WHAT argument about guns should be "won"?

Posit: The comparison between death/injury by automobiles v. firearms is facetious and misleading.

Tripping through the Way-Back Machine, I found this April 2018 article by Nicholas Kristof, one of my favorite Liberal (Anti-Gun) writers.

Opinion | How to Win an Argument About Guns - The New York Times:

You liberals are in a panic over guns, but look at the numbers. Any one gun is less likely to kill a person than any one vehicle. But we’re not traumatized by cars, and we don’t try to ban them. It’s true that any particular car is more likely to be involved in a fatality than any particular gun. But cars are actually a perfect example of the public health approach that we should apply to guns. We don’t ban cars, but we do work hard to take a dangerous product and regulate it to limit the damage.

(Emphasis Added:  Read the whole article to put this paragraph in the perspective of its author.)

The comparison suggests that since we've found ways to make cars less dangerous, we should be able to make guns less dangerous, too.

Well, that's just silly.
Although Nicky (who perhaps doesn't keep or carry firearms) conflates the two mechanical devices, he elides over the salient point:   Guns are dangerous because that is their purpose.

(Perhaps he proposes to "limit the damage" by making them more difficult to ... uh ... take the safety off?  Okay, that's silly, too.  I was just trying to imagine what measures Nicky was thinking of which would still keep them easily available in a self-defense situation.  I am confounded.     You think maybe Nicky didn't think it through? )

True, cars are intended for transportation.  But guns are designed to bore holes through their targets. 

Usually, that target is a piece of paper or some other inanimate object.  A tin can?   Often, a gun is used to kill an animal ... such as Bambi or The Easter Bunny. 

And once in a while a gun is used to dissuade a would-be felon from rape, mayhem, or murder.   In those cases, you don't want to piss on them, you want to step on them HARD!

Personally, I've never deliberately aimed a rifle or a pistol at a living human being; in Viet Nam, I preferred the M18 Claymore Mine or the M79 Granade Launcher ... More Bang For The Buck!
(My favorite weapon was the PRC-25 Radio, with which I could call in anything from mortar or artillery fire to an air strike.   Sorry, I digress.)

For personal/home defense, I have always preferred a 1911-style pistol in .45 ACP caliber.   Or 10mm. Or any caliber where the first digit was at least a "4".

(more overleaf)

"Oh, you're so paranoid; nobody does home invasions any more!"

Terror for the Beckhams as masked raiders attempt to break in to their Cotswolds home | Daily Mail Online: David and Victoria Beckham have been left distraught after a group of balaclava-clad burglars attempted to break into their Cotswolds mansion.  Police were called to the couple’s  6 million home in Great Tew, Oxfordshire, last Friday after their 24 hour security surveillance team noticed the intruders on the property’s CCTV.  Guests at the nearby Soho Farmhouse, which is just a stone’s throw away and a favourite haunt of Meghan Markle and Prince Harry, spotted them too and ran to scare them off.

Actually, home invasions do occur to "Normal Folks", too.
(details deleted)

That Was No Lady, That Was My Mom!

Been there, done that, paid the price, never did  it again!

There comes a time in a young man's life when he just HAS to rebel against authority.

I once stole my mom's car for a joy ride while she was shopping.  Didn't get it back in time ... but I DID get it back to her.

Not every young man is as lucky:
Some moms are more ... proactive ... than my mother was.

You can rail against "Corporal Punishment", but that's one young man who now understands that you don't compromise all of your in-home security measures just for a joy ride!

He won't be sitting down for a while.

Texas Mom Punishes 14-Year-Old Son With Belt After He Takes Family’s BMW - YouTube:

Good thing she caught him in his formative years; if he had continued to "get away" with this anti-social behavior, he might someday wind up in the Oval Office!

You want Irony? I'll give you IRONY!

Mexicans are now securing their own Southern Border against a flood of "Illegal Immigrants"!

(How do you like them apples?)

BREAKING. Caravan of Central American Illegals Turned Back By Mexico: A caravan of migrants near Mexico’s southern border with Guatemala on Friday has turned back from its planned sojourn to the U.S. in the face of a heavy presence of Mexican and Guatemalan law enforcement officers, according to media reports. The Associated Press reported that thousands of migrants stopped about two blocks from the Guatemala-Mexican border crossing before turning around, saying they would wait another hour or so. The border post, reports the AP, is guarded by a heavy security force and tall metal gates. Dozens of Mexican federal police officers are on the border bridge, with hundreds more behind them. In Guatemala, government authorities closed its border gate and are standing guard with dozens of troops and two armored jeeps. Mexico’s ambassador to Guatemala says his country has decided to enforce a policy of “metered entry” since thousands of migrants are clamoring to cross, says the AP.

Yes, I'm aware that this action has been taken because (our President) Trump has threatened to withdraw all "aide" (money we've been paying them off with) from both Mexico and Guatemala if the mob reaches America's border with Mexico.

Yes, I can use the "mob" word here.

Yes, I can also use the word Schadenfreude here.

The HillaryBeast would have welcomed the mob with open arms.   I'm finally glad to acknowledge Donald Trump as the most presidential President we've seen for a long time.

We needed a leader who could make the hard decisions.

Halloween

Great Jumping Jehoshaphat.

After all these years, just watching the intro to HALLOWEEN still sends shivers up my spine.


I tried to copy the link to the movie, and what I got back when I pasted it to this page, was ..

love

I don't know where that  came from, but it rates a great big WHOA!!! 

(If you don't have a premium  connection, don't bother trying to find the online version of the movie.)

I'm tempted to segue this article to pissing all over internet proprieties, but you already know it.

Just .. go search the movie title and watch it.  It's worth the effort (great movie!) and it's  a wonderful excuse to search the "net", get pissed off, and blog something about restricted access to legitimate files.

And if this doesn't give you an entire new perspective on the theme of "horror",
I don't know what will.

Just my minor contribution to Early Halloween ...

BTW, did you know that "HALLOWEEN" is shorthand for "All Hallow's Ever"?
That's right,  The first day of November is "All Saints Day", so "Halloween" actually means

All Saints Day Evening

Yes, I know this is just a little bit early for a "HALLOWEEN" article.
I claim "FIRSTS!" on Halloween articles this year.

Animal Farm

If you're reading THAT, you should be reading THIS.

Opinion | The Rich White Civil War - The New York Times

I don't think that the NYT intended this as humor.

There will not be a quiz at the end of the class.

I just thought you ought to know that people in New York think that you are all Neanderthals with no sense of civic virtue nor acceptance of people who may be "different from you".

It's a waterfall of bullshit.  I thought of making paragraphs to separate the issues, but i decided it's better that you enjoy the stream of consciousness. You can go to the link to appreciate the original.

All emphases are added:

Opinion | The Rich White Civil War - The New York Times: (T)he report is that ideas really do drive history. Progressive Activists and Devoted Conservatives organize around coherent philosophical narratives. These narratives aren’t visions of a just society. They are narratives of menace — about who needs to be exorcised from society. Devoted Conservatives subscribe to a Hobbesian narrative. It’s a dangerous world. Life is nasty, brutish and short. We need strict values and strong authority to keep us safe. 

 Ninety percent of Devoted Conservatives think immigration is bad, while 99 percent of Progressive Activists think it is good. Seventy-six percent of Devoted Conservatives think Islam is more violent than other religions; only 3 percent of Progressive Activists agree. Eighty-six percent of Devoted Conservatives think it’s more important for children to be well behaved than creative. Only 13 percent of Progressive Activists agree. Progressive Activists, on the other hand, subscribe to a darkened Rousseauian worldview. People may be inherently good, but the hierarchical structures of society are awful. The structures of inequality and oppression have to be dismantled. Ninety-one percent of Progressive Activists say sexual harassment is common, while only 12 percent of Devoted Conservatives agree. Ninety-two percent of Progressive Activists say people don’t take racism seriously enough, compared with 6 percent of Devoted Conservatives. Eighty-six percent of Progressive Activists say life’s outcomes are outside people’s control; only 2 percent of Devoted Conservatives agree.

Okay ... if you really want to read more, it's available "below the fold".

Bumpstock Ban

David Codrea's article on "Trump's Bumpstock Ban":

Trump's Pending Bumpstock Ban - Firearms News: "In order to eliminate -- terminate -- bump stocks, we have to go through procedure. We are now at the final stages of that procedure," President Donald Trump declared in an Oct. 1 Rose Garden press conference marking the anniversary of the Las Vegas shootings. "We are knocking out bump stocks. I’ve told the NRA -- bump stocks are gone.

Read the whole thing, of course.  Nobody is more erudite nor so well reasoned as Codrea.

My opinion counts for very little, and that's because I'm a "FUDD" when it comes to Bumpstocks.

Oh, what's a Fudd?   That's a pejorative term aimed at shooters who only care about hunting.  Deer, Elk, Quail, Lions ... or Skeet, Trap, etc.  it doesn't matter; as long as the Feds don't mess with their gun sport, they could care less about any other 2nd Amendment issues.   (It's actually defined in the Urban Dictionary.)

It surprised me to learn that I was a FUDD, but actually I have no use for a Bump Stock (spelling varies).  While I've written about the issue before, I find I can't get all that worked up about it.  I mean, who needs a Bump Stock?

On the other hand, who needs an M15?   (semi-automatic version of the M16 Assault Rifle ... which unlike the M16 is NOT capable of "Selective fire").   I don't own an M15, because I have no use for it.

The point is, most people think there is no difference between the M15 (semi-auto only) and the M15 (capable of full auto fire), and so the CIVILIAN M15 is denigrated almost as vigorously as the M15.

The difference is, the people who are pushing to ban the M15 don't know the difference.
And they don't care.  They just want it banned, because it looks dangerous.

All guns are dangerous; that's the whole point.

But the "Bumpstock" does not meet the criteria of the ATF, so it's still legal.  And when the feds get around to it, they will ban the ATTACHMENT because they don't like it, even though it's currently legal.

There are various bloggers describing the future consequences of banning "attachments" and "modifications".  One of the most popular is:

Suppose you lighten the trigger pull on your firearm.  Is that to become an illegal alteration?

Would the addition of a trigger shoe (to improve the ability to touch of an accurate shot, as I did when I was 16 and competing in .22 caliber "Gallery Rifle" matches) become a banned attachment?

When the ATF becomes involved in nuances of equipment to otherwise legal firearms, it may be that they are over-reaching their mandate.

Or I may be wrong; perhaps that is precisely their "mandate".

The trouble is, we don't know what that mandate is, except that we can expect it to be "floating" ... it means whatever they say it means, and will probably be enforced by Rule Of Law.

And there's very damn little we can do about it.

I'm just in ignorant old man, but there's a difference between LAW and REGULATION ... or is there?

Can a "Regulatory Agency" put you in jail because your gear doesn't violate either law or regulation, but they just don't like it?   Can you become a criminal even though you haven't committed a criminal act?

There is only ONE RULE to Gun Safety

Omaha Outdoors has a GREAT article about firearms range safety (see *overlink*), which I recommend highly for everyone no matter how long you have been shooting.

A few years ago I volunteered at my local club to instruct in an "Introduction to USPSA".   I taught the Rules of Competition, and coached new shooters on techniques which they would find useful.

And although almost every student in the class was familiar with the Three Rules of Safe Shooting, I boiled it down to One Sacred Rule:

DO NOT SCARE THE RANGE OFFICER! 

If a student, at the end of a stage, reached down to pick up his dropped magazine before holstering his pistol, I yelled STOP! 

I was scared that he would trigger a round into his hand. (Sure, he had already cleared his pistol because I was standing there to ensure that he had done so.  But what if he was practicing alone on the range and there was nobody there to tell him to "unload and show clear" and "holster"?)   The training was as much in safety as in competition; and if they didn't learn range safety ... they failed.

One of the stages I set up for them was to start facing up-range with a loaded gun; at the buzzer, turn and engage the targets.

I would stand one foot in front of them while they were facing uprange.  I would look right in his eyes, and say:  "okay, at the buzzer, turn and draw and engage the targets.  If you draw before you turn, your gun will be pointed at my feet.  Don't do that. "

Because Rule One was always: "Don't Scare The Range Officer!!!"

New shooters are usually apprehensive; the scary ones are those who are not apprehensive.

One weekend (the weekend immediately following the class) I attended a match where three of my new students were on their "maiden match".   After one of the students (the cocky one) finished his stage and returned to the spectator area to reload magazines, I stood on the other side of the counter and confronted him, saying: 

"Nice run.  Now what did you do wrong?"I don't know.
What did the RO say when you finished shooting?   Exactly?Uh ... "if you are finished unload and show clear.  If clear, hammer down and holster."
And what did you do next?Uh ... I cleared, then picked up my magazine.
And did you sweep yourself because you hadn't holstered?No, I did not.
No, but The RO didn't say "The Range Is Clear" so you could be DQ'd even though you had finished the stage and the gun was unloaded.    

That earned me a dirty look, because I was treating him like a newby.   Which he was.

His range experience had been unsupervised for the years he had been shooting ... and he was a military veteran with lots of range time.   He thought he knew all the important stuff.

But he had not learned to shoot competitively under the direction of Range Safety Officer who was using the required commands to ensure the safety of everyone ... not least the shooter himself.

Both USPSA and IPSC (and other organized competitive shooting sports) consider SAFETY to be the most important consideration; which is a difficult concept for very competitive people to assimilate because all they think about is to get good hits as quickly as humanly possible.  They want to be winners.

Range officers accept that, but their most important consideration is the safety of everyone on the range.   They want everybody to be survivors. (Okay, then there's obeying the stage rules, the range rules, and not using the "F-bomb" every time a reload fails ....)


ORIGINAL ARTICLE FROM OMAHA OUTDOORS: *overlink*

Yeah, what HE said!

Great Rant posted on Never Yet Melted.

It's one of those moments when you fall back in awe, saying to yourself:

"Gee ... I wish I had said that!"

I won't provide the link or the URL to the original youtube video.
The full credit (and hits-count) goes to the source:

https://neveryetmelted.com/2018/10/14/rejoinder-to-the-remoaners/

England doesn't allow guns, so they have "Acid Attacks"

England is so proud of their lack of "firearms violence".

So instead, their citizens are throwing acid in the face of their victims.

Hmmm ... getting shot or getting your eyes and face burned out.
It's difficult to choose which is worse, isn't it?

Weekly Rate Of Acid Attacks In U.K. Hits Staggering Number, Khan's London Hit Hardest | Daily Wire: 

New police figures reveal that the U.K. is averaging at least 15 barbaric acid attacks a week. The figures, first reported by The Mirror, show a total of 2,602 reported attacks from January 2015 to May of this year, averaging out to 15 per week. In comparison, there were only 100 total attacks reported from 2007 to 2011. Stunningly, nearly 75% of such attacks have been carried out in London, a city often praised by the Left for its multiculturalism and tolerance.

Somehow, I don't think that "GUNS" are the problem.   But your mayor thinks CARS are!

The problem is that Some People are vicious, aggressive, and they just want to do the most harm possible to their fellow citizens.

I'm unconvinced that GUNS are the problem; ever look at your mix of immigrants?
(You English are quite proud of that, aren't you?  Funny how nobody has identified their attackers .. oh, but the victims are blind, aren't they?  Darn, how inconvenient!)

I think it's society .. the people who walk past you every day on your way to work ... who are the problem!   England, I'm talking to you.  (And I hope and pray that this never comes to America!)

What's worse?

Is it worse to be permanently disfigured (blinded?) by having acid thrown in your face, and live with that?   Or is it worse to be shot, and possibly die?

Tough to choose, isn't it?

Me?  I'd rather be dead (and having had the choice whether to be armed to defend myself).

Portland has become the Canker Sore of Oregon

I use to live in Portland (the largest city in the state), back about 40 years ago.

I sold my house for "$2000, and you take over the payments" on my GI Bill loan. 

Ten years earlier, $30,000 for a cottage on the East Side of Portland was (in the words of our real estate agent when my wife and I bought it) a "steal".

But I got divorced, and gave my ex-wife the proceeds from selling the house.   At the time, I regretted having give up a 2-story house with a front and (fenced) back yard, detached garage, and a basement with an extra bedroom.

Now ... I realize that I could not have foreseen what a Liberal Hell-hole Portland would become.   And I'm glad I got out while "the getting was good".

What happened to Portland is what's happening to America.  Our elected officials are allowing violence by people who call themselves "anti-fascists", but who are in fact becoming the most violent fascists in America.

What happened in Portland is fanatics who wear masks and hoodies and assault total strangers on the mean streets of our most "Progressive" city.   

It's difficult to understand what these Rebels Without A Cause want, but they are more than willing to engage in anonymous violence to achieve their bizarre purpose.

It's just a guess, but I think what they want is anarchy.   So I'll call them Anarchists; people who have no clearly defined goal but mob rule .... and they do it because they can.

The state of Oregon, the city of Portland, have made no effort to curb these Anarchists even while they commit crimes of assault against innocent passers-by.

...

I remember, back in the day, driving 'home' to Portland and being greeted by a huge neon sign of a prancing White Stag (the emblem of a well-known outdoor clothing company)

That sign was ... well, it felt like coming home to me.   It was a comfortable welcome to the Portland of my era, and I loved it.

I don't know if that sign is still up; I have passed through Portland a few times on my way up the I5 Interstate highway, but I no longer look for the White Stag sign.  In fact, I try not to look at anything but the road; it's all too gruesome and disgusting to drive through this "Major City".

Portland, Oregon: The canary in a coal mine for the violent Left:

The last time I passed through Portland, Oregon, I was treated to the sight of a bum squatting with his trousers around his ankles, dumping a huge load of poop on the pedestrian walkway of the Morrison Street bridge. 

This was not the Portland of my memories. It was a Third World hell-hole, which I had become accustomed to in Viet Nam ... but not in My America!

This was a consequence of the progressive permissiveness which seems, to me, endemic to extend "Liberality" to the point where laws are not enforced,  anarchy is tacitly permitted, and basic rules of respectable human behavior are ignored.

Forget the riots, forget the protests, and forget the concept of human dignity.

If anyone wonders why I am a convicted Conservative, it's because I think that in an America which is becoming increasingly populated by people who have no concept of "Correct Behavior" ...

I don't want to be known as a part of that America.

This is not the America which drafted me, which sent me to war, or which expected me to act like a responsible human being in a country that I didn't care whether it went communist or was free.

Because I was, and I remain, an American.   I have my standards ... and I insist that those standards are respected and accepted by every American.

Don't shit on the bridge.
Don't shit on the Constitution.

Is that too much to ask?

Ask The Man Who Owns One

) What Happens When Democrats Run Your State? - YouTube:

Here's What Happens When Democrats Run Your State Government.

Shit Happens.
The good news? Actually, there is no good news.

California Sucks.  Wonderful climate, Horrible politics.
Welcome to California ... you're screwed!

Hotel California is so  "out of date"..

The Great Martian War

I found this this  ... a version of H.G. Wells' War of the Worlds ...while looking for something else on the internet.
Pretty good lead-up to halloween, I think.

Getting Shot: "It Hurts!"

THURSDAY, OCTOBER 4, 2018
Quora Question: What does it feel like to be shot with a .22 caliber firearm?

Strange as it may seem, there are still people out there who deliberately coax people to shoot them ... just to see what it feels like.

Have you ever had your curiosity overwhelm your good sense?

Well, of course you have.  So have I.  But chances are, neither of us have taken it to this degree of inanity.   I've seen people get shot, and I have no doubt that it hurts.  More-over, it typically results in a degree of leakage of "Precious Bodily Fluids". 

Usually the leakage is blood, but I've seen grown men piss themselves after being shot too ...  I'm not sure which is the most embarrassing, but apparently when you're bleeding a lot you don't care much about being "embarrassed".

Here's my advice about being shot:   Avoid it.

Kavanaugh

Well, this finally convinced me that Judge Kavanaugh is a moral and temperate man:

Feinstein hid an allegation of sexual assault against Kavanaugh - Vox:

Sen. Dianne Feinstein didn’t tell fellow Democrats on the Judiciary Committee that she’d received a letter accusing Brett Kavanaugh of attempting to force himself on a woman while both were in high school because, as the New Yorker reports, she didn’t want his confirmation hearings to be about his private life.

Anything that DiFi says about a Republican must always be a step to her goal of eliminating Conservatives from having any influence on American politics.

That she had this poison pen letter, and didn't use it immediately, is indicative that even she doesn't believe it.   (Speaking of believing; I don't for a minute believe that DiFi has any qualms about using personal character attacks against her foes ... and a Conservative Supreme Court Judge certainly qualifies.)

Kavanaugh's apparent anger at the accusations thrown at him  confirm  (for me) his sterling qualifications for the post.  Any man who won't react to unjust and unsubstantiated slurs on his character ... has no character.   The Washington Examiner says:

... if half the political machinery of the federal government, the leaders of one party, and about half of the media came after you with a campaign of lies — which is what this is, if Kavanaugh isn't guilty of rape and sexual assault — you would be angry.

... and while I'm no great fan of Washington newshawks, I'm inclined to agree with this statement.

I'm determined to be "not political", and I've tried to resist the urge to comment on this confirmation process.   But this whole fol-de-rol sounds too much like a political hatchet job to be ignored.

Nobody knows, really, what his relationship was with the teen-age chippie at a beer party umpteen years ago.   Still, it's perhaps telling that the WORST thing his political opponents (*cough* liberals *cough* ) can find to say about him is that he might have got fresh with a girl when he was 19 years old ... I think they may be so desperate to torpedo the political career of a Conservative that they're willing to go to any extreme to paint him black.








x

c

Is it Ignorance .. or apathy?

Judge Kavanaugh no longer teaching at Harvard Law School

John Lott's Website: Seriously, only a little over 700 signatures by Monday with students and alumni who graduated from as far back as 1959. Harvard has about 500 entering students each year. Over say the last 30 years that would be 15,000 graduates. There are currently 1,990 enrolled law students. So the number of signers equals only about one-third of those currently enrolled, let alone all the alumni who have graduated over the decades.

As far as I know, this is "Breaking News".

I never wanted to get into this purely political free-for-all, but at this point the controversy over Judge Kavanaugh's Supreme Court selection has become the number one political issue ... and it should not be.

The Liberal issue seems to be over "Abortion Rights", or the rights of a woman to terminate a pregnancy.   I'm not aware of any other "political" issue which would suggest that Judge Kavanaugh might not be a viable Supreme Court Judge.

WTF do they care?  Most of the Liberal congresspersons are too old to beget congress-children.

And those who are not "Too old", have political issues in mind; issues which do not affect them personally.

While the "abortion" issue is a legitimate controversy, this seems to be an issue which is better handled in the courts; it's not a presidential issue until he makes it so, and Judge Kavanaugh does not strike me as an judiciary who is determined to rule by fiat.

So, what's left?  The Left just doesn't want another Conservative on the Supreme Court .. and that's a legitimate concern ("dead babies" not having a vote.)

 With an odd number of judges among the Supremes, it's no wonder that the Left is worried that The Court might demonstrate a powerful shift to the Right upon confirmation of Kavanaugh's addition to The Court.

Bump Stocks Commentary

"What we've here ... is FAILURE ... to COMMUNICATE."

SayUncle: A year after Vegas shooting, ATF emails reveal blame, alarm over bump stocks. ATF stated they were suddenly thrown into the political by NRA, who pointed out they were ATF approved. 

What began as a "National Tragedy" has evolved into finger-pointing and a search for someone to blame for the insanity of one man.

Did I say "someone"?

Anyone! 

(Anyone except for the demented mass murderer who used a loophole in the law to arm himself for what is for all intents and purposes a "loophole" in the law.)

The hammer is going to fall on the ATF, and maybe that's legitimate; but maybe it's not.

Speaking of hammers, I'm pretty sure I'll get hammered for what I'm about to say:

Because of the Las Vegas Massacre, the ATF will eventually be mandated to severely regulate every accessory and replacement part to your firearms   (starting with firing pins, which will be required to "stamp" a serial number on the primer or base of your ammunition)  ... new rules, regulations and laws. 

Your access to replacement parts will be subject to federal oversight; including a firing pin (needs a serial number!), a trigger shoe, or adjustment to effect a lighter trigger pull. 

A "Normal Capacity Magazine" will be legally restricted by the Federal Government.

Your 12-gauge shotgun could be registered as a "hand cannon" because it is capable of shooting slugs (which are the only gun currently legal for deer hunting in some states) and may be designated a "Hand Cannon".   (Okay, I'm making that up. )

I'm not even going to try to address the possibility that you can't replace or modify the stock on your rifle with a "custom made" stock; that, too, will be serialized.

Why? Because the national hysteria about guns makes your deer gun a sniper rifle; your 12 gauge Quail Gun is an instrument of Mass Murder, and your WWI 1911 pistol will be illegal because it can accept a magazine of more then (5, 6, 8, or ten round) capacity.

This will result in arcane rules which make no sense to the Common Man, make it more expensive to own a firearm, and the government will become even more intrusive in your day-to-day life as a firearms owner.

Count on it.   Today, Government is not here to help you, but to turn you into a nameless plebe with even more limited rights.

And people say MY "game" is dangerous!

After competing in shooting sports for 60 years, I can only attest to one minor injury to a shooter.

Football?   Not so safe.

I've railed before about the dangers of head injuries to high school students. 
Same thing for college students.

Tennessee State LB Christion Abercrombie in critical condition was injured on normal 'football play' - AOL News:

It was just a normal “football play” that resulted in a serious injury for Tennessee State linebacker Christion Abercrombie. According to The Tennessean, TSU head coach Rod Reed said in a radio interview Sunday morning that Abercrombie “was taking on a block” in the second quarter against Vanderbilt when he suffered what has been deemed a serious head injury. “It wasn’t anything malicious or dirty or anything like that. Just an unfortunate situation,” Reed said.

(emphasis added)

Maybe he'll quit football and take up competitive shooting .. if he recovers.

Slippery Slope

The issue of bump-fire stocks has created an entirely new aspect of the Second Amendment.

Whether a bump-fire stock (see below) obscures the fine line between  "semi-automatic fire" and "Full automatic fire" is either an excuse for the Federales to impose new restrictions on the (supposedly) impermeable Second Amendment,  or it's a "loophole" which law-abiding American Citizens are using to grandfather a new generation of (more or less) "AUTOMATIC WEAPONS" which had not been anticipated by previous law-makers; that is the question.

I personally have no use for a "Bump-Fire stock".  I'm not "flock-shooting" so I have no dog in this hunt.

But (if and) when the Federal Government arbitrarily decrees that a technological innovation "cleverly" eludes their published laws, they either need to change their laws (imposing the possibility of a "grandfather" effect on previously owned weapons) or they need to think whether their Federal mandate covers their ass.   

Which it does not.

If I read this clearly, Uncle Sam has three options; any of which will probably not meet their goal of keeping fully-automatic weapons out of the hands of law-abiding AMERICANS:

(1) Write a bunch of rules specific to "Bump Stocks" which will be obviated as soon as the firearms manufacturers change one tiny feature of their product:
(2) write some other rules which SPECIFICALLY deny the "Bump Stocks" by name;
(3) give it up, and let the manufacturers build whatever they want;  and ... by the way ... delete the "full automatic" rules currently in place.

My best guess is that none of these arbitrary measures well be adopted, or enacted as LAW, because people will always find a way.     It's better to just delete all the fully-automatic weapons laws and let Americans seek their own best protection. 

What ... gangsters don't already have machine guns?
Why shouldn't we?

Want to start a rebellion?

Impose the  most strict laws possible, then wait and see how many people disobey the law; you will have lawsuits up the ass trying to resist the natural instinct of otherwise law-abiding citizens who recognize a bad law when they see it.   Many people, otherwise law-abiding, will deliberately violate laws  which they believe stomp on the Constitutional Rights which we have all been assured will be protected by our elected representatives.

Gun Owners Foundation Submits Comments to ATF Over Proposed Bump Stock Ban: If this administration outlaws bump stocks, without regard for the limitations on ATF authority under federal law, it will put into place a slippery slope for future, anti-gun presidents. If ATF chooses to ignore the statutory definition of a machinegun [sic], and instead creates a new definition based on anything that “increases the rate of fire” of a semi-automatic firearm, then far more is at risk than mere bump stocks.

Would-be lawmakers want to pay close attention to the Maverick personalities of the American Citizen.   Many people would deliberately disobey such ... a law if only to register their disgust at the distrust of their government to assume that owning a "questionable" firearm is equivalent to violent intentions.

I've been to war, and I didn't like it; but when it comes to American Constitutional Freedoms, any administrative official who tramples on our (narrowly defined) Rights must be prepared to discuss just WHY he doesn't trust the honor of the people who voted him into office.

That, which is specifically prohibited, is prohibited.
That which is not prohibited, is allowed.

vs:

That which is specifically allowed, is  allowed;
that which is not specifically allowed, is prohibited.

Which world-state would YOU prefer?