SHARE Act Pulled from Consideration

Moderators: gds, bakerjw, renegade

User avatar
Dr.Phil
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 1654
Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2010 4:50 pm

SHARE Act Pulled from Consideration

Post by Dr.Phil »

As the title suggests...
http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2017/1 ... ideration/
TTAG wrote:As predicted by, well, anyone with any knowledge of gun politics and the Congressional sausage making process,
House Speaker Paul Ryan announced that he’s pulled the SHARE Act — a measure that would have greatly de-regulated suppressors — off the table.
Image
From cnbc.com:

House Speaker Paul Ryan on Tuesday said Republicans have no scheduled plan to vote on a bill that would ease rules on gun silencers,
in the wake of the deadliest shooting in modern U.S. history.

Reports had suggested the House could vote on the National Rifle Association-backed legislation, known as the SHARE Act, soon.

“That bill is not scheduled now,” Ryan told reporters. “I don’t know when it’s going to be scheduled.”

If you’ll remember, the Hearing Protection Act was scheduled come before a House committee on June 15.
However, on the 14th, James Hodgkinson opened fire on a group of GOP legislators practicing for the annual Congressional baseball game.
The HPA was then shelved.

The momentum behind the already controversial firearms bill appeared to sag after the deadly shooting.
A hearing on the bill was previously delayed this summer when a shooter opened fire at a congressional baseball practice, severely wounding House Majority Whip Steve Scalise.

Ryan on Tuesday said the House’s immediate priority is passing its fiscal 2018 budget.

The SHARE Act, cast as a bill to help hunters, includes provisions to ease restrictions on buying silencers and making it harder for regulators to classify some types of ammunition as “armor-piercing.” Gun control advocates have opposed the bill.

And so it goes.
As much as I hate politics, it is part of the country and is what makes America what it is.
"Don't tell fish stories where the people know you; but particularly,
don't tell them where they know the fish."
--Mark Twain
mbogo
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 179
Joined: Mon Nov 14, 2011 12:19 pm

Re: SHARE Act Pulled from Consideration

Post by mbogo »

Those of you in his district should begin the slow roasting of his balls and support his primary opponent Paul Nehlen ASAP.

mbogo
ARHuman
Senior Silent Operator
Posts: 103
Joined: Mon Apr 08, 2013 4:58 pm

Re: SHARE Act Pulled from Consideration

Post by ARHuman »

And now Feinstein is proposing a ban in Bumpstocks
mbogo
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 179
Joined: Mon Nov 14, 2011 12:19 pm

Re: SHARE Act Pulled from Consideration

Post by mbogo »

I do not see ANY bill introduced by a Democrat to advance out of committee. The people we have to worry about are RINOs and GOP Establishment types.
NeVs24
Member
Posts: 42
Joined: Thu Aug 25, 2016 8:44 am

Re: SHARE Act Pulled from Consideration

Post by NeVs24 »

ARHuman wrote:And now Feinstein is proposing a ban in Bumpstocks
if we can be honest, the ATF royally f'ed up to begin with by deciding they were legal in the first place. I am 100% behind the 2A and would be a 3%er but I really do think it's ridiculous that bump stocks were ever allowed.

Even pro paintball has rules against trigger bouncing lmao
ThreeHundredBlackout
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 344
Joined: Sun Aug 09, 2015 3:52 pm

Re: SHARE Act Pulled from Consideration

Post by ThreeHundredBlackout »

NeVs24 wrote:
ARHuman wrote:And now Feinstein is proposing a ban in Bumpstocks
if we can be honest, the ATF royally f'ed up to begin with by deciding they were legal in the first place. I am 100% behind the 2A and would be a 3%er but I really do think it's ridiculous that bump stocks were ever allowed.

Even pro paintball has rules against trigger bouncing lmao

That's a dumb thing to say!

Any person has the capability to manufacture an illegal but nonetheless real functional machine gun!

Anyone with half a brain could figure the mechanical functions of them and duplicate it and i say EVEN IF GUNS WERE CIMPLETELY ILLEGAL THE FELLONS WIULD STILL HAVE THEM ! ! !

ANYONE THAT INTENDS TO BREAK THE LAW DOESN'T CARE WHAT IT SAYS !

THAT SAID, THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH A BUMP-STOCK!

I DO NOT OWN ONE AND NEVER INTEND TO, IF I WAS GOING THAT ROUTE ID SAVE THE CASH, FIND A MACHINEGUN FOR SALE, AND FILE THE PAPERWORK AND BUY THE REAL DEAL MACHINEGUN.

The last thing we need is pro-gunners going partial anti-gunners!

Besides, an electronic trigger in a paintball gun doesnt make up for lack of ability and skill to play. I once held off and tagged a guy with an electronic angel and 2 others with guns with resoonse triggers with my box stock spider tl all at the same time. But i dont oppose anyone owning a full auto trigger system in a paint gun or legally owning a real machinegun, or owning a bump stock, or a binary trigger.

I know you cant call out conspiracy on everything, but some old loser in a hotel shooting from a strategic position into a crowd of helpless people, and the first thing out of billary clintons mouth isnt sympathy for the injured or dead or their families, but is a political move against the share act and suppressors............sort of reminds me of obama when sandyhook happened.........the antigunner band wagon rolls through town bc thats their best chance to infringe on law abiding gun owners rights and try to steal them!
Makes me wonder what antidepressant drugs this guy was probably hopped up on and who got him on them and who influenced him to do what he did.
And next they go for bump stocks.....and tomorrow the rest of the country will be as liberal and libtarded as NY and CA with all their antigun laws and having ridiculous 7 round mag limits and featureless rifles and bullet buttons and..............all bc some ignorrant political fool drove the sheeple to believe that ghost guns and 30 caliber clips could kill 10 billion in half a second............

Lets keep a sane mind here folks !

If guns were outlawed obviously, and clicheously, the outlaws would still have their illegal machinguns....................and it is all about controlling the mass population that is law abiding......blah blah blah.........

A bump stock is not a machinegun, nor is an echo trigger..... and even without a bumpstock you could still shoot just as fast and accurate bc someone will always find a way.

I dont care for certain guns tastewise and prefer certain types over others, but i am all for anyone legal that wants them to have them legally.

And one more cliche old and warn out yet still true: "Guns dont kill people, people kill people."

Take all the guns an you will likely have a rise in use of melatov cocktails and ied's.........people will find a way to keep their either sick minds to do wrong, or self preserving minds alive.

So back off the moose trail and back to the point.....there's nothing wrong with a bump stock or that the BATFE approved it, but rather something wrong with the psychopath that misused it!


Never once in my life has one of my guns ever tried to kill me, or has ever talked, or even moved without my hand on it to pick it up and move it.....BECAUSE IT'S AN INANIMATE OBJECT THAT CAN NOT DO ANYTHING WITHOUT A HUMAN PICKING IT UP AND MAKING IT WORK !

The same goes for chainsaws, shovels, news papers, toothbrushes, toilet paper, guitars or any other nonliving inanimate object !

It is the possessor of the tool that employs its function !

And once again i wonder why i wasted the time to type this bc people are who and what they are and are in a rut on their own interests and care not for the interrest of their fellow sane law abiding friendly neighbors.

Ps- this is no petsonal attack on NeVs24, i dont know anything about you.

It just blows my mind how some people think sometimes.

Its Time for eberyone to turn off the news and get back to reading The Bible and doing right folks !
Only Jesus Christ Saves ! ! !
NeVs24
Member
Posts: 42
Joined: Thu Aug 25, 2016 8:44 am

Re: SHARE Act Pulled from Consideration

Post by NeVs24 »

lol

I'm 100% pro gun and in support of the 2A without question and that will never change. However I do question the low level of logic used by the ATF. If the production of fully automatic weapons is banned for civilian use then why the hell should the ATF allow bump stocks?

The result is the same, a fully auto shooting fully auto or semi auto shooting fully auto. Either allow them both or not.

Now is the bump stock really the big concern here? Definitely not! This guy would have done this with or without them. Imagine someone with real weapons experience and his arsenal shooting controlled bursts or semi auto. Probably would have had an even higher casualty count.

My point is our government never fails to boggle my mind with the stupidity found in so many decisions in all aspects of government. And I really hope you are honest enough to agree with that.

Like traitor Ryan pulling the SHARE act when "suppressors" were not even involved in this. Way to make irrelevant Killary nab a win and appear relevant again
mbogo
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 179
Joined: Mon Nov 14, 2011 12:19 pm

Re: SHARE Act Pulled from Consideration

Post by mbogo »

NeVs24 wrote:lol

I'm 100% pro gun and in support of the 2A without question and that will never change. However I do question the low level of logic used by the ATF. If the production of fully automatic weapons is banned for civilian use then why the hell should the ATF allow bump stocks?

The result is the same, a fully auto shooting fully auto or semi auto shooting fully auto. Either allow them both or not.
I would say that your understanding of "fully auto" is wrong, as is your position on bump stocks.

Full-auto = two or more rounds fired with a single actuation of the trigger..
Semi-auto = one round fired per actuation of the trigger.

If you've ever watched (the late) Bob Munden or Jerry Miculek shoot revolvers, it is almost too fast to follow. Those gentlemen were blessed with preternatural innate speed and dexterity (as well as hand-eye coordination),, the rest of us use bump stocks.

Also, "100% pro gun and in support of the 2A without question" would mean that you would not be against gun accessories.

mbogo
NeVs24
Member
Posts: 42
Joined: Thu Aug 25, 2016 8:44 am

Re: SHARE Act Pulled from Consideration

Post by NeVs24 »

mbogo wrote:
NeVs24 wrote:lol

I'm 100% pro gun and in support of the 2A without question and that will never change. However I do question the low level of logic used by the ATF. If the production of fully automatic weapons is banned for civilian use then why the hell should the ATF allow bump stocks?

The result is the same, a fully auto shooting fully auto or semi auto shooting fully auto. Either allow them both or not.
I would say that your understanding of "fully auto" is wrong, as is your position on bump stocks.

Full-auto = two or more rounds fired with a single actuation of the trigger..
Semi-auto = one round fired per actuation of the trigger.

If you've ever watched (the late) Bob Munden or Jerry Miculek shoot revolvers, it is almost too fast to follow. Those gentlemen were blessed with preternatural innate speed and dexterity (as well as hand-eye coordination),, the rest of us use bump stocks.

Also, "100% pro gun and in support of the 2A without question" would mean that you would not be against gun accessories.

mbogo
The problem is you are generalizing and providing a blanket approval.

There are extreme differences and results to attaching a red dot, grenade launcher or a bump stock to a rifle...
mbogo
Silent But Deadly
Posts: 179
Joined: Mon Nov 14, 2011 12:19 pm

Re: SHARE Act Pulled from Consideration

Post by mbogo »

NeVs24 wrote:
The problem is you are generalizing and providing a blanket approval.

There are extreme differences and results to attaching a red dot, grenade launcher or a bump stock to a rifle...
I am not generalizing; you are.

An anti-gunner or FUDD make dire associations with all of the accessories you mentioned plus flash hiders/muzzle brakes, bayonet lugs(!), rifle scopes, bipods, et sl..

mbogo
Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 41 guests