Page 1 of 2
Anybody souped up your Ruger 10/22 with this???
Posted: Thu Dec 14, 2006 5:16 pm
by stevie_d_64
http://www.firefaster.com/
Interesting banter running around the political forums on this issue...
Personally, I think the BATFE folks are jealous because we're having fun with these things...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9P8AbTKvykE
I can niether confirm or deny that I am in posession of one of these devices...
Posted: Thu Dec 14, 2006 5:33 pm
by kauboy
That thing is pretty cool. I would certainly want one if I had a Ruger. I would definitely like to see what the ATF thinks up as a good excuse for overturning their initial decision. The definition is clear and only makes mention that a machine gun fires multiple rounds with one function of the trigger, not the finger. Since the trigger is cycling, it can't fall into that definition. This should be interesting.
Posted: Thu Dec 14, 2006 5:56 pm
by cyphur
I'd buy a 10/22 just to get one of those things.
That is wicked cool!
Posted: Thu Dec 14, 2006 7:28 pm
by Mike1951
I seem to recall the price for the 10/22 stock was about $960.
It's not that neat!
looks like fun
Posted: Thu Dec 14, 2006 8:23 pm
by remington79
That looks like fun, but I can burn through ammo quick enough with my 10/22 as it is. (Not that quick but quick enough for my wallet.
)
Posted: Thu Dec 14, 2006 11:44 pm
by 4t5
This has now been ruled a machine gun by the BATFE.
Posted: Fri Dec 15, 2006 9:15 am
by kauboy
We know. Thats what their site explains. But after reading the documentation linked to on their site, I find it hard to believe how the ATF could overturn their initial decision. At first, they said that it indeed was NOT a part to convert a gun to a machine gun. Now with their change of heart, I want to know why.
Posted: Fri Dec 15, 2006 1:13 pm
by jimlongley
kauboy wrote:We know. Thats what their site explains. But after reading the documentation linked to on their site, I find it hard to believe how the ATF could overturn their initial decision. At first, they said that it indeed was NOT a part to convert a gun to a machine gun. Now with their change of heart, I want to know why.
I can see BATF might consider this modification to be a minor variation on the old old long recoil machine gun system (was it a Maxim or a Colt?) but I worry that following the same logic could lead to declaring that lever action rifles are readily convertible to full auto.
Posted: Fri Dec 15, 2006 1:53 pm
by KBCraig
Hey, we're talking about an agency that ruled a piece of string was a machine gun!
I guess it's time to put your thumb and belt loop on the NFA registry:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid ... 2139465694
Posted: Fri Dec 15, 2006 2:05 pm
by kauboy
DUDE!!! I so have to try that with my .22 now. Awesome!
Wait, there's probably not enough recoil to do it... but I still have to try.
Posted: Fri Dec 15, 2006 3:08 pm
by Skiprr
DUDE!!! I so have to try that with my .22 now. Awesome!
Just please don't giggle maniacally like the guy in the vid. Gives us all a bad image...
Posted: Fri Dec 15, 2006 3:12 pm
by kauboy
Oh no, I'm gonna giggle. I'm getting giddy now just thinking about it.
Posted: Sat Dec 16, 2006 8:10 am
by stevie_d_64
This is not all you can do with thr Ruger 10/22:
http://www.ruger1022.com/docs/israeli_sniper.htm
As for giggling...That makes my groups a little larger than normal...
Posted: Sat Dec 16, 2006 12:55 pm
by Roger Howard
just make sure you register your shoestrings with the BATF.
http://www.saysuncle.com/archives/2006/ ... y_fingers/
Posted: Sat Dec 16, 2006 1:56 pm
by kauboy
The sniper thing: Hilarious!
The shoe string: I kinda want to try it, but don't want to get busted by the ATF
)