proves it in every thread 

[steve from amherst]

1 hour ago, Highmark said:

The people should at minimum have the right to the same weapons as local, state and federal law enforcement.   JMHO.  

Trump fucked up here.   He will lose votes over this.  

I don't believe it will cost him votes. Most serious gun owners don't give a crap about the things. Or at least this one dosnt.

[Highmark]

Just now, steve from amherst said:

I don't believe it will cost him votes. Most serious gun owners don't give a crap about the things. Or at least this one dosnt.

I'm not talking them.   I'm talking the people who vote hard line 2nd amendment.   There are more of them in the country than you think and they just won't vote for anyone.  I'm seeing quite a bit of disapproval from strong Trump supporters on many Instagram pages.  

[steve from amherst]

Trust me Im a true believer in " give them nothing , let them spend their resources on shit ya don't care about so that they stay too busy to fight you on shit you do care about"

 

But Ive had guns for 40 yrs. Have belonged to many gun clubs , sportsmans clubs have many friends who are gun owners. Bumpstocks are nothing. 

Its telling telling a weed smoker he can no longer purchase banana flovored rolling papers in 2-1/2 size on Wednesdays.

[Whiskey Tango Foxtrot]

10 minutes ago, steve from amherst said:

I don't believe it will cost him votes. Most serious gun owners don't give a crap about the things. Or at least this one dosnt.

Though I don't care about the actual stock, as I said before, it's a gimmick, not a legitimate accessory as far as I'm concerned. My issue is with the chipping away of the 2nd, so @Highmark does have a point with Hardline 2nd voters. However, I'm also not going to cry about it on instantgram and it's not going to affect my vote one way or the other.

[Snoslinger]

4 hours ago, xtralettucetomatoe580 said:

Alright, I’m going to have to learn you here. The Vegas shooter shot 1100 rounds because there was no one able to stop him. He had time. The 1100 rounds was a result of opportunity not of rate of fire. Rate of fire, while effective in certain situations and with certain weapons is wholly ineffective with a light barrel weapon at that distance. It degrades the shooter’s ability to accurately control there fire at both point and area targets. While he was able to fire a lot and kill a lot, that was in spite of the fact that he used an improper shooting technique and setup. An AR-15 shot in a controlled manner would have resulted in a much more effective outcome (As sad as that is to say). The bump stock effectively runs rounds up and to the right for a right handed shooter. He was using scopes which would make those scopes unusable at that range. Furthermore, with his time allowed, controlled firing at a sustained rate of fire would have netted him more accuracy. 

I suggest you think. You are brighter than to question my knowledge on this subject as not only a sniper but as an Advanced Rifle Marksman trainer. Please feel free to retract your statement. 

meh, i would argue some of that. the dude was aiming at a large crowd, and from what i recall, he wasn't too far away and up. i doubt if he was even using the scope. if the victims were all from one area of the crowd, that tells me more accuracy. if they were from all over, less accuracy. either way, i would argue the bump stock saved lives....

[Highmark]

10 minutes ago, Snoslinger said:

meh, i would argue some of that. the dude was aiming at a large crowd, and from what i recall, he wasn't too far away and up. i doubt if he was even using the scope. if the victims were all from one area of the crowd, that tells me more accuracy. if they were from all over, less accuracy. either way, i would argue the bump stock saved lives....

You haven't shot much in your life have you?  490 yards for a AR is a long fucking ways.   Any significant barrel movements at that far probably miss the whole crowd.  Even with a semi-auto firing too fast completely fucks accuracy.    From close to 500 yards it would be huge.  

After Paddock used a hammer to break two of the windows in both of his suites,^[5] he began shooting through them at 10:05 p.m.^[27] He ultimately fired more than 1,100 rifle rounds^[28] approximately 490 yards (450 m) into the festival audience

Edited December 19, 2018 by Highmark

[xtralettucetomatoe580]

15 minutes ago, Snoslinger said:

meh, i would argue some of that. the dude was aiming at a large crowd, and from what i recall, he wasn't too far away and up. i doubt if he was even using the scope. if the victims were all from one area of the crowd, that tells me more accuracy. if they were from all over, less accuracy. either way, i would argue the bump stock saved lives....

Point target range on a typical AR-15 is sub 500m. Meaning he was maxing out what he could expect to hit with a well aimed shot. Take the elevation change into effect, and you have a hard shot to make. Basically that means he is then shooting at that area as an area target. Range for that is 550-600m depending on your gat. Area target meaning a group. Now you are right, dump bullets in a crowd and you are bound to hit something. But muzzle climb absolutely will have taken bullets out of the target zone. It also prevented him from focusing on choke points. A well sighted rifle shooting rapidly on single auto would without a doubt been able to focus fire on exits and congestion. With a bump stock at max range for accurately hitting a point target, not a chance. Which means he is basically limiting the effectiveness of the 1100 rounds substantially. Someone with some skill could have made his spree look like child’s play. That is my point. A bump stock in a night club... Absolutely would be worse. 

Edited December 19, 2018 by xtralettucetomatoe580

[Snoslinger]

13 minutes ago, Highmark said:

You haven't shot much in your life have you?  490 yards for a AR is a long fucking ways.   Any significant barrel movements at that far probably miss the whole crowd.  Even with a semi-auto firing too fast completely fucks accuracy.    From close to 500 yards it would be huge.  

After Paddock used a hammer to break two of the windows in both of his suites,^[5] he began shooting through them at 10:05 p.m.^[27] He ultimately fired more than 1,100 rifle rounds^[28] approximately 490 yards (450 m) into the festival audience

no, i have not. i have shot an AR, but much closer range, and without any bump stocks

4 minutes ago, xtralettucetomatoe580 said:

Point target range on a typical AR-15 is sub 500m. Meaning he was maxing out what he could expect to hit with a well aimed shot. Take the elevation change into effect, and you have a hard shot to make. Basically that means he is then shooting at that area as an area target. Range for that is 550-600m depending on your gat. Area target meaning a group. Now you are right, dump bullets in a crowd and you are bound to hit something. But muzzle climb absolutely will have taken bullets out of the target zone. It also prevented him from focusing on choke points. A well sighted rifle shooting rapidly on single auto would without a doubt been able to focus fire on exits and congestion. With a bump stock at max range for accurately hitting a point target, not a chance. Which means he is basically limiting the effectiveness of the 1100 rounds substantially. Someone with some skill could have made his spree look like child’s play. That is my point. A bump stock in a night club... Absolutely would be worse. 

both of you have more experience than i on this and what you are saying sounds believable. does anyone know how far the bullets were scattered? 

[Highmark]

14 minutes ago, xtralettucetomatoe580 said:

Point target range on a typical AR-15 is sub 500m. Meaning he was maxing out what he could expect to hit with a well aimed shot. Take the elevation change into effect, and you have a hard shot to make. Basically that means he is then shooting at that area as an area target. Range for that is 550-600m depending on your gat. Area target meaning a group. Now you are right, dump bullets in a crowd and you are bound to hit something. But muzzle climb absolutely will have taken bullets out of the target zone. It also prevented him from focusing on choke points. A well sighted rifle shooting rapidly on single auto would without a doubt been able to focus fire on exits and congestion. With a bump stock at max range for accurately hitting a point target, not a chance. Which means he is basically limiting the effectiveness of the 1100 rounds substantially. Someone with some skill could have made his spree look like child’s play. That is my point. A bump stock in a night club... Absolutely would be worse. 

Maybe I'm not thinking about this correctly but isn't 1 MOA at 100 yards 1.047".   1 MOA is 1/60th of a degree.   So if his barrel moves up exactly straight up on firing just 1 degree the round (not compensating for drop) is 314" higher?  (1.047x60x5).

Now take into account the significant drop in a 5.56 round at 500 yards (Approx 8-10 ft.) that makes for some pretty tough accuracy under any form of rapid fire much less taking ones time.   Not to mention windage movement if there were any.  

Edited December 19, 2018 by Highmark

[xtralettucetomatoe580]

2 minutes ago, Snoslinger said:

no, i have not. i have shot an AR, but much closer range, and without any bump stocks

both of you have more experience than i on this and what you are saying sounds believable. does anyone know how far the bullets were scattered? 

I actually looked for a bullet spray diagram from it. Couldn’t find one. That would alone give you a good idea of what his intentions were. If he was just pointing at the concert venue as a blob, or exits, stages, etc. 

[xtralettucetomatoe580]

2 minutes ago, Highmark said:

Maybe I'm not thinking about this correctly but isn't 1 MOA at 100 yards 1.047".   1 MOA is 1/60th of a degree.   So if his barrel moves up just 1 degree the round (not compensating for drop) is 314" higher?  (1.047x60x5).

Now take into account the significant drop in a 5.56 round at 500 yards (Approx 8-10 ft.) that makes for some pretty tough accuracy under any form of rapid fire.   Not to mention windage movement if there were any.  

Yeah, he wasn’t using match grade stuff either. Realistically I would expect someone to be able to hit a target from that distance reliably with well aimed prone shots after the first few misses. You can figure out your drop and wind from guess and check. But shooting a bump stock, no chance. 

[Highmark]

6 minutes ago, xtralettucetomatoe580 said:

Yeah, he wasn’t using match grade stuff either. Realistically I would expect someone to be able to hit a target from that distance reliably with well aimed prone shots after the first few misses. You can figure out your drop and wind from guess and check. But shooting a bump stock, no chance. 

No question with the weapons properly set up (optics pre-compensated for drop at that distance/angle for the ammuntion/firearm) I feel he could have been much more effective with a slower rate of fire.  I guess beyond the whole thing not happening from the get go its a good thing he wasn't that prepared at least what we've been told or not told.  May all the souls he took rest in peace.  

Edited December 19, 2018 by Highmark

[Mileage Psycho]

4 hours ago, xtralettucetomatoe580 said:

Alright, I’m going to have to learn you here. The Vegas shooter shot 1100 rounds because there was no one able to stop him. He had time. The 1100 rounds was a result of opportunity not of rate of fire. Rate of fire, while effective in certain situations and with certain weapons is wholly ineffective with a light barrel weapon at that distance. It degrades the shooter’s ability to accurately control there fire at both point and area targets. While he was able to fire a lot and kill a lot, that was in spite of the fact that he used an improper shooting technique and setup. An AR-15 shot in a controlled manner would have resulted in a much more effective outcome (As sad as that is to say). The bump stock effectively runs rounds up and to the right for a right handed shooter. He was using scopes which would make those scopes unusable at that range. Furthermore, with his time allowed, controlled firing at a sustained rate of fire would have netted him more accuracy. 

I suggest you think. You are brighter than to question my knowledge on this subject as not only a sniper but as an Advanced Rifle Marksman trainer. Please feel free to retract your statement. 

You're a trained professional, in the hands of an amateur who probably was shaking like he had a bad case of the DT's the rate of fire is huge as opposed to said amateur firing one round at a time. This asshole in LV had a casualty rate of 41% with his 1100 rounds with the bump stock, he would be extremely lucky to have a 41% casualty going single shot, and his rate of fire would have at least halved.

And comparing this asshole to you is like comparing me to @n2oiroc  in a tree stand 

Quote

fired more than 1,100 rounds from his suite on the 32nd floor of the nearby Mandalay Bay hotel, killing 58 people and leaving 851 injured (including over 400 by gunfire). 

 

[Zambroski]

Bumpstocks are for faggots.  Who cares?  Or are the liberals all upset about this for some reason?

[Rigid1]

Bump stocks are gay, only use is to inaccurately put out rounds quickly.. 

[motonoggin]

Let's be honest, if a Democrat did this, it'd be going a little bit differently.

You're all partisan hacks and a disgrace.

[Zambroski]

5 minutes ago, motonoggin said:

Let's be honest, if a Democrat did this, it'd be going a little bit differently.

You're all partisan hacks and a disgrace.

Be quiet and suck some more smoke.  This is gay as fuck.  I wish a Dem did do this.  It’d be as funny as Clinton banning bayonet lugs.  He fucking showed all those ass wipes affixing bayonets and running them through people!!!!!

#bayonetassaultsmatter

 

 

 

 

[motonoggin]

[motonoggin]

[Beavis and Butt-Head]

This is non issue to me. As long as trump supports the basic right to own firearms, this is like banning aftermarket cans / pipes. 

[xtralettucetomatoe580]

15 hours ago, motonoggin said:

Let's be honest, if a Democrat did this, it'd be going a little bit differently.

You're all partisan hacks and a disgrace.

Fucking nailed it. 

14 hours ago, motonoggin said:

Omg the most boot liquorish of boot flavors.  

[Highmark]

On 12/19/2018 at 10:03 AM, Highmark said:

The people should at minimum have the right to the same weapons as local, state and federal law enforcement.   JMHO.  

Trump fucked up here.   He will lose votes over this.  

 

15 hours ago, motonoggin said:

Let's be honest, if a Democrat did this, it'd be going a little bit differently.

You're all partisan hacks and a disgrace.

Hardly.  

[Angry ginger]

Just now, Highmark said:

 

Hardly.  

without question the right would be in an uproar if obama had done this

[xtralettucetomatoe580]

Just now, Angry ginger said:

without question the right would be in an uproar if obama had done this

Gun companies would be rejoicing, as they would be making money like crazy as the right wingers feared next was their guns.