Home » Blogs » Associated Press Crows About The Success Of Unnecessary ‘Glock Switch’ Legislation

Associated Press Crows About The Success Of Unnecessary ‘Glock Switch’ Legislation

Mark Chesnut - comments 23 comments

As more and more states pass unnecessary legislation to ban so-called “Glock switches,” historically anti-gun media outlets are going out of their way to fawn over the passage of such legislation.

The Associated Press is a great example. In the past considered by many as a legitimate news service, the AP has turned a corner and recently hasn’t seen an anti-gun proposal it didn’t favor. Its coverage of the “Glock switches” struck a decidedly positive note and, as AP stories tend to do, was regurgitated by several anti-gun publications and websites.

“At least half of US states now outlaw devices that convert pistols into machine guns,” read the headline on a March 29 story posted at apnews.com. Within hours, the same headline and story appeared in dozens of other places, including ABC News, The Independent, The Register-Herald, the Dayton Daily News, Yahoo.com and even the foreign publication India Today.

At issue is the so-called “Glock switch,” or “Glock auto-sear,” which is a piece of metal or plastic that can be used to illegally convert Glock pistols to fire full-auto. The switch works by applying force to the trigger bar to prevent it from limiting fire to one round of ammunition per trigger pull. 

Of course, Glock doesn’t produce the “switches,” doesn’t sell the switches and doesn’t condone their use. But since Glocks are the most common pistol converted using the devices, gun-ban advocates like to drag the company through a little bit more mud every time they talk about the issue.

Well, here’s some big news for AP, ABC News and everybody else who printed or posted the recent story about the devices: They’re already illegal under federal law!

Converting any firearm to fire fully automatic has been a federal felony for decades. Additionally, even possessing a “Glock switch” can result in a federal prison sentence of up to 10 years for violators.

Still the report makes a big deal about the latest few states to pass a law. “At least half of U.S. states now have similar laws prohibiting the possession of such devices, a list that has grown over the past decade as law enforcement officers have found more of the tiny yet powerful devices attached to gun,” it proclaims.

The AP and all media outlets that picked it up and ran with it represent a continuation of the so-called “mainstream” media’s push to address a violent criminal problem by blaming the device, not the felons who use it to harm others as they live out their criminal lifestyle.

Ultimately, the states that have passed such laws, and presumably the media who tout those laws, apparently think that violent criminals will be dissuaded from converting their semi-auto pistols to full-auto just because it is now a violation of state laws. It’s hard to understand since an even stronger federal law already regulates the devices, and violent criminals ignore the law with impunity.

And therein lies the main problem, and one of the things the “mainstream” media will never admit. Criminals don’t follow gun laws. Only law-abiding gun owners do, and that often leaves us at the disadvantage of being outgunned by those we might have to defend ourselves against.

In the end, all the states in the nation could pass “Glock switch” laws, and it is likely nothing would change. But you can bet the media will continue to celebrate each time another state goes down that futile road.

23 thoughts on “Associated Press Crows About The Success Of Unnecessary ‘Glock Switch’ Legislation”

  1. Between knowing nothing of the subject matter and outright agenda pushing all news media is essentially worthless. Only fit for partisan masturbation.

    Reply
  2. These states all think that criminals will stop crimning if they change the former single dog-dare to a double dog-dare with a pinkie swear?
    What WILL stop the influx of these products is the Import Tariff imposed on Chinese goods – no average banger is going to buy one when the price goes up by 87 percent!!

    Reply
    • That really wouldn’t be that steep an increase. It may reduce the widespread distribution of a device that isn’t particularly effective but for the intended purpose of the switch you would need to add a decimal point to the cost of these devices to price any noticable number of thugs out.

      Reply
    • … By the way, the above was //S

      Maybe one of AP’s top investigative reporters could actually follow an arrest, booking, charging, and ultimate disposition of what ACTUALLY happens after discovery of a giggle-switch violation. That would be a story that never sees the light of day, starting with the perp being released before the ink is dry on the officer’s report.

      Reply
      • That would describe each and every one I have seen and hard to tell with the sarc re tarriffs lately. People have gotten so crazy about any change in the status quo that might allow for different results. Then there is the actually locking up criminals for breaking the law is somehow racist. Eh whatever, usual suspects will have “stolen” guns from relatives or associated gangs elsewhere and unregistered machine guns all around.

        Reply
    • You might have a point.

      I forgot to buy the 27,837 items in my Temu cart, and after the tariffs my total went up $1.78.

      The humanity!

      Reply
  3. “…even possessing a “Glock switch” can result in a federal prison sentence of up to 10 years for violators.”

    Has it ever?

    I don’t recall any of the “usual suspect” reporting on such an event.

    You’d think they’d be all over thta.

    Reply
    • This. I sure wouldn’t want to count on Fat Alvin or some other Soros puppet to prosecute anyone with a switch too vigorously. If these state lawmakers really want to say something, their new law should mandate referral of the violator to federal jurisdiction, which also relieves the states of the incarceration burden.

      Reply
  4. A more appropriate headline would be along the lines of states enforcing laws already on the books. Law enforcement, what a concept.

    Reply
  5. Any “ban” by an unlawful and unconstitutional agency is null and void simply by existing. The people can (and should) own any ordinance the “government” owns, and one step beyond.,

    Reply
  6. I will never forget that it was a majority of REPUBLICANS who pushed anti 2A regulations in Florida following the mass shooting at Broward High School.

    Reply

Leave a Comment