Hacker News Reader

Comment by exhilaration | Hacker News Reader

While you are technically correct, NEARLY automatic weapons (binary triggers) are legal in most states, here's a random video for the curious: https://youtu.be/rOkAZkk__5g

And fully automatic (but illegal) weapons are easily available in the form of Glock auto sears https://www.vice.com/en/article/pkp8p8/glock-switches-auto-s... my buddy in Baltimore heard on of these being shot in his Baltimore neighborhood a few weeks back.

View on HN

I think this is a stretch. Binary triggers are tricky to use, and aren't nearly automatic. They're slightly more automatic than semi-automatic, but much, much less usable.

In terms of illegal weapons, yes. There are illegal fully automatic weapons in the US without taking your example into account. I'm talking about what's legal.

This sub-thread started on the Vegas massacre, where the shooter used a bump stock. It was legal at the time and pretty damn close to automatic.

That's fair, although I still don't think it's that close. An actually automatic weapon is the sort of thing militaries use, and witout minimising the horror that a bump stock can cause, I think they do far more.

Back to my original point, it's still wrong to say this will happen while we have automatic weapons. Why perpetuate a lie?

Several states and the Federal government found bump stock close enough to automatic that they are no longer legal. I’d guess the quote from the article is referring to the same point of view, a thin line from the perspective of the non gun-owning layman.

It's a thin line because of terrible reporting. This is destructive because until we get basic facts clear the pro-gun people are just not going to take people who say such things seriously. No more "assault-style" weapons or "fully semi-automatic" guns. Just tell the truth and break down the semantic defenses.

Naw, it’s a thin line because the whole point of bump stocks is to make a semi-automatic fire like an automatic. Even the NRA says so, this has nothing to do with the quality of reporting.

‘In the 2017 Las Vegas shooting, twelve bump stocks were found at the scene.[7] The National Rifle Association stated on October 5, 2017, "Devices designed to allow semi-automatic rifles to function like fully-automatic rifles should be subject to additional regulations"’ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bump_stock#Federal

> the whole point of bump stocks is to make a semi-automatic fire like an automatic

Then the lawyer should say "we should ban bump stocks" instead of perpetuating the lie that automatic weapons are prevalent in the US.

They did say that, and now we have fewer automatic-like weapons in the US. Hey I have no problem with your suggestion, I like the alternative wording you offered! I’m just pointing out that the quote was mostly reasonable at the time, I agree it’s slightly inaccurate as a shortcut summary of the situation, but I don’t think it’s as egregious as you claim. I’ll add that one quote out of context from one article does not establish a pattern. You jumped to complaining about the pattern without evidence of a pattern.

I thought it would be tedious to link to however many examples would illustrate a pattern. I think this wording is pretty commonplace though - military-style rifle, which sounds like "military grade" but is a motte and bailey for "looks military". That sort of thing.

I'm not a gun person at all, but I really despise manipulative language in media. That's why I'm harping on.

Fair enough, I hear you.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com