Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Gun Control & RKBA
In reply to the discussion: Swiss Balk At EU Concept Of Stripping ‘Assault Rifles’ From The People [View all]Straw Man
(6,777 posts)35. "Technically"?
Unless it's equipped with a bumpfire stock assembly, then the AR fires everything in the magazine with one trigger pull. Yeah, technically the trigger re-sets between firing but it re-sets mid cycle so the effect is the same as full auto.
So much misinformation in just a few sentences ...
Bump-fire doesn't change a semi-auto into a full-auto. The trigger still has to be pulled for each shot. It just enables you to hold your arm still while the rifle's recoil causes the trigger to push against your stationary finger. Nor does it change the reset point of the trigger, which would require mechanical modification to the trigger group. What does "re-sets mid cycle" even mean? When the trigger resets, that marks the end of one cycle and the beginning of the next.
Bump-fire stocks would be useless in any kind of combat situation because they don't work if you hold the rifle too tightly or too loosely. They're nothing but a gun-range gimmick, with no real-world application. That's probably why the ATF isn't really motivated to make them Class III.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
109 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Swiss Balk At EU Concept Of Stripping ‘Assault Rifles’ From The People [View all]
Purveyor
Sep 2016
OP
Then accessibility is not the culprit despite what we're constantly told.
Nuclear Unicorn
Sep 2016
#5
"and the argument is that the swiss are saturated with guns?" No one has made that argument
friendly_iconoclast
Sep 2016
#16
You countered my allegation by posting a "wall-o-text" that has naught to do with the OP...
friendly_iconoclast
Sep 2016
#60
600,000 full-auto rifles in Switzerland is far more than the 2-300k in U.S. civilian hands.
Eleanors38
Sep 2016
#12
That "effect" is not recognized as "auto" by the ATF, the agency charged with gun regs.
Eleanors38
Sep 2016
#44
I understand that. Contrary to a number of gunner's opinions of me I am not stupid.
flamin lib
Sep 2016
#66
Can you provide a link to the more sophisticated stock assemblies? I have no interest...
Marengo
Sep 2016
#70
You were able to provide an example in post #67 without much difficulty I presume. I would think...
Marengo
Sep 2016
#75
I'm not asking for advice, rather for you to provide an example to back you claim that...
Marengo
Sep 2016
#78
It would if it didn't lead to another red herring which is a specialty here.mnt
flamin lib
Sep 2016
#83
I am only asking for you to explain your understanding of a term you used in this thread.
Marengo
Sep 2016
#86
Regarding stocks, grips and guards, great attempt has been made by controller/banners
Eleanors38
Sep 2016
#73
If you don't know what that means you are unqualified to engage in this discussion. nt
flamin lib
Sep 2016
#65
I'm asking for your definition. Can you provide one? Why did you avoid the question?
Marengo
Sep 2016
#69
What causes you to believe I don't have that "level of sophistication". If your understanding...
Marengo
Sep 2016
#74
It seems I can safely assume you don't understand the concept and simply don't know what...
Marengo
Sep 2016
#80
You can assume anything you want. I really don't care to indulge you in meaningless banter. nt
flamin lib
Sep 2016
#82
I should think you would want to prevent others from assuming the same as well.
Marengo
Sep 2016
#84
Can you expound on your comment on design and adoption dates? What can't I tell...
Marengo
Sep 2016
#85
I found the reference. Are these pre-WWi rifle you own Mosin Nagants? Am I correct in recalling...
Marengo
Sep 2016
#90
Are they, or are they not, Mosin Nagants? Do you want me to assume that they are?
Marengo
Sep 2016
#95
Yep, they are Mosins, I found your post. The design was adopted in 1891, not 1898 as you...
Marengo
Sep 2016
#96
The Russian military put a call for a new infantry rifle sometime in the early/mid 1880s.
flamin lib
Sep 2016
#98
First production run of Mosin Nagant Model 1891 Three Line rifle was Chaterllerault, France 1892.
Marengo
Sep 2016
#99
You also might want edit where you claim the first production run was of Dragoons in the USA...
Marengo
Sep 2016
#101
Looks like your the one having the trouble understanding the difference. Designed in 1898...
Marengo
Sep 2016
#97
Some things never seem to change. The standard of accuracy for antigun posts at DU is one of them
friendly_iconoclast
Sep 2016
#104
Nice catch. Not only have we been served bullshit, it's *recycled* bullshit:
friendly_iconoclast
Sep 2016
#109
I'm sorry, you're wrong. And I don't feel inclined go indulge in the mental masturbation
flamin lib
Sep 2016
#32
It sounds like a bear trap snapping shut to include the anguished howls.
Nuclear Unicorn
Sep 2016
#38
No, I won't play your silly assed game. You don't get to assert that something that
flamin lib
Sep 2016
#39
"I want to save lives." Appeal to emotion aside, we are free to question the efficacy of your ideas
friendly_iconoclast
Sep 2016
#40