Liste des Groupes | Revenir à a tv |
In article <v5fv2g$1uphg$2@dont-email.me>,What *is* the proper response to an opinion given as unassailable fact?
moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On 6/25/2024 6:51 PM, BTR1701 wrote:You keep telling me what I mean, but I assure you, Kreskin, that if IIn article <v5ff1u$1ns3d$5@dont-email.me>,>
moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
>On 6/25/2024 3:34 PM, BTR1701 wrote:In article <v54u4f$3bnc4$3@dont-email.me>,>
moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
>On 6/21/2024 12:59 AM, BTR1701 wrote:>In article <v52nan$2v630$5@dont-email.me>, FPP <fredp1571@gmail.com>
wrote:>>>Nope. Same single function.How are they substantively different, counselor?>
One's trigger is functioned only once, the other's trigger functions
for every round fired.
>
Literally not. The firing mechanism inside the gun requires the trigger
go through its full cycle of function (depressed, released, and reset)
for every round fired in a semi-auto rifle. It's only activated once
for
an entire burst in a machine gun.
In both machine gun and bump-stock, the trigger cycle "consults" the
shooter's finger during each cycle. If there's pressure it fires, if
not it stops. For the shooter the guns are *functionally* identical.
Which might be relevant if the NFA regulated firearms in any way, shape,
or form based on what it's like for the shooter. It does not therefore
it is not.
You think "single function of the trigger" doesn't entail the shooter's
experience of it?No, it doesn't.>
You mean, "Yes I do."
mean something I write it. If it's not in what I've written, it's not
what I mean.
Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.