• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

auto trigger pull

P

Pace

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 2, 2009
Messages
1,140
Location
Las Vegas, NV
imported post

Not really OC, sorry. Serious question.

Automatic weapons are considered weapons with more than one shot from auto trigger pull. Has anyone considered making a gun that has a different trigger mechanism instead of a trigger? (ie, push button?)
 
Michigander

Michigander

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 24, 2007
Messages
4,818
Location
Mulligan's Valley
imported post

Any device you can depress or otherwise actuate to fire a gun is by default the trigger. A button, a switch, whatever you need to hit for rounds to go off, that's the trigger. More than one round per actuation of the trigger, and it is a machine gun.

If you want one easy motion with more than one round going off, and you want it cheaply and legally, then you want a Gatling type mechanism. Gatling type firearm systems are not considered machine guns, and are legal to own without any special paperwork in most states.
 
TechnoWeenie

TechnoWeenie

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 17, 2007
Messages
2,084
Location
, ,
imported post

why not a multi sear trigger?

one slight pull is one round, pull a bit harder, second round... farther still, 3rd round.

It is 3 different trigger pulls, from 3 different mechanisms...
 
4

4armed Architect

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2008
Messages
149
Location
L.A. County, California, USA
imported post

Then there is Bump Fire (uses recoil action to rapidly depress the trigger):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Va1TXGSCXk&feature=related



Seems like full auto, but it is not. Just extremely rapid single-shot-per-trigger-pull action caused by the recoil.

With practice (and watching You Tube videos), one can Bump Fire from other positions which have the possibility of increasing accuracy over the hip fire.

I seem to recall seeing a video of someone using a similar technique with a semi-auto handgun (just trying to tie the thread back to open carry of handguns). Oh, found it:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MydCuTfgt0k


A technique that could come in handy under very specific circumstances. Not that it needs to be said on this forum, but there are those who read the forum and don't know - Verifying the safety of shooting at the target is critical. (What is behind the target if you miss???)
 
Old Grump

Old Grump

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 22, 2010
Messages
387
Location
Blue River, Wisconsin, USA
imported post

I had to flip a switch then push a button to fire my weapon but it wasn't a gun exactly. In fact it looked an awful lot like a Terrier Missile.

I still look for the butterfly when I get to shoot somebody's Barret M82 and M99. It just doesn't feel right to shoot that round with a finger trigger. I don't know why they laugh at me.

Morini CM84E has an electronic trigger I've always wanted to try but Hammerli and Pardini are the closest I have ever come to a Free Pistol. That one is way out of my league.

I doubt the multiple notch sear would work, its still one pull no matter how many stages you have for it. One full pull of the trigger with multiple shots will have you and the BATF talking fines and forfeitures. This is the group that calls a part a machine gun and rigs up guns with shoe strings and weights to make it fire multiple shots so they can claim the defendant had a machine gun. Until sanity has come to the legal system and that alphabet agency has been relegated to the dustbin of history I don't think I would mess with my trigger very much.
 
TechnoWeenie

TechnoWeenie

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 17, 2007
Messages
2,084
Location
, ,
imported post

ATF got me thinking...

The irony of taking 1,000 rounds of ammo, immersing it in a tub of napalm, and lighting the fuse with a cigarette and some everclear.....

Initial reaction would be lots of fire/smoke, with secondaries being the rounds cooking off...

Methinks it'd do a LOT of damage... Especially if you were to use .50 or similar caliber rounds....

At what point do rounds start to cook off?


Kinda like an IRS agent dying from an infected paper cut... From a dollar bill....

Funny in a twisted kinda way..... Poetic justice maybe?

LOL
 
GLOCK21GB

GLOCK21GB

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Apr 22, 2009
Messages
4,347
Location
Green Bay, Wisconsin, USA
imported post

TechnoWeenie wrote:
ATF got me thinking...

The irony of taking 1,000 rounds of ammo, immersing it in a tub of napalm, and lighting the fuse with a cigarette and some everclear.....

Initial reaction would be lots of fire/smoke, with secondaries being the rounds cooking off...

Methinks it'd do a LOT of damage... Especially if you were to use .50 or similar caliber rounds....

At what point do rounds start to cook off?


Kinda like an IRS agent dying from an infected paper cut... From a dollar bill....

Funny in a twisted kinda way..... Poetic justice maybe?

LOL
Click to expand...
:uhoh:, I don't know if this forum is the correct place, for what you are talking about :exclaim:
 
Interceptor_Knight

Interceptor_Knight

Regular Member
Joined
May 18, 2007
Messages
2,851
Location
Green Bay, Wisconsin, USA
imported post

TechnoWeenie wrote:
why not a multi sear trigger?

one slight pull is one round, pull a bit harder, second round... farther still, 3rd round.

It is 3 different trigger pulls, from 3 different mechanisms...
Click to expand...
Machine Gun. A singlesteady trigger pull would result in 3 rounds fired.
 
P

Pace

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 2, 2009
Messages
1,140
Location
Las Vegas, NV
imported post

My point wasn't that the button would make it non auto, but that the pressing of a button would be faster (anyone who plays on an XBOX knows what I mean)
 
Interceptor_Knight

Interceptor_Knight

Regular Member
Joined
May 18, 2007
Messages
2,851
Location
Green Bay, Wisconsin, USA
imported post

Pace wrote:
My point wasn't that the button would make it non auto, but that the pressing of a button would be faster (anyone who plays on an XBOX knows what I mean)
Click to expand...

If you have ever witnessed handgun competitions, you would see thatrate of fire of the weapon is not an issue. You can not miss fast enough to stop a threat. Speed of the weapon does not compensate for lack of skill by the shooter.

It would be an ineffectivesolution to a non existent problem. It would also be cost prohibitive. Remington had precision rifles which fired electronically and which required special primers. The rifles were expensive as was the ammunition. The advantage of electronic firing was less moving parts to disturb the rifle (hammer, firing pin, etc) therefore a higher level of accuracy.
 
P

Pace

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 2, 2009
Messages
1,140
Location
Las Vegas, NV
imported post

Oh.

What they going to do with guns that have no mechanics and gunpowder?

Automatical Guns do not apply to any projectiles, correct? An automatic electronic rail gun wouldn't be banned?
 
Interceptor_Knight

Interceptor_Knight

Regular Member
Joined
May 18, 2007
Messages
2,851
Location
Green Bay, Wisconsin, USA
imported post

Pace wrote:
Oh.

What they going to do with guns that have no mechanics and gunpowder?

Automatical Guns do not apply to any projectiles, correct? An automatic electronic rail gun wouldn't be banned?
Click to expand...

If it does not meet the definition of a firearm, the ATF does not regulate it. Fully automatic rail guns are not regulated except that they are a "weapon" which is regulated by State and local Statutes/Code/Ordinances..

The term “firearm” is defined in the Gun Control Act of 1968, 18 U.S.C. Section 921(a)(3), to include “(A) any weapon (including a starter gun), which will, or is designed to or may readily be converted to expel a projectile by the action of an explosive; (B) the frame or receiver of any such weapon….
Click to expand...
” Based on Section 921(a)(3), air guns, because they use compressed air and not an explosive to expel a projectile, do not constitute firearms under Federal law — unless they are manufactured with the frames or receivers of an actual firearm. Accordingly, the domestic sale and possession of air guns is normally unregulated under the Federal firearms laws enforced by ATF.
Click to expand...
[/quote]
 
P

Pace

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 2, 2009
Messages
1,140
Location
Las Vegas, NV
imported post

Cool, anyone selling one? :)

Interceptor_Knight wrote:
Pace wrote:
Oh.

What they going to do with guns that have no mechanics and gunpowder?

Automatical Guns do not apply to any projectiles, correct? An automatic electronic rail gun wouldn't be banned?
Click to expand...

If it does not meet the definition of a firearm, the ATF does not regulate it. Fully automatic rail guns are not regulated except that they are a "weapon" which is regulated by State and local Statutes/Code/Ordinances..

The term “firearm” is defined in the Gun Control Act of 1968, 18 U.S.C. Section 921(a)(3), to include “(A) any weapon (including a starter gun), which will, or is designed to or may readily be converted to expel a projectile by the action of an explosive; (B) the frame or receiver of any such weapon….
Click to expand...
” Based on Section 921(a)(3), air guns, because they use compressed air and not an explosive to expel a projectile, do not constitute firearms under Federal law — unless they are manufactured with the frames or receivers of an actual firearm. Accordingly, the domestic sale and possession of air guns is normally unregulated under the Federal firearms laws enforced by ATF.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Gunslinger

Gunslinger

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2008
Messages
3,853
Location
Free, Colorado, USA
imported post

TechnoWeenie wrote:
ATF got me thinking...

The irony of taking 1,000 rounds of ammo, immersing it in a tub of napalm, and lighting the fuse with a cigarette and some everclear.....

Initial reaction would be lots of fire/smoke, with secondaries being the rounds cooking off...

Methinks it'd do a LOT of damage... Especially if you were to use .50 or similar caliber rounds....

At what point do rounds start to cook off?


Kinda like an IRS agent dying from an infected paper cut... From a dollar bill....

Funny in a twisted kinda way..... Poetic justice maybe?

LOL
Click to expand...
Incendigel (napalm) is jellied gasoline. You'd have to push it into the jello, not immerse it. And if it's lit off, I wouldn't want to be anywhere in the neighborhood. Forget the rounds blowing up, the gel would blow all over the place when ignited and stick to anything it came into contact with while flaming. You wouldn't want to light any fuse, either. Unless it's about 500 feet long.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top