Defending bump stocks and saying that their ban is just the tip of an ice burg strikes me as foolish, and in the long run, harmful to gun rights. What mature, responsible person would want a bump stock? Someone who finds using one to be amusing is someone whose judgement ought to be questioned. When gun owners support any damned thing having to do with firearms, we present ourselves as morons.
As usual Billy, your logic is faulty. Anti-gunners with your Liberal Left mindset say pretty much the same things about many other firearms as you say about bump stocks and military style semi-automatics.
For example, many Liberal Left anti-gunners have argued for years that semi-automatic "assault style" rifles are "weapons of war", and have no useful purpose besides killing people. You have made statements in the past that agree with that opinion.
Many Liberal Left anti-gunners have argued for years that handguns are useless for hunting and only good for killing people.
Many Liberal Left anti-gunners have argued for years that detachable magazines of certain capacities they consider excessive are dangerous, and should be banned. Don't many FUDD's like you think that we don't really need those 10, 12, 20, or 30 round magazines?
Many Liberal Left anti-gunners have argued for years that cartridges such as the 5.56 m/m or .223 Rem are designed for war, and can penetrate police body armor and have much higher velocity than dangerous handgun ammunition.
So if a .223 or 5.56 m/m is too powerful Billy and dangerous, where does that leave you and your .308, or .30-06 or 7 m/m mag?
In recent years, these same Liberal Left anti-gunners... the politicians you support... have been arguing that scoped bolt action rifles, such as the rifles you personally approve of, are super-dangerous sniper rifles.
So tell us Billy... using your flawed and faulty logic... do you present yourself as a moron when you own and shoot scoped bolt action rifles that many of your own Liberal Left consider to be dangerous sniper rifles which are unsuited for civilian ownership???
Who makes someone with logic as flawed as yours the arbiter of what firearms are Constitutionally protected and suitable for law abiding citizens to own and shoot??? And just what are you doing to diminish gun violence... aside from voting for the Liberal Left Democrats who work relentlessly to ban them all??? The "automatic assumption that all gun regulations are merely an intro to general confiscation" is not stupid, as you say. That assumption comes when Democrats like Barack Obama and Barbara Boxer come right out and publicly say that we don't need any guns or that they would round them all up tomorrow, if they could. It would be both moronic and dishonest of you to deny that fact.
