Gun “Experts”

If you’re going to regulate an industry, it helps to know something about it. Unfortunately, when it comes to firearms, there’s little evidence that those making the rules actually have any idea what they’re talking about. Over the years, we’ve seen countless examples of “leading” anti-gun politicians who aren’t quite sure which end the bullets come out of. As one of the most gaffe-prone politicians in modern history, President Biden has made his share of erroneous statements relating to firearms but he’s not alone.

One of the most classic examples of firearm-related ignorance came back in 2007 when Tucker Carlson interviewed then-Congresswoman Carolyn McCarty regarding a ban on so-called “assault weapons” that she had sponsored. The bill included barrel shrouds on the list of the defining features of an assault weapon. When Carlson asked McCarthy what a barrel shroud was, she dodged the question until finally responding “I actually don’t know what a barrel shroud is … I think it’s the shoulder thing that goes up.” Brilliant.

We can almost give politicians a pass, given that they blow hot air for a living but the actual executive branch officials who are responsible for enforcing the law should probably have a basic understanding of the subject matter, right? Unfortunately, there’s little evidence that they do. The most comical example came recently when Chris Bort, Acting Chief of ATF’s Technology Division, attempted to show CBS “Face The Nation” reporters how simple it is to assemble a “ghost gun.” He is ironically identified by the ATF Director as one of the agency’s “leading experts.”

First, Bort struggles in his attempt to field strip a factory Glock handgun, one of the most common firearms in the world, for an agonizing length of time. Eventually he gives up, picking up another Glock that he’s finally able to get apart. Next, he demonstrates how to “simply” attach the factory slide assembly onto a homemade frame except — you guessed it — he can’t get the slide onto the frame. So much for “simple”!

What about our Judicial Branch? Surely the United States Supreme Court, home of some of the most experienced jurists in the nation and staffed with the top law school graduates in the nation can get it right? Not quite. Back in February, during oral arguments for Garland v. Cargill, a case challenging the ban on “bump stocks,” Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson established her ignorance when it comes to firearms. Jackson stated that “The function of this trigger is to cause this kind of damage, 800 rounds a second or whatever,” she doubled-down during the same exchange, claiming that “It can function in the same way insofar as it automatically allows for 800 rounds to be released.”

Eight hundred rounds a second would be roughly 48,000 rounds per minute which is 60 times faster than the rate of fire of a full-auto M4 carbine. It’s worth noting that 800 rounds of 5.56 would weigh roughly 21 pounds so that would be a hefty mag to carry. Keep in mind that Justices and their law clerks have months to prepare for an oral argument so there’s little reason for such a wildly inaccurate statement. So much for a Harvard education.

One would hope that Department of Education officials would be experts in education, Department of Transportation bureaucrats would know a bit about transportation and that the scientists at the Centers for Disease Control are familiar with infectious diseases. One thing that we know for sure is that the folks seeking to regulate your ability to exercise your Second Amendment rights know little to nothing about how firearms actually work.

---