Glock switches are the latest battlefront in war over guns

That justices would, for even a nanosecond, hesitate to uphold the Donald Trump-era federal ban on bump stocks seems absurd, but we live in an absurd world.

On Wednesday, as the U.S. Supreme Court pondered whether to uphold a ban on “bump stock” devices, which can speed up the firing of semi-automatic firearms to near machine-gun rate, lawmakers in Annapolis were presented with concerns about the rising use of “Glock switches” which can likewise convert Glock semi-automatic handguns into fully automatic ones.

In other words, in the war to keep the most destructive firearms out of the hands of evil-doers, yet another battlefront has opened up.

There is simply no justification for owning, making or selling these tiny conversion devices, which can be created for as little as $20 by a 3D printer.

And local authorities need to be empowered to take action as soon as possible, as evidenced by last October’s mass shooting on the campus of Morgan State University in which the 17-year-old perpetrator was allegedly armed with a Glock switch-equipped gun. Lawmakers in Annapolis should move quickly after Wednesday’s hearing before the House Judiciary Committee on House Bill 810, which would prohibit the manufacture, possession, sale or transportation in the state of such switch devices and subject violators to a $5,000 fine and three years in prison.

There is good reason to restrict ownership of automatic weapons that are designed for the battlefield and not self-defense or sport.

Federal law has done so since the 1930s. Yet technology marches on, and the ability to create and use add-ons to upgrade legal weaponry has altered the terrain considerably over the last few decades.

The 2017 mass shooting at a Las Vegas music festival, during which a gunman killed 60 people and injured 500, involved bump stock-equipped rifles. Yet a group of Second Amendment absolutists has challenged bump stock restrictions, finding a gun-friendly panel of judges at the 5th

U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans last year to rule against the bump stock ban, leaving the matter to the Supreme Court. That justices would, for even a nanosecond, hesitate to uphold the Donald Trump-era federal ban on bump stocks seems absurd, but we live in an absurd world.

Of course, the court may yet do the right thing in Garland v. Cargill. Yet once that case is settled, new ones will appear and the question remains: What will it take for Americans to keep weapons of mass destruction out of the hands of individuals who are a threat to themselves and others? One can quibble about magazine capacities or background checks or waiting periods, licensing fees and training requirements. But it’s nothing less than criminal that machine-style guns can be created at home by the addition of a square-shaped part hardly bigger than a quarter.

Whether it takes action in the nation’s highest court or the halls of Congress or in the Maryland State House, it’s crucial that steps be taken to protect the public from a growing threat. Existing federal law may ban the use of Glock switches today, but will it be on the books tomorrow or in the future? And shouldn’t Maryland and its local governments be given every tool necessary to help enforce the law? Technically, the switches aren’t illegal in Maryland unless attached to a firearm. That ought to change.

Active shooting incidents have become increasingly common in the United States. In 2000, for example, there were three, according to the Federal Bureau of Investigation. By 2021, there were 61.

We see no reason to provide mass shooters with more powerful firearms. Even in a country where issues involving gun rights can get dicey, this should not be a difficult choice. The Supreme Court must uphold the federal ban on bump stocks, and lawmakers in the Maryland State House should pass the proposal by House Speaker Adrienne A. Jones to prohibit the making, selling or possession of Glock switches.