Future Ban on Bump Stocks?

Following the tragedy in Las Vegas recently, there has been an outcry from the media and gun-control activists to ban “bump stocks,” a device used by the shooter in his rampage. A bump stock replaces a rifle’s standard stock and increases the rate of fire of a semi-automatic weapon to mimic that of an automatic weapon.


              Image courtesy of Wikipedia

As stated, a bump stock replaces the standard rifle stock and uses the energy of the recoil to effectuate rapid fire. The shooter keeps his finger in place on the trigger while exerting backward pressure on the pistol grip, and then exerts forward pressure on the barrel. The rifle is held loosely against the shoulder to allow the stock to rapidly slide back and forth between the shoulder and trigger finger.

When a round is discharged, the rifle will recoil (“bump” back) against the shoulder. The trigger resets, and the non-trigger hand continues to push the rifle forward, away from the body. This causes the trigger to press against the stationary finger again, firing off another round.

It still results in one round being discharge with a single trigger pull and is therefore not a truly automatic rifle. However, the bump stock pushes the trigger forward against the stationary trigger finger rapidly, resulting in the rifle mimicking an automatic weapon.

Get Gunowner Identity Theft Coverage NOW

Since the rifle is held loosely against the shoulder, accuracy is somewhat sacrificed during the operation of a bump stock. What you gain in rate of fire you give up in accuracy.

Granted, it does allow for someone to fire off a number of rounds in a short amount of time, but is it that much faster than an experienced shooter using a standard equipped weapon?


That very question was put to the test by marksman Jerry Miculek as he used a traditional AR-15 in a match against someone using an AR-15 with a bump stock. Each had a ten-round magazine, and at the sound of a buzzer, both emptied their magazines at a target down-range.

The result?

There appeared to be no discernible difference in the amount of time it took either of the shooters to run through ten rounds. In other words, an experienced marksman can fire off as many rounds in nearly the same amount of time as someone using a bump stock. But one thing that was evident is that the bump stock proved to be less accurate in the showdown. That could be because of the shooter’s lack of skill or more likely because of the method a bump stock uses in attaining a rapid rate of fire.

See for yourself. Here is a video of the challenge.


Should Bump Stocks be banned? Tell us what you think!

First Aid for Gunshot Wounds 2A Institute

Comment section

57 comments on “Future Ban on Bump Stocks?

  1. Yes, I think they should be ban. This device has been on the market since 2010, now after saying that I was as I still am amazed it was allowed to be sold on the market. President Obama allowed this device to be sold on the open market for what reason? I have shot with one and it is worse than having a weapon in full auto which is not legal unless you are in the military.

  2. Banning bump stocks is the first step down the slippery slope toward banning semi-automatic weapons in general. For instance, I cannot fathom how any kind of bump stock reasonably be adapted to classics such as the M-1 Garand. Perhaps an accomodation (about which I also have reservations) would be to put them on the NFA list, which might deter spur-of-the-moment purchases by buyers who might be in a short-term state of anger.

  3. Like all laws, the devil is in the details. No matter how you write it it will be twisted beyond recognition. Okay, thou shell not have a bump stock. So if I call it a rapid fire enhancer is it legal? Or, thou shall have no mechanism that increases the rate of fire of a semi automatic weapon. So are wide triggers, trigger shoes, reduced springs etc. or the like now illegal? No law has ever prevented a crime. Each new law only creates a new class of criminal. Evil can not be regulated. When we start putting the blame on the user instead of the tool we will have started to solve the problem.

  4. I get it. Jerry is insanely fast, and a professional shooter. The bump stock costs you shots. However, you are forgetting how Paddock utilized the bump stock. As not a professional, he fired many, many more rounds at a mass of targets. If we could be certain that bad guys think like we do; that accuracy is more important, then we can leave the argument there. But, the publicity of Las Vegas now telegraphs the ability for bad guys to purchase a simple device without background checks or any kind of look into the person buying a bumpstock. That requires us as a society to take a long look at whether it needs to continue being sold without regulation.

  5. I have no need for this piece of junk. It is just a device for the
    shooter who feels he is not “Manly” enough. It will not
    “put more lead in your pencil”!

  6. No because then they would try to ban semiautomatics. And that would cause a revolution.

  7. Unlike the NRA Texas Law Shield supports our second ammendment rights. Great article.

  8. In my personal opinion, there is no logical reason for bump stocks.
    I get it that some enthusiasts want the full auto “experience” and no harm would necessarily come of them having access to these devices, but in the overall picture, anything that sacrifices accuracy for a firing rate most of us can’t match naturally is just a device for mass destruction.
    I would also like hand grenades and land mines to play with, and could do so safely out in the country where I live, but that doesn’t mean they should be legal for me to collect or own.

  9. Was thinking about getting a bump stock, but the article and the video persuade me that practice — not more equipment — is what is really needed. Personally, I can’t afford the $$$ to shoot that fast and potentially waste ammo. I’d rather shoot slow and make sure each round counts. Sad tragedy in Vegas, but I don’t think outlawing bump stocks is the answer because gun laws only restrict the freedoms of law-abiding citizens. And I don’t particularly care whether we can continue to buy bump stocks. But if those are made illegal, what will be next? Will we all have small magazine restrictions like California (land of fruit and nuts)? The problem is INCREMENTAL control by the government. Will banning bump stocks make us safer? Or will the ever-increasing reach of government endanger our lives?

  10. So now one person can’t take the pressures of life and there’s a massacre now the rest have to suffer for his stupidity. With a bump stock or regular stock he still would’ve done what he did. No made a fuss about the bump stock until this idiot .there should be no restrictions on the bump stock or banned

  11. If your object is to spray and pray, then keep them. Most of us w/military experience know that automatic weapons are only effective against masses of men, vehicles, or other large objects in which accuracy matters little to not at all.

    I have zero problems w/a ban on bump stocks even though they are not true automatic weapons.

  12. I have found the same results in accuracy. The only advantage I believe would be that the rate of fire with a 20 or 30 round mag will make an apponent shiver in their pants giving me an advantage.

  13. Yes. Ban bumpstocks. They serve no useful purpose in self defense.

  14. The two shooters should have exchanged weapons and fired another 10 rounds. That would remove any question of relative skills.

  15. I don’t think bump stocks should be banned. And my reasoning behind the madness is because it’s part of a sport; gun sport that is! Most people who buy this type of product is buying it just to have fun. I truly feel that anyone can take a gun out of a box and misuse it. If we’re going to base banning the bump stock on one mans misuse of it’s intended use; why don’t we just ban all guns altogether!

  16. Any after market product that has as its purpose to enable a semi-automatic fire weapon to have a firing rate approximating an automatic fire weapon should be regulated by the ATF. Automatic fire weapons enthusiasts will still be able to procure such devices should they satisfy the requirements set forth by the ATF as they do today regarding all of their automatic weapons purchases.

  17. Miculek is a world champion and can empty a six shot, double action revolver in about 1 second. Accurately! That said, I think that good political compromise is to have suppressors taken off the NFA list of controlled weapons and have Hellfire triggers, bumpstocks, and other similar devices placed on that list. In other words, treat them like machine guns were treated before Reagan outlawed the manufacture of them.

  18. I am not a “shooter” per se! I own 5 hand guns that range from 22 cal Ruger to 40 cal. Taurus semi auto pistol. I have 2 hand guns that have never been fired. I don’t really understand the NEED for a bump stocks, or any automatic weapon, except for our Armed Forces in combat. Are sport hunters using bump stocks? That even seems “unsportman like” to me. Enlighten me, please.
    Thank you.

  19. NO! Personaly I look at a bump stock as a novelty item. They might be fun to play with but I would not buy one. But I still wouldn’t ban them. There would still have to be a evil or deranged person pulling the trigger.

  20. Just another step in the Gun Grabbers attempt to limit our 2nd amendment rights. If they are allowed to ban this what will be next all semiautomatic weapons. The Los Vegas shooting was tragic and perpetrated by a sick evil man. Again the left wants to blame an inanimate object the gun. Instead of recognizing the real problems a sick individual who no matter what laws are on the books was going to find a way to wreak destruction. Laws don’t prevent those intent on breaking them from acting. The laws are there they just need to be enforced. Let’s not punish the Law Abiding citizens.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: