NRA Leader Wayne LaPierre's Much-Criticized Sandy Hook Speech Was Actually Quite Effective

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

actually the shroud is the forearm - it keeps the shooter from getting their hand burned by a hot barrel. the flash suppressor is what you're referring to.

eta: i've also never known anyone to be injured by a bayonet lug either.

Lol I just got back and realized about midday that I had mixed the two up.

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

How to Bump fire a semiautomatic AR-15 from the hip

In most states getting a legal fully automatic rifle is impossible, but semiautomatic AR-15's and other rifles are much more readily available. If you're rocking a semi auto AR-15 your best bet for really fast firing is to bump fire it. Bump firing uses the recoil of the gun to pull the trigger, allowing you to shoot at full auto speeds with a legal gun.

http://guns.wonderho...rom-hip-415460/

Its not full auto, but whatever. You can bumpfire an M1 garand circa 1940s BUT if you want to ban bumpfire stocks that make it easier then so be it. I wouldn't have an objection.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Its not full auto, but whatever. You can bumpfire an M1 garand circa 1940s BUT if you want to ban bumpfire stocks that make it easier then so be it. I wouldn't have an objection.

That wasn't the main thing I was showing with those various posts. The AR15 is more than just cosmetic and the differences have to do with the ease by which someone can indiscriminately fire into a crowd and with high capacity magazines, they could mow down dozens of people in a matter seconds. I even posted an editorial piece by the conservative judge who sentenced Jared Loughner, who happens to be pro-gun. He says no logical reason why assault weapons with high capacity magazines be legal because the potential harm they can do a large number of people in a matter of seconds. That's why this is bigger than just about gun rights - it's a health and safey issue, it's a security issue and it's a cost issue. Maybe what I'm trying to argue will go to deaf ears this time as people quickly forget about that latest massacre, but eventually, the American voter is going to say enough is enough. If gun owners reject a mandatory liability insurance solution and thereby rejecting personal responsibility, then that's when big momma gubmint comes in and takes away their most dangerous toys.

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

That wasn't the main thing I was showing with those various posts. The AR15 is more than just cosmetic and the differences have to do with the ease by which someone can indiscriminately fire into a crowd and with high capacity magazines, they could mow down dozens of people in a matter seconds. I even posted an editorial piece by the conservative judge who sentenced Jared Loughner, who happens to be pro-gun. He says no logical reason why assault weapons with high capacity magazines be legal because the potential harm they can do a large number of people in a matter of seconds. That's why this is bigger than just about gun rights - it's a health and safey issue, it's a security issue and it's a cost issue. Maybe what I'm trying to argue will go to deaf ears this time as people quickly forget about that latest massacre, but eventually, the American voter is going to say enough is enough. If gun owners reject a mandatory liability insurance solution and thereby rejecting personal responsibility, then that's when big momma gubmint comes in and takes away their most dangerous toys.

Well you are actually arguing two issues. Most firearms can accept larger magazines, and the issue of speed relates to the speed of the trigger pull be it an assault weapon or not. They DO fire at the same speed.

An AR 15 will not fire faster than say a mini 14 etc.

Quite frankly, your argument defies logic and doesn't make sense.

Edited December 24, 2012 by Usui Takumi

[Bad_Daddy 2,209]

Well you are actually arguing two issues. Most firearms can accept larger magazines, and the issue of speed relates to the speed of the trigger pull be it an assault weapon or not. They DO fire at the same speed.

An AR 15 will not fire faster than say a mini 14 etc.

Quite frankly, your argument defies logic and doesn't make sense.

This

[james&olya 1,121]

Well you are actually arguing two issues. Most firearms can accept larger magazines, and the issue of speed relates to the speed of the trigger pull be it an assault weapon or not. They DO fire at the same speed.

An AR 15 will not fire faster than say a mini 14 etc.

Quite frankly, your argument defies logic and doesn't make sense.

So mandate that all new firearms sold be manufactured so that they cannot accept large magazines. Even better, don't allow semi-auto either. Make the shooter work a bolt action for each shot and reload after several rounds fired. Decent hunters don't need high capacity magazines and semi-auto fire. Give the animals, including the humans, at least a sporting chance!

Edited December 24, 2012 by james&olya

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

So mandate that all new firearms sold be manufactured so that they cannot accept large magazines. Even better, don't allow semi-auto either. Make the shooter work a bolt action for each shot and reload after several rounds fired. Decent hunters don't need high capacity magazines and semi-auto fire. Give the animals, including the humans, at least a sporting chance!

Well thats a theory, one that 98% of owners will disagree with you on and the courts will not support.

Edited December 24, 2012 by Usui Takumi

[Bad_Daddy 2,209]

So mandate that all new firearms sold be manufactured so that they cannot accept large magazines. Even better, don't allow semi-auto either. Make the shooter work a bolt action for each shot and reload after several rounds fired. Decent hunters don't need high capacity magazines and semi-auto fire. Give the animals, including the humans, at least a sporting chance!

Mandate your head with a tire iron or move to North Korea. Seriously you anti gun nuts need to get a clue. First read the Constitution so you know what it's all about. We have guns for many reasons and one of them is to protect us from a commie like government. Americans should be allowed rocket launchers, tanks, whatever the military has the citizens should also.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

So mandate that all new firearms sold be manufactured so that they cannot accept large magazines. Even better, don't allow semi-auto either. Make the shooter work a bolt action for each shot and reload after several rounds fired. Decent hunters don't need high capacity magazines and semi-auto fire. Give the animals, including the humans, at least a sporting chance!

The barn doors been opened and short of a constitutional amendment, I don't think will we ever have such dramatic gun restrictions. And really, talking of such dramatic measures only emboldens those gun owners who are already skittish that the government is going to take away their guns.

Meet the Press' David Gregory interviewed Wayne LaPierre today and he made a very pointed question to LaPierre, "What gun laws would you offer or support in wake of this latest massacre." LaPierre kept dodging the question and instead wanted to talk about going after criminals with guns, apparently even disregarding a person's right to due process because (I'm just guessing) no other constitutional right is more precious than our 2nd Amendment right to bear arms.

Here's a link to the interview.

[james&olya 1,121]

Mandate your head with a tire iron or move to North Korea. Seriously you anti gun nuts need to get a clue. First read the Constitution so you know what it's all about. We have guns for many reasons and one of them is to protect us from a commie like government. Americans should be allowed rocket launchers, tanks, whatever the military has the citizens should also.

Mandate that felons of all 50 states never be allowed gun ownership!

You don't like the idea that in our DEMOCRACY we, the citizens, can decide, through our elected representatives, to control the kind of guns that can legally be owned? And you think that if you have enough big guns you can prevent that from happening?

[james&olya 1,121]

The barn doors been opened and short of a constitutional amendment, I don't think will we ever have such dramatic gun restrictions. And really, talking of such dramatic measures only emboldens those gun owners who are already skittish that the government is going to take away their guns.

Meet the Press' David Gregory interviewed Wayne LaPierre today and he made a very pointed question to LaPierre, "What gun laws would you offer or support in wake of this latest massacre." LaPierre kept dodging the question and instead wanted to talk about going after criminals with guns, apparently even disregarding a person's right to due process because (I'm just guessing) no other constitutional right is more precious than our 2nd Amendment right to bear arms.

Here's a link to the interview.

The reason I bring up semi-auto is that, as the gun nuts on here frequently point out, the difference between an 'assault' weapon and modern semi-auto hunting rifles is mainly cosmetic. The point is sound. One of the objectives of gun control is to limit the ability to fire rapidly as well as the ability to fire many rounds without reloading. This makes it too easy for deranged people to kill large numbers of innocents in spite of attempted heroics like those witnessed at Sandy Hook. Like I have said elsewhere, is it too much to ask that human targets be given any kind of sporting chance?

[Bad_Daddy 2,209]

Mandate that felons of all 50 states never be allowed gun ownership!

You don't like the idea that in our DEMOCRACY we, the citizens, can decide, through our elected representatives, to control the kind of guns that can legally be owned? And you think that if you have enough big guns you can prevent that from happening?

They already decided and I passed with flying colors. Three felonies, a couple of DV's along with a few good ol assault charges, a DWI and some others I can't remember and lo and behold I can pack guns around concealed and open carry like Rambo with a hard on and no permit required.

Edited December 24, 2012 by Bad_Daddy

[one...two...tree 2,762]

The reason I bring up semi-auto is that, as the gun nuts on here frequently point out, the difference between an 'assault' weapon and modern semi-auto hunting rifles is mainly cosmetic. The point is sound. One of the objectives of gun control is to limit the ability to fire rapidly as well as the ability to fire many rounds without reloading. This makes it too easy for deranged people to kill large numbers of innocents in spite of attempted heroics like those witnessed at Sandy Hook. Like I have said elsewhere, is it too much to ask that human targets be given any kind of sporting chance?

You make a good argument, but I just don't see this country making such sweeping gun laws short of a constitutional amendment.

[james&olya 1,121]

They already decided and I passed with flying colors. Three felonies, a couple of DV's along with a few good ol assault charges, a DWI and some others I can't remember and lo and behold I can pack guns around concealed and open carry like Rambo with a hard on and no permit required.

You know I was just jerking your chain a bit. I actually think it is quite reasonable to consider each case on its own merits. I know that there is dv and then there is DV! Not to excuse either but too much comes down to 'he said, she said' and some courts judge you based on having testicles! I know that all too well in matters concerning child custody issues!

[Bad_Daddy 2,209]

You know I was just jerking your chain a bit. I actually think it is quite reasonable to consider each case on its own merits. I know that there is dv and then there is DV! Not to excuse either but too much comes down to 'he said, she said' and some courts judge you based on having testicles! I know that all too well in matters concerning child custody issues!

I got a DV for telling her I wanted my money or else...and that was construed as a threat so I got hit with a DV, and I got another DV for breaking a no contact order when I went to the house I paid for and got my clothes and tools while she was at work. In Washington state they call it a DV. Same with my DWI. I was sleeping in my truck in the parking lot of the bar because I didn't want to drive the 2 miles to my house drunk yet because the keys were on my person I got hit with a Physical Control which is the same as a DWI. The cops were dicks and so was the judge. What they nailed me for in Washington and called a felony would have been a few days in jail up here and some community work service chipping ice along with a fine. I'm not too hip on the American justice system after all that #######.

Luckily for me I live next to a cool judge who saw the light.

Edited December 24, 2012 by Bad_Daddy