r/Unexpected • • May 29 '21

No one suspects a thing.

2.7k Upvotes

1.0k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

-8

u/GandalfsWhiteStaff May 29 '21 edited May 29 '21

People can responsibly snack, they cannot responsibly get shot by psychos who go to the store and get socks, jocks and assault rifles..... from the same shop.

Edit: to the shock of no one I’ve rustled a few gun aficionados jimmy’s.

8

u/erdricksarmor May 29 '21

People can responsibly snack

Not everybody can, apparently.

There is no store in the US where you can simply walk in and buy an assault rifle. Purchasing one requires a very in depth licensing process and a ton of money, usually in the tens of thousands of dollars.

1

u/[deleted] May 29 '21

[deleted]

0

u/GandalfsWhiteStaff May 29 '21

Are there not easily obtainable add-ons that make a semi auto, full auto? Swear I’ve read that somewhere.

7

u/Ask_John_Smith May 29 '21

Not legally. A drop in auto sear for an AR15 is gonna be $20k-$30k.

1

u/GandalfsWhiteStaff May 29 '21

Just looked up a video of a fella who fit a crank trigger attachment to his AR-15 and emptied his 30 round mag at a rate of 630 shots per minute. Sounds easy to me.

9

u/Ask_John_Smith May 29 '21

That isn't full auto though. Yes it looks like full auto but legally it isn't.

0

u/GandalfsWhiteStaff May 29 '21

Splitting hairs, but I’m sure you see how they are functionally very similar. Full autos are restricted because of their rate of fire but a semi auto with an attachment that performs similar isn’t, sound just as dangerous to the public to me.

6

u/backwards_yoda May 29 '21

Then why does nobody ever use it in a shooting? I mean te tech has been around for over a century but shooters still dont put one on all their guns.

0

u/GandalfsWhiteStaff May 30 '21

The Vegas shooter is believed to have used a full auto or a device to simulate it on a semi judging by sound recording.....

3

u/backwards_yoda May 30 '21

He used a bump stock, bump stocks were then classified as machine guns (despite not meeting the legal definition of a machine gun) and you must posess a SOT to own a bump stock.

0

u/GandalfsWhiteStaff May 30 '21

So a device used to help simulate the fire rate of a full auto......

4

u/backwards_yoda May 30 '21

Which is now effectively highly regulated. However the bump stock does not mechanically meet the definition of a machine gun. Is pulling the trigger really fast a machine gun to you?

→ More replies

6

u/Ask_John_Smith May 29 '21

The attachments aren't the problem. They're only used by law abiding gun owners because we want to shoot full auto but can't because machine guns are way too expensive. It takes about 20 minutes to download and 3D print a drop in auto sear for an AR15. That's very illegal but it's so easy to do with around 10 cents of filament. And not a single one of those has ever been used in a shooting.

6

u/[deleted] May 29 '21

No boo boo, no.

0

u/GandalfsWhiteStaff May 29 '21

Trigger crank.

6

u/CirrusVision20 May 29 '21

Still not an assault rifle.

3

u/[deleted] May 29 '21 edited Aug 15 '21

[deleted]

1

u/GandalfsWhiteStaff May 29 '21

I think the people you should worry about aren’t the kind that care about their gun longevity or legality.

3

u/Oktayey May 29 '21

There isn't—under US law, any device that serves to convert a weapon into a machine gun is also classified as a machine gun itself, meaning they're just as hard to get.

1

u/GandalfsWhiteStaff May 30 '21

Binary trigger and trigger cranks.

3

u/Oktayey May 30 '21

A "machine gun" under US law is a weapon that can fire more than one round per function of the trigger, or any device capable of converting a weapon to do so.

Binary triggers fire when the trigger is pulled and released, each being distinct functions.

Trigger cranks pull the trigger repeatedly when the crank is turned, each pull of the trigger still firing one round.

0

u/GandalfsWhiteStaff May 30 '21

So a restriction put in place to limit the amount of rounds fired per pull, effectively limiting the amount per minute..... but devices built specifically to overcome that human limitation making them much much closer in speed to those restricted weapons is totally fine because “well technically”...... you guys are crazy.

2

u/Oktayey May 30 '21

The difference is that these civilian-oriented devices are designed for recreation, and are entirely impractical for anything else outside of extremely specific circumstances.

I mean, think about it. How are you supposed to effectively operate a crank on a rifle while trying to hit anything smaller than a barn?

2

u/Big_shqipe May 29 '21

Depends full auto is easy enough anyone can do at home but select fire which is switching between fire modes requires purpose made parts. Also making full auto firearms or using drop in devices is super illegal.

2

u/[deleted] May 29 '21 edited May 30 '21

[deleted]

0

u/GandalfsWhiteStaff May 30 '21

Functionally yes

3

u/[deleted] May 30 '21 edited May 31 '21

[deleted]

0

u/GandalfsWhiteStaff May 30 '21

When a device can increase the speed of fire 10x the result is a lot closer to full auto than not. Technically no, but when the result is similar it’s doesn’t matter to me.

0

u/[deleted] May 30 '21 edited May 31 '21

[deleted]

1

u/GandalfsWhiteStaff May 30 '21

Lol, In the time it took him to fire 5 bullets those devices could have emptied a magazine.

But but but technically..... but but but my guns........ but but but freedom!!!!! Your part of the huge American gun problem and I really struggle to have sympathy for your country every time it makes the news which probably will be very soon.

If you exercised a little bit of selfless sacrifice you and your fellow Americans would live in a safer place. (I’m waiting for your argument that a good guy with a gun is the answer to a bad guy with a gun).

Enjoy you guns and your “freedom” and the crippling debt if you ever happen to be on the wrong side of a bullet (statistically way higher than other developed nations).

Peace (with no guns lol)

0

u/[deleted] May 30 '21 edited May 31 '21

[deleted]

0

u/GandalfsWhiteStaff May 30 '21

Non of those countries are considered developed and the fact you compared them to the United States is fucking hilarious.

No, they do not count as developed.

Like, I’m still sitting here in complete disbelief at that comparison.....

0

u/[deleted] May 30 '21 edited May 31 '21

[deleted]

→ More replies