Gun Control proponents have made gains.
-Florida passed the Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School Public Safety Act.
The age to purchase firearms in Florida is now 21. Military service members and LEO’s can purchase if they are under 21 for rifles and shotguns.
A three day minimum waiting period is now applicable for all firearms. Exceptions for concealed carry license holders, and Military/LEO who are buying long guns, and licensed hunters buying long guns.
Bump stocks are no more. Possession and transfer are now prohibited in all forms.
For the violation and delay of the second amendment rights of all and especially those 18-20 we have gained…
A provision called the “Guardian” program where certain school faculty members can take 132 hours of specialized training (3+ weeks full time) and then be armed on school grounds. While this provides a more formalized methodology it must still be administered by the local jurisdictional law enforcement, who in all reality could have implemented similar programs already if they have chosen to do so.
While I believe there was a lot of positive language in the bill it should have stood alone away from the firearms prohibitions. From a legal standpoint gun owners lost much and gained nothing that could not have been easily accomplished in other ways.
The security farce of gun control has been appeased and now we see how far down the slope we slip because…
-Illinois HB 1465 passed the house solidly and was referred to the senate.
HB 1465 Provides that on or after the effective date of the bill, it is unlawful for any person within the State to knowingly deliver or sell, or cause to be delivered or sold, an assault weapon, assault weapon attachment, .50 caliber rifle, or .50 caliber cartridge to, any person under 21 years of age. Makes it unlawful for any person under 21 years of age to knowingly possess an assault weapon, assault weapon attachment, .50 caliber rifle, or .50 caliber cartridge 90 days after the effective date of the bill. Provides exemptions and penalties. Provides that it is unlawful for any person within the State to knowingly deliver or sell, or cause to be delivered or sold, a large capacity ammunition feeding device to a person under 21 years of age. Provides that it is unlawful for any person under 21 years of age to possess a large capacity ammunition feeding device within the State. Provides exemptions and penalties. Effective immediately. (Emphasis mine)
If the State Senate passes it the solidly blue state of Illinois will go further into the gun control hole.
-The Department of Justice submitted to the Office of Management and Budget a notice of a proposed regulation to clarify that the definition of “machinegun” in the National Firearms Act and Gun Control Act includes bump stock type devices, and that federal law accordingly prohibits the possession, sale, or manufacture of such devices.
While I personally hold bump stock’s somewhere between bemused acceptance and mild contempt as being a gimmick for amusing ammo consumption. Holding no other purpose, I do not wish to see them banned as the precedent set is ‘we can ignore mechanical realities if we feel like it and it makes us feel good’.
In the video above Gunner Wade of 2MARDIV demonstrates how effective (or ineffective) automatic fire actually is when the express purpose is to cause casualties. Gunner Wade is an expert in his field and is regularly part of the future systems process for the Marine Corps.
What does this mean?
A bump stock and the other methods for rapidly firing a rifle with mechanical advantage are sloppy workarounds to actual machineguns. While the fire rate does increase the effectiveness of the shots diminishes to nothing, actually hindering accuracy substantially. The additional mechanical slop induced by bump fire devices magnifies the diminished effectiveness of automatic fire in standard machineguns.
It is possible to easily bump fire a rifle without mechanical aid. It is still ineffective beyond extreme close quarters.
Las Vegas was a circumstance where the target of the attack was thousands of closely packed people. Casualties were easy to induce because the target was hard to miss and the noise at the target venue covered immediate notice of the attack among the other general confusion. Any rifle including a single shot would have been effective on such a target and the massacre would have been equivalently horrific. Use of a vehicle as a weapon or HME (Homemade Explosive) would have dramatically increased casualties as well.
In short it is impossible to factually argue a bump stock or similar device increases anything but the rate at which the firearm expends ammunition. It cannot be factually argued without a very staged set of circumstances that it would produce higher casualties or that it’s regulation will reduce casualties in similar circumstances.
The regulation will not and cannot give the desired result of casualty prevention and reduction.
This will result in proposition of additional regulations when the current ones fail to prevent casualties, despite every expert’s warnings to exactly that result. This is the slippery slope of gun control regulations.
Hang on folks we are not done.
