Outcome of Vegas shooting?

[Wildcat Diva]

I don't see how they can legislate how you shoot a gun. I don't need a device to achieve bumpfire.
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLjgs17C2oGF0QEai5BxCpb-6ximy2xPUk

And I wonder... if we say that you can just use your belt loop to bump fire, if then they will say fine, let's ban guns altogether. You know they will try. They are already saying that this isn't going to cut it, banning bump fire stocks.

I edited my post to add the word "guns" to clarify better what I meant.

 

[Lunyfringe]

And I wonder... if we say that you can just use your belt loop to bump fire, if then they will say fine, let's ban altogether. You know they will try. They are already saying that this isn't going to cut it, banning bump fire stocks.

Then don't do it... it's a fallacy to go after any device as being what did this... the narrative is that a 64 year old Democrat with a gambling problem did it...

prohibit all Democrats from buying firearms, declare the Democrat party to be a terrorist organization for sending one of their own to commit a terror act in order to further the Democrat political agenda.

 

[Wildcat Diva]

Then don't do it... it's a fallacy to go after any device as being what did this... the narrative is that a 64 year old Democrat with a gambling problem did it...

prohibit all Democrats from buying firearms, declare the Democrat party to be a terrorist organization for sending one of their own to commit a terror act in order to further the Democrat political agenda.

When you say "don't do it", which part of my post do you mean? I'm not going to suggest banning anything but that is what I expect will be said and is being said.

Do you mean 'don't say the belt loop part' to not give them any ideas to then try for the next "logical" (in their mind, ha) conclusion?

(I edited my post you quoted to add the word 'guns' to the ban guns altogether part, to better explain my meaning, in case I confused anybody with my intended meaning).

 

[Lunyfringe]

I meant conceed to banning anything, because banning anyTHING is a fallacy.. it was a monster who did this, not a THING. "ProgreSSives" seem to always focus on some inanimate object as the fault... as if Monsters like him cannot find any other way to kill... or because the effort is NOT about saving lives at all, but about disarming and controlling the public.

 

[Younggun]

Most any progressive agenda comes down to control. Whether you are discussing feminism or guns. First they try to comvince you to think like them, and then try to force you.

 

[Wildcat Diva]

I meant conceed to banning anything, because banning anyTHING is a fallacy.. it was a monster who did this, not a THING. "ProgreSSives" seem to always focus on some inanimate object as the fault... as if Monsters like him cannot find any other way to kill... or because the effort is NOT about saving lives at all, but about disarming and controlling the public.

I'm pretty sure my opinions on the topic won't matter even if I express them. So me "conceding" or not won't mean a thing as far as a law passing in the house or senate. My opinion won't be the deciding factor.

 

[easy rider]

I'm pretty sure my opinions on the topic won't matter even if I express them. So me "conceding" or not won't mean a thing as far as a law passing in the house or senate. My opinion won't be the deciding factor.

That sounds very much the reasons many give for not voting.

 

[Wildcat Diva]

Ok. Well explain to me how I can "not concede" to something being banned, other than to give my opinion. Please tell me how.

 

[easy rider]

Ok. Well explain to me how I can "not concede" to something being banned, other than to give my opinion. Please tell me how.

Writing Reps. make it heard.

 

[Wildcat Diva]

That's fine... but after that... how can I "not concede"?

I already mentioned expressing my opinion. So... once that doesn't matter... what then?

 

[easy rider]

That's fine... but after that... how can I "not concede"?

I already mentioned expressing my opinion. So... once that doesn't matter... what then?

I'm not sure I understand your question I guess. If it becomes law then other than trying to get it repealed, there is not much you can do.

 

[Lunyfringe]

That's fine... but after that... how can I "not concede"?

I already mentioned expressing my opinion. So... once that doesn't matter... what then?

It's frustrating... only recourse after that is to recall or impeach those that don't listen to their constituents... ask John Morse, who was the CO state senate majority leader when they forced the bullshit there in 2013... he was recalled along with 3 others, for the first time in the history of Colorado.

The BS laws still stand, but the outrage from those liberal bastards when they were removed was a little bit of justice.

Ultimately, it was one of the reasons I left Colorado... our voices were ignored on purpose... Mr. Morse called gun owners "a sickness on our souls", and TOLD his peers to ignore us... I hope he's flipping burgers.

 

[Wildcat Diva]

So for me to "not concede" as was suggested upthread, is really impossible. Unless I have a banned product and decided to keep it unlawfully. Which I do not.

Whether of not I personally agree or express it, there is not much I can do except express my opinion and also vote. Which I do not mind doing. Still, "not conceding" is not within my power, so it was a moot suggestion (upthread).

 

[Wildcat Diva]

Also, YouTube is removing videos already.

This is a video I watched earlier today, and now it's gone.

 

[Wildcat Diva]

I have now transcribed the instructions on another such video about bumpfiring, just to be a rebellious bitch...

in case that info should benefit me later on, to show up those who want to censor the public.

 

[Lunyfringe]

Unless I have a banned product and decided to keep it unlawfully. Which I do not.

There was a bunch of civil disobedience in CO after the mag ban... a bunch of people in front of the capital building after mag ban went into effect handing 30 round mags down a line of people... against the letter of the law, but harmless.

LE refused to prosecute

 

[Younggun]

How to bump fire:

Hook thumb of foreign hand in belt loop with trigger finger firm and grip loosely around pistol grip.

Use nonfiring hand to pull rifle forward so that trigger finger presses trigger. Allow firearm to recoil so trigger resets while keeping enough forward pressure with no firing hand to pull rifle forward after recoil and start the cycle again.

 

[easy rider]

Guess I better buy stock in suspenders.

 

[Ranger550]

There was a bunch of civil disobedience in CO after the mag ban... a bunch of people in front of the capital building after mag ban went into effect handing 30 round mags down a line of people... against the letter of the law, but harmless.

LE refused to prosecute

Just be glad you live in Texas. Bump-fire stocks are already banned here in California, along with many other add-on features, like flash suppressors and
pistol grips on long guns.

Ten round mag limits on every firearm too. Oh yeah, next year we have to pay the CA DOJ firearms division more $$$ to have a permit to buy ammo, and online sales of ammo must go through an FFL. Hopefully that will make y'all feel better in TX.

 

[easy rider]

I'm sorry, but it does. The sad thing is that it shouldn't be like that anywhere in the U.S.A., but then look who were the first politicians to come out with bills. Not for California since it's already banned, but politicians wanting to force other states that they don't represent to ban.