“Psst. Want an untraceable gun? Courtesy of Congress and the U.S. military?” Well, yes, actually. Why do I get the idea that the huffingtonpost.com is teasing me? “That may soon be possible thanks to a provision tacked onto this year’s National Defense Authorization Act, which the House of Representatives is set to pass this week.” So I “may” be able to get an untraceable gun from Uncle Sam? Which means I may not. What are the odds? “According to a white paper prepared for Congress by the Army opposing the amendment, the measure would allow the unregulated distribution of up to 100,000 Colt .45s, more formally known as .45-caliber semiautomatic M1911 handguns.” Unregulated? Wait. What? . . .
Rogers’ amendment would change language in the law that specifies certain rifles allowed in the program to include the much broader category of “firearms.”
Although the marksmanship program aims to educate youth about safety and shooting, according to the military’s white paper, “There is a significant risk of approximately 100K semi-automatic handguns that are virtually untraceable, being released into commerce.”
Untraceable? Don’t the guns have serial numbers on them? I bet they do.
That’s because although the amendment specifies that the weapons cannot be sold to people who are barred by law from having guns, the CMP sells guns over the Internet, and has no mechanism to verify who is making purchases.
Over the internet? As in straight to the buyer’s door? I don’t think so. Anyway, why not just require the sale to go through an FFL? That way you get a federal background check (more’s the pity).
A spokesman for Rep. Adam Smith (Wash.), the top Democrat on the House Armed Services Committee, said his boss agreed with the Army and would try to strip the amendment.
“This provision, which the Army has said it does not want or need, could potentially put nearly 100,000 untraceable .45-caliber military-grade handguns on our streets,” the spokesman, Michael Amato, said in an email. “This provision is an unnecessary risk.”
Politicians who restrict Americans’ natural, civil and Constitutionally protected right to keep and bear arms put their fellow countrymen at unnecessary risk. But that doesn’t seem to stop them. Anyway, what’s the bet collectors of milsurp 1911 are in danger of a sudden devaluation in the value of their guns? [h/t MN]