AK Rifles banner

1 - 20 of 22 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
121 Posts
Discussion Starter #1 (Edited)
Slidefire stocks and mass shootings...It has to be the worst scenario that I can think of. With the Slidefire's growing popularity, I fear there isn't a question of "Will it ever happen?".

I bet there will be an executive order or legislation presented to ban them after its first use in a mass shooting. (If I could only find someone to take that bet.)
IMO, If our representatives were to vote on a Slidefire ban bill that didn't include banning other things within, it would pass .

What are your thoughts and what do you foresee the government doing afterwards? Do you think they would try and ban the "assault rifle" again??
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
977 Posts
I'd actually be happy if they could see their way to arguing over whether or not the slidefire should be banned. Fighting over the legality of a toy would distract them from banning things that are actually useful for self-defense and/or opposing tyranny.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,103 Posts
I hate those F'n things. All it does is scare the shit out of people who do not understand its a toy to waste ammo at best. All its going to take is one BUBBA to shoot up the trailer park with one. We will get a statement like this. "LOOK they can simply by a single part thru the mail or at a gun show to turn an assault weapon into a full auto machine gun"


Have you ever wondered why they even said ok on this and the Saiga 12 gauge drum anyway?

Give a cowboy enough rope he will hang himself. Do you think they care if a few people die to get there way in the end?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,218 Posts
Any further encroachment to the 2A is a detriment to the overall cause. Does not matter if people don't like it or it looks like a toy. You all are already coming up with excuses why it's inevitable and stating that you don't care. Kinda like the fudds willing to compromise on so-called assault rifles because it did not fit their lifestyle. I may end up not wanting one but I reserve that right to get on anytime I damn well please.

Sorry for the rant but I'm just fed up hearing law-abiding gun owners already accepting defeat before it even gets started.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
977 Posts
Any further encroachment to the 2A is a detriment to the overall cause. Does not matter if people don't like it or it looks like a toy. You all are already coming up with excuses why it's inevitable and stating that you don't care. Kinda like the fudds willing to compromise on so-called assault rifles because it did not fit their lifestyle. I may end up not wanting one but I reserve that right to get on anytime I damn well please.

Sorry for the rant but I'm just fed up hearing law-abiding gun owners already accepting defeat before it even gets started.
I agree with you in principle, but you've gotta weigh the amount of good the device does you versus the odds that it will be used as an excuse to screw over all gun owners. I don't like it because:

-It makes your gun less accurate
-It would be amazingly irresponsible to use for self-defense unless the zombie apocalypse happens or the Chinese invade.
-It doesn't make anyone a better marksman
-It doesn't encourage proper gun safety or trigger discipline
-It turns semi-auto AKs and ARs into something resembling the super evil deadly machineguns that liberals always want to pretend they are
-It makes it way easier for some mall ninja who already isn't safety conscious to screw up and kill someone (or several someones).

Or, to put it simply: It doesn't help you do anything besides dick around and turn money into noise, but it could easily screw us out of the ability to own guns. That's the tradeoff in reality. The minute someone gets killed with one there will be a huge shitstorm and we will not be better off for it. If it made my gun more accurate, made it easier to defend yourself or did anything positive, I'd be all for it, but I just don't see it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,935 Posts
I agree with you in principle, but you've gotta weigh the amount of good the device does you versus the odds that it will be used as an excuse to screw over all gun owners. I don't like it because:
-It makes your gun less accurate
-It would be amazingly irresponsible to use for self-defense unless the zombie apocalypse happens or the Chinese invade.
-It doesn't make anyone a better marksman
-It doesn't encourage proper gun safety or trigger discipline
-It turns semi-auto AKs and ARs into something resembling the super evil deadly machineguns that liberals always want to pretend they are
-It makes it way easier for some mall ninja who already isn't safety conscious to screw up and kill someone (or several someones).
Or, to put it simply: It doesn't help you do anything besides dick around and turn money into noise, but it could easily screw us out of the ability to own guns. That's the tradeoff in reality. The minute someone gets killed with one there will be a huge shitstorm and we will not be better off for it. If it made my gun more accurate, made it easier to defend yourself or did anything positive, I'd be all for it, but I just don't see it.
That's some interesting logic on the matter.
The way I see it, if it wasn't the concept of a sliding stock, it would just be some other excuse to infringe on liberty (and once the slidefire is banned, there WILL be a new excuse to infringe even further).
If someone is bent on mass murder, they don't need a sliding stock to do it. You can argue that it makes it easier for some Bubba to shoot up a trailer park, but then you're just paralleling the fascists who feel that way about ALL repeating weapons.
Take a look at this video regarding the recent ban on M1 Garands and tell me if you don't at least start to question the virtue of sacrificing a ammo wasting toy to the hypothetical alter of gun-ban gods.
Pay special attention to his points about the anti-freedom groups relocating the battleground just after the 1 minute mark.
None of the above is meant to imply that I disagree with your points about the function of the device in question, but be careful about giving up even a single inch on ANY front.

As for the Slidefire itself? Yes, I'd say it's only a matter of time, and if you bought one, you better hope you didn't give your information to the dealer via credit/debit information, etc.
Just look at MachineGunEddie's post here:
http://www.theakforum.net/forums/121-ar-15-general-discussion/163416-atf-confiscating-drop-auto-sears.html#post1503616

On a long enough time line, I'd say we're all eventually going to be vulnerable to raids unless we turn the steering wheel on the titantic all the way back the other direction.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,218 Posts
I agree with you in principle, but you've gotta weigh the amount of good the device does you versus the odds that it will be used as an excuse to screw over all gun owners. I don't like it because:

-It makes your gun less accurate
-It would be amazingly irresponsible to use for self-defense unless the zombie apocalypse happens or the Chinese invade.
-It doesn't make anyone a better marksman
-It doesn't encourage proper gun safety or trigger discipline
-It turns semi-auto AKs and ARs into something resembling the super evil deadly machineguns that liberals always want to pretend they are
-It makes it way easier for some mall ninja who already isn't safety conscious to screw up and kill someone (or several someones).

Or, to put it simply: It doesn't help you do anything besides dick around and turn money into noise, but it could easily screw us out of the ability to own guns. That's the tradeoff in reality. The minute someone gets killed with one there will be a huge shitstorm and we will not be better off for it. If it made my gun more accurate, made it easier to defend yourself or did anything positive, I'd be all for it, but I just don't see it.
So you wouldn't want to own a full-auto even if it was legal to do so? What would you have done back in 34 when NFA act was introduced? Would you have opposed it?

Civilians can't own full-auto unless they're made before 1986 and are prohibitively expensive. The slide fire is a cheap workaround that happens to be legal in the eyes of the law, due to technicality. At the end of the day, it's still achieving it's intended purpose. Why would you want to give that up?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,218 Posts
Honestly, dont see any use for them for anything other then a toy.

Been/trained in units that rate M4A1s (full auto) and never fired them in full aut except to waste ammo, or to show us that full aut is a waste.
It has nothing to do with your opinion of it being a toy, or that M4A1 in F/A is a waste of ammo. It has everything to do with having the option to use it when you need it VS. not having that capability at all.

Would you support the MIL fighting in foreign lands to not have this capability in the field?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,181 Posts
It has nothing to do with your opinion of it being a toy, or that M4A1 in F/A is a waste of ammo. It has everything to do with having the option to use it when you need it VS. not having that capability at all.

Would you support the MIL fighting in foreign lands to not have this capability in the field?
Having fired my weapon in combat, I would say yes..I would rather have a nicer trigger.

Belt fed is a different story, but that is their purpose.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,181 Posts
Well, you are not firing in ideal conditions;

Chances are, you slept a couple hours, slept like shit, walked all night/day with allot of weight, and are actually running for your life.....So even semi auto, aimed fire is not as accurate as it was during training...

Not to mention, I can get throw the selector from safe to semi, and get off two or three accurate rounds off just as quick as I can throw it into auto, and shoot three rounds....And the later takes allot more time on the flat range to get right.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,935 Posts
So basically, the full auto function is good for when you want your carbine to impersonate the function of a SAW?
That's kinda how I always looked at it (as a layman).

Still, wouldn't you agree Stottman--not from a technical standpoint, but from a philosophical standpoint, that sliding stocks are something that citizens should be allowed to own if they want them?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,901 Posts
Have you ever wondered why they even said ok on this and the Saiga 12 gauge drum anyway?
The BATFE didn't "approve" the stock or the magazine.
The BATFE determined that the stock wasn't a "machine gun". It did so because it doesn't fit the definition of a "machine gun". Any other decision would have been appealed successfully.
There is no basis upon which the BATFE could have prevented the manufacture, importation or sale of drum magazines which aren't made in prohibited countries. The authority to prohibit the manufacture or importation of magazines expired in September 2004.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,181 Posts
So basically, the full auto function is good for when you want your carbine to impersonate the function of a SAW?
That's kinda how I always looked at it (as a layman).

Still, wouldn't you agree Stottman--not from a technical standpoint, but from a philosophical standpoint, that sliding stocks are something that citizens should be allowed to own if they want them?
Sure, but I would not go so far as to say that they have some sort of use.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
121 Posts
Discussion Starter #18
I agree with you in principle, but you've gotta weigh the amount of good the device does you versus the odds that it will be used as an excuse to screw over all gun owners. I don't like it because:

-It makes your gun less accurate
-It would be amazingly irresponsible to use for self-defense unless the zombie apocalypse happens or the Chinese invade.
-It doesn't make anyone a better marksman
-It doesn't encourage proper gun safety or trigger discipline
-It turns semi-auto AKs and ARs into something resembling the super evil deadly machineguns that liberals always want to pretend they are
-It makes it way easier for some mall ninja who already isn't safety conscious to screw up and kill someone (or several someones).

Or, to put it simply: It doesn't help you do anything besides dick around and turn money into noise, but it could easily screw us out of the ability to own guns. That's the tradeoff in reality. The minute someone gets killed with one there will be a huge shitstorm and we will not be better off for it. If it made my gun more accurate, made it easier to defend yourself or did anything positive, I'd be all for it, but I just don't see it.
The NRA invested a ton of time and money during the resent weapons ban ordeal. Would they even support the Slidefire and do the same P.R. campaign for the concept?
I'm not a member. But I think they wouldn't fight for the slidefire concept for the reasons you and everyone else has posted. There is nothing slidefire does to your rifle that makes it better for responsible gun owners.

What valid argument will the pro-gun politicians even present when the thing comes up for a ban?????
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,935 Posts
What valid argument will the pro-gun politicians even present when the thing comes up for a ban?????
I guess that depends on your definition of "valid".
For me, "shall not be infringed" means only that--that it is no okay to "infringe a little bit when convenient".
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,901 Posts
What valid argument will the pro-gun politicians even present when the thing comes up for a ban?????
Well to start with, defining the object(s) to be regulated and/or prohibited would be difficult.
While some politicians would undoubtedly be satisified with banning any device which permits someone to operate a semiautomatic firearm fast enough to frighten Sally Soccermom and Harry Hipster, such a definition won't pass Constitutional scrutiny.
The line between semiautomatic and automatic is a bright one. The line between semiautomatic and semiautomatic fired "too fast" isn't. Criminal laws with vague definitions won't fly.
 
1 - 20 of 22 Posts
Top