On the menu today: Many gun-control advocates are insisting that the proper response to the Monterey Park mass shooting is to put a nationwide ban on the gun the shooter used, even though that firearm is already illegal in California, and there is no way he could have legally acquired it. Meanwhile, African Americans in Georgia give rave reviews to their voting experience in 2022, under election-reform laws that President Biden denounced as “Jim Crow 2.0.”
Gun Controllers’ Response to Monterey Park Shooting Has a Pretty Serious Flaw
If you’ve seen action movies, you’ve almost certainly seen a gun that looks like the semi-automatic 9mm MAC-10 before. Compact enough to be held with one arm, with an extended clip sticking out the bottom, the gun is usually associated with bad guys and gang members. The site FireArmsNews tartly observed that, “Hollywood would have us believe that every two-bit 1980s-era thug in America had a full auto MAC-10 tucked in his gym bag. In reality, the criminal use of full auto weapons has always been vanishingly rare.”
The shooter in Monterey Park reportedly used a Cobray M11 9mm semi-automatic weapon, which is designed to look like, and is often mistaken for, the MAC-10. Cobray purchased the rights to the design from the Military Armament Corporation and created its own smaller, lighter, cheaper version. Those who take shooting seriously consider the Cobray M11 “one of the most useless handguns in existence” and conclude that, “Everything about this gun just makes it hard to shoot accurately, so it’s much better to fire from the hip and keep your enemies guessing.”
Both the MAC-10 and the Cobray M11 are illegal to possess in California. Chip Brownlee and Jennifer Mascia of The Trace lay out the law:
While AR-15-style rifles are what most people immediately think of when they hear “assault weapon,” any type of a firearm — including handguns and shotguns — can be considered an assault weapon under both California’s assault weapons ban and the expired federal Assault Weapons Ban passed in 1994.
I would note that bringing up the federal assault-weapons ban that expired in 2004 confuses things; under California law, possession of anything defined as an assault weapon is a felony under state law that can be punished with up to three years in prison and a $10,000 fine. The only way a California resident may legally own an “assault weapon” is if he lawfully possessed the firearm before it was classified as an assault weapon and registered the firearm with the state authorities. The deadline for registering an assault weapon passed more than 20 years ago. Those who legally possess an assault weapon cannot pawn, sell, lend, or give the weapon to a family member; assault weapons cannot be legally inherited from a Californian.
The Trace continues:
Both laws named certain makes and models of guns as assault weapons because they were semiautomatic civilian versions of guns originally designed for the military. The 1994 federal ban and an update to California’s ban also listed certain characteristics that classify a gun as an assault weapon.
The Cobray M11 came standard with a threaded barrel and a 30-round magazine, which earn it the label of assault weapon under both the federal and state bans. Both laws also name the “SWD Inc. M11” as a banned model. Because SWD used the name Cobray, many Cobray models have branding with both names.
In other words, the Cobray M11 was illegal to possess in California, and yet, somehow, the mass shooter in Monterey Park got his hands on one and used it to kill eleven people.
Senator Dianne Feinstein contended that it was time for the federal government to ban that kind of weapon nationally, even though the gun was illegal to possess in her state and yet was still used in a mass shooting.
“We were tragically reminded this weekend of the deadly nature of assault weapons when a shooter used one to kill 11 people and injure 9 more at a Lunar New Year celebration in California,” Feinstein said in a released statement. “The constant stream of mass shootings have one common thread: they almost all involve assault weapons. It’s because these weapons were designed to kill as many people as quickly as possible. They have no business in our communities or schools. It’s time we stand up to the gun lobby and remove these weapons of war from our streets, or at the very least keep them out of the hands of young people.”
My friend Cam Edwards predicts that, “Democrats in Sacramento will most certainly use this attack as a springboard to target legal gun owners in California, Gavin Newsom is already exploiting the tragedy to call on Congress to do the same.”
Gun-control advocates have a problem here, in that they are calling for the ban of a weapon that is already illegal. The state can increase the criminal penalties for possessing one, but it cannot ban it harder.
The Giffords Center ranks California as first in the nation for “gun safety” — ahead of New York, Illinois, Massachusetts, Connecticut, and New Jersey. The organization raves that:
California has the strongest gun safety laws in the nation and has been a trailblazer for gun safety reform for the past 30 years. California has been the first state in the nation to adopt a number of gun safety reforms, ranging from assault weapons restrictions and strong background check requirements to extreme risk protection orders and domestic violence protections.
We don’t know how the mass shooter in Monterey Park obtained that Cobray M11. We do know that the shooter legally purchased a Norinco 7.62 x 25mm handgun, despite having an arrest record from 1990 for unlawful possession of a firearm.
Police found homemade firearm suppressors during a search of the shooter’s home. Suppressors are illegal in California.
Fines and jail time are in place to punish but also to deter crime. But the mass shooter in Monterey Park clearly didn’t care about any laws, legal or moral. That shooter committed suicide as police closed in. How do you deter someone who is willing to die? In cases of “suicide by cop,” how do you deter someone whose goal is to be killed in a shootout with police?
While it is possible that the 72-year-old mass shooter traveled to another state to legally purchase his Cobray M11, it is likely he purchased his weapon on the black market.
Last year, Newsom signed the nation’s first legislation allowing individuals to sue those people spreading illegal guns as California continues to ramp up its gun-safety protections. The law allows Californians to “sue those making, selling, transporting or distributing illegal assault weapons and ghost guns — guns made at home to avoid tracing — for damages of at least $10,000 per weapon involved. The same damages are also available against gun dealers who illegally sell firearms to those under 21 years of age.”
You probably noticed the word “illegal” in there, meaning California is enabling civil lawsuits as an additional consequence to breaking the law. “Manufacturing, distributing, transporting, importing, selling or giving away assault weapons” can carry a penalty of up to eight years in prison. It is fair to wonder just how much those who are willing to risk eight years in San Quentin to sell guns illegally will be deterred by the threat of lawsuits down the line.
This is the distilled essence of the modern gun-control movement: throwing additional civil penalties atop the considerable criminal penalties imposed on illegal-gun dealers, in the hopes of keeping guns out of the hands of those who, because they are not in their rights minds and don’t necessarily plan on living long enough to face justice for the crimes they intend to commit, will go to nearly any length to procure weapons.
ADDENDUM: Our Dominic Pino spotlights an absolutely astounding figure: A University of Georgia survey found that zero percent of African-American voters in the state said their voting experience was “poor” in the midterm election. Just under 73 percent of African-American voters in the state said their voting experience was “excellent.”
President Biden and other national Democrats will never get enough grief for their demagogic lie that Georgia’s voting-reform law represented “Jim Crow 2.0.”