Practical effects of bump stock ban being blocked

I’ve only recently heard the term bump stock in the last few years, and it is not something I personally had an interest in it. I understand that the claim has been made it makes a semi automatic feel like an automatic if i am correct in my understanding of it. But logically thinking about this, the presence or absence of the stock should not change the operation of the trigger, so that It would be one squeeze, one shot, one release.

Could anyone explain the practical effects of the ban being blocked?


Fine rifles don’t get their barrels overheated and excessive throat erosion from people who like the noise of rapid fire as easily. Thus preserving the life of the rifle for accurate fire longer.


Thanks for taking the time to offer a reply. but could you elaborate a little further, I do not quite understand.

1 Like

Rifles are made to place single bullets accurately at long distances.
Shotguns are made to send a lot of projectiles downrange that spread out and create a pattern.

The practical aspect of banning bumpstocks is a lot of quality rifles that are capable of accurate fire won’t be ruined by a cheap bumpstock from excessive heat and throat erosion.

If you wanna send a lot of lead down range somewhat indiscriminately get a 12 gauge with buckshot. If you have a rifle, learn to use it as intended and make accurate hits at 200 yards and beyond.

A bumpstock was just a device that allowed the rifle to slide back and forth with recoil forces allowing one to “pull” the trigger rapidly. The rifle sliding back and forth is a horrible idea for accuracy.


Ah, so banning it was a terrible idea if your a bad guy, but good idea if you care about and value your rifle? And you have less control over shot placement using one?


I apologize. I honed in on practical in your opening post. Wasting expensive ammunition and damaging a quality rifle isn’t practical in my opinion.

Hopefully someone else can better answer what you are asking.


No, i think in a practical sense. Your answer was very good. As someone who does not know anything about bump stocks. I know not to use one which would abuse a rifle.


I’ve never seen or touched a bump stock.
My understanding of how they operate is the rifle is able to move back and forth in the stock.
The stock had a ledge or something that went up even with the trigger. So to fire the rifle with the bumpstock, one held the hand firmly with the trigger finger held off the trigger by the bumpstock ledge. The other hand pulls the rifle forward away from the shoulder and then the trigger is actuated and the rifle fires. (This is terrible for accuracy moving a 5-8 pound rifle versus a trigger only. )

So now the first round fires and the recoil lets the rifle slide back and the non trigger hand is pulling the rifle forward. The trigger finger is still resting on the ledge of the bumpstock so the sliding back and forth cycle of the rifle in the bumpstock and recoil allows the trigger to be “pulled “ as fast as the rifle can cycle and fire.

I’m sure there are better explanations out there but the trigger finger doesn’t consciously move. The rifle is fired by opposing pushing and pulling motion with your two arms. Most any semiautomatic rifle that generates enough recoil can be bump fired even without a bumpstock. The bumpstock just kept one point of contact stationary with your body.


When you have time watch some videos of Jerry. He is so well trained he can fire accurately just as fast as most people can fire with a bumpstock inaccurately.

Look for the one of him trying to fire a bumpstock probably for the first time. It shows his real talent in the same video.


Personally I have no use for a bump stock. Banning them, however, is wrong imo. I’m sure we all agree it’s not the gun causing chaos, it’s the person holding it.


He put six shots down range on three targets in ninety four hundredths of a second. He’s shooting so fast it’s hard to distinguish six shots being fired.



Yeah i could tell he was not a fan of it…the expressions, and stating it was going against what was natural to him.


I agree with mattm I’m not a fan. I’d rather use the ammunition training and working on honing skills.

I also think the “gadget” being banned by 45 through executive order set an extremely bad precedent.

It’s an interesting subject btw. Thanks for posting. I hadn’t thought about bumpstocks in a while.


In my opinion these guys are accomplishing something. Making hits at 300 and 400 yards with a 22! It’s probably comparable to making hits with an ar at a mile.


I’ve been hitting 12" steel at 300 with my .22’s. Definitely a lot of fun, but I’m simply using the slow speed of that round at that distance to get on target. Got my holdover down (it’s hilarious), windage usually 12-18". As a tightwad I love hitting steel at the cost of a penny per 100 yards…3 cent t’bolt rocks this cheapskates world
Had my .308 RPR out the other day, foggy out…took my first shot at 300 and didn’t hear the thwack. Took a shot at 100 and thwack…Turned out at 300 there was no steel hanging :rofl:…remains of it were on the ground. I propped it up and stuck a piece of white paper on it for visibility, tagged it a few times, then the fog came back in. Fog backed out, but the plate was knocked over, and blended in with the snow. At 200, the plates are also missing, but I took to hitting the one remaining chain which provided some fun, and nailed it dead on one time which sent it into a spin, wrapping itself around the bracket. Bolt guns can be a lot of fun, too.


I haven’t read other responses yet (time constraint I’m at work) but also don’t want them to color how I phrase my post.

This is how I view the bump stocks and their ban (I’m not even up to speed on this block yet:

I never had any interest in a bump stock. Still don’t. Nothing against them or those that do, just doesn’t appeal to me. HOWEVER, they absolutely should not be banned. I don’t even believe full auto machine guns should be regulated the way they are (NFA), but, even if one were to accept the regulation of machine guns via NFA, a bump stock IS SEMI-AUTO and it is legally wrong, even within the current setup, to ban them or regulate them as a machine.

And I HATE that it in effect sets the precedent that it’s okay to regulate a SEMI-AUTO rate of fire

But I am not a lawyer and that’s just my personal opinion as an individual


How do you think full auto should be regulated? The NFA is basically the 200 tax? I don’t think they should be as easy to get as a semi because the streets would be flooded with hot machine guns.

I believe it should not be regulated.

Shall not be infringed.

I think they should be at least as easy to get as semi autos are, if not easier. It’s supposed to be an uninfringed Right

But that’s just my personal opinion and I very often believe too strongly in individual Rights and Liberties as I indicate on my profile


I dont see any real useful value to them myself, but if someone wants one, there was no legal reason they could not have one. Thats what irritates me. They quickly and ILLEGALLY banned them, threatened fines and jail time, oonly later to have the law/ruling rejected.

So, how does the government compensate people who destroyed their personal property to avoid being arrested? What if next time it IS something of value that many of us may have? The bigger issue is agencies making law and acting on it when that is the sole duty of congress. And, regardless, surely this will happen again, the anti-gunners will keep trying to twist laws, all laws should be subject to Ex Post Facto.


I played with one back in the day when ammo was cheap(er) it was fun but not enough to warrant spending the money on one. The presidential order to have the ATFE ban them was one of the few things DJT did that I didn’t like at a visceral level. With the block in effect now and a new precedent set I wonder if it can be applied to other ATFE overreaches through bureaucratic regulation which ultimately has the effect of law. The AR pistol nonsense comes to mind immediately. The definition of machine gun has been around since 1934 (GCA) as has the definition of a pistol. The bump stocks were approved by the ATFE as a legal accessory for 10 years.

Because the nut job in LV had one or two does not reach to the further question of were there any FA rifles in that pile of guns (converted our built) nobody seems to know. I have more than my fair share of time down range and know FA fire when I hear it. The nut job would have to have been exceptionally well versed in bump stock use to produce that level of sustained fire with one. In my limited exposure 10-15 rounds was as much as I could muster before coming out of sync with the bump stock. I imagine with more than a bit of practice you could dump a 30 rnd mag. That is not what the nut job had in the room. If you look at the photo’s he had dozens of 60 and 90 rnd mags allover the hotel room.

On a humorous note, this leaves the Dem’s in the unenviable position of having a Trump era regulation struck down but at the same time it’s a plus for gun owners and the rule of law which is of course a bad thing for them.