There have been other things happening in the news this week. They've just been bumped to the inside pages.
Speaking of bumps . . . .
The courts have taken up bump stocks again. For some reason, a Texas gun owner--have we got your attention yet?--has sued to overturn the rule against bump stocks, which are substituted stocks on the end of long guns to make them fully automatic.
The ban was implemented during the Trump administration, after a sick man took cover in a room on the 32nd floor of a hotel overlooking a concert in Las Vegas, and used bump stocks on his weapons to kill 60 people and wound more than 400.
That was back in 2017. It's taken this long for somebody to decide they really need a bump stock, and have the case wend through the courts.
A panel of the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans has upheld the ban already. But a majority of the 17-member court has voted to rehear the case. So there's a chance . . . .
The court ought not reverse itself. It makes too much sense to ban these gawd-awful things.
As most gun owners know, a semi-automatic firearm shoots a bullet from its barrel every time the shooter pulls the trigger with his finger. A fully automatic firearm can shoot everything in the machine with one squeeze (and hold) of that trigger.
Fully automatic weapons--machine guns--are heavily restricted by the government, and have been since the 1930s. If you know somebody at the deer camp who owns one (that wouldn't be common) he's probably the least likely to make trouble with it, because he's already undergone all kinds of federal background checks and paperwork and license requirements and fees and fingerprinting and a year-long inspection.
Semi-automatic weapons are used in deer, duck and dove hunting. And are much easier to get.
But this damnable bump stock invention can turn a semi- into a fully- in a few minutes. And give somebody a military-grade weapon without all those checks, licenses and inspections. It basically uses the kick of the rifle against your shoulder to shuck and load shells from the magazine. And as fast as the gun can lock and load, it can shoot bullets down range.
Which is why the ban.
Machine guns--fully auto- matic weapons--are already so regulated by the feds that . . . . Well, it's doubtful even you, Mr. and Mrs. Arkansas, know a soul who owns one. And court after court has ruled over the years that, yes, machine guns can be regulated this way.
What we can't figure out is why some argue that a weapon with a fully automatic triggering mechanism is fundamentally different from a weapon with a fully automatic stock mechanism. The bullets are flying just as fast, either way.
Those who worry about their gun rights often hold true to Foch's maxim: Hold fast everywhere. The fear is that one compromise would end up on the downside of a slippery slope.
Except this compromise has already been made, years ago: We the People have decided, and 99.99 percent of us have agreed, that machine guns are something the government has a real interest in limiting. And not only shouldn't those machines be on the streets, they probably don't belong behind the deer camp at the sighting-in targets, either.
There has been a lot of talk this week about what is and what isn't settled law. As far as Americans are concerned--most Americans, the lion's share of Americans, a super-super-majority of Americans--the ban on bump stocks ought to be.