Virtue signaling??

[44 AMP]

Am seeing a bunch of news in the mainstream media about states passing state laws banning the "Glock switch", along with the usual BS claims how this will (or worse, is) reducing crime and gun violence.

What I wonder is, A) how this can be anything but BS, and B) who do they think cares?

The Glock switch is illegal under federal law. For people who ae not FFL licensed to deal in full auto firearms they cannot be registered and made legal.

I don't know if possession of the switch alone is a crime, but putting one in a gun absolutely is a Federal crime, as the Fed govt will not, and cannot, by existing law, approve them.

The Hughes Amendment prohibits full auto not in the registry as of May 19 1986. The Glock switch did not exist then, and cannot be added now, unless the law is changed to allow it, or repealed entirely.

SO EVERYONE who is getting one of the switches and putting it in a Glock is breaking Federal law by doing that.

What can the point of a state passing a law making something already illegal under Federal law also illegal under state law? Virtue signaling?

With such a law, can a state prosecute or would that be a double jeopardy situation if the feds are already prosecuting??

How does that help anything? From where I sit, I don't see that it does, thoughts??

[zukiphile]

How does that help anything?

It helps the advocates who pushed for it. Often in politics, expending capital also generates it. State Rep. Smith really cares because he helped to curb dangerous gun possession.

Am seeing a bunch of news in the mainstream media about states passing state laws banning the "Glock switch", along with the usual BS claims how this will (or worse, is) reducing crime and gun violence.

What I wonder is, A) how this can be anything but BS, and B) who do they think cares?

The Glock switch is illegal under federal law. For people who ae not FFL licensed to deal in full auto firearms they cannot be registered and made legal.

I don't know if possession of the switch alone is a crime, ...

If the state laws to which you refer just ban the switch itself, they would permit state prosecution of possession of the switches only without any fully automatic arms involved.

That the law is about something that isn't really a problem or that a federal prosecutor would get the credit for a plea isn't for the issue for the advocates of the restriction.

I'm not a criminal attorney, but just because an act violates both a federal and state law wouldn't mean that separate prosecutions would violate a prohibition on double jeopardy. If you remember some high profile cases, after the state prosecution, there's a federal civil rights case as well. I'm not telling you it is right or fair to be tried twice, one each by separate governments, but we know that it happens.


The glock switch is an issue like the bump stock. Lots of people interested in guns wouldn't take one for free, but expanding the scope of government power to make the sphere of allowed actions smaller ends up making everyone a bit smaller.

[Double Naught Spy]

This is no different than all the other times laws are passed in response to specific circumstances that are already covered by other laws.

Virtue signaling? Sure, but no more so than with the other laws. It makes it look like they are proactive and sensitive to the needs of the constituents.

It adds another legal tool with which to threaten criminals as sometimes the feds won't or don't prosecute certain crimes for various reasons. This will allow the state to do it.

[Brian Pfleuger]

Originally Posted by 44 AMP

What I wonder is, A) how this can be anything but BS, and B) who do they think cares?

It's definitely virtue signaling but it also falls into the modern legal concept of charging people with every possible thing you can get.
One murder is committed, and the perp is charged with 3 or 4 counts of murder, just state charges, then if they decide the Feds are involved somehow, 2 or 3 more.
Kill one person and get 5 murder charges?

Regarding the switch itself, it would definitely fall in the "constructive possession" category if you had it and a Glock that fit it, regardless of it you put them together.

[rc]

Well they can't actually do something about the criminals who commit crime can they? That would be politically incorrect because offending does not occur at the same rate across all racial groups. The disparate incarceration rate for each race is considered itself racist. Glock is not a race Personally I prefer to virtue signal with CZ and Ruger fans. I don't care to associate with Glock and Savage fans because like dogs, guns reflect the personality of their owner I guess that makes me a "Firearm Supremist" I'm sure some of you snobs only associate with classic Colts and would not dream of owning a....uh.... Marlin.....puhhh!

[44 AMP]

We're all "snobs" about something, and usually a great many things. And I don't feel the dogs in my home reflect anything about me, (I'm a cat person) other than the fact that I tolerate them because my wife loves them.

There are some gun brands where I don't like anything they make, (Glock is one) but for most gun brands, I am model, (and sometimes caliber) not brand specific.

The glock switch is an issue like the bump stock.

No, its not. Not even close.

The Glock switch is an illegal conversion of semi auto to full auto, was not, is not, and cannot be legal, from the moment the first one entered the US. They were never approved by the govt and sold to the general population as legal. Bumpfire stocks were. Bumpfire stocks simulate the rate of full auto firing by assisting the shooter in pulling the trigger very rapidly, but the trigger is pulled separately for each shot, in compliance with the law.

Glock switches convert the pistol to true full auto fire. Doing that, without PRIOR Federal approval and licenses has been a crime since 1934. Not the same thing as bump stocks, at all.

[Jim Watson]

The supporting legend here was that it allows state prosecution without having to get a federal lawyer's attention. Handy as a Piling On Charge to induce a plea bargain or to have something to nail him on if the main charge misfires.

[zukiphile]

The glock switch is an issue like the bump stock. Lots of people interested in guns wouldn't take one for free, but expanding the scope of government power to make the sphere of allowed actions smaller ends up making everyone a bit smaller.

Originally Posted by 44AMP

No, its not. Not even close.

The Glock switch is an illegal conversion of semi auto to full auto, was not, is not, and cannot be legal, from the moment the first one entered the US. They were never approved by the govt and sold to the general population as legal. Bumpfire stocks were. Bumpfire stocks simulate the rate of full auto firing by assisting the shooter in pulling the trigger very rapidly, but the trigger is pulled separately for each shot, in compliance with the law.

Glock switches convert the pistol to true full auto fire. Doing that, without PRIOR Federal approval and licenses has been a crime since 1934. Not the same thing as bump stocks, at all.

Emphasis added.

You may see bump stocks and clock switches as more than a minor niche in the general market. I see the appeal as petty limited just because the trait it introduces, a high rate of fire or a simulation of a high rate of fire, isn't desirable for most applications.

[Ricklin]

Well a bump stock or a Glock switch effectively converts good guns in to a poorly controlled bullet hose. Not at all the same thing, but the result is somewhat similar. A high rate of inaccurate fire, the better to kill or injure innocent bystanders.
The baggy pants boys pack pistols, not carbines and rifles where bump stocks are employed. I'll also add I've heard of zero cases of gang violence where bump stocks were used.
The dark web facilitates the availability of the switch kits, 3d printers are everywhere, while costly 3d printer machines that print metal are available. Many services are available to 3d print parts with no questions asked.
I have a deep understanding of 3d imaging esp radiography, I'm also well versed in 3d printing. My point is there are hundreds of thousands of individuals with more knowledge than I. It's sad and amusing to see and hear of yet more laws banning technology..how cute. The genie is out of the bottle, the "genie" is WAY TOO BIG to stuff back in there.

[44 AMP]

A high rate of inaccurate fire, the better to kill or injure innocent bystanders.

OR to just have fun with at the range or plinking in a safe shooting area that isn't an organized range.

This is what bump fire stocks were made for, recreational enjoyment, because firing fast like a machine gun is FUN! Sure, its wasteful, and not effective but it is fun. And that's why they were legal and unregulated, because they were simply a range toy, used for recreation. Until one mass murder used them shooting into a crowd from an elevated hotel room. After that the govt changed its mind about them, and put them on the restricted list.

The Glock switch, on the other hand illegally modifies the firearm (a bump stock does not) for the express purpose of turning a concealable handgun into a machine pistol, who's only use is shooting people for fun or profit.

No one will ever convince me that the designer(s) and the people selling them (also illegally) could have been unaware of this.

They are a force multiplier for the criminal underworld, including terrorists, never legal in the US and the people using them are doing so only for criminal purposes.

Shooting people for fun or profit is (and always has been) against the law. having an unregistered full auto firearm has been against the law since 1934.

Felons in possession of firearms has been against the law since 1968 (other than those few cases where a court has restored the right).

Here's a catch, a felon with an illegal machine gun cannot be convicted of having an unregistered (and therefore illegal) machine gun. They are actually not required to register the gun. Doing so violates their 5th amendment rights.

They can be charged and convicted of being a felon in possession of a firearm, but cannot be charged with failing to register the gun.

So, what's the point of another law?

[Koda94]

Originally Posted by 44 AMP

SO EVERYONE who is getting one of the switches and putting it in a Glock is breaking Federal law by doing that.

What can the point of a state passing a law making something already illegal under Federal law also illegal under state law? Virtue signaling?

I used to wonder about this but now believe its to make the public think its a bigger problem than it is to bolster arguments in the lawsuits against Glock for somehow not knowing how to prevent people from inventing modifications to their guns.

[Aguila Blanca]

It's pure virtue signaling.

I can't find it now, but a number of years ago I saw a video on YouTube that was recorded during a public hearing over a town's (or county's) proposed new anti-gun law. I don't remember the specifics of the proposed law, either, but it doesn't matter. What matters is that a member of the audience came up to the microphone during the public comment portion of the hearing and pointed out that the proposed law, if enacted, couldn't be enforced because that state had a firearms preemption law. No municipal or county regulations affecting firearms were valid.

And one of the council members then spoke up and said that he didn't care if the new law could be enforced, he was going to vote for it anyway because [wait for it] ... "We've got to do something."

[gwpercle]

I stopped watching any / all main stream news media ...

gary

[44 AMP]

I stopped watching any / all main stream news media ..

I still keep an eye on them, its useful to know what the enemy is doing. I did, however, stop taking what they say at face value a couple of decades back in the last century.

[Ricklin]

Did ya know there is a good morning Britain? Vicki and I got back from a week in London lately. It's the same mainstream noise there, the Brits are just more polite about it.
One must get their information from multiple sources today, choose carefully and compare the "story" told based on the media outlet that told it.
Having a wide variety is both a good thing, and a dangerous thing. Choose carefully and most of all wisely.

[Brian Pfleuger]

We live in a world of insanity now.

Look at the absolute LUNACY around the measles "outbreak" in Texas.
This is a disease with 99.975% *complete recovery* rate, say nothing of actually dying.

The media coverage has been like something out of the movie "Outbreak" where they were going to air/fuel bomb the entire town.

We Outsourced Risk to Institutions. We Lost Firsthand Experience. Risk Aversion Has Become a Virtue.

Fear Is Profitable. Fear fuels engagement. Outrage spreads fast. Calm logic doesn’t go viral.

Measles or "Glock Switches". It's all the same.

[Aguila Blanca]

I was born in 1944. When I was growing up, mumps, measles, and chicken pox were rites of passage. Everybody got them. It wasn't a question of "if," it was just a question of "when." The current flap over the measles "epidemic" in Texas leaves me shaking my head.

[Ricklin]

Measles can be lots worse for adults. For heavens sake the MMR vaccine has been around since my kid was a kid anyway, that's 50 years. Those childhood diseases are hell on an adult. Crazy ass people who don't vaccinate, we had a recent outbreak down in Clark county Wa too. These diseases pop back up with the non vaxxers, that's what makes me shake my head in wonder.