No one is going to confuse Maryland with a pro-gun state anytime soon. While they’re not as bad as some other places, they’re still hostile to the Second Amendment in so many ways.
Plus, it’s only getting worse.
It seems that lawmakers there are tripping over themselves to ban unserialized firearms, also called “ghost guns.”
In less than three weeks, the Maryland General Assembly will wrap up its legislative session and lawmakers are furiously trying to pass whatever bills are still a priority.
On the issue of crime, lawmakers are still considering a bill that if it passes, would ban ghost guns.
Ghost guns are untraceable guns with no serial numbers. People could buy parts online with no background check then assemble them at home.
It’s a little more involved than that. I mean, you can buy the parts, but without a receiver–which is the part that is considered a firearm–you’re not going to accomplish much while trying to assemble them. Further, you can’t just buy a receiver without undergoing a background check.
To assemble a so-called ghost gun, you need an incomplete receiver and then finish the manufacturing process to turn it into what the ATF would consider a gun.
It’s a little more than just buying the parts and putting them together like a model car.
But hey, why worry about facts when you’re trying to scare people into supporting a certain bit of legislation? Details are irrelevant, especially since that’s the bit of legislation mentioned in the headline but got a whole three sentences.
And I bet they wonder why we think the media is biased.
As for unserialized firearms, Maryland is wrong to focus on these. Yes, criminals are using them and I have no doubt that given enough time, they’ll be the preferred firearm for criminals in a lot of ways. However, people are looking at the situation wrong.
Bad guys in Maryland didn’t really have too much of a problem getting guns before “ghost guns” were a thing. If that weren’t the case, then maybe opponents of unserialized firearms might have a point, but it is and they don’t.
Because they didn’t have an issue with getting guns before, there’s no reason to believe a ban like the one Maryland is trying to push through would really have any appreciable impact on crime. Yes, that includes a ban that encompasses all 50 states.
After all, as noted, bad guys didn’t exactly have a difficult time getting a gun before these were a thing, especially in Maryland.
What Maryland and all these other anti-Second Amendment states should consider is the possibility that the problem isn’t the availability of firearms and is instead a problem that revolves around people. Even if you remove all the guns on the planet, there will still be violent crime. Think of how violent we consider the medieval world. In the 1340s, Oxford, England had a homicide rate of 110 per 100,000 people. In 1991, when homicide was sky high here in the gun-loving US, our homicide rate was 9.71.
Now, obviously, the medieval world and the modern one are quite different. However, if guns were the totality of the problem, why was there an issue in the 1340s when the only guns really around were siege artillery? I’m pretty sure there weren’t drive-by sieges.
The problem is people, and Maryland–a state that loves medieval trappings, it should be noted–are missing the reality.