If gun control advocates are really going to capitalize on Sunday’s mass shooting in Las Vegas, they need to make it sound as if it takes little to no effort to pull of the horrific killing spree that left at least 58 dead.

According to the Wall Street Journal and other reports, suspect Stephen Paddock did have fully automatic weapons in his hotel room, as well as an arsenal that included the makings of explosives explosives.

Word that the gunman had at least one full-auto weapon inspired a chorus of people to exclaim that machine guns should be illegal. Sean Davis in The Federalist makes it clear that there are plenty of laws on the books already.

Davis writes:

Reports, like those from ABC reporter Terry Moran, that machine guns are perfectly legal in Nevada and other states are highly misleading. Federal law, after all, pre-empts state law. In fact, under Nevada state law, NFA items are only legal if they have been legally obtained and registered under federal law. You can’t just waltz into the state with an unregistered machine gun and expect to walk around scot-free. This is the case in all states which allow possession of NFA items. Legal federal ownership is a prerequisite in every case. If the NFA item is not owned, registered, and stamped in compliance with federal laws and regulations, then the item is illegal under state law.

In other words, Huffington Post editor-in-chief Lydia Polgreen makes walking around with a machine gun sound a lot easier than it really is. You know how they are out there in the Wild West — guns everywhere, ’cause that’s the way they like it.

“HuffPost sent a reporter strapped with a fully automatic rifle to Las Vegas to show how easy it is to walk around the city…”

There’s that little detail of federal law trumping state law. Good thing the experts at HuffPost are here to set us straight.

Same difference when you just want to ban everything.

* * *

Related: