It is pretty amazing to see the rate of the semi-auto action that a human by themselves (mostly) would never achieve. I have never done it with an AR, but with a SKS it can be interesting, and almost impossible to aim.
Reminds me to footage of someone who used to 'bump fire' the M1 Garant. It kinda works similar to what a bump stock does where you simply use the recoil to speed up the firing. Of course completely unpractical and useless in a combat situation, but still interesting nontheless, pretty sure you could do that with other weapons too, like the SKS Simonov.
Again, this is pretty much completely useless, and in no way meant as an argument.
A Bump Stock on the other hand, makes it far more easier to reliably emulate the full-auto mechanic of a weapon and making it actually practial.
Since we're talking about it, I find the argument by some on youtuber about the Bump Stock being 'inacurate' for practical use somewhat funny, like accuracy is a key point with automatic fire in the first place ...
And to
@DarkCorp, I didn't post the video about Bump Stocks particularly as answer to you, just to remind people again what it actually is and what it does. And honestly I see this discussion about what fully automatic fire is, rather as a technicality and semantics with a Bump Stock. A Bump Stock, does turn your weapon
effectively into an assault weapon, even if the mechanics inside the weapon don't change but the end result is pretty obvious. - I am not stupid, I understand this:
A Bump stock really does something that is not that far away from what some weapons do, using the recoil and spring mechanics and firing gases of the weapons to cock the pins inside the guns or what ever.
Banning bump stocks, would be really a sensible thing to do in my opinion and it is a loop hole giving civilans access to something that would be only available to fully automatic weapons.
Make coherent arguments based on facts and not emotions.
Which of my arguments is incoherent, please be specific.
