Slide Fire AR15
Not to be a debby-downer but this is exactly the stuff we DON'T need right now. I'm a huge advocate of guns, both for hunting and sport shooting and I have gone through the hurdles to legally purchase and own full-auto weapons. Not semi-auto weapons but rather the ones that come straight from the factory with the option to hold the trigger and empty the magazine. That being said, this piece, while amazing in what appears a very simplistic design, is something that unless it carries the EXACT restrictions a full-auto weapon does, should not be legal to sell, purchase or posses.
Sorry if you some of you feel I'm giving up my 2nd amendment on this. I am not. I just strongly feel something like is nothing but a circumvention of the laws relating to the possession of a full-auto weapon. Weapons like this might not be used in as many crimes as pistols, or for that matter, knives or blunt bludgeoning objects, but they serve very little purpose in the civilian sector and if you want to legally poses one, you better be ready to give up the good on your past without hesitation. The other side of this is if you haven't followed the set-forth procedures and haven't gone through the correct channels to legally posses them and you still do and are caught, it's a felony with very stiff punishments.
There's a fine line that no one wants to cross when it comes to guns and an AR-15 is not an assault weapon but when you put something like this on it, it becomes one. I think the assault weapons ban is not a bad thing, I do however think the definition of an assault weapon or assault-style weapon is completely incorrect. We don't need more laws, we need stronger enforcement of the ones we already do and we need signification stiffer penalties for those that don't abide by them. Regardless, this won't keep the crazies from doing what has happened in the schools, theaters, workplaces, etc, but it will be a detriment to those that still value their own life even if they don't value someone else's.
Sorry if you some of you feel I'm giving up my 2nd amendment on this. I am not. I just strongly feel something like is nothing but a circumvention of the laws relating to the possession of a full-auto weapon. Weapons like this might not be used in as many crimes as pistols, or for that matter, knives or blunt bludgeoning objects, but they serve very little purpose in the civilian sector and if you want to legally poses one, you better be ready to give up the good on your past without hesitation. The other side of this is if you haven't followed the set-forth procedures and haven't gone through the correct channels to legally posses them and you still do and are caught, it's a felony with very stiff punishments.
There's a fine line that no one wants to cross when it comes to guns and an AR-15 is not an assault weapon but when you put something like this on it, it becomes one. I think the assault weapons ban is not a bad thing, I do however think the definition of an assault weapon or assault-style weapon is completely incorrect. We don't need more laws, we need stronger enforcement of the ones we already do and we need signification stiffer penalties for those that don't abide by them. Regardless, this won't keep the crazies from doing what has happened in the schools, theaters, workplaces, etc, but it will be a detriment to those that still value their own life even if they don't value someone else's.
So you are saying you should have full automatic weapons but we shouldn't? Sounds familiar dude.
This does not make the AR15 an automatic weapon. It is still semi-auto just fires really f-ing fast.
This does not make the AR15 an automatic weapon. It is still semi-auto just fires really f-ing fast.
Last edited by tunaglove; Jan 18, 2013 at 10:54 AM.
(1) Immigration
And about this not making it full-auto, while there is not much difference in the number of rounds fired between pulling a trigger repeatedly in very quick succession on a semi-auto vs holding the trigger on a full-auto, the fact is that you're removing the need to release the trigger for the next round to be chambered and fired. How does that not make this full-auto?
Do some research into MN law, you can legally purchase and posses a full auto in your state... I used to live there. You just need to go through the right steps to do it. It's like driving a car, you get a license to do that right? And a tractor-trailer, you have to get licensed for that too, correct? Driving either are against the law if you haven't taken the proper steps to become licensed.
And about this not making it full-auto, while there is not much difference in the number of rounds fired between pulling a trigger repeatedly in very quick succession on a semi-auto vs holding the trigger on a full-auto, the fact is that you're removing the need to release the trigger for the next round to be chambered and fired. How does that not make this full-auto?
And about this not making it full-auto, while there is not much difference in the number of rounds fired between pulling a trigger repeatedly in very quick succession on a semi-auto vs holding the trigger on a full-auto, the fact is that you're removing the need to release the trigger for the next round to be chambered and fired. How does that not make this full-auto?
Not to be a debby-downer but this is exactly the stuff we DON'T need right now. I'm a huge advocate of guns, both for hunting and sport shooting and I have gone through the hurdles to legally purchase and own full-auto weapons. Not semi-auto weapons but rather the ones that come straight from the factory with the option to hold the trigger and empty the magazine. That being said, this piece, while amazing in what appears a very simplistic design, is something that unless it carries the EXACT restrictions a full-auto weapon does, should not be legal to sell, purchase or posses.
Sorry if you some of you feel I'm giving up my 2nd amendment on this. I am not. I just strongly feel something like is nothing but a circumvention of the laws relating to the possession of a full-auto weapon. Weapons like this might not be used in as many crimes as pistols, or for that matter, knives or blunt bludgeoning objects, but they serve very little purpose in the civilian sector and if you want to legally poses one, you better be ready to give up the good on your past without hesitation. The other side of this is if you haven't followed the set-forth procedures and haven't gone through the correct channels to legally posses them and you still do and are caught, it's a felony with very stiff punishments.
There's a fine line that no one wants to cross when it comes to guns and an AR-15 is not an assault weapon but when you put something like this on it, it becomes one. I think the assault weapons ban is not a bad thing, I do however think the definition of an assault weapon or assault-style weapon is completely incorrect. We don't need more laws, we need stronger enforcement of the ones we already do and we need signification stiffer penalties for those that don't abide by them. Regardless, this won't keep the crazies from doing what has happened in the schools, theaters, workplaces, etc, but it will be a detriment to those that still value their own life even if they don't value someone else's.
Sorry if you some of you feel I'm giving up my 2nd amendment on this. I am not. I just strongly feel something like is nothing but a circumvention of the laws relating to the possession of a full-auto weapon. Weapons like this might not be used in as many crimes as pistols, or for that matter, knives or blunt bludgeoning objects, but they serve very little purpose in the civilian sector and if you want to legally poses one, you better be ready to give up the good on your past without hesitation. The other side of this is if you haven't followed the set-forth procedures and haven't gone through the correct channels to legally posses them and you still do and are caught, it's a felony with very stiff punishments.
There's a fine line that no one wants to cross when it comes to guns and an AR-15 is not an assault weapon but when you put something like this on it, it becomes one. I think the assault weapons ban is not a bad thing, I do however think the definition of an assault weapon or assault-style weapon is completely incorrect. We don't need more laws, we need stronger enforcement of the ones we already do and we need signification stiffer penalties for those that don't abide by them. Regardless, this won't keep the crazies from doing what has happened in the schools, theaters, workplaces, etc, but it will be a detriment to those that still value their own life even if they don't value someone else's.
( Tunaglove) Check it out. Fully legal quasi automatic. Me want......
One could say the same for the second statement here. It is or it isn't.
Each round requires a decisive muscular movement to fire rather than hold the trigger down and have a spring or other mechanical piece fire the round. It is semi-auto and fully legal, just fast. In one sentence you say you owned full auto guns then the next you say assault rifle bans are ok. Once again I ask you why you should have them and not me?

My take on an assault weapons ban is that you clearly define what really is an assault weapon. Assault-type weapons or weapons that displays visual similarities to assault weapons are NOT assault weapons and are not part of that. That being said, a full-auto weapon should not be available for purchase by any individual that at that immediate moment expresses a want for such weapon. If you want to go through the extensive background check and wait the period of time it takes for them to identify you as someone that isn't buying this on a whim or with malice intent, and you've proven that you're not a liability if given the permit to posses and use sch weapon, then I think you have every right to go out and buy one, purchase ammunition for it and go out and shoot it in a lawful manner. If you go outside the bounds of this, you forfeit that.
Once again I ask you, why do you feel you should be any different than me and be able buy a full-auto weapon, use a device like this, etc, without going through all the prescribed requirements to do so legally that I did? I don't think the government should be able to tell you or I that we cannot own any weapon but I think there should be restrictions on obtaining them. You can't make it too easy and at the same time impossible. You just need to make sure that the steps taken by both you and the government are pertaining to the best interest of the public. This means that if you have never done anything to harm anyone, haven't committed a felony, and have been deemed psychologically fit to posses a weapon, nothing should further impede that. I think that should blanket every firearm as well. If you want to buy a shotgun, you get a permit for a shotgun, if you want to get a permit full-auto, you get a permit for that. If you've never owned a gun prior, you don't just go out and get a full-auto permit, just the same as you don't start driving at age 16 and get a CDL the same day. I don't want to go off as sounding Orwellian but I think every firearm should be registered to a person the same that a vehicle is. Your car is titled and you must have a license to operate said car. If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear.
Last edited by rcompart; Jan 18, 2013 at 02:55 PM.
Actually, this thing only requires you to keep your finger in a stationary position relative to the buttstock. The receiver is pushed forward by the inertia of the weapon resulting in the trigger moving forward to meet your finger and while you may argue the use of your forearm is causing this, it is truly not because of any direct control of the person operating it. The decisive muscular movement you're talking about is to stop the continuation of the cycle rather than repeat it as it would in a semi-auto weapon. I'm sorry but it is absurd if you think that anyone at will should just be able to posses one of these.
My take on an assault weapons ban is that you clearly define what really is an assault weapon. Assault-type weapons or weapons that displays visual similarities to assault weapons are NOT assault weapons and are not part of that. That being said, a full-auto weapon should not be available for purchase by any individual that at that immediate moment expresses a need for such weapon. If you want to go through the extensive background check and wait the period of time it takes for them to identify you as someone that isn't buying this on a whim or with malice intent, and you've proven that you're not a liability if given the permit to posses and use sch weapon, then I think you have every right to go out and buy one, purchase ammunition for it and go out and shoot it in a lawful manner. If you go outside the bounds of this, you forfeit that.
Once again I ask you, why do you feel you should be any different than me and be able buy a full-auto weapon, use a device like this, etc, without going through all the prescribed requirements to do so legally that I did? I don't think the government should be able to tell you or I that we cannot own any weapon but I think there should be restrictions on obtaining them. You can't make it too easy and at the same time impossible. You just need to make sure that the steps taken by both you and the government are pertaining to the best interest of the public. This means that if you have never done anything to harm anyone, haven't committed a felony, and have been deemed psychologically fit to posses a weapon, nothing should further impede that. I think that should blanket every firearm as well. If you want to buy a shotgun, you get a permit for a shotgun, if you want to get a permit full-auto, you get a permit for that. If you've never owned a gun prior, you don't just go out and get a full-auto permit, just the same as you don't start driving at age 16 and get a CDL the same day. I don't want to go off as sounding Orwellian but I think every firearm should be registered to a person the same that a vehicle is. Your car is titled and you must have a license to operate said car. If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear.
My take on an assault weapons ban is that you clearly define what really is an assault weapon. Assault-type weapons or weapons that displays visual similarities to assault weapons are NOT assault weapons and are not part of that. That being said, a full-auto weapon should not be available for purchase by any individual that at that immediate moment expresses a need for such weapon. If you want to go through the extensive background check and wait the period of time it takes for them to identify you as someone that isn't buying this on a whim or with malice intent, and you've proven that you're not a liability if given the permit to posses and use sch weapon, then I think you have every right to go out and buy one, purchase ammunition for it and go out and shoot it in a lawful manner. If you go outside the bounds of this, you forfeit that.
Once again I ask you, why do you feel you should be any different than me and be able buy a full-auto weapon, use a device like this, etc, without going through all the prescribed requirements to do so legally that I did? I don't think the government should be able to tell you or I that we cannot own any weapon but I think there should be restrictions on obtaining them. You can't make it too easy and at the same time impossible. You just need to make sure that the steps taken by both you and the government are pertaining to the best interest of the public. This means that if you have never done anything to harm anyone, haven't committed a felony, and have been deemed psychologically fit to posses a weapon, nothing should further impede that. I think that should blanket every firearm as well. If you want to buy a shotgun, you get a permit for a shotgun, if you want to get a permit full-auto, you get a permit for that. If you've never owned a gun prior, you don't just go out and get a full-auto permit, just the same as you don't start driving at age 16 and get a CDL the same day. I don't want to go off as sounding Orwellian but I think every firearm should be registered to a person the same that a vehicle is. Your car is titled and you must have a license to operate said car. If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear.
( Tunaglove) Check it out. Fully legal quasi automatic. Me want......
Incredible Bump Fire! - YouTube
One could say the same for the second statement here. It is or it isn't.
Incredible Bump Fire! - YouTube
One could say the same for the second statement here. It is or it isn't.
That being said, a full-auto weapon should not be available for purchase by any individual that at that immediate moment expresses a want for such weapon. If you want to go through the extensive background check and wait the period of time it takes for them to identify you as someone that isn't buying this on a whim or with malice intent, and you've proven that you're not a liability if given the permit to posses and use sch weapon, then I think you have every right to go out and buy one, purchase ammunition for it and go out and shoot it in a lawful manner. If you go outside the bounds of this, you forfeit that.
Once again I ask you, why do you feel you should be any different than me and be able buy a full-auto weapon, use a device like this, etc, without going through all the prescribed requirements to do so legally that I did? I don't think the government should be able to tell you or I that we cannot own any weapon but I think there should be restrictions on obtaining them. You can't make it too easy and at the same time impossible. You just need to make sure that the steps taken by both you and the government are pertaining to the best interest of the public. This means that if you have never done anything to harm anyone, haven't committed a felony, and have been deemed psychologically fit to posses a weapon, nothing should further impede that. I think that should blanket every firearm as well. If you want to buy a shotgun, you get a permit for a shotgun, if you want to get a permit full-auto, you get a permit for that. If you've never owned a gun prior, you don't just go out and get a full-auto permit, just the same as you don't start driving at age 16 and get a CDL the same day. I don't want to go off as sounding Orwellian but I think every firearm should be registered to a person the same that a vehicle is. Your car is titled and you must have a license to operate said car. If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear.
Lol. I agree with most of what you are saying. Background checks and waiting periods are fine with me. The ATF also agrees that a slide fire equipped AR15 is a semi-auto gun.You have to push forward on the grip for each round. I'll let you know how well it works because I'm going to shoot one this weekend!!!
My whole point is this thing is nothing more than a way around the law. I don't want people to be prohibited from legally being able to purchase full-autos, I just want people to go about their ownership in a law abiding manner and don't want people that aren't or shouldn't have access to any weapon, especially a full-auto, from something like this that gets them very close. If that was the case, bump-fire devices like this unequivocally would be illegal.
Well enjoy it while it lasts. This thing is a novelty and a great way to waste ammo but the second something like this gets used in the commission of a felony, the ATF will reclassify it and it will be illegal to own. Sorry but that is a fact and I understand these arguements very well. The anderson accelerator is what got me wanting in on the full-auto club. For those that don't know what that was, it was this thing with a spring in it and initially the ATF said those were OK too.
My whole point is this thing is nothing more than a way around the law. I don't want people to be prohibited from legally being able to purchase full-autos, I just want people to go about their ownership in a law abiding manner and don't want people that aren't or shouldn't have access to any weapon, especially a full-auto, from something like this that gets them very close. If that was the case, bump-fire devices like this unequivocally would be illegal.
My whole point is this thing is nothing more than a way around the law. I don't want people to be prohibited from legally being able to purchase full-autos, I just want people to go about their ownership in a law abiding manner and don't want people that aren't or shouldn't have access to any weapon, especially a full-auto, from something like this that gets them very close. If that was the case, bump-fire devices like this unequivocally would be illegal.
Yes it is a novelty just like 400 HP sports cars. When it becomes illegal I will take it off and throw it in the garbage. I just want to have fun shooting up north. No biggie.
Rudy, we must be related. I've told you this before.
I believe in the right of ownership for anyone that can jump through the hoops presented. Home protection is a damned lame excuse for owning one, though. C'mon-it's just fun as all get out. I don't own any-never felt the need. Have had friends all my life with them, though. I still like firing the BAR. If one is stout enough. Tina likes it too. Bruising and all.
This is all moot. No matter what the guv'mint decides to do-the criminals will still keep what they have and do everything they can to procure more. High-cap mags, full-auto weapons, newly restricted handguns, whatever.
Whatever the guv'mint does will only affect those who decide to follow the new rules.
Mental capacity checks? OK.
Background checks for any purchase? Wellllll...OK. Though, I've known MANY people over the years "...I wouldn't trust with a potato gun." I think Canada has the right idea here-mandatory safety training. But it would be a nightmare running that in the USA.
Registration for the firearms I already have? Not OK. I will draw the line there.
Restricting what video games and movies can show? Puleeease. How about better parenting? My 330 lb. son is interested in collecting and enjoyment firing new handguns. I have absolutely no problem with that. He is now an adult. Kinda'.
But, we had a long discussion about his temper and how that could cause him some real trouble if he goes over the line. I'm (we) are the kind of parents that will always guide our children through new waters. He understood, and, more importantly, agreed that the responsibilities of firearm ownership are little known and less recognized.
Sorry.
I believe in the right of ownership for anyone that can jump through the hoops presented. Home protection is a damned lame excuse for owning one, though. C'mon-it's just fun as all get out. I don't own any-never felt the need. Have had friends all my life with them, though. I still like firing the BAR. If one is stout enough. Tina likes it too. Bruising and all.
This is all moot. No matter what the guv'mint decides to do-the criminals will still keep what they have and do everything they can to procure more. High-cap mags, full-auto weapons, newly restricted handguns, whatever.
Whatever the guv'mint does will only affect those who decide to follow the new rules.
Mental capacity checks? OK.
Background checks for any purchase? Wellllll...OK. Though, I've known MANY people over the years "...I wouldn't trust with a potato gun." I think Canada has the right idea here-mandatory safety training. But it would be a nightmare running that in the USA.
Registration for the firearms I already have? Not OK. I will draw the line there.
Restricting what video games and movies can show? Puleeease. How about better parenting? My 330 lb. son is interested in collecting and enjoyment firing new handguns. I have absolutely no problem with that. He is now an adult. Kinda'.
But, we had a long discussion about his temper and how that could cause him some real trouble if he goes over the line. I'm (we) are the kind of parents that will always guide our children through new waters. He understood, and, more importantly, agreed that the responsibilities of firearm ownership are little known and less recognized.
Sorry.
Last edited by maxcichon; Jan 19, 2013 at 11:49 AM.


