Once more contradicting the oft-repeated claim that Republicans are “good” on gun rights, President Trump is poised to implement an unconstitutional federal ban on bump stocks for semi-automatic rifles.
“We’re knocking out bump stocks,” Trump said at a White House news conference. “We’re in the final two or three weeks, and I’ll be able to write out bump stocks.”
A year ago in Las Vegas, gunman Stephen Paddock used bump stocks on 12 of his weapons in a mass shooting that killed 58 people and wounded hundreds.
Authorities said his ability to fire hundreds of rounds per minute over the course of 10 minutes from his perch in a 32nd-floor hotel suite was a major factor in the high casualty count.
Regardless of how effective a bump stock ban might be in preventing mass shootings or reducing casualty count (not very), the feds have no authority delegated to them to enact such a rule. Under the Constitution, this is power simply does not exist.
While some states have either passed or are considering a bump stock ban, others can resist this illegal federal power grab by introducing and approving their own Second Amendment Protection Act – barring the use of state resources to enforce federal gun control.
Based on James Madison’s advice for states and individuals in Federalist #46, a “refusal to cooperate with officers of the Union” represents an extremely effective method to bring down federal gun control measures because most enforcement actions rely on help, support and leadership from state and local governments.
Fox News senior judicial analyst Judge Andrew Napolitano agrees. In a televised discussion on the issue, he noted that a single state taking this step would make federal gun laws “nearly impossible” to enforce.
“Partnerships don’t work too well when half the team quits,” said Michael Boldin of the Tenth Amendment Center. “By withdrawing all resources and participation in federal gun control, states and even local governments can help bring these unconstitutional acts to their much-needed end.”