I, for one, am surprised at the unease regarding bump stock bans. Allowing their use appears to have been an Obama Administration attempt to to skirt the spirit, if not the letter, if the NFA.
Consistency in the law would have suggested that bump stocks should never have been permitted.
We can debate the value of the NFA, bump stocks, and other devices that permit multiple shots with a single human activation. They all, however, should treated as part of the broader definition of “machine gun.” The rationale is that an observer watching the firing would be unable to tell the difference between the bump stock and a firearm equipped with a full auto trigger.
PS Does anyone care to be a Don Quixote and joust at the windmill to start a movement to repeal the NFA?
Consistency in the law would have suggested that bump stocks should never have been permitted.
We can debate the value of the NFA, bump stocks, and other devices that permit multiple shots with a single human activation. They all, however, should treated as part of the broader definition of “machine gun.” The rationale is that an observer watching the firing would be unable to tell the difference between the bump stock and a firearm equipped with a full auto trigger.
PS Does anyone care to be a Don Quixote and joust at the windmill to start a movement to repeal the NFA?
shootersnotes.com
"To those who have fought and almost died for it, freedom has a flavor the protected will never know."
-- Author Unknown
"If at first you do succeed, try not to look astonished!" -- Milton Berle
"To those who have fought and almost died for it, freedom has a flavor the protected will never know."
-- Author Unknown
"If at first you do succeed, try not to look astonished!" -- Milton Berle