this post was submitted on 02 Nov 2023
1762 points (94.7% liked)

Political Memes

5419 readers
3719 users here now

Welcome to politcal memes!

These are our rules:

Be civilJokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.

No misinformationDon’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.

Posts should be memesRandom pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.

No bots, spam or self-promotionFollow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] havokdj@lemmy.world 13 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That's because legally speaking, it is not a machine gun.

Disbarring effectiveness from the conversation (although bumpfire is hilariously innacurate compared to true fully automatic fire), bumpfire also requires a degree of skill to actually pull off, even with a bump stock, as you have to manipulate the firearm in a way that it actually can continuously fire, something that would be very difficult to do in a stressful situation.

Bumpstocks also make semiautomatic fire much more difficult.

I should clarify that I'm not defending bumpstocks, I'm just saying that banning bumpstocks was a farce, especially since you can still bumpfire without them due to the existence of physics.

[–] TopRamenBinLaden@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I would imagine bump stocks are actually less effective than regular aimed semiautomatic fire in just about every situation. That's why bans like this are pointless. People don't realize how fast a person can already shoot a semiautomatic rifle, while actually being able to properly aim at what they are trying to hit.