Had you ever heard of a “bump stock” before the events of the last week?  Neither had I, but now those devices are on the lips of every anti-gun politician, media commentator and indignant Hollywood celebrity. Calls for the item to be banned abound, and on the face of it, it seems reasonable to do so.  However, what’s the old saying?  “Give them an inch and they’ll take a mile!” That seems very apropos to the situation we once again face after the Las Vegas massacre.

The anti- Second Amendment people, (aka: “gun-grabbers”) are out in force.  Once again, they are demanding additional regulations to curb access to firearms in this country.  Notice that I didn’t say “weapons”, because there are many ways that implements can be used to cause fatal bodily harm.  A knife, hatchet, machete or even a hammer can kill, and very effectively.  A truck in Nice, France killed more people on Bastille Day last year than the maniacal shooter in Las Vegas.  What scares people is that individuals are out there who are perfectly willing to terminate their lives or those of friends or loved ones.  What can be done to make us all safer?

Well, drive the elements of Radical Islam back so far down the cesspools they come from that they will never see the light of day again would be good for starters.  But wait, that’s not politically correct!  Islam is a religion of peace!  We can’t blame the acts of a few individuals (actually, potentially tens or hundreds of millions if the truth is known) on a whole religion consisting of north of 1.6 billion souls.  So, we must look for another bogey man to vanquish.  How about the NRA and American gun owners?  Those evil bastards are just out there clinging to their guns and bibles while planing to eradicate some minorities and enslave others, according to the Democrats.

When John Hinckley shot President Reagan and White House Press Secretary James Brady in 1981 he used a six shot 22LR revolver.  That act led to the “Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act”, which was passed by the Congress in November of 1993 as an attempt to restrict access to guns.  A year later “The Federal Assault Weapons Ban” (AWB) — officially, the “Public Safety and Recreational Firearms Use Protection Act” was passed as a subsection of the “Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994”.  It was a United States federal law that included a prohibition on the manufacture for civilian use of certain semi-automatic firearms it defined as assault weapons, as well as certain ammunition magazines it defined as “large capacity.”  The law expired in 2004.

Factually, there is little evidence that any of these laws reduced “gun violence” crimes, many of which are gang related and involve control of drug distribution “turf”.   However, the Las Vegas shootings have once again lit the fires of gun control legislation . The theory is that we must do something, even if it is just symbolic.

So, for all you anti-gun people out there, I have a suggestion.  Practice what you preach.  No more private gun toting security for the media, celebrities or corporate executives.  Limited armed protection for politicians.  They are citizens just like the rest of us.  If we are to be denied the right to be responsibly armed to defend ourselves and those around us, why should you be so protected?

I refer you back to the old saying in the first paragraph of this piece. While many people are willing to go along with limited restrictions on our Second Amendment rights, we must remember that the gun-grabbers will not settle for less than the total disarming of the populace. Except for the privileged few, that is. Incrementalism is their stock-in-trade.