Comments by "Titanium Rain" (@ChucksSEADnDEAD) on "How Las Vegas gunman might have turned a rifle into a rapid-fire weapon" video.

  1. Want to hit people? Paused, aimed, semiautomatic fire. It's what they teach in the military. Automatic seems like the perfect solution because you're spraying the area, but 99.9% of the bullets missed. Imagine he sat there with a thousand rounds but only missed a third of the shots. That's 300 deaths.
    1
  2. It would have been even more practical to take aimed shots and claim a life with each trigger pull, rather than 99.999% of the rounds hitting walls and pavement.
    1
  3. No, 59 dead and 500 injured. How many of them trampled? They specifically said they wouldn't release that information right now.
    1
  4. Tony P but then you're just bastardizing the definition of automatic. Automatic has a definition for a reason - the cycle is completed and resumed without assistance, entering a loop until input is removed or ammunition is expended. By "bumping" a firearm you're assisting the trigger mechanism by making your input intermittent. Look at Gatling guns. You can crank one faster than 350 RPM. The issue is, they use camming action to act like several straight-pull bolt action rifles at once. You're calling for the ban of what essentially is a bolt-action rifle due to a "soft limit" on the rate of fire, when the law should be about "hard limits" that are based on actual definitions. A shotgun shell fits multiple pellets. You can easily get more than 350 projectiles downrange in a minute with a shotgun.
    1
  5. +Warriors Fan93 if you're in a position overseeing a crowd of 20,000 and you don't care about accuracy (59 dead, how many from trampling rather than gunfire?), a belt loop will do just fine.
    1
  6. +Collin Graves haven't you been reading the thread? "This" device you're referring to does absolutely nothing except provide a comfortable shooting position. If you want to simulate automatic fire, the capability belongs to the semi-automatic firearm and it's recoil forces resetting the trigger for you. The most powerful military in the world struggled against goat farmers in Afghanistan. The American terrain is even more appropriate for guerrilla warfare. Not to mention that half of the military would desert on the spot and prefer to fight in the rebellion.
    1
  7. +IVORY123100 RPGs are legal, if registered with the ATF as destructive devices. Grenade launchers are also legal. Automatics can spray bullets? So can shotguns. The stock doesn't make the weapon automatic. it merely provides a comfortable shooting position. People were bump firing for years before they made these stocks.
    1
  8. +Jason Armstrong if that's your argument YouTube wasn't around during the First Amendment's writing so stop using your free speech online. Jesus Christ the Puckle Gun was impratical but was invented like 70 years before the 2ndA. You really think that some of the founding fathers like Benjamin Franklin, who were inventors themselves, wouldn't have foreseen rapid fire? Back then inventors and gunsmiths from all over America and Europe were trying to achieve rapid fire.
    1
  9. +socc69 two wrongs don't make a right. Short barrel shotguns being on the NFA was going to be challenged in the Supreme Court but the guy (ironically a bank robber) was killed before he could show up in court. The 2ndA by SCOTUS definition is supposed to apply to weapons in common use at the time for lawful purposes and there's a serious case for Short Barrel Shotguns having legal purposes - in Canada you can have 14" barrels if I'm not mistaken - and besides that also having Militia purposes. However, I don't think anyone else has tried to challenge it since so it's been in the books for decades for no reason. We put silencers on cars not to modify the car, but to prevent sound pollution. Silencers on guns do not "modify" them per se, just make the report safer to human ears.
    1
  10. +IVORY123100 back then people fought the British with personally owned cannons and warships. Every gunsmith and inventor out there was trying to get rich with devices that allowed rapid fire, they knew that at one point automatic fire would come. There's no logic in bringing up nukes. Though they are fitted with safety features, nukes as a concept are always one electronic glitch away from reaching critical mass. A gun, even as an abstract concept, needs to be loaded and "cocked" for it to go off accidentally even if there are no safeties, or in cases of inertial firing pins a slam is required to set off the primer. And in case of accident, it only kills someone if they're in the line of fire. Nukes level entire cities. If not for the numerous redundancies and fail-safes they would always be a short circuit or the processing chip hitting a bug away from killing thousands in a flash. A gun, even if faulty or poorly designed, requires you to operate the damned thing and then use it improperly.
    1
  11. You can't get accuracy from full auto fire from a semi-automatic rifle (the military keeps their rifles on semi, it's the machine gunners that let it rip) especially when the barrel heats up, if you're bumping it with a bump-stock the rifle isn't stable so you're throwing wild shots. For all intents and purposes he misssed 99.99% of the shots so he had no accuracy at all. Also, you can bump without a stock without it being at the hip: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iqzS9b1Msyk
    1
  12. You can bumpfire without the stocks. You want to ban bumpfire, you need to ban all semi-autos: Look at these idiots who managed to do it without stocks: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iqzS9b1Msyk Even a WWII era weapon such as the Garand can be bump-fired with a finger through the belt loop in your pants: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dinl3ohoXtM Should we ban pants too?
    1