How do you feel about the Automatic Gun Fire Prevention Act?

SSG Robert Webster - You can also align the gas rings on the bolt and screw up the gas cycle, as I'm sure you know. It was shooter's responsibility to check. If the gaps are not staggered you're losing gas and impacting low or having cycling problems in rapid-fire stages. Then you're making needless dope changes on the weapon and basically wasting ammo on the KD course. That's many levels above the disinformation that labeled "assault rifles" as bad and mistakenly got them banned though. ARs are here to stay and the sooner gun control advocates figure it out the better. Disinformation won't work again.

1LT Sandy Annala - The time period where the pressure in the chamber exceeds atmospheric pressure is measured in fractions of a second. The energy is not stored as gas pressure, nor can it be. That energy is captured by and stored in a spring that is prevented from releasing the energy, by the sear. The trigger is the mechanism, that releases the sear, and the stored energy, which drives the bolt and firing pin into the cartridge, firing the next round, completing a cycle.

A slow release of that energy results in insufficient kinetic energy to cause the cartridge primer to spark, and cause a misfire. The amount of kinetic energy required to spark the primer is in and of itself a designed safety feature. No how much you desire it to be a design flaw, the ability to create enhanced rates of fire is NOT. The weapon is functioning exactly as designed.

If you find a way to release the sear, whether by motion of the entire weapon actuating the trigger or trigger pulling device, the weapon will fire at the cyclic rate until it runs out of ammunition, or the sear engages because the trigger has been released. Enhanced rates of fire are not possible for ONLY gas operated firearms.

Trigger actuated firearms, lever actuated firearms, bolt actuated firearms; are only limited by the operators ability to operate the actuating mechanism. Everyone of these types of weapons, given a little time and a modicum of tinkering skill, can be modified by the home engineer to have a substantially greater rate of fire. In fact that is the history of how firearms have experienced leaps forward in technology.

Maj John Bell - This is very helpful. I thought it might be the case that slowing the mechanism would prevent it from working. I understand your description. Warmest Regards, Sandy

1LT Sandy Annala - I think, by your last response Sandy, that you're starting to understand a bit of the engineering requirements behind the proper functioning of a semi-automatic weapon. But let me go a little further.

The difference between semi-automatic and full automatic weapons isn't the part of the mechanism responsible for chambering and ejecting the rounds, like what you're talking about with respect to they cycling mechanism itself.

Semi auto-automatic weapons don't all work the same, though in principle the operation is very similar. Some work by recoil operation, in which the direct impulse of the cartridge moving backward when the powder ignites, pushing the bullet down the barrel. (Remember that whole equal and opposite thing from physics?). The operation of a blowback system is centered around the cartridge itself...the mass of the bullet and the powder charge, essentially. The pistol/rifle is thus designed to balance the forces required to operate the bolt/slide with the forces the cartridge is designed to produce.

What does this mean?

It means, for example, that you just can't "change the springs" on, say, a Colt 1911 slide to a weaker spring in order to make the slide chamber a round more slowly. Nor can you use a stronger spring to make the slide chamber a round more quickly. If you use a weaker spring, you damage/break the gun as the slide slams back too hard during the ejection phase...and then the spring won't be strong enough to properly chamber and seat the next round. If you use a stronger spring, then the slide won't move back far enough to properly eject the round at all. So what you end up with is a Colt 1911 (in this example) which will not function reliably and which will end up damaged/broken.

So, there's recoil operation, simple blowback, advance primer ignition blowback, delayed blowback (about 9 or 10 designs of this), floating chamber blowback, primer actuated blowback, and more.

WHAT CONTROLS THE RATE OF FIRE of an automatic weapon isn't the cycling operation of the mechanism, which is what we're talking about above. Remember, a semi-automatic weapon means "one trigger pull, one shot". Full automatic means "one trigger pull, several shots" for as long as you hold the trigger down.

The difference between semi-automatic and full automatic is in how the trigger/hammer/firing pin mechanism itself functions.

In the case of the Colt 1911 (to continue from my previous example), there are 4main components (not counting springs): trigger, hammer, sear, and disconnector.

When you pull the trigger, the sear and disconnector are pushed, which releases the hammer, dropping the hammer onto the firing pin.

When the bullet fires and the slide moves back, the hammer is cocked by the slide for the shot. When the slide moves forward, the hammer stays cocked EVEN IF THE TRIGGER IS HELD DOWN, because the disconnector will not reset until the trigger is released and will thus not allow the sear to be disengaged from the newly cocked hammer.

On the 1911 design, even if the disconnector fails, or is altered, the weapon still will not function in full automatic mode because the hammer would "ride the slide" on the way down and not have enough energy to drive the firing pin into the primer of the next bullet.

Remember...there are many ways in which the cycling mechanism works on different firearms. But the cycling mechanism itself is not what makes the weapon semi-automatic, or full automatic.

https://animagraffs.com/how-a-handgun-works-1911-45/

. CPT Mike Cunningham - Funny how I showed you the whole strategy of gradualism of the gun-grabbers, with the proposed solution of the “final problem”, to have handguns “totally illegal”, was clearly stated by Pete Shields back in 1976. That was some 5 years before the Reagan Presidency, and almost 35 years before Obama took office. You appear inept in handling the sequence of events.
Claiming it was “paranoia” after “the [B]lack man took office” is the usual baseless charge of “racism”, a common desperate attempt to rationalize their collective mind-set uttered by the extreme left wing. They project their own racist guilt of "gun control" on those who oppose them, a guilt that reaches back to the "Black codes", that forbade Blacks possession of ANY weapon --- no guns, knives, not even a cane, not even a dog.
“Paranoid” can now be given an additional definition ---- “What a gun-grabber calls a gun-owner who knows what the gun-grabber is planning to do”.
But of course, you don't give credence to any “right wing extremist sites”; sources you have determined “ALWAYS lie, twist facts, and misquote everything”. Everybody knows “The New Yorker”, where that quote of Pete Shields was published, is a right-wing magazine, just a tool of the NRA, and a sister publication of “The American Rifleman”. I'm sure the publisher and editorial staff would be amused to hear that.

CPT Mike Cunningham - "THERE IS NO SOCIALIST AGENDA". I heard the same thing about the Mafia -- it doesn't exist.

SSG Robert Webster - I must admit I was surprised to find that my reference to an entry in the OED and a quote from "The New Yorker", could be interpreted as "extremist views". What's that saying? --- "When the only tool you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail".
Please check your messages for an inquiry from me.

CW3 Harvey K. - Thank you, I responded to your query.

Unfortunately, we have suffered a number of tragedies lately committed by homicidal/suicidal psychos, including the subset of that group, jihadists. They have no fear of any punishment threatened by the law, not even capital punishment. They have accepted their own deaths as part of the horror they have chosen to inflict on innocent strangers.
Suicidal insanity such as that makes all laws meaningless. It is impossible to control the behavior of such suicidal mass-murderers by passing any laws, which provide any punishment. That includes laws designed to limit the availability of weapons.
If guns were effectively banned, and became non-existent in our society, far worse, far more deadly weapons would take their place. How many were killed by the combination of diesel fuel and lawn fertilizer? Or fireworks and pressure cookers? Or box cutters and planes? A truck became an "assault weapon" in Nice, FR and was used to murder 80 people.
You are correct, "New laws will not change anything". They simply don't have any power over the threat we face.