• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

You Guys Can Exhale Now!

Rich2018 said:
Where is the contradiction ?

A bump stock CAN allow a semi-automatic gun shoot automatic fire

Automatic fire is a continuous burst of rounds from a single pull of the trigger.

A bump stock allows this and this is why the ATF and DOJ class bump stocks as machine guns and automatic weapons and consequently banned them



This is despite you quoted the ATF as a source that did not make this classification until I pointed out to you that it did - you had a OLD reference. It was a this point when you ceased regarding the ATF as a credible source backing you up, and instead branded them as "cowardly".

Amazing how fast a source like the ATF changed status from an expert and unimpeachable source of truth to being wrong and "cowardly".

And you are shocked the your claims of being a lawyer with 30 years of prosecution experience is questioned ?
Click to expand...

more stupendous idiocy

the only way a gun can shoot "automatic fire" is if it is an automatic

as USUAL you are unable to understand the difference between RATE OF FIRE vs "automatic fire"
 
TurtleDude said:
more stupendous idiocy

the only way a gun can shoot "automatic fire" is if it is an automatic
Click to expand...

More stupendous ignorance

Nope, you can add a bump stock to it, and a semi-automatic gun can fire fully automatic.

Hint: This is WHY the ATF and the DOJ have classed bump stocks as machine gun and automatic weapons and banned them.


And you claim to be a LAWYER with 30 years of experience !!!




...as USUAL you are unable to understand the difference between RATE OF FIRE vs "automatic fire"
Click to expand...


No, and the ATF and DOJ are capable of understanding that distinction too.
 
Rich2018 said:
More stupendous ignorance

Nope, you can add a bump stock to it, and a semi-automatic gun can fire fully automatic.

Hint: This is WHY the ATF and the DOJ have classed bump stocks as machine gun and automatic weapons and banned them.


And you claim to be a LAWYER with 30 years of experience !!!







No, and the ATF and DOJ are capable of understanding that distinction too.
Click to expand...

you keep contradicting yourself

do you claim a bump stock modifies the internal characteristics of a semi auto to make it fully automatic?
 
TurtleDude said:
you keep contradicting yourself

do you claim a bump stock modifies the internal characteristics of a semi auto to make it fully automatic?
Click to expand...


No


But a bump stock does give a gun a capability of automatic fire.


This is WHY the ATF and the DOJ have classed bump stocks as machine gun and automatic weapons and banned them.
 
Rich2018 said:
No


But a bump stock does give a gun a capability of automatic fire.


This is WHY the ATF and the DOJ have classed bump stocks as machine gun and automatic weapons and banned them.
Click to expand...

you confuse rate of fire with automatic weapons fire

you ignorantly believe that a certain rate of fire means the gun is firing automatically. That is not true. For example, a hand cranked gatling gun could be designed with various gears that would allow a hand cranked multi barrel weapon to shoot at RATES OF FIRE faster than many automatics. That wouldn't make that hand cranked weapon an AUTOMATIC even though it shoots more bullets in a 10 second period than some automatics

The ATF and DOJ's dishonesty was designed to allow them to bend to political whims without having to get a law passed through the senate. So they dishonestly called Bump stocks "machine guns" so they could ban them.
 
rjay said:
Are you for allowing machine guns?
Click to expand...

Since in every state except Maryland and California you can own flamethrowers I would say yes, people should be allowed to own machine-guns.
 
TurtleDude said:
you confuse rate of fire with automatic weapons fire

you ignorantly believe that a certain rate of fire means the gun is firing automatically. That is not true. For example, a hand cranked gatling gun could be designed with various gears that would allow a hand cranked multi barrel weapon to shoot at RATES OF FIRE faster than many automatics. That wouldn't make that hand cranked weapon an AUTOMATIC even though it shoots more bullets in a 10 second period than some automatics

The ATF and DOJ's dishonesty was designed to allow them to bend to political whims without having to get a law passed through the senate. So they dishonestly called Bump stocks "machine guns" so they could ban them.
Click to expand...


Nope automatic fire allows for continuous fire with one trigger pull - as a bump stock allows

This is why the same ATF you once invoked as defining what a bump stock is, banned them in accordance with the DOJ as they're classed as automatic weapons and machine guns.

Upon having this pointed out to you, you immediately branded the ATF as "cowardly"


I'll go with the ATF rather some guy, who claims he has thirty years of prosecution experience, off the internet.
 
Rich2018 said:
Nope automatic fire allows for continuous fire with one trigger pull - as a bump stock allows

This is why the same ATF you once invoked as defining what a bump stock is, banned them in accordance with the DOJ as they're classed as automatic weapons and machine guns.

Upon having this pointed out to you, you immediately branded the ATF as "cowardly"


I'll go with the ATF rather some guy, who claims he has thirty years of prosecution experience, off the internet.
Click to expand...

you already have CONTRADICTED yourself by admitting bump fire is not automatic fire and then claiming it is.
 
TurtleDude said:
you already have CONTRADICTED yourself by admitting bump fire is not automatic fire and then claiming it is.
Click to expand...

No I don't think I did.

A bump stock allows for automatic fire from a semi-automatic gun.

This is why the agency (ATF) who actually quoted to support you of classification, actually bans the bump stock as it and the DOJ classify them as automatic weapons and machine guns.
 
Rich2018 said:
No I don't think I did.

A bump stock allows for automatic fire from a semi-automatic gun.

This is why the agency (ATF) who actually quoted to support you of classification, actually bans the bump stock as it and the DOJ classify them as automatic weapons and machine guns.
Click to expand...

wrong again-a bump stock allows a semi auto to shoot at faster rates than it normally would. The ATF had to pretend it is an automatic under the law to comply with political pressure to ban the things
 
TurtleDude said:
wrong again-a bump stock allows a semi auto to shoot at faster rates than it normally would. The ATF had to pretend it is an automatic under the law to comply with political pressure to ban the things
Click to expand...

No a bump stock allows automatic fire from a semi-automatic weapon.

Hence the classification of the ATF and DOJ

(the same ATF you invoked Btw)
 
Rich2018 said:
No a bump stock allows automatic fire from a semi-automatic weapon.

Hence the classification of the ATF and DOJ

(the same ATF you invoked Btw)
Click to expand...

you still continue to lie.
 
Rich2018 said:
Nope, you still refuse to accept the FT and DOJ classification, even though you once quoted their definition.
Click to expand...

Sorry, bump stocks don't turn semi autos into automatics.
 
Rich2018 said:
No they don't. They do however allow for automatic fire as classified by the ATF and DOJ.
Click to expand...

I don't care-it is still not automatic fire because the trigger on the firearm has to reset each shot. I cannot help it if you are ignorant about how firearms work. Real automatic weapons involve ONE MOVEMENT OF THE TRIGGER firing MORE THAN ONE SHOT. the bump fire still requires the trigger to reset after each shot.
 
Rich2018 said:
But the shooter gets continuous fire from one trigger pull.
Click to expand...

does not matter, the gun is still not an automatic because the trigger has to reset after each pull.
 
TurtleDude said:
does not matter, the gun is still not an automatic because the trigger has to reset after each pull.
Click to expand...

The gun is not automatic, but the fire is.

It doesn't matter what is happening internally

Autonomic fire is continuous fire from one trigger pull.


So bump stocks are classified as "automatic" and "machine guns" by the ATF & DOJ and consequently banned.


I'll go with the ATF's classification and not yours.
 
Rich2018 said:
The gun is not automatic, but the fire is.

It doesn't matter what is happening internally

Autonomic fire is continuous fire from one trigger pull.


So bump stocks are classified as "automatic" and "machine guns" by the ATF & DOJ and consequently banned.


I'll go with the ATF's classification and not yours.
Click to expand...

they changed their views due to political pressure. they are cowardly. and you again are unable to understand that rate of fire is not the same as automatic fire
 
TurtleDude said:
they changed their views due to political pressure. they are cowardly...
Click to expand...

But they're the US official word on guns.

And you once tried to invoke their classification....until I pointed out to you that their official classification supported me and not you.
When you suddenly ceased invoking their definition as am "argument settler" and branded them "cowardly".
 
Rich2018 said:
But they're the US official word on guns.

And you once tried to invoke their classification....until I pointed out to you that their official classification supported me and not you.
When you suddenly ceased invoking their definition as am "argument settler" and branded them "cowardly".
Click to expand...

before political pressure arose-they honestly declared those items did not make semi autos into illegal full autos. which definition do you think was more honest?
 
TurtleDude said:
before political pressure arose-they honestly declared those items did not make semi autos into illegal full autos. which definition do you think was more honest?
Click to expand...

The more recent one.

This a DOJ headed by one of Trump's men...Mr 2nd amendment guy.
 
Rich2018 said:
The more recent one.

This a DOJ headed by one of Trump's men...Mr 2nd amendment guy.
Click to expand...

I think Trump was wrong on this issue
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom