Constant Conservative

I am gravely concerned about the probable encroachment on the Second Amendment by this next federal administration. Via Instapundit comes this link to a video in which an ATF agent speaks of the recent increase in violent crime in Arizona. However, he classifies a whole group of guns as “weapons of choice” for these criminals (who are doubly criminal in that most are illegally here to begin with). Buffering on the video is horrible (to warn those of you who might actually want to see it) since the site is probably getting pounded right now.

Here’s a news story which is tied to the video interview:

A recent gun bust in Phoenix is a clear indication of how the drug cartels depend on their connections in the United States to obtain the weapons they need to continue their deadly battles. They are powerful, sophisticated weapons they cannot get in Mexico but are finding in the U.S.

[...]

One of the weapons is called a “mata policia” or cop killer. Rounds fired from that weapon will penetrate bullet-proof vests that law enforcement wears.

No incendiary language there. When’s the last time you heard of a “car bust”? Wish I knew which weapon was the “cop killer.” Last time I checked, just about any gun that wasn’t a .45acp, 9mm, 40 S&W or similar (that is most centerfire rifle rounds) had the capability of penetrating standard body armor at close ranges.  (Update: From other data I can find, the “mata policia” is the FN 5.7 (such as the P90). That’s what SWAT in Sioux Falls, South Dakota uses.)

Let me be blunt. While I (and our federal constitution) have no difficulty with a law enforcement agency knowing what types of guns are most attractive to criminals, to stop lawful commerce of such weapons is wrong. I’m not saying that the ATF has actually done this as of yet, but this is exactly the sort of thinking which led to the 1994 gun ban (and Obama has been very friendly to all of those who were not friends of the Second Amendment).

To stop commerce of these weapons is analogous to the TSA determining which airliners are most likely to be used by terrorists and then proscribing their manufacture, or having the NTSB determine which vehicles are used most often for hit-and-run crimes and determining that such autos are the “vehicles of choice” for such criminals.

This type of thinking is not a slippery slope: it is a greased pole.