One of the problems with regulation

Those weapons have been largely outlawed for three decades, though Paddock used a device to give him “a souped-up semi”.

Jill Snyder, special agent for the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms (ATF), said 12 of the guns found in the gunman’s hotel room were fitted with so-called “bump-stocks”. The device basically replaces the gun’s shoulder rest, with a “support step” that covers the trigger opening. By holding the pistol grip with one hand and pushing forward on the barrel with the other, the shooter’s finger comes in contact with the trigger. The recoil causes the gun to buck back and forth, “bumping” the trigger.

Technically, that means the finger is pulling the trigger for each round fired, keeping the weapon a legal semi-automatic.

Is that you’ve got to be very detailed about the regulation and even then often enough someone will engineer around it. Regulation, therefore, isn’t as effective as the regulators assume.

40 thoughts on “One of the problems with regulation”

  1. I like the arguments so far.

    Need background checks!

    He would pass.

    Need to control automatic weapons.

    They were.

    He used hollow points, ban them.

    AP would have done an order of magnitude more damage.

    Sometimes all we can do is react. He would have done far more damage with a truck if he could get it to the crowd.

  2. Now watch carefully in the media what happens if it turns out he’s a batsh*t crazy leftard like that guy that brassed up Repub congressmen playing basketball.

    “AP would have done an order of magnitude more damage.”

    Nah, AP does less damage on soft targets than expanding ammo. Which is why expanding ammo is often actually mandated for hunting and is banned for use by armies, whereas AP is OK for antipersonnel use by armies cos it doesn’t expand (contrary to popular belief, the US in WW2 had the tendancy to issue AP almost exclusively for .30-06 chambered smallarms instead of ball)

  3. I think the point re AP rounds is that they would have travelled through one target and into the next (and potentially into the next). It’s hard to say, given his elevation, but I guess it’s possible once people were lying down on top of each other eg dads trying to protect kids/husband trying to protect wives etc.

    As I understand it, he was firing for approx ten minutes, but it was a further hour before he was confirmed dead. Certainly during that ten minute period, and for some part of the subsequent hour, I assume paramedics were unable to reach the injured, and thus that some number of them who would have lived bled out. This number might have been greater if more targets had been hit (or it might not, dependent on where the wounds were).

  4. That is true, Julia, but it’s not an argument against mousetraps. Out here in the sticks, we are plagued by mice – I trap (humanely and release, I’m too soft – let the owls have them) ten to twenty each winter. But if I didn’t trap the fuckers we’d be properly overrun.

  5. The problem is that there is a regulation against murder. If that becomes your intent then all other regulations that lead you to do the murder are just as ineffectual.

  6. @Peter – I think it is a question of scale. The London Bridge attackers killed (from memory) seven people with knives. If they had been equipped with AK-47s, daysacks with 10 magazines each, and a minimum of training – much less, actual experience of urban warfare garnered from Raqqa or somewhere – they could easily have killed hundreds. All those people crouching down under tables in pubs, safe behind locked doors, are no longer safe. The police who turned up and killed the three attackers would instead have turned up and been killed themselves. I really do understand the arguments against restrictions and legislation and government power, I wouldn’t be a regular commentator on this blog if I didn’t. But I don’t think many people understand the sheer scale of the carnage that would ensue if we were ever to relax gun ownership in this country. A hundred years ago, there was no issue with Joe Public possessing a revolver. But we are not living a hundred years ago, we are where we are – thanks to the wankers in government who have betrayed us, yes – and we have to live in the real world, not some libertarian fantasy.

  7. To Hell with that Interested.

    There is war coming prob with several fronts –and in case you didn’t notice the fucking Gubmint isn’t on our side.

    There will always be a few nutters but our dear friends at the top have been and still are importing organised nutters en masse.

    You and yours can be disarmed if you like. But that time is coming to an end. Or we are. You choose for yourself.

  8. Tim, this is rare and precious thing. I think you’ve discovered a neo-thatcherite writing in the Guardian.

    1. Right to buy
    2. Mortgage interest tax relief.

  9. “I don’t think many people understand the sheer scale of the carnage that would ensue if we were ever to relax gun ownership in this country.” What, the dreadful carnage we had before Dunblane?

  10. The “problem” is culture not law. Wasn’t it 150 years ago in Britain that it was fashionable to go around carrying guns? Yet that didn’t result in 66/1000 gun deaths. Hell, even Denmark has more /1000 gun deaths than the UK.

  11. @Interested
    “I don’t think many people understand the sheer scale of the carnage that would ensue if we were ever to relax gun ownership in this country.”
    Gun ownership was relaxed in the UK a while back. Guns don’t kill people, people kill people & the UK’s been importing a lot of people from parts of the world where killing people with guns is part of the culture.
    So it’s really just a case of can they get their hands on the guns & nothing whatsoever to do with legal gun ownership.
    Can they? The authorities have done a remarkable job of interdicting the importation of illegal drugs into the UK, haven’t they?
    It’s really just a matter if those people are incentivised enough to go to the trouble & expense of obtaining an illegal firearm. It really isn’t hard. Here in Spain I can legally own an automatic pistol, a short barrelled pump action shotgun, a semi-automatic rifle & most of the other things the UK bans. Or if I felt a little more ambitious, there was an AK74 assault rifle (not an “assault type” rifle but the real, ex-Bulgarian Army fully auto) being offered around a while ago. £500 plus ammunition, on the grey market.
    One country’s gun laws are irrelevant. In the same way as one country’s drug laws are irrelevant. They just create a market to arbitrage.

  12. @Dearieme

    ‘What, the dreadful carnage we had before Dunblane?’

    No, the dreadful carnage that will be unleashed if we make it easier to buy (and therefor steal or otherwise acquire) automatic weapons in the UK. Pre Dunblane, no-one – in UK Counter Terrorism, never mind the general public – had any thought at all of the Islamist threat. We had the IRA to deal with, but they gave warnings, latterly tried reasonably hard to avoid civilian loss of life, and were not actively hoping to die while carrying out their attacks.

    The Ecksist argument, if I can put it like that, seems to be twofold.

    The first part is that there is a conspiracy of the ruling classes to take away our liberties, and we need to be prepared for armed insurrection at the point where they push it too far. I actually have some sympathy with the idea that our ruling classes are trying to take away our liberties. They’re cunts. However, the rest of it is (IMO) a Mad Maxian fantasy. No-one is going to take on the state using a Glock, or even a semi-automatic AR15, even if it is comverted to ‘bump fire’. Try it, and you will die. The way to overthrow the state is through the ballot box and if it absolutely comes to is, peaceful protest. Taking on the average police firearms unit, never mind an SAS CT team, is just suicide.

    The second part (I think) concerns the risk of an Islamist with a gun barging into a shopping centre. The theory is that if there are armed civilians nearby they will take him down. Possibly they would. But I personally think a better way to combat that threat is to try to keep firearms out of the hands of the terrorists in the first place. Allowing every Tom Dick and Harry to keep weapons in his back bedroom inevitably means that they will leak into circulation. It’s that simple, really. I wish it were different – I’ll have a Glock 17 and a Diemarco, please – but it isn’t.

  13. @BiS

    Gun ownership was relaxed in the UK a while back. Guns don’t kill people, people kill people & the UK’s been importing a lot of people from parts of the world where killing people with guns is part of the culture.

    I understand that – but it has happened and we have to deal with where we are, not where we wish we were.

    So it’s really just a case of can they get their hands on the guns & nothing whatsoever to do with legal gun ownership.

    See above – theft, black market sales of legally-purchased weapons.

    The authorities have done a remarkable job of interdicting the importation of illegal drugs into the UK, haven’t they?

    Guns and drugs are different. You’d have to accept that they have done a pretty good job of interdicting weapons. There are people out in the Balkans/Holland/France right now turning these fuckers over, day in, day out. Most of the weapons used by UK criminals are reactivated, old Webleys, sawn-offs or replicas.

    It’s really just a matter if those people are incentivised enough to go to the trouble & expense of obtaining an illegal firearm. It really isn’t hard.

    It’s pretty fucking hard, which is why we don’t have many such weapons on our streets.
    Spain lacks the English Channel, which is by far our biggest asset in this whole sorry affair – but firearms ownership is still highly restricted.

    Personally, I would not be against some people – perhaps ex military with skills and aptitudes – being allowed to own firearms in the UK, and even encouraged to carry them when out and about. (I’d also like lots more armed cops.) A man who knows what he is doing can had a serious impact (ask eg Bill Scully). But the average bloke in the street? Sorry, no.

  14. Interested: ” No-one is going to take on the state using a Glock, or even a semi-automatic AR15″

    If one is just one then no one is going to set out to take on the state with an Arnold-style minigun let alone a pistol.

    But –if they intend to kill you anyway–why not? I would rather die fighting and take several with me than just be passively abused and killed like a coward. If all the 150 million murdered by socialism had had only a loaded Glock each matters would not have gone so well for socialist tyranny. As with the 80 odd shot in Venez by guns handed out to socialist thugs by Maduro.

    Military hardware is the military’s power. 1to1 squaddies die just as easily as anyone else. I can think of few examples when redscum have actually unleashed the military full-on anyway. Usually it is copper/paramilitary leftist thugs doing the killing –lightly armed thugs.

    As for your guns/drugs thoughts–the English Channel doesn’t keep out drugs or the 300.000 excess migrants the Fish Faced Cow let in during her reign of stunning success at the Home Office. It won’t stop guns once the demand takes off. Drones will give channel-hopping a whole new meaning.

  15. Out here in the sticks, we are plagued by mice

    Borrow a ferret from the nearest gyppo. It’ll kill most of them within a week, and the smell will keep the place clear for the next few months.

  16. @Interested; ignore Mr N (but only on this) and get a snake – quieter & less smelly than a ferret, and a nice clean pet shop man will sell you one, no need to have to slum it!

  17. ” ‘It’s really just a matter if those people are incentivised enough to go to the trouble & expense of obtaining an illegal firearm. It really isn’t hard.”

    It’s pretty fucking hard, whic’ is why we don’t have many such weapons on our streets.”

    It really isn’t hard, Interested. Anyone with a few connections can lay their hands on something. But generally, the Brits aren’t a particularly gun obsessed culture. But not all Brits are Brits now, are they? The tinted chappies down the road from where I used to live in N. London are big on guns as fashion accessories. Says more about you than your Nikes i suppose & encourages respec’ mon. Big thing with the tinted chappies, respec’ & t’dissin’ of. So hearing the odd bang in the night was just part of living in a vibrant city, as our mayor likes to say. So are 14 year old girls getting a bullet through the head.
    And I plug into the Greek Cypriot community, thanks to the ex. Lot of history Greek Cypriots. Like their hardware, they do. Quite amazing what some of them have stashed away.

  18. A Russian guy was machine gunned at a westferry near where I live in London recently. Not “shot” but actually machine gunned down on the street with a fully automatic weapon.

    Guns are around us. Just that the vast majority are completely law abiding therefore don’t want one. The non-law abiding minority have ready access otherwise teenagers wouldn’t be shot dead in kebab shops. It doesn’t happen often as carrying means a severe custodial sentence. So they shifted to knives. They made knives as bad as guns so they shifted to acid. They make acid as bad as guns and they will shift again as they are scum and respec’ init.

    Read an article about French police training and the trainees were told to go out and get a weapon to show how easy it was. One in the class came back with an Ak47 inside 45 mins.

    Ammunition is tricky though.

  19. ignore Mr N (but only on this) and get a snake

    Fucking hell, the day a snake moves into my house is the day I move out, get on a plane, and sleep in a tent suspended above a swimming pool. *Shudder*

  20. Tim/Julia – I’m happy with my little humane traps, but thanks!

    Mr Ecks – the state doesn’t really want to kill you, if it did it would. The state mostly comprises incompetent well-meaning (but obviously wrong) people, not evil maniacs. I don’t think we’ll ever get to a USSR of GB. I could be wrong.

    BiS – I’m not saying there are NO illegal firearms in the UK. Of course there are. I’m just saying that there aren’t many. I’m not saying it’s impossible to smuggle guns in fron the continent – just that it’s obviously hard. Making TATP isn’t easy – it’s unstable if you get it right (risk to you) and easy to get wrong (risk to no-one). if you want to kill people, it’s much easier and simpler to hose them down with an AK. The fact that the UK’s most vibrant religionist maniacs are not (yet) doing so speaks for itself.

    Andrew again – see above, yes they exist. But they’re rare. If you made (say) handguns legal tomorrow I expect a couple of million would be sold in the first year. (I’d buy a couple myself.) You might have some soft vetting to restrict ownership – you might even have proper vetting, so that no-one with religiously inspired hatred for the UK is allowed one. But now you have two million new firearms in circulation, some of which are in the hands of people who get pissed, forget to lock the cabinet, etc etc. It’s just not a good idea.

    Has anyone on here actually got any real world experience of firearms, by the way? I know there are a few squaddies – BiND, Steve. Ever shot someone/been shot at? Just curious.

  21. Andrew again – again. Re your French police/A story, I don’t believe it. Not saying you are lying, obviously, but that the journalist was, or his sources were. (Entirely possible – to go a bit Ecksy – that the thrust was ‘Look how easy it is to find guns, we need to tighten the law.’)
    What the hell kind of new police recruit is it who can wander out and locate an AK inside 45min? I would be highly suspicious of that person for starters. Who gave it to him? Pierre the gangster? Who i) knows a new police recruit and ii) doesn’t mind handing over an AK? Why? Did he know where it was hidden and remove it? If so, did he expect there to be no reprisals for its loss? Lots more holes (to me).

    But even if true, that’s France. I very much doubt you could replicate that here.

  22. Bloke in North Dorset

    “Ever shot someone/been shot at? Just curious.”

    Never shot at anyone.

    In the Falklands we were doing electronic wafare and before the final assaults we were based on Mt Estancia and monitoring their artillery nets. We heard one of their controllers trying to call fire down on us, but fortunately our jamming team stopped him sending our location long enough for our own artillery to take him out. It was a bit nerve racking as we had nowhere to go as our vehicles had been choper’d in because the terrain was so bad.

    We were on board the LSL in San Carlos Bay for 24 hours after the invasion stared, that was also scary.

  23. “Don’t ban guns, make bullets cost $5,000 each, that way there are no innocent bystanders”

    – The wisdom of Chris Rock.

  24. @JuliaM, October 4, 2017 at 1:09 pm

    @Interested; ignore Mr N (but only on this) and get a snake – quieter & less smelly than a ferret, and a nice clean pet shop man will sell you one, no need to have to slum it!

    A snake requires to much looking after. I recommend a Giant huntsman spider

  25. @Interested, October 4, 2017 at 2:16 pm

    Tim/Julia – I’m happy with my little humane traps, but thanks!

    Which humane trap(s) do you use?

  26. Interested said “But I don’t think many people understand the sheer scale of the carnage that would ensue if we were ever to relax gun ownership in this country”. Then he adroitly, and perhaps dishonestly, shifted ground by pretending that he’d mentioned, or I’d mentioned, automatic weapons.

    I think it would be simplest if we re-adopted the Bill of Rights with a small modification. Thus “Protestants may have arms for their defence suitable to their conditions and as allowed by law” might be modified to read ‘Protestants, atheists, Jews, Buddhists, and Hindus may have arms for their defence suitable to their conditions and as allowed by law, except if they’re black.’ That would seem to suit the reservations expressed by many people here.

  27. Interested;

    ” If they had been equipped with AK-47s, daysacks with 10 magazines each, and a minimum of training – much less, actual experience of urban warfare garnered from Raqqa or somewhere – they could easily have killed hundreds.”

    While I agree this is possible, it does seem like most Islamic types are simply incapable of being very effective. Most of these attacks seem spectacularly ill-conceived and inept.

    9/11 and Bataclan being notable exceptions.

  28. Interestingly enough the “Bump Stock” items were relatively recently approved for sale – under the Obama administration. They were pushed as “an aid to disabled shooters” so the could more easily pull triggers.

    Could well be grounds for banning these as far as I am concerned. Only useful as a form of automatic fire enabler with a big negative for accuracy. The gunman had 12 of these attached to otherwise semi-autmatics, and i believe (from news so far though it may be unreliable) one genuine full automatic weapon, obtained quite how I’m not sure. the great majority of the weapons were legally obtained.

  29. David Moore

    To date they have been relatively ineffective but unfortunately that is going to change. Like anyone else who has spent a long time in warfare, they have got better at it by a process of observing and training and wastage of the idiots. I know people who have observed them at very close quarters in the recent past who are reluctantly very impressed and concerned by what they’re seeing. Don’t take my anonymous word for it, there are various sites online where you can watch them fighting the Russians, Syrians, Kurds and others and giving a good account of themselves.

    Some of those blokes are going to make it back here, and then it’s really only a question of whether they still want it and whether they can get their hands on weapons and ammo.

    A halfwit could construct an ambush with four blokes that would kill hundreds. How many exits are there in your average shopping centre, especially if you set a few petrol bombs off and funnel people? What protection is there at Old Trafford? If you’re trying to sneak a bottle of Scotch in, or a flare, you;re fucked. But if you just vittle the security guards up and walk through…? Stay away from crowds is my half-serious advice.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *