Feinstein’s “Automatic Gunfire Prevention Act” Might Make Replacement Triggers Illegal

Moments ago we heard that Dianne Feinstein had introduced her “Automatic Gunfire Prevention Act,” a bill which would ban bumpfire stocks like the one used in the Las Vegas shooting among other things. In an attempt to make her new law apply as broadly as possible she not only specifically wants to outlaw bumpfire stocks, but also any modification that makes a firearm fire “faster.” But what exactly does that mean?

Here’s the relevant section:

Except as provided in paragraph (2), on and after the date that is 180 days after the date of enactment of this subsection, it shall be unlawful for any person to import, sell, manufacture, transfer, or possess, in or affecting interstate or foreign commerce, a trigger crank, a bump-fire device, or any part, combination of parts, component, device, attachment, or accessory that is designed or functions to accelerate the rate of fire of a semi-automatic rifle but not convert the semiautomatic rifle into a machinegun.

The issue is in the definition of “accelerate.” Bumpfire stocks are an obvious step, and are specifically named. The same with hand cranks for triggers. But the bill wants to make anything which increases the rate of fire of a semi-automatic rifle illegal, yet it doesn’t do a good job of outlining exactly what that means.

For semi-automatic firearms the rate of fire is completely subjective. An untrained shooter and Jerry Miculek will be able to achieve two very different rates of fire with the same firearm. The bill thankfully isn’t silly enough to outlaw training sessions and gym memberships — it concerns itself only with attachments and physical devices. Tools like the bumpfire stock are obvious targets, but other factors can have similar effects.

Lighter replacement triggers are a great example. A lighter trigger in a firearm can allow the shooter to fire faster than with a heavy trigger simply because their finger is less fatigued. We reviewed one such trigger years ago, the Geissele S3G trigger, which absolutely increases the rate at which a shooter can fire their weapon. For that reason, according to Feinstein’s bill the Geissele S3G trigger would be illegal to purchase or possess in the United States.

Another issue: what exactly is the baseline for the rate of fire?

The baseline rate of fire that can be achieved with a finely-tuned competition rifle and a bare bones budget rifle are two very different things. Would there be one baseline for each weapon platform against which all other examples would be compared? Would manufacturers be required to install the worst trigger possible in order to reduce the rate of fire? Or would it simply be illegal to modify the trigger from the factory installed version, making drop-in replacements like Timney and Geissele illegal?

On its face, it sounds like Dianne Feinstein’s bill, as written, would kill the aftermarket trigger industry and make it illegal to improve the trigger on your rifle. We’ll have to see whether this bill makes it out of committee, and what (if any) amendments would be added to give some clarity to the situation.


  1. avatar Kenneth G Maiden says:

    This “SLIPPERY SLOPE” bill will lead to other untended consequences. It’s all part of the plan. You have been warned.

  2. avatar KenW says:

    I wonder how would it work for a home assembled rifle?
    Would we have to order the lower complete with crappy trigger installed?

    1. avatar Kenneth G Maiden says:

      That will be attacked too.

    2. avatar KenW says:

      And how would 80% receivers be able to be completed?
      If you are not allowed to modify the trigger installed, since there is none would you be able to install one?

    3. avatar Garrison Hall says:

      Well, the law could prohibit home-assembled rifles because they depart from some “original” design or other that ATF chooses to list. What’s even worse, however, is that the language that potentially prohibits modifying triggers would also open the door for government regulation regarding trigger pulls. Since modifying triggers would be illegal, it would be a short step to mandating impossibly stiff triggers in semi-automatic weapons. The rationale would be that rifles with very stiff trigger pulls would make it harder for spree killers to fire rapid shots. It is entirely possible to mandate that triggers be made so stiff and awkward to pull that they inhibit the built in advantages of a semi-automatic rifle. The gun-controllers would love to make guns so unpleasant to use that people would just give them up out of disgust. And you know something? Our Quisling elected Republican office holders would go for it.

  3. avatar Publius says:

    $20 Republicans pass it, despite having the majority of both houses, because they’re completely spineless.

    1. avatar TrueBornSonofLiberty says:

      I’ll take that bet. Perhaps you’d like to add a few extra zeros?

      1. avatar Publius says:

        You like losing money? Look how terrified they’ve been to even discuss the SHARE act! They refuse to repeal Obamacare, refuse to discuss tax reform, they refuse to do ANYTHING their voters want because doing so would get them called names by liberals and they’re too pathetic to ignore it.

        1. avatar When Bullets Collide says:

          I’ll take your bet times 100.

          Not going to happen.

      2. avatar Mike says:

        From the numbers that almost have enough votes to do it. All the dems and there are a handful of republicans willing to do so. they will get it passed but what will the president do?

    2. avatar pwrserge says:

      Betcha she won’t even get most Democrats to vote for it. They have too many seats in red states up for grabs next year.

      1. avatar DoomGuy says:

        Unfortunately I predict almost every republican will be jumping all over themselves to ram it through.

        1. avatar rosignol says:

          They held the line on new laws after both Sandy Hook and the Pulse nightclub shootings.

          I dunno what was reinforcing their spines, but they deserve a little more credit than you’re giving them.

        2. avatar Chris Mallory says:

          They only held the line because Obama was president. If we had had President McCain or President Romney you can guarantee there would have been an AWB. The GOP was founded as a progressive, big government party and it has not changed it’s spots since.

      2. avatar Garrison Hall says:

        I tend to agree. We should not at all underestimate the muscle of the NRA. If they derailed gun-control after Sandy Hook, I think we’ll see a similar strong lobbying effort this time around. Say what you will about the NRA, this is a game they know how to play very well.

  4. avatar FedUp says:

    Is that the “pro gun socialist” former presidential candidate standing next to her?

    1. avatar cmac890 says:

      No, thats the ventriloquist.

    2. avatar Chris Mallory says:

      Romney or McCain were on stage with her?

    3. avatar Chadwick says:

      Nah it’s just a dirty commie.

    4. avatar Ad Astra says:

      I thought it was a zombie sneaking up behind her to eat her brain. Then realized:
      1. It was only Bernie
      2. She has no actual brain to be eaten.

  5. avatar C.S. says:

    What ever happened to, “No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed.”

    1. avatar BLoving says:

      Dianne replies, “That unfortunate loophole has prevented us from passing this common sense law… but hey, at least I tried – right? Reelect me!”

    2. avatar Mark N. says:

      Nothing. Those rules have nothing to do with a ban of existing equipment, which is by its terms forward looking. Ex post facto (literally “after the fact”) criminalizes what was legal behavior after it has occurred; a ban of future conduct does not violate this rule. In other words, just because your cocaine is legal today does not preclude passage of a law that makes possession of it illegal tomorrow. Bills of attainder are declarations of guilt without trial and are thus violations of due process; nothing in the proposed bill have any provision which would criminalize conduct and abuse fine or forfeiture without trial.

      1. avatar C.S. says:

        By that logic, the government can simply make the operation of all gas powered cars illegal, or change the zoning codes of a persons property forcing eviction and get away with it.

        1. avatar JPT says:

          “or change the zoning codes of a persons property forcing eviction and get away with it.”

          Local govts get away with that all the time.

      2. avatar kevin says:

        She’s from California. For all the people who do not live here, the politicians do not care what the law says, what the constitution says or even what the public says. They implement laws and make the courts over rule them, and if the court doesn’t then they win and other states follow suit. We already can not have bump fire stocks or any modification that make the firearm shooter faster.

        1. avatar Phil Wilson says:

          Sigh. She was supposed to be the sane, reasonable one to balance out Barbara Boxer. Well, on many issues (including certain aspects of national security), she actually IS one of the more sane Dems. She’s got a real hard-on for guns, though. I’m a wee bit surprised we got all the way to Wed for her to introduce a bill of some kind.

    3. avatar Big Bill says:

      When those convicted of domestic violence were, after the fact, or “ex post facto,” denied the right to own guns, it went out the window.
      Because, guns.

  6. avatar fiundagner says:

    Mmot just trigger Replacements, but wouldn’t this cover recoil springs to? As your spring wears out your rate of fire slows down however imperceptively. or even just replacing that heavy-duty Factory recoil spring with one that’s a little lighter. and would this affect bolt action rifles to? I just had to replace the recoil spring in my Lee-Enfield bolt and you can definitely feel a difference in the snap

  7. avatar SkG says:

    If the language is cleaned up, and lighter, shorter and modifiable triggers are exempted. Is this a bill that should be strongly opposed?

    1. avatar Joe R. says:

      If it’s coming from the evil POS (D) then it should be quashed.

      1. avatar Chris Mallory says:

        99% of all laws passed since 1900 should have been opposed.

    2. avatar Soylent Green says:

      Oh Christ yes, of course it should. You’d only be controlling lazy and dumb criminals which don’t have the motivation for mass murder like this. The monsters like the LV shooter are motivated and, unfortunately, not as stupid as we would like.

    3. avatar ColoradoKid says:

      Let me ask this…IF the language was cleaned up and a clear baseline defined, would you trade this for the passage of SHARE? Just asking…

      1. avatar Chadwick says:

        I’ll trade nothing because trading essential liberty will end with the whole country adopting gun laws like those found in Cali, Colorado, New Yuck, etc.

      2. avatar Sabrina M Gray says:

        Nope, this is where we have to hold the line. Millions of people who own the Slide fire, did nothing wrong. THis bill is probably going no where. The election year is coming up in a couple months. Do you want to go to a red state and say I voted to take your gun rights away.

    4. avatar rosignol says:

      It’s a firearms bill written by Dianne Feinstein.

      That means it’s going to be a bad idea, the writing will be a vague, sloppy, ambiguous mess with very little relation to reality, and it will contain clauses that will be abused by future gun-controllers.

      Thankfully, the Republicans hold the Senate, House, and White House, and this is certain to die in committee. Feinstein may not care about 2018- her seat is safe- but the Democrats are facing a very challenging electoral map and do not want to rile up 2nd-A voters.

      1. avatar DoomGuy says:

        Commenting from your previous reply to me, but the repukes deserve nothing but the utmost contempt and disdain and prodding and anger from us voters until they do what we put them there to do.

        They have proven time and again they cannot be trusted. And they held on sandy hook because we were there to keep them in line.

        And they must be prodded and yelled at by voters every single time because they’re worthless human beings who when given the choice to follow the Constitution or sell out to their friends in the democrat party, they’ll choose the latter every time when they think we’re not paying attention.

      2. avatar Honorable says:

        rosignol—– Don’t look now, but the “Repugs” have introduced virtually the same Bill in the House.
        NOTE THE DATE, FRIDAY the 13th

  8. avatar Joe R. says:


    Feinstein can pack her sh_t and go home. Quietly.

    1. avatar Chris Mallory says:

      The same can be said for any ban put forth by any politician. Don’t think the Republicans are your friends. They are just as evil and corrupt as the Dems.

  9. avatar Leighton Cavendish says:

    And as the trigger and components wear…it can also lead to a lighter trigger…what then?
    And as always…criminals and those that want these things…WILL find a way to get them.
    Laws are only for the law-abiding…the penalty phase only applies AFTER the crime has happened and the damage has been done…
    Bans do not work…proven with alcohol…drugs…and abortion already…
    But I suppose THIS time will be the charm…right?

    1. avatar Joe R. says:

      You’re wasting too much energy. Don’t think it thru, just respond FU !

      1. avatar TyrannyOfEvilMen says:

        “Don’t think it thru, just respond …”

        Exactly. That should be on a coffee cup.

  10. avatar surlycmd says:

    I have a completed 80% lower that currently has a Sig Brace on it. I think I’ll replace the brace with my Slide fire stock and install my Franklin Armory Binary trigger as well. I might take 27 color glossy photos with circle and arrows and a paragraph on the back of each one, explaining what each one is. I’ll might mail them off to DiFi’s office with a deeply obscene and pornographic statement about what I think of her multiple attempts to infringe on my rights.

    Ultimately, it’s not worth the effort or the postage but, the thought does amuse me.

    1. avatar Moonshine says:

      I wonder if they serve SlideFire stocks at Alice’s Restaurant…

      1. avatar 36IDRedleg says:

        Of course, Slide Fire sales probably have gone through the roof. Just like following Sandy Hook, there is a burgeoning market for components with prices commensurate with demand.

        1. avatar Sabrina M Gray says:

          Yep they have. I checked Gun Broker today, they have them going for like 700 bucks.

      2. avatar surlycmd says:

        Sure they do. Remember, you can get anything you want except Alice.

    2. avatar Mark N. says:

      Does that rant come with a sound track too?

      1. avatar surlycmd says:


      2. avatar surlycmd says:

        And possibly an 80s movie montage.

    3. avatar DonS says:

      Group W bench for you.

      1. avatar joetast says:

        Right next to a father raper

  11. avatar Ima Yeti says:

    If it wasn’t for guns she’d have nothing to talk about.

    1. avatar Chadwick says:

      If I can get that in writing then I might consider disarming. We would have to get some reassurance that she wouldn’t be assaulting our other senses as well.

  12. avatar D.B. Cooper says:

    Feinstein’s been at this sh!t since I was a kid. And I just turned 40 this summer. I guess I will never get to stop having to see her pugnacious face.

    1. avatar surlycmd says:

      She’ll probably out live Keith Richards.

      1. avatar Darkstar says:

        Has anyone ever seen Keef and Senator Medussa in the same place at the same time?……Just sayin’……

  13. is there any way we can ban Dianne Feinstein?

  14. avatar Wiregrass says:

    Do you really think the BATFE&RBF would have made that stretch on their own? Stop giving them ideas.

  15. avatar W says:

    Thankfully, Schumer is not the majority leader.

    1. avatar Hank says:

      Yet. The R’s still have time to make that happen, and seem to be doing quite well at it.

  16. avatar Andrew Lias says:

    But they don’t want to ban guns. I will say I like this, it’s at least honest.

  17. avatar P-Dog says:

    As I predicted!!!!

  18. avatar Larry C says:

    It’s long past time to introduce Feinstine to a nicely made noose and that slippery slope for the benefit of all! Notice the Socialist idiot behind her with his nose buried up her ass trying to latch on any bread crumbs of support. Now begins the rampant race to produce the most outlandish restrictive legislation proposals with all the monkeys trying to outdo each other to earn personal best awards.

  19. avatar BLAMMO says:

    What about the buffer, recoil spring, BCG or gas components? Any of those can change the cyclic rate of the rifle. Some must be charged or matched in order for reliable full-auto to be possible.

  20. avatar Tim says:

    So she wants people with arthritis in their fingers not to be able to defend themselves against the healthy criminals attacking them. Nice old lady…please retire and go away.

  21. avatar Does it matter says:

    I am new to the 2a community. Became an enthusiast last year. I am a Texas democrat but my new hobby has turned me into a single issue voter. I am embarrassed that I blindly supported my old party over the last decade or so…

    1. avatar uncommon_sense says:

      I am confident that I speak for all People of the Gun when I say, “Better late than never!”

      Welcome to the fold.

    2. avatar joetast says:

      It’s to bad you had to change your party, instead of making your party change.

  22. avatar Martin Zima says:

    The other non-descriptive language was added so it can be thrown away during debate. Ultimately the bump fire stocks and trigger cranks will be banned. Since it is not the gun itself and since courts have upheld magazine bans as being reasonable, I think this one has legs.

  23. avatar Ryan Carlin says:

    This dusty crone won’t see this bill leave committee, much less pass both houses and the President’s desk.

    Trump may be an incompetent twat, but I know what would happen if this landed on HRC’s desk. And for that peace of mind, he can continue to sit in the White House and act like a moron.

    Rex Tillerson’s words. Not mine.

    1. avatar DoomGuy says:

      You put too much faith in the willingness of cowards, snakes, and turncoats (aka the Republican Party) to sell us out in order to placate the media and the democrats.

      These leftist rats are in NO position to do anything and yet they’re the ones who seem to still be in power, and worse yet we have a Republican Party who is either too cowardly to do anything or worse on the same side as the democrats.

  24. avatar FlamencoD says:

    A light trigger isn’t designed specifically only to speed up the shooting rate, it’s generally designed to help improve precision and accuracy of the shooter.

    I disagree with the law, but I don’t think it’s very ambiguous. It clearly says any device – so Jerry can fire as fast as he wants – his finger is not a device that was designed specifically to speed up shooting of a semi-auto. Or, maybe it was, by God.

    1. avatar uncommon_sense says:


      You are incorrect because you failed to read the entire wording:

      “… [stuff] that is designed or functions to accelerate the rate of fire of a semi-automatic rifle …”

      Even though an expensive trigger upgrade is specifically designed to improve accuracy, it also functions to accelerate the rate of fire of a semi-automatic rifle. Therefore, Feinstein’s wording would ban such triggers.

    1. avatar Nick Leghorn says:

      Oh wow!

      I should ask for royalties…

      1. avatar txJM says:

        I hear she pays out in favors

  25. avatar Jeff says:

    Only if this requirement is attached to the Hearing Protection bill now in congress.

  26. avatar adverse4 says:

    How long have those two in the photo been dead? Shouldn’t someone have the decency to cover them up?

    1. avatar Smoke Jensen says:

      That made me chuckle.

  27. avatar Patrick says:

    Gun grabbers will lose.

    It’s time to turn their anti-2A bills into pro-gun legislation.

    Those enemies of the Constitution will soon realize that the complete ban on “bump-fire stocks” directly violates the Fifth Amendment.

    Some moderate proponents of gun control like Toomey may introduce a bill aims to treat these stocks like an NFA item. But they will soon understand that the easiest and the most obvious way to do it is to change the definition of a machine gun. But in that case, if they want to register bump-fire stocks, they should first open a machine gun registry. That means the end of the ban on new machine guns.

    After that pro-gun groups must force legislators to remove bump-fire stocks out of the NFA registry. If that is done, we will secure current unrestricted status of these accessories and will repeal the ban on new machine guns.

    1. avatar Patrick says:

      ‘to remove bump-fire stocks out of the NFA registry’
      I meant “out of that bill”.

    2. avatar Honorable says:

      Patrick—- The 5th Amendment doesn’t apply to a firearms ban due to “Public Safety concerns”. The confiscated bump-stocks will not be “used” by the government, therefore the 5th Amendment doesn’t apply.

      Sorry, they can take your gun stock and not compensate you for it.

      This is federal law and legal precedent upheld by the SCOTUS

  28. avatar Jack says:

    It is obvious they do not intend this to be an enforced law as there is no grandfather clause and no one is going to set up a confiscation and compensation committee to handle that since it would make all owners in violation of the law. This is the same reason that the CA mag ban law has not gone into effect.

  29. avatar TwoJohnsonsAreBetterThanOne says:

    How about closing the Southern border loophole? Yeah, didn’t think so.

  30. avatar MDH says:

    When it is revealed that Paddock was a politically motivated left wing terrorist – AND IT WILL COME OUT – this bill is done. 2nd Amendment hating Dems, and gutless RINOs will trample each other heading for political cover.

  31. avatar John in TX (Was CT) says:

    On the upside, maybe it would signal the end of manufacturers putting shitty triggers in their rifles, since there would be a market for good ones from the factory.

  32. avatar Andrew says:

    I will support this if an amendment is added the repeals the NFA

  33. avatar Chris says:

    Add it to the SHARE Act for a sure win. Bump stocks, cranks, and braces are all just wanabe cool shit anyway. Want an MG? Dont pretend, just buy one! Want an SBR? Dont pretend just buy one. NFA is not for the frugal or impatient.

  34. avatar MiniMe says:

    Oh, for the love of God, will someone PLEASE do the world a favor and throw a bucket of water on this witch already? Jeeze freaking Louise, I’m so fucking sick and tired of having to listen to this woman’s bullshit. >:-/

  35. avatar Sian says:

    Thankfully such a dangerously vague-worded bill doesn’t have a chance in hell.

  36. avatar Gunny Gene says:

    You don’t need any gismos to bump fire a semi-auto, including many pistols, It’s just a technique that doesn’t cost a dime. Watch the HOW-TO video’s on Youtube.

  37. avatar Brian says:

    Next thing will be taking away our 2nd amendment rights! It’s not the gun it’s the person. All they done so far is make gun safe zones a place a crazy person know where he can do the most damage! If concealed weapon holder are allowed in these zones then it would be least of a target rich zone to those stupid/crazy people wanting to hurt because someone armed at a place as such would save more lives! They are going after our 2nd AD! I feel and pray for all those hurt in Las Vegas!

  38. avatar Republic if you can keep it says:

    This Bill does not scare me. What scares me is the ATF issuing an opinion letter banning any device which simulates full auto fire. And don’t think they won’t do it. They have declared entire firearms illegal before. (See the Street Sweeper) They are unfortunately above the law.

  39. avatar pete garcia says:

    i propose an amendment to the bill. lets call it say, “The People’s goose/gander Bill” where any and all bills introduced and passed by congress, would have to include them, including but not limited to their security detail being disarmed.

    1. avatar joetast says:

      The goose/gander bill, I like that. But then you’d have the, ” down with the goose/gander ” flock

  40. avatar EleanorSJones says:

    my mom in-law recently purchased an almost new red Infiniti G Convertible IPL only from
    working off a computer. see more……http://www.nexuswiz.com/

    1. avatar rt66paul says:

      Editor – please monitor these remarks. The spam is driving us nuts

  41. avatar Ian in Transit says:

    Some jurisdictions classify airguns as firearms. Modern paintball guns have adjustable rates of fire. Can’t even consider that a slippery slope.

  42. avatar BlinkyPete says:

    The most logical thing to do is to move bump fire stocks to NFA. It would effectively check a box for the public and prevent Mein Feinsteins bad law from passing. It would be positively asinine to try and defend them at this point.

  43. avatar Wally1 says:

    Even if this bill passes, it will not stand up to legal scrutiny based on science. The rate of fire is set in any weapon by design and function, also known as cyclic rate. Who will enforce it? Most L.E. agencies have neither the training or will to be involved in enforcing ambiguous laws. Take Washington state Prop I-594, Private gun sales are done on a daily basis and not reported. Even the state officials, when called, do not know how to advise to complete the transaction in accordance with the law. Dept of licensing was to take care of this, but they received no funding to set up a program or employees to facilitate or service the new law requirements. . More feel good legislation will not solve anything.

    Dems and libs have an agenda, it’s not about safety, it’s about control.

  44. avatar Jim Bullock says:

    So … broadly, sloppily written so it can be applied to any number of things. Just like the “assault weapons ban” or ammo-type restrictions, or …

    It’s almost like the point of the camel’s nose is that the rest will follow into the tent.

    Stupid, sloppy, or malicious? Can’t it be all 3?

  45. avatar Dave says:

    My thoughts are as follows:

    1. How many times has a bump fire stock been used in a crime? I only know of one time.
    2. The reason they are not used so much in crime is they are not all that reliable and rifles are rarely used in crime.
    3. Would it have made a difference if he did not have one? Probably not. The police said several of his rifles were jammed, probably because he was using bump fire stocks.
    4. The incident took 75 minutes to resolve. He was not shooting the entire time so was rate of fire that important? Probably not. He could probably have injured more by slowing his rate of fire a little.

  46. avatar ^Sammy says:

    I am sick about the loss of life in LV. I am also sick about the success of the fascists’ successful boa constrictor tactic of disarmament that continues to gain ground. A ban on semi autos will be the end game of a bump stock ban as you don’t need a bump stock to bump fire. It’s all Kabuki Theater.

  47. avatar Donny says:

    Time to buy as many bump stocks and binary trigger systems as you can before they jump in price like autosear blocks and select fire lowers did. $500 today and $10k next year.

  48. avatar John Russell says:

    For the love of GOD it is a Stock that moves not a special trigger.

  49. avatar honorable says:

    To get back on topic, the AR-15 parts that would be included in a ban: “any part, component, or combination of parts that are designed or function to increase the rate of fire of a semi-automatic rifle”. Increase a rate of fire from zero rounds per minute. ” Mr. and Mrs. America turn in your firearms”.
    1. Gas tube
    2. Gas block/ front sight
    3. Gas key
    4. Buffer spring
    5. Buffer
    6. Buffer tube
    7. Trigger
    8. Hammer
    9. Disconnector
    10. magazine ( holds more than one cartridge)
    11. Barrel ( because it functions to channel gas to the gas tube)
    12. Ammunition cartridge
    America, are we clear on the ramifications to the operation of firearms. After all, the receiver of an AR-15 is classified as the firearm. However if legislation bans the components within the receiver, not banning the receiver itself, it doesn’t infringe upon the 2nd Amendment,

    Smile and bend over America.

  50. avatar honorable says:

    “To get back on topic, the AR-15 parts that would be included in a ban: “any part, component, or combination of parts that are designed or function to increase the rate of fire of a semi-automatic rifle”. Increase a rate of fire from zero rounds per minute. ” Mr. and Mrs. America turn in your firearms”.
    1. Gas tube
    2. Gas block/ front sight
    3. Gas key
    4. Buffer spring
    5. Buffer
    6. Buffer tube
    7. Trigger
    8. Hammer
    9. Disconnector
    10. magazine ( holds more than one cartridge)
    11. Barrel ( because it functions to channel gas to the gas tube)
    12. Ammunition cartridge
    America, are we clear on the ramifications to the operation of firearms. After all, the receiver of an AR-15 is classified as the firearm. However if legislation bans the components within the receiver, not banning the receiver itself, it doesn’t infringe upon the 2nd Amendment.”

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email