Was this really a good idea at this time

Status
Not open for further replies.
Cool! :)

I have been watching the gun community's reception of all these "simulated full auto" devices and it's been sort of funny.

We all laugh at the old idea of the "Fudd" gun owner who thinks guns are just for bustin' bunnies and ducks and slaying that one deer a year, and throws handgunners or machine-gun owners, or concealed carry types to the wolves come election time. We THINK we're more enlightened than that.

But when something new comes out that pushes the boundaries of what we're used to, we're still a deeply conservative bunch. "Great for wastin' ammo!" "Turns money into noise!" "Not accurate, so that's stupid!" "Immature..." "Bunch of idiots blastin' up ammo by the pallet..." And so on.

It has taken several years for even maybe a third of the gun community to start to give these things a second look and treat them with any seriousness, instead of knee-jerk disdain.



And really, we understand the 2nd Amendment to be a deeply revolutionary idea -- that, as Tench Coxe said, "Their swords and every terrible implement of the soldier are the birthright of Americans." But when someone comes up with a way to put "military style" automatic weapons (albeit "simulated" through a mechanical work-around) back in the hands of the American civilian, "we" (the gunny community) acts like this is the silliest thing we ever heard of and we aught to ban these chuckleheads from our ranges and laugh them out of our midst.
 
*** Continuing:

We went through this at my own shooting club, where I sit on the Board. In working up a major re-write of our range rules, the subject of bumpfire stocks came up and the Board and rules committees were pretty close to rejecting them entirely for use on our ranges.

This is a club that hosts USPSA and IDPA matches, SASS, and was the home of one of the most innovative and practical self-defense study groups in the nation for decades. No bunch of "Fudds" here! But we were ready to ban these new innovations which we only even knew by their reputation.

It took our new club president (who many here would recognize from his published writings and his long series of YouTube videos on the history and use of very traditional firearms dating back to the French and Indian wars) to turn that around. After several months of discussion, he came to the Board and said he'd bought one of these stocks and tried it at his personal range, and he found it to be both perfectly controllable, as accurate as one might hope for, and also SAFER (in some ways) than full-auto fire!

With his endorsement of these as not being the big, dumb, unsafe, scary boogeyman most had expected them to be, we had a sea change in opinion and the Board voted to allow them under the same rules that we allow full-auto firearms.

Just like with "assault rifles" in the '80s, it takes people actually getting some experience with an item and being willing to stand up to their peers and say, "This is valid. This can be safely used. There is a purpose to this. We should support it and defend those who would use it."
 
Excellent post Sam.

A lot of you saying this is a dangerous trigger as best I can tell, are working under the assumption that a new shooter picks up his AR15 for the first time, installs a $500 trigger, and goes to the echo position for his first shot... While not impossible, I see that as highly unlikely. This trigger is marketed to folks who would like to fire a rifle FA once or twice, but can't afford to spend over $20,000 plus stamp on a sear.
 
"Personally, I think it is dangerous as heck, but it appears to be legal."
So much freedom, it's sickening. Despite the valiant efforts of the ATF, no less.

"Great for entertainment but dangerous & stupid for real."
Most guns are largely there for entertainment value, thank God, and while all are hazardous they are rarely dangerous; this will be no different ('it fires with every trigger pull? Why, summon'll shoot their Papa after thinking the gun is safe when they pull the trigger a second time!')

"All it does is simulate full auto in a legal manner, and it won't get you more accurate shooting [than a bump-stock? Really? :scrutiny:] or garner any points for getting more hits."

"I don't understand the market for this."
Neither do lots of folks understand the market for assault weapons, nor Beanie Babies. There's even a market for guns that have been destroyed with cutting torches, believe it or not :eek:

"doubling is something to avoid, not a design feature" --uh, except when its :rolleyes:. Also, it's largely the ATF that is the reason we seek to avoid doubling; they have thus far approved of these trigger designs.

Seriously. So much hand-wringing, worry-warting, and cringing going on; it's pathetic. I thought folks understood the perils of Fudd-dom, and looking down upon others' firearms choices with an eye toward their potential peril. The only 'safety' issue going here is the fact that the ATF has single-handedly ordered the removal of safety sears in all firearms, which could otherwise mitigate the potential hazards of hammer-follow on certain designs.

You know what's also "a bad idea at this time?" FN's (the company formerly known as FNH) new semi-auto beltfed M249S. Expensive, 'stupid,' 'impractical,' and extraordinarily scary to the anti-gunners, no doubt. It can probably shoot through schools and blow up a submarine, all before breakfast. And yet it is an undeniable victory for civilian shooters in America that we can convince (capitalist for 'coerce') a European conglomerate to divert a tiny portion of their heretofore exclusively military production, despite all the bad optics or 'potential hazards' or whatever other excuse Fudds can muster to deny us access to whatever firearms technology we see as best for the task before us. Be it defending our self, the home, the community, hunting, competition, or just having fun & blowing off steam.

TCB
 
"A lot of you saying this is a dangerous trigger as best I can tell, are working under the assumption that a new shooter picks up his AR15 for the first time, installs a $500 trigger, and goes to the echo position for his first shot... While not impossible, I see that as highly unlikely. This trigger is marketed to folks who would like to fire a rifle FA once or twice, but can't afford to spend over $20,000 plus stamp on a sear."
Someone like that would be just as likely to put a hole in their TV the night before, playing with it. Or to send a round over the berm from flinching or as a reflexive second shot.

TCB
 
So if you want to shoot fast but don't pony up for a RDIAS your likely to shoot your tv? I dunno, whatever works for you I guess.
 
if it's like the Franklin, bump firing it on accident, in the binary mode, is unlikely.

If they were no more $$$ than a Geiselle 3 gun trigger, I'd order one. For the novelty at least. Just to upset the libbys maybe.
 
So if you want to shoot fast but don't pony up for a RDIAS your likely to shoot your tv? I dunno, whatever works for you I guess.
No, if you're the type to go loud with no prior training or experience to burn as much ammo as fast as possible after dropping a mint on your first gun...maybe.

TCB
 
No, if you're the type to go loud with no prior training or experience to burn as much ammo as fast as possible after dropping a mint on your first gun...maybe.

TCB
Going off this assumption there are a lot of things new shooters shouldn't touch, and kind of speaks to the anti-gunner assumption that there should be some kind of training before ever touching any gun. Sure a casual shooter with little experience could make a mistake, the same as he might with and gun or accessory he isn't familiar with.
 
Well I am cheap by nature so I will probably not purchase one, although for the smile factor alone it would be a fun thing to have in the safe as an option. Then on the other hand if those others that want us to give them all up have a big problem with this trigger I MIGHT find the necessary funds to get one for myself.:evil:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top