In the last several years, a proliferation of tiny pieces of plastic and metal is fueling a spike in semi-automatic handguns converted to fully automatic fire.

Communities around the U.S. have seen shootings carried out with weapons converted to fully automatic in recent years, fueled by a staggering increase in small pieces of metal or plastic made with a 3D printer or ordered online. Laws against machine guns date back to the bloody violence of Prohibition-era gangsters. But the proliferation of devices known by nicknames such as Glock switches, auto sears and chips has allowed people to transform legal semi-automatic weapons into even more dangerous guns, helping fuel gun violence, police and federal authorities said.

The (ATF) reported a 570% increase in the number of conversion devices collected by police departments between 2017 and 2021, the most recent data available.

The devices that can convert legal semi-automatic weapons can be made on a 3D printer in about 35 minutes or ordered from overseas online for less than $30. They’re also quick to install.

“It takes two or three seconds to put in some of these devices into a firearm to make that firearm into a machine gun instantly,” Dettelbach said.

  • SupraMario@lemmy.world
    1·
    9 months ago

    What bullshit did I spew? The NRA just says mental health and gun control doesn’t work. You listed a link to fucking Harvard which is known to directly make studies to say what they want. This isn’t news.

    I’ve stated that safety nets in countries with less crime in general isn’t because they have less guns. It’s because their citizens are taken care of. Are you really going to sit there and say this isn’t true?

    Suicides…guns do not magically make people more prone to suicide, this is and has always been false. Japan is one of the strictest countries on the planet for access to firearms. Yet they have a suicide rate that is far greater than ours. Are you suggesting their miniscule amount of suicides is related to their access to firearms?

      • SupraMario@lemmy.world
        1·
        9 months ago

        Man you got me I’m a minority hillbilly who follows the NRA and watches faux news. Got me.

        You apparently have an issue with reading comprehension, what part of fuck the NRA did you not get?

        The studies from Harvard are well known flawed. Their DGU study assumed that for a DGU to happen a shot had to be fired, this is just single example of shit data. Most DGUs the firearm is never even drawn, usually it’s shown and that’s enough to de-escalate the situation.

        I’ll ask you, how do you plan on banning and getting rid of 450+ million firearms? You going to collect them all?

        The CDC used to do legit studies, but since the whole “we’re going to make a link that proves guns are bad” a lot of their shit has gone down hill. The level of pressure from Bloomberg “stop and frisk” and his ilk create a lot of bullshit studies that are designed to say one thing.

        https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/rr5214a2.htm

        During 2000–2002, the Task Force on Community Preventive Services (the Task Force), an independent nonfederal task force, conducted a systematic review of scientific evidence regarding the effectiveness of firearms laws in preventing violence, including violent crimes, suicide, and unintentional injury. The following laws were evaluated: bans on specified firearms or ammunition, restrictions on firearm acquisition, waiting periods for firearm acquisition, firearm registration and licensing of firearm owners, “shall issue” concealed weapon carry laws, child access prevention laws, zero tolerance laws for firearms in schools, and combinations of firearms laws. The Task Force found insufficient evidence to determine the effectiveness of any of the firearms laws or combinations of laws reviewed on violent outcomes.(Note that insufficient evidence to determine effectiveness should not be interpreted as evidence of ineffectiveness.) This report briefly describes how the reviews were conducted, summarizes the Task Force findings, and provides information regarding needs for future research.

        Additionally, firearms studies often fail to note potential biases associated with measurement of outcomes not directly associated with the law in question (e.g., using victims rather than agents of violence in the assessment of CAP laws). In conclusion, the application of imperfect methods to imperfect data has commonly resulted in inconsistent and otherwise insufficient evidence with which to determine the effectiveness of firearms laws in modifying violent outcomes.

        The ivory tower you sit in is so bright no one is able to look at it…