The WaPo has never seen a gun control law it didn’t like . . . After getting an NRA permission slip, the GOP shouldn’t be let off the hook
There is something pathetic about grown men and women who hold federal office waiting to get instructions from the NRA before suggesting that they might be willing to discuss a laughably tiny move to regulate the bump stocks — but of course, not the semiautomatic weapons themselves nor the numbers of weapons one can buy for a personal arsenal. And perish the thought that the NRA might permit lawmakers to consider universal background checks.
The stubborn refusal to enact any meaningful reforms for fear of inconveniencing legal gun owners spurs otherwise sympathetic voices to demand drastic measures. (Bret Stephens decried half-measures, arguing, “Repealing the Amendment may seem like political Mission Impossible today, but in the era of same-sex marriage it’s worth recalling that most great causes begin as improbable ones.”) When exasperated Americans demand big, bold steps, the NRA screeches that the government wants to take away your guns.
Mr. Ghost Gun himself to challenge DiFi . . . Sources Say California Senate Leader Kevin de Leon to Challenge Sen. Dianne Feinstein in Democratic Primary
California state Senate president Kevin de León intends to enter California’s 2018 Democratic primary against Sen. Dianne Feinstein, three sources with knowledge of his plans say.
De León has begun calling labor leaders and elected officials to inform them of his plans, the sources said, and is expected to soon announce his campaign against Feinstein, a giant of California Democratic politics who has held the office since 1992.
Gee, it’s almost as if gun control laws don’t really work . . . Gun laws that cost millions had little effect because they weren’t enforced
In Colorado and Washington state, advocates spent millions of dollars, and two Colorado Democrats lost their seats, in the effort to pass laws requiring criminal background checks on every single gun sale.
More than three years later, researchers have concluded that the new laws had little measurable effect, probably because citizens simply decided not to comply and there was a lack of enforcement by authorities.
Congress has never let facts or precision of language get in its way . . . Two Bad Ideas on Bump Stocks
It’s a bipartisan effort that applies to “any part or combination of parts that is designed and functions to increase the rate of fire of a semiautomatic rifle but does not convert the semiautomatic rifle into a machinegun.” As Christian Britschgi notes at Reason, this is an insanely broad definition: “Binary triggers, which fire[] a round on both the pull and release of the trigger, would also likely be prohibited under this language, as would lighter triggers, and heavier recoil springs, both of which allow for a faster rate of fire.”
They need to reword this. One option they should explore is the concept of “deliberate engagement” (which made the rounds on “Gun Twitter” last week, though the user who came up with the idea seems to have deleted his tweets). The idea would be to regulate devices that help users fire multiple bullets without deliberately engaging the trigger each time.
The monoparty reaches consensus . . . Your Bipartisan Bump Stock Ban Has Arrived
As Reason has pointed out, bump stocks are easy targets for politicians looking to “do something” about gun violence, and it is not surprising that they would be the subject of Curbelo and Moulton’s bill. Some gun enthusiasts and retailers considered them a novelty—little known about until the shooting—and one that detracts from the functionality of a weapon by sacrificing accuracy for the speed of firing.
With the issue of a weapon’s rate of fire on the table, there is every reason to believe lawmakers might consider amendments to add to the ban extended magazines, reloading aids, or anything else that allows a shooter to get rounds off more quickly.
This is the slippery slope uncompromising libertarians and conservatives worried about and liberals hoped Congress would find itself negotiating. And even if it passes unanimously, the bill brings the nation no closer to preventing what happened in Las Vegas.
7 or 8. My dad bought me a Remington Nylon 66 for Christmas.It’s probably had at least 20,000 rounds through it (weekend camping trips sounded like WW2). I still have it, I’m 63. Works fine.
fine pistol.
with that knife you could smash a burning or sinking car window, slice the occupant out of their seat belt, drag them to safety and severely tanto them into submission.
Easy check:
Set up 500 targets 400 yards downrange. These are standard targets with vital zones marked.
Shooter with a bumpstock has 10 minutes and 1000 rounds to hit as many as he can. He must fire long bursts.
Repeat the test with a standard scoped semi-auto and a shooter of the same skill level.
See how many are wounded/killed in each test.
Bumpfire stocks do not make a rifle more deadly. They just make it louder.
From first article…There is something pathetic about grown men and women who have to get permission from the federal government on what products they should be able to buy or not buy, and which activities are safe and which ones are too dangerous or scary.
Fixed that for them.
I have a modest proposal: in my opinion most of the labels that get thrown about here and elsewhere rapidly turn into nonsense, and are mostly epithets- liberal, conservative, leftist, fascist… the only “meaning” being that each writer intends their word of choice as labeling the ‘other’ categorically awful, and different people just think being on the sending or receiving end of certain labels is the most awful.
It all might as well be two kids on a playground, each trying to shout louder than one another “I’m not a doodoohead, you are the doodoohead”… “no you are the doodoohead”… “no you are”
So, back to my modest proposal-perhaps the software that runs the forum could be set up to recognize and automatically strip out all of the standard, worn out, meaningless label/epithets, and universally replace each and every one, of every political flavor and color, with “doodoohead”
Maybe then we could actually get back to spending the bandwidth of our thoughts, our words, our deeds, our strategies, our tactics… on communicating effectively about guns and preserving gun rights.
They should seriously come out with a 6.5 / .260 barrel. Even in 18 inches. I’d have a LOT of use for that.
Where’s the pic/comment that won last week?
Say hello to my little friend…
I was four. My dad sat me on his lap and had me shoot his old Sears .22LR. 42 years later I still love shooting that gun. Unfortunately my dad is no longer around to shoot with.
“like giving a first grader a cup of Nitro Cold Brew and expecting them to sit quietly through mass class.”
That one’s good, but this one’s better:
“Giving money and power to government is like giving whiskey and car keys to teenage boys.” -P. J. O’Rourke
Well said, Mr. O’Rourke!
Well, as long as you’re requiring that the buyer indicate on the for the reason for the multiple gun purchase, that should be ok, right?
Then again, is just a reason enough? Mass murderers and Islamic terrorists are well known for their honesty, but what if one should happen to lie? If we add in a requirement for a pinky swear, and a cross my heart and hope-to-die promise backing up that stated reason for the multiple purpose, then I’m on board. That’s common sense.
I’m into it. Don’t know why but I am.
Anybody know how that bolt system works? It looks a lot like a standard AR but somehow got rid of the buffer tube.
Looks very interesting.
“John, this IS the most fun you can have with your clothes on…wanna go next?”
A little more to the left Feinstein……..then I will show you what ‘full auto’ really means…..
Willing to trade rights for security? You sir, deserve neither.
Liar, Liar! Real gun owners do not use “AR” and “Clip” in the same sentence. F’ng idiot.