The Gridlock Over Bump Stocks

Before I get into tonight�s blog, I would like to take the time to say a few things.

1.     I forgot how good Eminem is at rhyming.

2.     The Vice President definitely wanted to watch the Colts play football on Sunday.

3.     It�s not a good day to be an establishment Republican in Congress.

4.     Somebody needs to teach the President how to use air quotes.

      That�s all I have to say.

Tonight�s main story is about the NRA and their attempt to trick the American people. Stephen Paddock, the Las Vegas killer, turned his semi-automatic guns into fully automatic weapons using an accessory known as the �bump stock.� Bump stocks allow a semi-automatic rifle to mimic a machine gun by allowing the shooter to �bump� the trigger using the recoil of the gun. Anybody can buy a bump stock because they are not classified as a firearm. Automatic weapons are much more difficult to maintain and require a lot of paperwork. A bump stock is as easy to buy as groceries.

     Following the massacre in Las Vegas, the NRA announced in a statement that they would be willing to have a conversation about restrictions on bump stocks. The statement from Wayne LaPierre and Chris Cox reads, �The NRA believes that devices intended to allow semi-automatic rifles to function like fully automatic  rifles should be subject to additional regulations.�

            While some may view this concession by the NRA as a victory for gun reform, I ask you to heed the wise words of Lee Corso: �Not so fast!� This is a distraction from the gun control debate. LaPierre and Cox have decided to give in on this one battle because they are in danger of losing the war that is gun control. They are hoping that by encouraging this regulation, the people who want broader gun reforms will be momentarily satisfied and ease the pressure that they have put on gun lobbyists and Congress.

            It was also strategic for the NRA to ask the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms to enact this regulation instead of Congress. The ATF can make a decision on policy without a vote and without a senator or representative altering the proposal to encompass more reforms. It�s like buying a car that is brand new off the lot or buying one that has had five previous owners, 200,000 miles, and a faulty ignition . Driving the brand-new car will ensure that you will get where you want to go. Who knows if you will make it to your destination with the used car (if it even starts)?

            This statement also gives the NRA ammunition to fire back (pun intended) against accusations that they have done nothing to combat gun violence and prevent more mass shootings. Gun lobbyists can now reply to criticism with, �Well, we were the first to push for regulations on bump stocks.�

            While they are correct, this whole bump stock sideshow is just a way to avoid talking about reasonable gun control. I�m guessing that LaPierre and Cox read my blog from last week and thought they could fool me into believing that they care about the well-being of our country and not the profits they make from America�s obsession with guns.

            Over the weekend it looked like the Democrats, led by Senator Feinstein of California, were going to draft a bill that focused on banning bump stocks. Promptly, the NRA put out a new statement proclaiming that they were against the ban of bump stocks. I wonder why they decided to completely change their opinion on the issue? Was it because it became obvious that they were not going to be able to escape the gun control debate?

            The most annoying part about this whole debacle is that no matter what, the NRA controls whether or not gun reform will pass as long as Congress is majority Republican. No matter how hypocritical or blatantly corrupt they are, it does not matter because they own too much of the Republican party. A lot of Republicans in Congress depend on the NRA for survival because they fund campaigns and their endorsements can have major effects. They will do anything to keep their endorsement because they are so desperate to stay in power. Maybe I�m too cynical, but this does not sound like a democracy to me. That�s all for this week.