Author Topic: [NEWS] South Carolina is attempting to ban Bump-Stocks (Read 4640 times)

plad101 · December 19, 2017, 04:39:15 PM

South Carolina is making an attempt to ban Bump-stocks due to the Las Vegas shooter owning 12.

And on another note the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco Firearms and Explosives is going to review the device again and might also try and ban them on a national level.
This most likely won't go anywhere due to their current regulations in place on Automatic Weapons.

Ad Bot · Advertisement

Drydess · December 19, 2017, 04:41:49 PM

bump stocks should absolutely be banned

plad101 · December 19, 2017, 04:43:32 PM

Quote from: Drydess on December 19, 2017, 04:41:49 PM

bump stocks should absolutely be banned

They don't break any laws or regulations currently in place.

Why should they be banned?

Drydess · December 19, 2017, 04:44:17 PM

Quote from: plad101 on December 19, 2017, 04:43:32 PM

They don't break any laws or regulations currently in place.

Why should they be banned?

they're a loophole for automatic weapons...? something that's already banned without an expensive permit...?

Mr Noone · December 19, 2017, 04:45:26 PM

>doesn't just ban guns outright
you see this is why america has a problem

HellHound · December 19, 2017, 04:46:31 PM

Quote from: Mr Noone on December 19, 2017, 04:45:26 PM

>doesn't just ban guns outright
you see this is why america has a problem

hm, I'm sure that would work well in a nation with nearly as many firearms as there are people.

Tactical Nuke · December 19, 2017, 04:48:16 PM

this is pointless

you don't even need a bump stock in order to fire like an automatic, and even then, they're really really easy to make

SeventhSandwich · December 19, 2017, 04:48:32 PM

Quote from: plad101 on December 19, 2017, 04:43:32 PM

They don't break any laws or regulations currently in place.

Why should they be banned?

Because they have zero utility for self-defense or hunting or ~~even recreation~~.

Basically, the idea behind a bump stock is that you can take the recoil of a semi-automatic weapon to make it behave like it's fully automatic. While there's nothing specifically terroristic about an automatic weapon, the fact is that a bump stock makes your gun jump around like crazy, which makes it useless for basically everything except trying to mow down dense, large crowds of people.

People buy bump stocks as a novelty to use on firing ranges. They don't really serve any practical purpose to anyone who isn't trying to commit a mass-shooting.

SWAT One · December 19, 2017, 04:50:38 PM

Quote from: Mr Noone on December 19, 2017, 04:45:26 PM

>doesn't just ban guns outright
you see this is why america has a problem

Okay but you see America's culture will not stand for that and you would get a civil war. Second, that can only happen in a Constitutional Convention/Convention of States, which would allow the entire US Constitution to be subject to change.

plad101 · December 19, 2017, 04:53:27 PM

Quote from: SeventhSandwich on December 19, 2017, 04:48:32 PM

Because they have zero utility for self-defense or hunting or even recreation.

Basically, the idea behind a bump stock is that you can take the recoil of a semi-automatic weapon to make it behave like it's fully automatic. While there's nothing specifically terroristic about an automatic weapon, the fact is that a bump stock makes your gun jump around like crazy, which makes it useless for basically everything except trying mow down dense, large crowds of people.

People buy bump stocks as a novelty to use on firing ranges. They don't really serve any practical purpose to anyone who isn't trying to commit a mass-shooting.

Firing a lot of bullets doesn't make a gun deadlier, a semi-automatic rifle can do just as well. Charles Whitman killed several people with just a hunting rifle, plus this is such an easy item to make people who want to break the law will do it anyway.

I like the fact you say that aren't good for recreation then say they are a novelty item, people who want to mag dump will mag dump. That is mainly what a bump-stock appeals to is people looking to forget around and waste time, it's incredible worthless otherwise and I bet you hundreds of thousands of people own them and aren't planning on shooting up their local middle school.

Steve5451� · December 19, 2017, 04:54:30 PM

Quote from: HellHound on December 19, 2017, 04:46:31 PM

hm, I'm sure that would work well in a nation with nearly as many firearms as there are people.

iirc there's actually more guns than people

HellHound · December 19, 2017, 04:55:31 PM

Quote from: Steve5451� on December 19, 2017, 04:54:30 PM

iirc there's actually more guns than people

there are ~300 million people, ~100-250 million guns.

Tactical Nuke · December 19, 2017, 04:56:52 PM

Quote from: Mr Noone on December 19, 2017, 04:45:26 PM

>doesn't just ban guns outright
you see this is why america has a problem

so how are people killing you in your country? are they stabbing you or just throwing acid on your face? maybe they're using trucks or bombs?

Steve5451� · December 19, 2017, 04:57:19 PM

Quote from: HellHound on December 19, 2017, 04:55:31 PM

there are ~300 million people, ~100-250 million guns.

i read a something on that so i guess it was bs

SeventhSandwich · December 19, 2017, 04:58:28 PM

Quote from: plad101 on December 19, 2017, 04:53:27 PM

Firing a lot of bullets doesn't make a gun deadlier, a semi-automatic rifle can do just as well. Charles Whitman killed several people with just a hunting rifle, plus this is such an easy item to make people who want to break the law will do it anyway.

I like the fact you say that aren't good for recreation then say they are a novelty item, people who want to mag dump will mag dump. That is mainly what a bump-stock appeals to is people looking to forget around and waste time, it's incredible worthless otherwise and I bet you hundreds of thousands of people own them and aren't planning on shooting up their local middle school.

The massacre which Charles Whitman committed was less than a third as deadly as Stephen Paddock's, despite lasting 45 minutes as compared to Paddock's 10.

I don't know what to tell you. This is an example of an opportunity for sensible, non-intrusive gun regulation. We can lessen the chances of a future Las Vegas shooting by passing a law which will make absolutely no difference to 99.9% of legal gun owners. How does this not sound like a good idea?