Previous Post
Next Post

Support for banning bump fire stocks is gaining momentum. Following Dianne Feinstein’s proposal yesterday a number of prominent Republicans have stated that they are open to discussing a ban on the devices, including one Republican senator from Texas. From the NYT:

“I own a lot of guns, and as a hunter and sportsman, I think that’s our right as Americans, but I don’t understand the use of this bump stock,” Senator John Cornyn of Texas, the No. 2 Republican in the Senate, said, adding, “It seems like it’s an obvious area we ought to explore and see if it’s something Congress needs to act on.”

He’s not alone when he says he sees limited utility for the bump fire stock. Robert and myself have both made similar statements — there’s really no use for the item beyond its function as a “range toy.” Even our own readers have a difficult time arguing to keep them legal.

Other moderate (and somewhat anti-Trump) Republicans are jumping on board, including Senators Marco Rubio, Lindsey Graham and Orrin Hatch.

The wildcard in this situation: the NRA.

Over the last few years, the NRA has endorsed bills that would create stricter gun control legislation — including stricter scrutiny of gun purchases for people on the government’s secret terrorist watchlist. It’s entirely possible that the NRA will see this as an opportunity to poke a hole in the Democrat’s anti-NRA narrative, removing a talking point from their arsenal for the coming midterm election.

Watch this space.

Previous Post
Next Post


  1. Stop giving ground! Gun rights are being won back faster and faster. Banning these devices won’t accomplish anything but to set us back.

    • Why the left’s focus on the silly bump stock. I don’t understand it. He had weapons with optics that with a little practice would allow one to put a bullet right between someone’s eyes from a couple of hundred yards away. With one of those you don’t need to fire and waste a dozen bullets to kill somebody. Just one if you practiced. Think of the damage you could do with single clipazine of ammo! Seriously, they need to ban telescopic sights and probably bolt action rifles which are just too accurate for civilians to own. They are just dangerous and there is simply no good reason for civilians to own them. It’s time to ban these things. Nobody needs to own them.

      • I’m a not one more inch guy.

        But, the fact is the guy was able to kill and injure more people with the bump stocks.

        Spray and pray is the only advantage of these stocks. Which work from 300 feet above a large crowd.

        To argue otherwise makes no sense to me.

        • His advantage was WEALTH, not the tools used to ply his evil trade. It took thousands of rounds, and dozens of firearms, to cause the amount of damage that he did. If the reports are to be believed about his gambling habits, he could have easily, legally obtained a full-auto firearm. It can be argued that it could have been much worse had he used any firearm without actual or simulated automatic fire. The shots could have hit more people, and possibly been more fatal, since they could have been directed (less hits per person / more people targeted / people struck in vital areas). It’s possible that this fool REDUCED the casualties by not caring what was or wasn’t hit.

        • The reason nothing has been said about the murderer’s politics (possibly registered Democrat) is the Dems are scared of a reprisal action on them. Guilt by association. And rich dems seem to think their opinions matter more than those of us “little people” (Bloomberg, Souros, Clintons, etc).

          This whole event was to make a statement. Buying 33 guns in 12 months. What was happening 12 months ago? Over 20 guns in the room. 12 fitted with bump fire stocks. A country and western concert being the target. A reprisal action on the “inbred, mouth-breathing, redneck, flyover state hicks” who voted for Trump costing Saint Hillary her unloseable coronation.

      • First then came for the bump stock and …..

        It is how they open the door to further regulation.

        Has no one learned that is what Leftists mean by “Progressive”?
        Progressively eroding our Rights. Progressively controlling our actions, our words and even thoughts.

        I’m for a “discussion of gun laws” that starts with repealing 99.999% of the existing ones.

    • Agree 100%
      This foolish token will not be taken as good faith.
      If they roll over on these stocks, “pistol braces” are next. MARK MY WORD. Then a complete ban on possession of suppressors. Then SBRs. Then, rat bite by rat bite, the entire Second Amendment.

    • Hey everybody! Nick and Robert of TTAG are willing to give up ground because they don’t see a reason to own something! Bill of Needs? No. Go run and hide in a cave you cowards.

    • I agree…I’m tired of the incrementalism. And if a ban is passed, how narrow or broad will it be? Will it include other items? Will there be regulatory leeway? And in the end it will do little to nothing, except likely make it harder for law abiding folks to navigate the law, and criminals still won’t care.

  2. Good God Cornyn, just weather the freaking storm. Neither you, nor any other member of the Republican party is going to lose their office because they didn’t ban bumpfire stocks.

    The media and liberal hysteria will die down in a few weeks or months. Let it go by and don’t give them an inch. You should be smarter than this… or is that giving you too much credit?

    • i’m here in texas and i’m watching the way this is voted on (if it gets that far)….remember cornyn 1 person….1 vote…

      • I just sent him a letter. I’d encourage all of you in Texas to do the same. Keep it civil, but direct and let him know his vote will influence how you vote.

        • I called his office. I could only get the voice mail. I left a message quoting his statement, saying that I understood that the Senator might just be trying to calm things down, but that if the Senator was going to vote against the 2A, I might as well vote for a Democrat and definitely for a primary challenger.

    • Cornholio has and will always be a turd. Remember, he voted FOR cloture on the original ACA bill and we ended up with this Obamacare mess.

    • Which would mean no Democrat would vote for it and the anti-gun members of the Republican party wouldn’t vote for it either. It’s a good way to keep the status qou.

    • If they want bump stocks banned, I’ll propose a compromise. Ban bump stocks (not with feinsteins asinine broad wording) and in exchange for banning bumps, make national conceal carry reciprocity, and remove SBS’s and SBR’s and suppressors from the NFA.

      • I’m fine with that. This needs to be what we tell our reps and senators. Remove SBS, SBR, suppressors from the NFA, replace them with bumpfire stocks.

        It’s a fair trade. Short barrel shotguns are useful home defense guns, SBR’s are no more dangerous than 16 inch barrel rifles, and suppressors have no intrinsic ability to kill, they require a gun to do anything and whether a gun has a suppressor on it or not it’s still able to kill.

        • And add a repeal of the Hughes Amendment. I will trade in bump stocks for post 86 machine guns.

          Really though, if you ban bump fire stocks, only the bad guys will have bump fire stocks. And illegally converted machine guns. This is a silly ban on something that seems scary only from a visceral level. I don’t think we should give up anything. Collecting, playing with, taking selfies with, cleaning, shooting, hunting, building, modding, training… Any legal purpose, even “scary” guns, even if it is a dumb product or not something I want to do. Bayonets on a handgun? Stupid to me, no “useful” purpose. But if you want one, go for it. Collecting safe queen world war 2 machine guns? I don’t have the cash but go for it! Want to build a three barreled silenced grenade launcher with 9 inch barrels? You *should* be able to legally do it.

          As long as you don’t murder or assualt with them, possession and whatever other legal activities you think of should be, and remain, legal.

    • Good luck with that, but if they are going to push for it we may as well get our pound of flesh if they do. You know, actual compromise instead of gun owners just giving things up.

    • Dead on, if the left really wants to ban bump fire stocks make them pay the price. I would add SBRs to the legislation as well.

  3. “I own a lot of guns … as a hunter and sportsman …” — Senator Cornyn.

    Good for you Senator Cornyn.

    “… I don’t understand the use of this bump stock …” — Senator Cornyn.

    Whether or not YOU think, feel, and/or perceive a bump stock to be “useful” is wholly irrelevant Senator Cornyn. Unless we have injured someone, mind your own damn business and leave us, the good and decent people or our nation, alone.

  4. I don’t understand why politicians are allowed more than one term. It seems like it’s an obvious area we ought to explore and see if it’s something the American People need to act on.

  5. Really! You need to help Robert pull his head out of his arse and then he can help you pull your head out of your arse. Come on guys. F-ing man up! Find your spine. It’s not about utility. You know as much. I’m never using my SBR’s in self defense given the mandatory sentencing that goes along with any use “deemed” inappropriate by a DA. I don’t need my 11 suppressors as my electronic hearing works just fine and the same sentencing guidelines apply. Every time Robert ends his article he’s talking about natural, civil and constitutional rights. Hmmm, maybe it’s time for that reasoning on this issue. Very disappointed. Thought you guys would always have our back.

  6. These repubs better learn to cowboy the f@&k up and hold their ground or they will all lose their jobs come primary time. I’m taking names by the way!

  7. Look, the only way I can support this is if there is an actual compromise:

    1) Change the language from the generalized “ban all things that accelerate your rate of fire” to making the bump stock and gat crank an NFA item. I don’t like generalized wide net verbiage, the bill will have to be specific to these two items.

    2) We need goodies in return. Attach this to the SHARE act or national reciprocity.

    If those two requirements are met, I’m willing to work with the other side.

    • Combine national reciprocity AND the SHARE act AND allow the domestic production and importation of NFA fully automatic weapons and I’m ready to deal, provided that the vague language in the proposed bill is eliminated.

      I would like to see language according to the following guidelines: One trigger pull with a finger, one shot fired. All GAT’s, dual action triggers, and bump fire stocks still available, but as NFA items. New (and much cheaper) full auto weapons available to anybody who pays a tax stamp and passes a background check.

      • Eliminate the tax stamp entirely as well. The tax stamp is a 2A loophole. The point of the tax stamp is because the government believed it illegal to do anything it was doing in the NFA except as a tax and the structure necessary to enforce the tax. It was a de facto ban. The whole NFA was devised as a loophole to the 2A.

        All gun control is a 2A loophole. “These arms aren’t protected.” “The government has an ______ interest and the restriction ________________ that interest.” (Court’s are applying different standards). These “exceptions” to the 2A are fairly characterized as loopholes.

        “Definition of loophole

        1 a :a small opening through which small arms may be fired
        b :a similar opening to admit light and air or to permit observation
        2 :a means of escape; especially :an ambiguity or omission in the text through which the intent of a statute, contract, or obligation may be evaded” – Merriam Webster

        Obviously I’m going with definition 2, but left 1 it because of the potential for puns whenever someone brings up the gun show loophole.

    • If you attach National Reciprocity, it’s a poison pill – which is fine by me but not great.

      If you attach SHARE, it just might pass – and we’d be trading something useless for something really useful. Suppressors aren’t the only good thing in SHARE.

      • Share would be enough for me. I think settling for the elimination of the tax stamp would be a good enough compromise if the bill only banned future manufacturing or importation of bump fire stocks. Almost nothing would be worth the vague language and absolute language in Feinstein’s bill.

  8. The best case scenario is NFA, which is what they should be doing right now. Everyone can stop demanding anything back relating to guns – Donnie will use this as a chip for his tax plan, not for your rights.

    It’s stupid. It won’t save lives. The antis won’t stop and will feel empowered, but it’s happening. Save your energy for the fight that matters. An object that amounts to a dumb toy that didn’t really exist 6 years ago doesn’t matter in the grand scheme of things.

    • Did you not read Feinstein’s bill? All aftermarket triggers would be banned too. Never give in, because they’ll only come after more once you show weakness.

      • I did not, though I don’t care as I’m not suggesting they sign that bill. The Republicans are going to need to write their own to reduce the damage here, and like I said, NFA is the best case scenario. Don’t expect Donnie to protect you here.

        • They’re not going to even ask for anything in return, because most of the Republicans are Democrats in hiding. They’ll gladly support Feinstein’s bill and I’m sure they Trump will sign it, because he was a big proponent of gun control in the past.

    • “We shall go on to the end, we shall fight in France, we shall fight on the seas and oceans, we shall fight with growing confidence and growing strength in the air, we shall defend our Island, whatever the cost may be, we shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the landing grounds, we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills; we shall never surrender.” – Winston Churchill.

      “Never give up, never surrender!” – Tim Allen as Jason Nesmith/Commander Peter Quincy Taggart in Galaxy Quest.

  9. We have workable and functional definitions of fully automatic and semi automatic firearms. Banning any device that accelerates the rate of fire of a weapon is the first step toward banning all semi automatic firearms. What they are really saying is that they want to define how fast is too fast for a gun. As a Texan, I have grave concerns that my Congressman (Flores) and one of my Senators (Cornyn), both Republicans, are dancing with the devil. Maybe it is part of the make happy politics dance with no intent to follow through, but this is my one issue litmus test on whether I will be voting for them in the next primary.

    • “Maybe it is part of the make happy politics dance with no intent to follow through, but this is my one issue litmus test on whether I will be voting for them in the next primary.” Call Senator Cornyn’s office and tell them this. It’s polite, but let’s them know your position. I said that there was no point in voting for a Republican who would vote against the 2A, and I might as well vote for a Democrat.

      Senator Cornyn’s D.C. office number is 202-224-2934.

  10. Pay attention to the wording of her proposal:

    ” . . .or any part, combination of parts, component, device, attachment, or accessory that is de- signed or functions to accelerate the rate of fire of a semi- automatic rifle but not convert the semiautomatic rifle into a machinegun. . .”

    ” . . . de-signed (sic) or functions to accelerate the rate of fire” is language that will be used (not can—WILL) to prohibit any modification of a trigger. All that has to be claimed is any modification away from the as-installed trigger that creates a lighter/easier trigger-pull will “increase the rate of fire” for it to be an illegal modification. This opens the door for government to start mandating the design of triggers to inhibit the ability for rapid firing—all in the interest of public safety, of course. How about a required 17 lb. AR trigger? Think our esteemed RINO swamp critters won’t vote for something like this? Think ATF wouldn’t use this language to regulate triggers? Think again.

    • The problem with Feinstein’s bill is enforcement. 1, Congress won’t pass anything unless it grandfathers in stuff you’ve already bought. This means that the triggers you own and the trigger work you’ve had done will all be just fine. 2, A national registration is impossible because triggers aren’t serialized, so law enforcement would never be able to prove when you bought or had work done on a trigger. 3, replacing springs to lighten a trigger and polishing surfaces to smooth a trigger is something that can be done at home with the most basic of understandings. It’s also something that only the shooter would know was done. It’s not like a giggle switch or bump fire stock that visibly changes the firearm and also changes the function.

      • So, when ATF does a few spot checks at gun ranges or gun shows and turns up a “illegally modified” weapon they’ll still happily charge you with a felony despite your claims and it will be up to you and your lawyer to prove your innocence. . . after a few years. Maybe. Of course they could always create a federal register for “modified long-guns”. We know how that would work. Once the feds start mandating trigger design, the gun-controllers will have a field-day making privately owned guns impossible to use. Of that you can be assured.

  11. You people willing to trade your rights are so precious…what a waste for all those who died so y’all could be so gutless.

    What we need are sanctuary cities for constitutionalists, and most of you shouldnt be allowed to enter.

    • What we need is to start hitting everyone who speaks out against the Bill of Rights with treason charges…

      • Should we start by charging you with treason because of that comment, which is clearly anti 1st amendment?

        • What the First needs are some common sense regulations, just like your 13th bud. Like i posted, when you come to the gates, you will be turned away.

        • I’m not saying that they can’t voice an opinion, I’m simply pointing out that being opposed to freedom and the rights protected by the Bill of Rights is there most un-American thing you can do.

  12. I agree that bump fire stocks are a gimmick, and I have no use for one.

    However, I will not support a ban on these stocks unless the GOP gets gun owners something in return. We’ve waited long enough for ridiculous suppressor and SBR/SBS laws to be repealed. If the GOP strategy is anything but a quid pro quo, I will vote against my GOP representative and senators in their upcoming primaries. And I intend to let them know it.

    • I would like to have the best chance possible when the government/blue helmets come a knockin’
      At some point they will and the armed citizen is the only one that can prevent tyranny (hence the 2A).

  13. Honestly, I was unaware of these accessories before this happened. I don’t find them all that interesting, and I’m having a hard time caring about whether they exist or not. That said, I still stand firmly against giving these leftists ground on banning anything. Give them an inch and they’ll take a mile.

  14. I wish it would have been said in the CBS interview but, had the shooter taken reasonably-aimed shots at a slightly slower pace (but the same number of total rounds), that ass-hat would have produce more carnage. Those evil bump fire stocks probably saved lives.

    • Maybe, maybe not. He was a 64 year old guy – his eyesight and/or hand steadiness may not have been up to deliberate, aimed fire at 400m.

  15. What would happen to my 2 bump fire stocks if bump fire stocks are banned?
    They were perfectly legal product when I bought them
    Will I become a criminal if I continue to possess them?
    Will I get any compensation for the forfeiture of my property?

      • Under any legislation that we’ve seen dlj95118 is correct, but one of the problems with predicting what will happen with legislation is that what gets submitted is almost never what comes out.

  16. If only there was one honest representative in D.C.. If only. One that would stand up with a proud voice and demand National Carry Reciprocity and an end to the NFA. If only. But no. We seem to have elected nothing but weak kneed, lily livered, pompous asses who care more for their job than the very people who elected them and the Constitution they swore to support and defend. NOW is the time for one honest soul to stand up and tell the truth. The 2nd Amendment is NOT about hunting Bambie and that which makes this nation great must not yield any more ground to the forces of evil.

  17. Just a thought. The antis have had a great deal of success with the gradualist incremental approach. Is it time for us to consider a simmillar approach?

    Just as an example, if we had the bump fire & crank fire devices banned, but in exchange could t.add any new machine guns to the register, would that be a fair trade? Would you consider that progress?

    • I’d call it fair if you also eliminated the tax stamp in it’s entirety. (Not the rest of the NFA, just the tax).

  18. No compromise. Republicans think play nice and give ground is good politics. Democrats tantrum like a toddler by the chocolate in the checkout lane. If they don’t compromise, we don’t either. NFA? ATF? End them. Reciprocity? Full 50 state and territories, D.C., everywhere. Gun free zones abolished.

    Anyone who wants a gun compromise, we double down in the opposite way, strictly and without yielding any ground. See what happens.

    • We literally cannot compromise if they are unwilling to compromise. That would be a concession, not a compromise.

  19. Trey Gowdy (a Republican).

    “We already have controls on what kind of guns you can have, where you can have them, when you can use them and what individuals can possess even a single bullet. So the question to me is whether or not current controls are adequate and there are two fundamental questions that you should put your finger on,” Gowdy said. “What law had it existed at the time would have prevented this mass killing or another mass killing. What law, but for its lack of implementation could have prevented this. That’s one question. The other question is, among all the panoply of current gun laws, how are we doing enfocing them?”

  20. C’mon, it should be easier than every to do a quid-pro-quo on this.

    Move bump-fire stocks to NFA status, at the same time suppressors are removed from NFA status.


    • As long as it’s the plastic stock *only*, or a crank.

      The “anything to increase” part is the road straight to hell…

  21. There can’t be any horse trading of our rights. Full stop.

    No “I’ll let you ban bump fire stocks if you give us suppressors” or any other such nonsense. Yes, nonsense, because it pits one POTG’s rights against another’s and because it never, ever stops until there’s nothing left to trade away.

    • I’ve been at this awhile, as have you.

      You know and I know that there’s going to be all sorts of caterwauling about being “unreasonable” if we stand fast on bump-fire stocks.

      So, in order to appear “reasonable,” I’d give them NFA classification (not a ban, but a requirement for a tax stamp) for bump-fire stocks. In return, I want silencers pulled completely out of the NFA. The only way they get bump-fire stocks is to give us something in return – and silencers out of NFA seems like a fair trade to me. Lots more people want to own silencers without forking over $200 than want to own bump-fire stocks.

      I know, a priori, that liberals will howl about this – and they will never pass anything.

      We look reasonable, the Democrats fall apart in front of their base, and we win. Again.

      Don Kates used to tell me that RKBA people had their hearts in the right place, but were naive about how legislation and PR worked in DC. He said the secret to winning against the liberals was to appear “reasonable” and ready to give them what they wanted, but attach a quid-pro-quo for which they would never vote. One of Don’s favorite QPQ’s was full gun rights for Washington DC residents, including CCW. Since most of these liberals are creatures of DC, the prohibition on CCW in DC is very important to them – and we could use that to torpedo any legislation we didn’t want passed.

  22. You people wanting to give up these stocks are morons.

    If they ban these stocks you won’t be getting anything in return so you can stop with the negotiating, it will not happen.

    Either we keep them or we don’t.

    If you want them gone you are an antigunner.

  23. Sorry f*ckstick, no deal. True I cannot fathom a practical use for a bump fire stock nor can I find the desire to own one myself but that doesn’t mean no one should be allowed them and I could say the same for the following:

    1. Racecars
    2. Cars manufactured before 1940
    3. Mud Trucks
    4. Monster Trucks
    5. Wheels measuring over 18 inches in diameter
    6. Diesel trucks when you do not tow anything
    7. Four Wheel drive vehicles when you drive properly maintained roads
    8. More than one bank account
    9. More than one TV
    10. More than one computer
    11. More than one phone
    12. A refrigerator with built in freezer (with a separate a deep freezer)
    13. A deep freezer (with a refrigerator having a built in freezer)
    14. More than one vehicle
    15. More than one bathroom
    16. More than one bedroom
    17. More than one outfit per day of the week
    18. More than one pair of shoes
    19. Numerous sets of plates, flatware, glasses, utensils, and other eating devices
    20. More than one house.

    Some people may not want to own these items but that doesn’t mean they should be banned. Long as the person is not using them to harm people they should be allowed to own and use any item they want.

    • I Love it! Especially deep freezers. They just contribute to global warming and the hoarding of valuable food.

  24. What Ralph said…I did not vote in any primary on PURPOSE. F##k any republitard who goes along with this. AND our so-called Republican president. Keep you powder dry😡

  25. I’ve got a use…when the blue helmets come a marching (tomorrow or 50 years from now), we can actually make a decent stand considering full autos aren’t readily available except to those that would enslave us..

  26. Trade bump-fires for a repeal of the Hughes Amendment. Not happy about giving up ANYTHING, but bump-fires wouldn’t be a thing if we had legal autos after ’86.

  27. Is it ironic that the left repeatedly calls Trump racist and a fascist but constantly want to grant the government the exclusive right to bear arms?

  28. I don’t know how many times I have read, “Repeal the NFA!” In this comment section on TTAG. Today people want to add items to NFA regulation. Right now you can buy one of these things over the counter. Would you honestly rather go through NFA B.S. to get one of these bump stocks later? Or would you rather not lose ground? I can see it now, and in 5 years some of you are going to be crying in this comment section about how bump stocks used to be legal and now you have to go through all this ATF horsecrap to get one.

  29. Even though they’re gimmicky range toys, I’m 100% against banning them on principle. They are by and large a recreational item and their misuse in a black swan event shouldn’t be an occasion to grant the anti-gun forces a victory. Never give an inch, ever.

  30. Conservatives and Civil Libertarians Signal Willingness to Quit Voting for Republicans.

    There, Cornyn, how to you like them apples?

  31. Republicans are painting this as an Obama oversight. They are saying it was approved by Obama’s ATF.

    • It seems that the NRA has now come out supporting a review of regulations surrounding bump stocks. This would likely push it down an NFA path. It would hopefully kill the Feinstein bill and probably tip toward the Republican bill.

  32. Yeah , Sure who’s brokering that sale of the Brooklyn bridge!?
    HELL! Let’s just give up the entire Bill of Rights! To Dangerous for most citizens..No one needs anything! Lets just reason-away

  33. Doubt they would ban them outright, they would likely become NFA devices with people being required to register them, probably as an AOW. I think in the past their have been NFA item amnesties.

    • There was a brief amnesty as part of the GCA, so for 30 days in 1968 you could register NFA items without paying the $200 tax, but any existing items that you didn’t register would forever be unregisterable at the end of those 30 days. Perhaps we could insist on opening up the Registry for all items for a few months to give people a chance to register their existing bump stocks.

      In the novel Unintended Consequences, Henry Bowman bought several 10′ chunks of stainless aircraft tubing, cut them to suppressor length, serially numbered all the pieces, and registered them with BATF. He wanted to haven enough housings to build every suppressor he might want to have for the rest of his life, and he was very young in 1968.

      Can you imagine what would happen if we had a tax free amnesty for previously unregistered NFA items today, and everybody with internet access knew about it? “I’d like to buy 100 of those $29 Anderson lowers, please”.

      • I’d buy a ghost gunner and “make” a bunch of lowers. By “make,” I mean fill out a bunch of paperwork and actually make a couple. If prices were crazy after the amnesty ended, I’d sell the ones I actually made and make the ones that only existed on paperwork. Sure that’s probably a couple of felonies, but it’s a not going to happen hypothetical any way.

  34. They should ban them and have to go door-to-door to collect them. Preferably while standing in a large group, en masse. They just need to wait while I go get my bump-stock. I’ll only be a second…

  35. Democrats always say we need to compromise, how bout in return for banning bump stocks, they agree to pass the share act.

  36. they wont ban obamacare…

    but theyll ban bump fire stocks…

    reason #1896 why theyre called the stupid party

    but for now i guess theyre better than the dangerous party

    eventually theyll be stupid enough that theyll be as dangerous

    who do we vote for then

    see: quandary

  37. If you really want to shoot fast, get Jerry Miculek to teach you. He can shoot an AR as fast as a bump fire.
    Well, actually he was like .2 seconds slower.
    Check YouTube for it. Iraqveteran8888 channel

Comments are closed.