In Maryland, a new law has defined the term “machine gun convertible” pistol, effectively banning many Glock and similar handguns, which are owned by millions of Americans for legal use. Connecticut has followed suit, prohibiting the future manufacturing, selling, and importing of various widely used handguns, along with imposing fresh restrictions on unfinished frames and receivers. New York State has taken it a step further, making the sale or transfer of what it calls a “convertible pistol” a Class D felony.
The NRA, which filed a lawsuit against California last October, has already initiated legal actions in Maryland and is contemplating challenges in other places.
These legislative moves appear to be less about public safety and more about a broader strategy to limit access to firearms owned by the public.
Denver’s Democratic mayor has stated, “I will not be bullied,” as the Justice Department sues the city over its ban on “assault weapons.”
These laws are often marketed as targeting “do-it-yourself machine guns.” However, justifications for such measures seem weak upon closer examination. Converting a semi-automatic weapon to a fully automatic one is already a serious federal crime, punishable by up to ten years in prison. Federal laws also prohibit the manufacture, sale, or possession of devices that facilitate conversion, and more than half of the states have already outlawed such conversion devices.
The crucial question is why we don’t see enforcement against criminals using semi-automatic firearms when illegal conversions have been banned multiple times. The simple answer might be the lack of enforcement.
Instead of pushing for stricter enforcement of existing laws, activists have shifted their focus from criminal behavior to targeting responsible gun owners.
Banning Glocks will not put an end to criminal ingenuity but might move toward the long-held goal of extreme gun control advocates: an outright ban on all handguns.
Courts have repeatedly struck down broad handgun bans, so advocates are altering their approach. They’re trying to redefine common firearms as “DIY machine guns” to label them as safety risks. However, the prohibited firearms are widely used and aren’t rare. They’re popular largely because they are reliable, effective for personal protection, law enforcement, and recreational shooting. Their affordable prices also make them appealing to new gun owners, while seasoned shooters value their consistent design.
The economic consequences of these bans will likely hit small businesses hard, especially since brands that comprise a large portion of the market will be removed from shelves. The existing restrictions on semi-automatic rifles, often labeled as “assault weapons,” further complicate the situation, risking the viability of small stores in a sector where profit margins are already tight.
The effects on current and prospective gun owners could be substantial. Law-abiding citizens may find themselves with fewer options for self-defense. Glocks, known for their affordability and reliability, come in numerous models, sizes, and calibers, catering to varying personal preferences.
Women, for instance, often prefer slimmer and subcompact models because they’re more comfortable to handle. These laws will limit choices for those simply seeking to protect themselves and their families.
Historically, Americans have faced similar legal challenges, but none have withstood constitutional scrutiny. Recent Supreme Court cases, like New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. Bruen, illustrate that firearm regulations need to align with the country’s longstanding traditions of gun ownership.
This situation is no different. The right to bear arms shouldn’t be vulnerable to the political whims of any one state, nor can it be negated by redefining well-known firearms into obsolescence. Although these restrictions are expected to face strong legal opposition, there’s optimism they will be overturned based on the constitutional principles that have safeguarded these rights for generations.
Yet, gun owners can’t afford to be passive, expecting the courts to take up their cause. With three states already joining California in these efforts, more states might follow their lead. Once advocates of strict gun control feel empowered by these laws, they are likely to explore additional methods of curtailing Second Amendment rights. Therefore, it’s vital for gun owners to remain engaged, voice their opinions to elected officials, and vote for candidates who support their rights come November.
