Yes, but we were discouraged from using the M16 in full auto mode... I only fired the 16 in full auto mode one time, on the range, it was not easy to keep on a single target. Being in the Air Force I never got a chance to fire the 16 in combat because the one fatal attack I was directly involved in was a mortar attack the Cong mortar possitions were out of range, out of sight, and they took off after dropping 10 or 12 rounds on us. Back to semi auto weapons and bump stocks in a civilian setting. It is obvious that is a situation as that Las Vegas concert or God forbid a school where you have bodies in concentrated quarters the faster a killer fires the more victims will die. So if the killer of the Florida school had a bolt action rifle instead of a semi auto and even with a 10 round mag which are abailable that killer may have killed fewer people. How many fewer? Depending on his experience but the average person will fire fewer rounds with a bolt action rifle plus it takes much more skill to rechamber a bolt action and keep on target. The bump stock will increase the rates of fire a bit but can the average guy keep a bump stock weapon on target ? I am nit sure !, So if banning bump stocks saves one life of a child , two, then let's go for it and we can take the heat if that is unconstitutional but I do not think that it is unconstitutional.
I thought that the Germans develoed the magazine around the turn of the 19th to the 20th century. I could be wrong, I was once.
What is really confusing me is the way they keep calling the AR-15 a "high power" semiauto rifle. I mean, I guess if you are just using "high power" as a catch-all for centerfire rounds, sure, but as far as the .223 round itself goes, it is fairly low-powered compared to most popular hunting rounds. I've heard plenty of hunters debate about whether or not the .223 is even powerful enough to be humane for hunting unless you can reliably nail a behind-the-ear shot.
Ok good for you but bad for Trump because why didn't he call it then? I know why! He kept it as a trump card to pull out when he needed one. What a waste of humanity people like that are.
so basically what you want isn't a ban on so called assault rifles but semi automatic rifles because what you gun grabbers use the term assault rifle it refers to just cosmetics the looks of the rifle but in all actuality what you want done is a ban on all semi automatic rifles 40% of all rifles sold in the US are semiautomatic
Some people use the term "high powered" in place of rapid fire or semi auto. Again it is that not everyone is not well versed in the topic of weapons.
Maybe so. I kept hearing it in terms of "high-powered semiautomatic rifles," so I just assumed that they meant that "power" part meant something in addition to the "semiauto" part. But it could have also just been a repetitive thing. I keep hearing these, "I'm not against hunting but you don't need a _____ for hunting" arguments that don't make sense. I literally had someone tell me in another forum that "You don't need a shotgun to hunt a bird." Which . . . kind of what they were invented for.
Who the F..... are you call me a " gun grabber". , what the F .....did I say?.???????????.??? I said it was ok to restrict the bump stock! The F..... bump stock! I did not say to ban semi autos .... n I did discuss the fact that a bolt action weapon would be more ( edited) likely to cause less kills but did not say ban semi autos.. I very specifically said that if restricting the bump stock saves one child's life then ok go fir it... Even if someone did suggest we ban semi autos why must you call oeople gun grabbers instead of debating the two two points of views on an intellectual basis. Read the F.... g person's post before you call them gun grabbers!
There are many oeople who do not hunt or shoot target practice who do not know s.....t about guns... that is a fact...
I am sure banning bump stocks does not run afoul of the constitution. Banning rifles does. The Texas Tower shooting was accomplished with a bolt action rifle. 14 people dead including one unborn child and 31 injured.
your the gun grabber because using your rational you saying if bump stock saves one life ban it then you discuss a bolt action will kill less so that is directly implying that banning semi automatics will save lives and if it saves one life ban it you gun grabbers hide behind words like assault rifles when anyone with any intelligence knows a so called assault rifle is just cosmetic its the mechanics how it can be fired repeatedly that makes it affiant in killing many. so stop playing your charred grow a set of balls and admit it you want semi automatics banned
So you are either not honest enough to have a discussion about guns or you lack the intellect so you insist on name calling fellow forum member . If you had the honesty to read my posts about gun topics you will notice that I never confuse what an assault rifle is and I never use that term as a cosmetic description. Instead of making up lies about me go and find posts of mine where I according to you called for banning guns and display these posts here. Until you do that you are not worth talking to because I like to deal with honest people.
What's even more curious is how gun-grabbers keep referring to the AR-15 as an assault rifle. However, when you're trying to fans the flames of hysteria a wanton disregard for facts makes perfect sense. To paraphrase George Orwell, sloppy language leads to sloppy thinking...
mmm. so to be clear, you are angry that Trump is going to sign that as opposed to not. Correct? Do you prefer he doesnt...like Obama did?
I mean, I have to disagree. When they outlawed drinking and driving, deaths by DUI decreased. Seems to me that laws do have an impact on overall incidents. I am pro-2nd amendment, but frankly, there are just too many school shootings for me to think we can continue to ignore this. It just can't be ignored. Bump stocks is not a solution to this problem. It's a band aid to an amputation.
