The world is changing, at least in people’s heads if nothing else. Right now, 3D-printed guns aren’t a threat. There are already too many guns on the black market and available for purchase by criminals and other nefarious folks. However, they do represent a massive step forward in the war on gun control.
Primarily, it makes gun control impossible. This is a good thing for all pro-gun folks. After all, once (if?) anti-gunners realize it’s a lost cause, they’ll stop trying to infringe on our rights.
But not everyone is on board, and for some ostensibly pro-gun candidates, not being onboard may be costly.
A gun-rights group in Connecticut has pulled its endorsement for a Republican candidate after she spoke out against 3D-printed guns.
Susan Hatfield (R) was previously endorsed by the Connecticut Citizens Defense League (CCDL) in her primary race for attorney general, Fox 61 News reported Sunday.
The CCDL, however, withdrew its endorsement on Thursday after Hatfield condemned 3D-printed firearms.
“While we still feel she would make a far better Attorney General than any of the other candidates in the race, we simply cannot endorse the recent comments she’s made,” the gun rights group said in a blog post.
The comments mentioned referred to Hatfield’s statement against “ghost guns” — firearms assembled from mail-order kits or manufactured with 3D printers.
“3D-printed firearms are not only unnecessary but will make our communities and state less safe,” Hatfield said in a statement to the local CT Mirror newspaper.
Colossally stupid, and not just from a strategic standpoint.
The fact is that 3D-printed firearms are merely the latest evolution in homebuilt firearm technology. Between 3D-printers and computerized machines that will mill a receiver, the ability of the government to control firearm ownership is dead and has been. Even before that, though, 80 percent of receivers were being made into functional firearms in backyards and garages all throughout our nation.
And you know what? There’s no evidence that we’re less safe. None.
Oh, some will claim law enforcement are finding these “ghost guns” in raids and such, but no evidence accompanies many of these claims and even if they’re true, these weapons don’t seem to be used, only possessed. Additionally, these are unlikely to be the only guns found, making my earlier point that criminals already have an easier access to firearms.
Hatfield lost her endorsement because she bought into the anti-3D-printing hysteria, a collective delusion that argues we’re somehow less safe because of a new technology that does similar things to pre-existing technologies, only using a slightly different material. It’s that simple.
However, I’m also going to say that she should have lost that endorsement.
Anyone who buys so completely into the anti-gun hysteria probably shouldn’t be endorsed by a pro-gun group. It’s one thing to mention concerns of prohibited persons making guns. It’s another to pretend that we’re going to be less safe because of this despite no supporting evidence. The only way people can believe this technology will make us less safe is if they honestly believe the only way criminals can get their hands on guns is through loopholes in current gun laws, rather than outright illegal activity.
That’s an anti-gunners position, after all, not the position of someone endorsed by a pro-Second Amendment group.