The White House 1600, Pennsylvania Avenue NW , Washington DC 20500
6 June 2019
Dear President Trump:
Over 500,000 bump-stock devices have been sold. One was used in a crime. Now they all have been banned. Nearly two million suppressors are in civilian hands. One was used in a crime. Now are they all going to be banned too? Using this mentality, we should also be banning knives, baseball bats and hammers.
A bump-stock device cost between $100 and $425. Suppressors cost from $300 to $1,900 plus the $200 tax stamp required by the National Firearms Act of 1934. It just seems wrong to tell law-abiding citizens that a legal device is now illegal because of the misuse of one person. And now they must be destroyed or turned in to the government with no reimbursement.
If suppressors are banned, it will prove to gun owners they were right to fear registration. Unlike bump-stocks, every legal suppressor is registered with the ATF. If banned, ATF SWAT teams will know the location of every legal suppressor in the country to make confiscation easy.
As a businessman, you understand supply and demand. If there is a criminal demand for bump-stock devices, suppressors, or firearms, someone will illegally fulfill that demand at the expense of legal commerce, taxation on that commerce and legal possession and use of these devices. In many South American countries where civilian possession of firearms is illegal, a cottage industry has sprung up making illegal submachineguns because there is a criminal demand. Law-abiding civilians are left unarmed because they obey laws. Banning firearms has made them less safe.
Some say we don’t “need” these devices. If the government can decide what we need, can they decide no one “needs” a car that will go 180 MPH. Or a million-dollar yacht. Or a private jet. Or a 10,000 square foot residence. Government shouldn’t decide need, just reasonable guidelines for ownership.
The problem isn’t access to inanimate objects that can be used for good or evil; the problem is the person who decides to use these objects for evil. No law written can control the behavior of lawbreakers. To disarm the law-abiding leaves them defenseless against the lawbreakers. If just one employee in the “Gun Free Zone” known as the Virginia Beach Municipal Building was armed, maybe the casualty count would be lower. Maybe a lot lower.
Before making a final decision, I hope you will converse with a representative from the Gun Owners of America, the Firearms Policy Coalition, or the 2nd Amendment Foundation. Or a member of California Gun Owners (Calguns) who can explain in detail how the State with the strictest gun laws in the country has seen no reduction in criminal use of firearms because of those restrictions..
Sincerely,
ALLAN L. PERKINS, Sergeant Major, U.S. Army (Retired)