Posted on 12/30/2018 9:34:07 AM PST by rktman
“...it’s encouraging to see the Trump administration take action on gun safety...”
The hell you say Beth...no it’s not encouraging. And “gun safety” is the left’s euphemism for gun control. Gun safety is taught by the NRA...not THE Bloombergs and Feinsteins of the world.
"The ATF lacks the authority under the law to ban bump-fire stocks. Period. The agency made this crystal clear in a 2013 letter to Congress, writing that 'stocks of this type are not subject to the provisions of the federal firearms statutes.' Legislation is the only answer and Congress shouldn't attempt to pas the buck."
She even got the name right, one of the few lefties to do so.
Hmmm. I wonder if she thinks we have a democracy here too.
“Congress must still pass a law banning bump stocks and other similar devices, such as trigger cranks.”
Damn these people.
I was thinking “Who cares about bump stocks ? Trigger cranks are the way to go!”
I don’t really want a binary trigger but these people are going to force me to buy one.
I’ve never fired a weapon with a bump stock, mostly because of the negative stories I’ve been told by those that have. They claim it’s almost impossible to get a tight grouping because the action of the bump stock causes to weapon to jump around too much.
If you’re into spray and pray, perhaps a bump stock would be right for you.
What you say about the accuracy of a bump stock does not comport with my personal experience.
Under existing law, bump fire stock equipped rifles are NOT machine guns because each and every shot, utilizing a bump-fire stock in the slide fire mode requires a separate activation of the trigger. Period. There are NO modifications to the fire control group. Neither the disconnector, the hammer, the selector lever, lower receiver, or the trigger is altered in ANY way. An automatic sear is not added.
One thing that I really like about Free Republic is the amazing incisiveness and the vast quantity of thoughtful and informed analysis and information about a multiplicity of subjects. However, I am EXTREMELY disappointed about much of what has been said of the the bumpfire stock controversy. Much of it sounds has though it was promulgated by the ignorant gun grabbing left.
I am a 2 tour Vietnam infantry and armor combat veteran, and a member of the Illinois National guard for 26 years. I served in a NG Military police battalion has a platoon sergeant and an operations sergeant. I was a certified Illinois State Police Firearms and Defensive tactics instructor, and a member of Special Reaction and SWAT teams. I have fired hundreds of thousands of rounds through automatic weapons of all types, belt and magazine fed, tripod and shoulder mounted, ranging from .45 caliber M-3 sub machine guns up to M2A1 40 mm twin anti-aircraft guns mounted on an M-42 self propelled anti-aircraft gun.
I am retired and spend one day a month on the rifle range shooting my AR-15 rifles. When this slide fire device was first introduced, the low cost and novelty intrigued me and I purchased one. It was a bit awkward to use at first, but in one afternoon, after a bit of practice I was able to get 90% of any length burst on a man sized target at 70 yards, which is close to the normal engagement ranges for truly effective full auto fire from shoulder mounted assault rifles. It is not as useful has a true selective fire assault rifle since it requires two hands to employ, but it DOES have some measure of limited tactical utility for anyone who practices with it. I never really considered this item to be a true tactical instrument, but I did appreciate the ingenuity and thought that went into turning “bump fire’ into almost as accurate a technique has I could use with a true select fire assault rifle. It was even more accurate when firing from the prone position while using a bi-pod. I kept every round from each burst on a man sized target silhouette at a range of 100 meters. When I got the technique right, my bursts would average 4”-6” groupings, all on the target, with the more accurate ones fired prone from the bi pod.
Experts who have decried the effectiveness of full auto fire from assault rifles and other shoulder fired weapons are largely correct. I was constantly yelling at my squad to use the “auto” location for the selector switch sparingly. Semi-auto fire is usually most desired and superior, and includes the advantages of duration of sustained fire to prevent barrel overheating and enhances ammo expenditure and accuracy. Auto fire from an assault rifle has the following tactical utility, in the final and close in (100 meters or less) stages of an assault, to gain initial fire superiority, to break contact, particularly has a counter ambush technique, when firing along final protective lines when a perimeter is in danger of being overrun, and to support by fire the maneuver tactics of another element. Leaders are responsible to control the fire of their subordinates to maintain fire discipline, but in those roles that I have outlined, full auto fire is very useful indeed, even if it is simulated auto fire delivered from a bumpstock.
The battle has been joined. The anti-gun hysterics are in full cry. They will never be satisfied until they achieve near total firearm confiscation. The genie is out of the bottle. You cannot stop psychopaths employing bump fire methods unless you can repeal the laws of Newtonian physics. I realize that some sort of regulation will ensue in the wake of this horrific atrocity. But I don’t like it one damn bit. BTW, you can effectively bump fire with a thick rubber band wrapped around the magazine well and on the trigger on an AR-15, while firing thru the sights from the shoulder.
If they do enact this ban, then any so called “compromise” should include repealing the 1986 Hughes Act which caused the prices of full auto weapons to skyrocket by making it impossible to register newly manufactured NFA firearms. There is NO REASON for a legally transferable M-16 to cost over 50,000 dollars. You can be assured that any such owner will be thoroughly vetted by the background check that would be required to purchase one. But none of that matters to gun grabbers anyway.
When Congress passed the NFA of 1934, they didn’t ban ACTUAL machine guns. The law required a background check, and the payment of a $200.00 transfer tax on weapons like, a World War I belt fed, tripod mounted German 1908 Maxim machine gun or a Thompson sub machine gun. Neither type of weapon was banned outright.
Flash forward to 2018, and we are confronted with a ban on a piece of ABS plastic, previously ruled as NOT a MG by the very same agency that is now declaring that it is. That piece of plastic is viewed more harshly than an actual automatic weapon.
All those concerned about arbitrary and capricious regulation by government agencies might want to consider this hysteria carefully.
I installed a Franklin Arms binary trigger in 2 of my AR-15’s. In binary mode, I can run them at an effective cyclic rate of 680 rpm or so. I had to install a heavier recoil spring and an “H” buffer to cure bolt carrier bounce, but that totally cured the problem.
The FA trigger is crisper, and has less creep than the Mil-Spec G.I. trigger in semi-auto mode.
I’ve been looing at the FA trigger group. So you like it then?
Good tip about the spring and buffer. I would put it in a Colt Match Target.
What is the “H” buffer?
The original gas impingement system of the M-16 series rifle was designed for a 20” barrel. When the barrel was shortened to 14.5 and 16 inches, for the M-4 carbine and the AR-15 carbine, respectively, the shorter barrel resulted in what is called shortened dwell time, meaning the length of time that the gas system is pressurized after the bullet clears the gas port and the gas enters the bolt carrier key, with the bullet still traveling down the barrel. This higher pressurization results in increased bolt carrier velocities, which increases the likelihood of the bolt bouncing off of the barrel extension as the bolt is in the locking phase, causing an out of battery failure to fire if the hammer falls at the moment that the bolt is out of battery. (like when you drop a hammer on an anvil, and the hammer bounces) The AR-15/M-16 is designed not to fire when the bolt is out of battery as a safety measure.
AR-15 M-16 buffers come in different weights to minimize bolt carrier bounce. They are the standard unmarked weight which is sufficient for all semi auto firing. But the next marked weight is an “H” weight which is used in the M-4 series of carbines. The next highest weight is the H3 weight.
The internal weights are loose in the buffer, like un seat belted people in a car. That is why the buffer rattles when you shake it. When the rifle recoils, the loose weights are pushed to the rear of the buffer. On counter recoil, they rush forward and the weights tend to stop the bolt carrier from bouncing out of battery and causing a failure to fire due to the unlocked bolt not aligning with the firing pin.
If your rifle has light primer strikes when you do mag dump rapid firing with a FA trigger, you may need to step up the buffer weight to cure this. When I did it fixed the problem. The recoil impulse is a bit less too.
Long explanation, but I hope that it answered your question.
Correction: That is H2 and H3 weights.
Not long, informative. Thanks for taking the time.
Lever Actions are still OKAY,
XLNT!
Wrong.
16.
Red Ryder BB,,,,
Is History!
My eye Is Out!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.