Guy Peifer is a resident of Millsboro.
As a lifelong supporter of the Second Amendment, a Delaware resident and a federally licensed firearms dealer, I am increasingly frustrated by Delaware’s continued restrictions on lawful firearm ownership. At what point do we stop blaming firearms and responsible gun owners for the criminal actions of others?
In 2022, Delaware banned many AR- and AK-pattern rifles, certain semiautomatic shotguns and magazines capable of holding more than 17 rounds. These restrictions affected firearms that law-abiding citizens had previously been permitted to purchase and own.
Now, Attorney General Kathy Jennings has taken another step, filing a lawsuit against Glock that seeks to prohibit the sale of certain Glock handguns to Delaware civilians.
The justification? Criminals are illegally modifying these handguns with devices commonly called “Glock switches,” converting semiautomatic firearms into fully automatic weapons.
Here is what I find particularly troubling: These conversion devices are already illegal.
Glock does not manufacture these illegal switches. Individuals who install them are already violating the law. Yet, rather than concentrating exclusively on those committing these offenses, Delaware is asking the courts to restrict the sale of otherwise lawful firearms.
The attorney general argues that Glock should redesign its firearms to make illegal conversions more difficult. That argument deserves examination, but so does the question of whether manufacturers and lawful purchasers should be penalized for criminal modifications performed by others.
Consider Delaware’s own mortality statistics.
In 2024, Delaware recorded:
Drug overdoses claimed nearly seven times as many lives as firearm homicides, while traffic crashes claimed more than twice as many.
Every one of these deaths represents a tragedy. I am not suggesting that 50 firearm homicides are acceptable or that gun violence should be ignored. However, we must distinguish criminal violence from suicide and accidental deaths when discussing public safety, and we should examine all these problems with the same commitment to evidence and effective solutions.
Where is the evidence that banning additional firearms from responsible citizens will prevent criminals from obtaining weapons, illegally modifying them or committing acts of violence?
Where is the accountability for individuals who repeatedly violate existing firearm laws?
And why does Delaware continue pursuing restrictions on what law-abiding citizens may purchase instead of demonstrating that existing laws are being effectively enforced?
As a firearms dealer, I see firsthand the extensive regulations that responsible customers and licensed businesses must follow. Background checks, identification requirements, transfer procedures and federal and state regulations are already part of every lawful transaction.
Responsible firearm owners comply with these requirements. Criminals, by definition, do not respect them.
Supporters of these restrictions believe they can reduce violence by limiting access to certain firearms and preventing dangerous modifications. I understand the desire to protect our communities. But good intentions alone are not enough. Every restriction on a constitutional right should be supported by clear evidence, careful constitutional scrutiny and measurable public safety benefits.
The Second Amendment is a constitutional right, not a privilege to be continually narrowed whenever someone misuses a firearm.
I want safer communities. I want violent criminals prosecuted. I want illegal machine gun conversion devices removed from our streets. And I want our elected officials to prioritize enforcement, accountability and meaningful crime prevention.
What I do not want is an endless cycle of new firearm restrictions without clear evidence that those restrictions are solving the underlying problem.
Delaware citizens deserve better than legislation and lawsuits that continually place additional burdens on lawful ownership, while leaving serious questions about criminal enforcement unanswered.
Enforce the laws already on the books. Hold violent offenders accountable. Demonstrate that new restrictions actually work. And respect the constitutional rights of Delaware citizens.
Reader reactions, pro or con, are welcomed at civiltalk@iniusa.org.
