Dems Rush To Ban ‘Bump Stock,’ But Look Which One Approved Them In The First Place?

There’s be plenty of talk from the left about gun control, in light of the Las Vegas shooting. But, as always, their shocking ignorance of the facts disproves their own arguments.

First, they complained about how easy it is for people to get automatic weapons. Then they realized we can’t get automatic weapons, nor did the shooter use one. They claimed a lack of gun control laws allowed the shooter to acquire his weapons. Then they learned he broke numerous laws in order to do what he did.

Now they’re blaming “bump stock,” a feature added to rifles, as cause of the attack. Anything to ignore the real problems, eh democrats?

But as it turns out, this device was approved not that long ago. By whom, you may ask? There’s the interesting bit!

From The Resurgent:

Liberals are all enraged that Stephen Paddock could transform two AR-15s into “machine guns” using a simple “bump stock” device. Now they know who to blame…

The “bump stock” requires constant pressure on the trigger cover of the device, and considerable pressure in the non-trigger hand on the rifle stock. The device uses the shooter’s shoulder as a recoil to slide the trigger cover back and forth, depressing the trigger once for each shot, which is what semi-automatic firearms do. But with the “bump stock,’ the AR-15 can achieve rapid rates of fire with some practice (and a sore shoulder).

A company named Slide Fire invented the “bump stock…”

Slide Fire submitted their invention, along with its patent, to the ATF’s Firearms Technology Branch, for testing and approval. The ATF responded in June 2010.

“The stock has no automatically functioning mechanical parts or springs and performs no automatic mechanical function when installed… The stock has no automatically functioning mechanical parts or springs and performs no automatic mechanical function when installed.”

It may seem a bit complicated, but here’s the skinny: bump stock devices don’t turn guns into automatic weapons. They’re simply an assistive accessory to help shooters, including disabled. The device requires significant focus and practice to work. In fact, it doesn’t make a gun easier to shoot, but—based on the above description—much harder.

The argument that bump stocks made it easier for Paddock to kill 59 people and injure many more is a lie. Only a trained marksman could have used a bump stock, someone who wouldn’t have needed one to cause harm in the first place. That only casts more doubt on Paddock himself, who was described as not having any firearms experience.

The bump stock is such a complicated a device to use, that Obama’s ATF approved it, noting that cannot be regulated by their draconian gun control laws.

Democrats are only using gun control as a scapegoat. They want to distract the public from the real issues of this case—like what motivated Paddock, who was helping him, and what actually was going on in that hotel room—to the dangers of firearms. Yet again we see liberals trying to lie to cover up the truth.

But one way or another, we are going to get to the bottom of this case.

Source: The Resurgent

[fbcomments width="100%" count="off" num="3"]
To Top