By now you have heard that President Trump is calling for the ban of so called “bump stocks” and other items that simulate full-auto rates of fire while still meeting the current definitions for semi-auto firearms. You have probably also seen the same variety of responses including those who don’t own bump stocks and are wondering why a ban even matters. Well… Why does it a matter?
Bait and Switch
We’ve been had. President Trump was elected on the backs of gun owners and the NRA with the promise of ending the 8 year assault on Second Amendment rights. Now we see that he (and the NRA) are willing to capitulate on our rights when politically expedient. Worse that that, they are willing to do it in the same cowardly, backdoor ways as previous administrations – by decree of the ATF. Even Senator Dianne Feinstein is calling BS:
If the president really wants to ban bump stocks, he will support our bill. If ATF tries to ban these devices after admitting that it lacks the authority to do so, that process could be tied up in court for years. Legislation is the ONLY answer. #BanBumpStocks
— Sen Dianne Feinstein (@SenFeinstein) February 20, 2018
Perhaps the biggest reason that you should care about a bump stock ban, is the potential for the language used in such a ban to be more broadly interpreted than the author intended. Early ban legislation referred to devices that “increased rate of fire” which could have application far beyond just bump stocks and binary triggers to include high end target triggers, muzzle devices, and more.
Who gets to decide what constitutes an increase in rate of fire? What is the baseline rate of fire for a particular firearm? These questions should worry you.
Same Old, Same Old
The current threat to your rights doesn’t end with just banning certain firearm accessories. The President is reportedly exploring a whole host of potential measures including expanded background check and raising the age required to purchase certain guns. In the end, this is just more of what gun owners have become all too use to from a President, Legislature, and Lobbying Group that people expected would stand firm against such threats – the very reason they elected them.
Lets just throw new laws and definitions at the problem. That has always worked in the past right?