Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
The Unbalanced Scales of Las Vegas
Over the last 24 hours, I’ve been doing something I don’t normally do: I’ve been debating the right of self-defense with gun-control advocates on social media. I don’t normally do this because I find most gun-control arguments rather tiring. However, it’s been interesting to note the assumption of guilt in the minds of a great number of gun control supporters, and the National Rifle Association in particular as the source of their wrath, as if the NRA itself gave somehow gave tips to the Las Vegas murderer on how to perform his horrible deed.
The NRA is not responsible for this, neither are its millions of members. I am not in favor an entire group responsible for actions of one man, because the minute you do such things, you lay down tracks for the boxcars headed east.
Why then do people see a need to scapegoat the NRA here? I can think of a number of reasons why:
- A horrible act requires a horrible villain, and the villain we currently have on our hands just isn’t horrible enough. It offends our sense of proportionality that such a crime could be done by one man, so we invent a supporting cast for his movie. For those on the political left, the NRA fits that bill quite nicely.
- Someone or something could have prevented this, and the NRA allowed it to happen. This argument tends to focus on the use of the now-notorious “Bump Fire” stock, however, how the NRA could have prevented a product coming to market that was approved by Obama’s ATF remains a mystery to me.
- The NRA needs to stop getting in the way of “common sense” gun laws that might somehow have prevented this from happening. What laws in particular might have stopped a quiet accountant with no history of mental illness, no significant run-ins with the law, and no track record of violence from doing such a thing are left unspoken in this argument.
NRA members are a powerful political force, and Trump appealed to gun owners early on in his campaign, to good effect. To my friends on the left, I ask you, when your boogeyman behind the evil in the world just happens to be a big supporter of your political opponents, are you really worried about changing the world, or is scoring political points the ultimate goal here? If it’s changing the world and making it a safer place, I share those goals, as does every single NRA member, and we also share a desire not to be labeled accessories to a crime we had nothing to do with.
Published in Domestic Policy
Ok, after reading the NRA’s press release versus what CBS says the NRA said, they are urging the ATF to look at bump stocks again, that’s it, and it looks like we might get nation-wide reciprocity in return.
I’ll take that, especially if the SHARE Act is thrown in for good measure.
Sorry, but I only use handguns, so without understanding the mechanics, if a semi-automatic’s purpose is to NOT automatically fire (which I think most reasonable people support) how is it that anyone can do a simple modification, even using ones clothing (!) to make it automatic?
After seeing your video, I couldn’t tell the difference between that guy’s rapid fire into the pond and what my friends in Vegas escaped on Sunday night.
Again, I support 2A, and know what the Left is doing with the politics. I just don’t understand how the gun manufacturers are not required to prevent modification. Are you saying it’s a cost issue? If it adds $ to ensure the trigger mechanism can’t be altered, who would argue with that?
But if it’s a complexity issue, and it makes the weapon more likely to fail to operate correctly … not good.
I think the 2nd Amendment is necessary both to make meaningful the right of self-defense and a people-controlled government. With respect to the former there can be substantial regulation with regard to the type of weapons in the hands of citizens so long as effective self-defense is not denied. But even a crazy person is entitled to self-defense if they are not being actively protected by someone else. (You know the saying: “Just because your paranoid doesn’t mean they can’t be out to get you.”) So there are no easy answers for self-defense, even as many unregulated objects can be made into lethal weapons.
With respect to the people controlling their government rather than being enslaved to it, existing regulation puts the people at a severe disadvantage. They cannot contend with the violent capabilities of their government unless they are willing to organize in a sacrificial way to deprive or appropriate the armory of the government.
These questions do not arise when things are peaceful between citizens and government is benign. But neither do rights elsewhere in the constitution become a matter of great moment until the situation arises where the abridgment of that right does manifest harm. Who in the LGBT community having recently been found to have equal protection rights would now argue that there was no need for the 14th Amendment?
Personal security is a state of mind reinforced by some preparation and a lot of fortune. That is why the 2nd Amendment is a natural right. “Common-sense gun regulation” is simply an invitation to integrate into a shared delusion about government and our fellow man.
Here’s a schematic of an AR-15, the most common semi-automatic, centerfire rifle in America. Each and every part is numbered because you can buy each of them separately, to repair or upgrade your firearm. You can in fact build your own AR that way, and good number of people do just that, to get exactly the combination of features they want. Who’s the ‘manufacturer’ in that case?
I don’t think your question is trolling, but it is naive. You seem to have the idea that a firearm is a sealed unit with fixed parts that are never touched by its owner. Nothing could be further from the truth. The AR is probably the epitome of ‘platform-ness’, that is, a design that has attracted myriads of parts and upgrade suppliers due to its standardization, but it’s far from the only. For instance, I own four Ruger 10/22s, one of the most common semi-automatic rimfire rifles. I have modified every one of those over time – one that’s my target rifle to be more precise, and three that I use for instruction to be easier to operate by novices.
Even if you do not modify a firearm, it is necessary to periodically ‘strip’ it for cleaning. ‘Strip’ is just a short way of saying “partially dismantle in order to access the working parts”. Just how are you going to prevent access to the components if that’s routinely necessary for normal operation?
Based upon my experience on the streets I learned that you cannot prevent someone from doing something stupid, or doing something evil. Once someone intends to do something they will take steps to complete the act, laws do not matter to them.
You have a right to protect yourself and your family.
When I’ve decided to sell one of my handguns I place them on consignment with a licensed gun dealer. I do this because I know they will do the paperwork and the background check. There is always a chance that someone who passes the background check might misuse the gun. That is my personal preference for selling a gun because I will have a personal record of the transaction.
Police officers that work the streets support the right of firearm ownership for personal defense. I assumed everyone I met during a shift was armed, and I have conducted traffic stops with individuals that had a CHL. I did ask to see the permit.
If you decide to carry you must know your state laws for your own protection. Knowing is not relying on hearsay from friends. Knowing means reading the statutes, and if you don’t understand the statute you might want to consult an attorney for a clarification. I know that’s an extra expense, but it will save you a lot of grief.
Just so. Basically all the “reasonable” manufacturing requirements lead you to non-functioning guns for either recreation or self-defense. Then you might as well have a 3-D printed disposable gun. They exist already but these new regulations would be a boon to 3-D printer manufacturers.
I’ll be the first to agree, definitely naive. While we have handguns, I have never owned an AR. I understand stripping and cleaning, I’ve done that with an older 9 mil. What you say makes sense. Thanks.
Let emphasize and extend on @lockeon‘s point: Given virtually any firearm — barrel, breach block, and trigger –, virtually any idiot criminal exposed to a few tools can use a home shop to create just about any banned firearm or accessory. It’s just not that difficult. Banning selected kinds of firearms is like banning old-style paper matches but allowing kitchen matches. Cuz arson, and smoking, and kids sometimes burn themselves, doncha’ know.
And banning firearms entirely is like banning fire itself.
Is that a real, rather than merely a rhetorical question, because I grew up thinking the NRA was basically evil- or close enough so as not to make much difference. If you’re genuinely curious, I think I can explain the reasoning behind it.
First off, see here: http://ricochet.com/460156/bump-fire-trigger-toys-and-gun-laws/
Secondly – your suggestion has been tried before.
To make an AR15 fully automatic, you need to change several things:
AR15 manufacturers have, in the past, purposely not milled out a back pocket on their receivers so that they could not accommodate an auto sear. They also used to use a different sized pin-hole for the hammer and trigger pins (the pins which hold these components in the receiver, and about which these components move), so that you could not install a mil-spec trigger set.
For a determined tinkerer with a hand drill (though a drill press or mill would be better), some end-mill bits, and a bit of time, these were no obstacles at all. It’s not rocket science.
It’s not a cost issue either. Guns are made of metal, and anyone who can work with metal can do this sort of work, regardless of what precautions the gun makers take.
Looks like you asked the same thing I was wondering about – but earlier.
PS: Nice chatting with you yesterday. I’m with you on Grapes of Wrath – makes Fabianism appealing.
Is 67 the regulated part?
Is that diagram to scale?
Asking for a friend. :)
There is “regulated part”. What is regulated is assembling them into a complete firearm. You can posses all the component parts, just so long as you do not assemble them, but be warned that the BATFE does prosecute people for “constructive possession” if you have the parts and a gun where (if modified) they could work, even if you haven’t made the modifications (the BATFE rarely even attempts to prove intent in these cases).
Starting from the Constitution of the United States of America (COTUS), Amendment II, the appropriate laws would be in the training, regularly assembling, and promotion of the militia made up of the free people. COTUS Amendment II has at its heart a basis from the Virginia 1776 Constitution’s June 1776 Bill of Rights, which states:
“That a well-regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the proper, natural, and safe defence of a free State; that standing armies, in time of peace, should be avoided, as dangerous to liberty; and that in all cases the military should be under strict subordination to, and governed by, the civil power.”
It was even then understood that the proper, natural, safe defense of a free State (including its peoples) is a populace trained to arms, and not denied the possession or carrying of those arms. Private entities and governments that interfere with this, interfere with the very own security of the people and their organized state.
You want to do something to ensure there are people who can bring attacks like this to a stop? Take seriously the purposes of the militia and ensure that the people are broadly trained, ready to fight, and armed to defend themselves anywhere they may be. It is not reasonable to expect that every person with a vile purpose will be stopped in the planning stages, but it is reasonable to assure that once the fight starts there are people ready and willing to bring it to an end. The University of Texas tower shooting gives us an example of how that works.
Very nice Post, Kevin.
I have to admit, because I live near (but never IN) the sanctuary-giving, Communist-loving, far-left-crazies-living Travis County Texas, I will not put my NRA sticker on my new car. At the moment, I love the paintjob more than I love my pride for the NRA. Those Leftists are well-known for keying cars with Trump stickers, GOP stickers, etc.
I don’t care what the NRA or GOP say about bump-stocks – let’s face it, prior to Vegas they were barely used by anyone. Ammo is expensive these days, and you go through money way too fast pretending your semi is full-auto. It ain’t worth it.
et us not forget that the Shooter had plenty of money. The amount he spent on the guns in his room alone would have probably have paid off my morgatge. Even if we went the Full British a guy with a million dollars and the willingness to spend it could probably buy any weapon he wanted. We should be thankful he didn’t get a Grenade Launcher.
I admit I don’t know anything about guns. I guess I was misinformed. What I was told is that you can buy all the AR-15 parts except for a receiver, which is legally considered to be what counts as the gun, and you need a license to own that. The chart said part 67 is the lower receiver, so I thought that’s what they were talking about.
Ah, I missed the chart. Yes, the lower receiver is the regulated part, in the sense that it is what counts as the firearm. However, you do not need a license to purchase a semi-auto version. A full auto version must have been made before May of 1986, and while not licensed it is registered and the buyer must go through extensive background checks, get a law enforcement officer to sign off on it, and pay a $200 tax.