Biden to target 'ghost guns,' stabilizing braces in new gun control actions
- Thread starter Aim1
- Start date
- Status
dogtown tom
Member
On what grounds?
It's not discriminatory on its face in the least.
No federal law grants an exemption from firearms laws to the disabled, to veterans or to disabled veterans or even disabled American veterans. If you are a bad shot and want to hunt rabbits with a hand grenade, that isn't "discriminatory" because a game law that restricts what weapons or calibers can be used applies to everyone.
Thankfully you didn't mention the American with Disabilities Act as many do, as it has nothing to do about firearms.
dogtown tom
Member
Which has nothing to do with Biden's announcement today of his Executive Actions, not Executive Orders. He simply gave another campaign speech.
shoobe01
Member
+1000
Not one thing that impacts anyone outside of a few government offices happened today. This is the normal function of government, and when in those industries you hear about this stuff for industrial safety, or transit funding or environmental concerns or aviation security or a million other fields, when there's an emergent situation or a political need to change stuff, and the WH lawyers say that the President can just tell the appropriate agency to investigate rulemaking or propose if they need laws.
Will be interesting to see what they come up with, and note stuff like braces are not "ban" but "clarify." Some of these — if you can admit a government should exist — could be good.
Insignificant bill
Member
- Joined
- May 2, 2019
- Messages
- 1,214
This is about controlling us, has nothing to do with anyone's safety.
So if they declare the braces of a certain type make a SBR, you register it or take off the brace and throw it away. It becomes useless. Let's skip the politics about controlling us and focus on the actual situation.
To focus, which is hard - the idea was to avoid NICS with the kits. Do you think NICS should exist all together or anyone without the 4473 questions should be able to buy a gun at a store? That's the real issue.
To focus, which is hard - the idea was to avoid NICS with the kits. Do you think NICS should exist all together or anyone without the 4473 questions should be able to buy a gun at a store? That's the real issue.
BlueHeelerFl
Member
Back when I lived in NYC I first had the NYC Rifle and Shotgun License and later got the NYC Target Handgun License.
Neither allowed me to keep a loaded gun in my home and IIRC everything had to be kept separate
Elkins45
Member
I had never disassembled a Glock before I did mine. I think the whole idea of ghost guns is just more grist for the mill, but the P80 frames are pretty darned close to a completed gun. The “buy and build” kits offered by a number of vendors are essentially the same as having a Glock delivered to your mailbox. People have been sticking their thumb in the eye of the ARF with 80% kits and shoulder braces for a while now and ARF has finally been let off the leash to poke back.
And a big thanks to “friend of the 2nd Amendment” Trump for normalizing the process of the President ordering ATF to redefine terms in common use.
This distinction only matters in states that ban private sales. Here in KY if I want a paperless gun I can just buy it at the flea market. In a mandatory background check state the 80% kits are a significant workaround to the law.
Last edited:
CapnMac
Member
That's a complicated question at several levels.
Now, I prefer NICS over the old Brady wait.
I'd prefer if NICS was closer to accurate than it is.
I'm sore concerned with POC states being so, just so that they can collect shooter data.
Now, just what defines a "kit" is deeper water.
If I own charcoal to cook steaks, sulfur to control ticks & chiggers, and potassium nitrate for meat curing--do I own gunpowder?
castile
Member
- Joined
- Jun 19, 2012
- Messages
- 602
First off we all know that braces do not make an ar pistol more deadly that is just stupid and DADS. President house plant is just that dumb. Second the whole SBR thing is out dated and never really was effective in crime stopping. Can you imagine someone saying I was going to cut down a shot gun and kill a bunch of people but its illegal to cut it shorter than 18 inches so I will pass. Never ever or will happen. Ghost guns is an area I can see, not agree with but can see getting banned. I would buy the kits now if you want one and put it away. But the question is and where biden is not smart enough to get, is that its not a receiver until its milled. How do you treat a non gun as a gun? Where is the line? Is now a billet of aluminum that can be milled into a receiver a gun because it could be a gun? The Glock ones are a bit crazy, there is so little to do to make them full on a gun its crazy. I have seen people build them at gun shows in less than 20 min. with only a dremel and drill.
Again, you have to think this through. A billet that is shaped like a receiver is for a gun. Unless it is a block with no resemblance to a receiver, the percentage argument will be voided. More or less drilling doesn't negate the argument that will be used against them.
The SBR ban is stupid from the get go - it is a remnant from the days of Al Capone. However, the usage of braces to make a 'legal' SBR used in a nonlegal fashion is the argument and low hanging fruit for trying to avoid a regulation.
The SBR ban is stupid from the get go - it is a remnant from the days of Al Capone. However, the usage of braces to make a 'legal' SBR used in a nonlegal fashion is the argument and low hanging fruit for trying to avoid a regulation.
dogtown tom
Member
ATF created that leash by issuing the determination that many of those 80% frames were NOT firearms. It was ATF's determination at the time those frames didn't meet the definition of firearm. They COULD have easily made a determination that they were indeed, a firearm.
What happened later is interesting. Some companies began including a jig to make completion faster and easier. Then later including a slide a barrel assembly. This last bit caused ATF to think.....hold on....you didn't submit all that stuff when you asked for a determination letter. and now we think that might actually be a firearm. Thats when ATF started seizing kits and customer lists.
Trump was never a friend of the 2nd, he's a friend of whatever gets him applause. Remember his comments regarding silencers? "I don't like them"
It's not a workaround, it's not a loophole, its a legal means to build, own or possess a firearm.
Elkins45
Member
Semantics. You have to do extra work to get around the law that was intended to prohibit the acquisition of firearms without a 4473. To me workaround doesn’t imply something sneaky or underhanded in the same way that people use the term loophole. But I agree that to anti gunners their definition of loophole is “something that is legal but I don’t like.”
As in the infamous “gun show loophole” which is otherwise known as a legal sale of privately-owned firearms.
Pudge
Member
"GEM, post: 11891894, member: 10500"]So if they declare the braces of a certain type make a SBR, you register it or take off the brace and throw it away. It becomes useless. Let's skip the politics about controlling us and focus on the actual situation.
Ok, the actual situation is, law abiding gun owners are required to register their pistol as an SBR, or remove and discard the brace, and the benefit to society is??? If all SBR's were eliminated today, could the impact on crime be measured? This situation is entirely about votes, nothing to do with any social benefit.
To focus, which is hard - the idea was to avoid NICS with the kits. Do you think NICS should exist all together or anyone without the 4473 questions should be able to buy a gun at a store? That's the real issue.
That is one perspective of the issue. Avoiding an NICS check for criminal reasons is a bad idea, but avoiding an NCIS check legally isn't. I've done so, it saves money, and no instant check on me has ever prevented a crime. If the NICS check were the issue, I would expect crime scene evidence to show a significant amount of these kits involved in illegal activity. Absent that evidence, I would suggest the purpose of the "kits" isn't to avoid the NICS, but rather to avoid a paper trail controlled by the government which has shown very little commitment to protecting the individual's rights and freedoms, and a strong inclination to trample and eliminate those rights.
Ok, the actual situation is, law abiding gun owners are required to register their pistol as an SBR, or remove and discard the brace, and the benefit to society is??? If all SBR's were eliminated today, could the impact on crime be measured? This situation is entirely about votes, nothing to do with any social benefit.
To focus, which is hard - the idea was to avoid NICS with the kits. Do you think NICS should exist all together or anyone without the 4473 questions should be able to buy a gun at a store? That's the real issue.
That is one perspective of the issue. Avoiding an NICS check for criminal reasons is a bad idea, but avoiding an NCIS check legally isn't. I've done so, it saves money, and no instant check on me has ever prevented a crime. If the NICS check were the issue, I would expect crime scene evidence to show a significant amount of these kits involved in illegal activity. Absent that evidence, I would suggest the purpose of the "kits" isn't to avoid the NICS, but rather to avoid a paper trail controlled by the government which has shown very little commitment to protecting the individual's rights and freedoms, and a strong inclination to trample and eliminate those rights.
milsurpguy
member
- Joined
- Feb 12, 2021
- Messages
- 549
Is the NRA going to do anything?
Or are they going to play fud and be like " no one needs an AR pistol".
Man spell check does not like the term "NRA" for some reason, likes to turn NRA into NFA.
Or are they going to play fud and be like " no one needs an AR pistol".
Man spell check does not like the term "NRA" for some reason, likes to turn NRA into NFA.
I have a buddy who is a very progun Federal agent. He reports they are seeing quite a few of these guns in crimes. California might have 30 % of the long arms being such in crimes. If that is true, I can't tell but the source is not antigun.
Avoiding a paper trail is exactly the issue. How is that different from saying it is to avoid NICS? If you disagree with any recording (even if it is at the LGS level) or support anyone buying a gun with no checks, then that is your position. Is the inconvenience of the checks such that you would go back to the mail order days of the past for long arms? There are rampages where a screwed up NICS didn't stop a nut.
We do see that new guns enter the criminal world - would no NICS have no effect on that? We don't know. There are studies on the pathways and theft, friends and family transfer, straw man sales, etc. are part of it.
So should there be no requirements for a gun purchase? The reason is to provide an easy path for gun to protect against tyranny? Recall that the defense against tyranny is not a popular selling point. The NRA does
not push it as their marketing says it does not sell. The Heller decision focused on self-defense which generated quite a bit of rationales for weapons type and mag bans in lower courts as 5 is enough, blah, blah.
I simply don't see the argument that doesn't boil down to NO checks vs. NICs or even something stricter.
Avoiding a paper trail is exactly the issue. How is that different from saying it is to avoid NICS? If you disagree with any recording (even if it is at the LGS level) or support anyone buying a gun with no checks, then that is your position. Is the inconvenience of the checks such that you would go back to the mail order days of the past for long arms? There are rampages where a screwed up NICS didn't stop a nut.
We do see that new guns enter the criminal world - would no NICS have no effect on that? We don't know. There are studies on the pathways and theft, friends and family transfer, straw man sales, etc. are part of it.
So should there be no requirements for a gun purchase? The reason is to provide an easy path for gun to protect against tyranny? Recall that the defense against tyranny is not a popular selling point. The NRA does
not push it as their marketing says it does not sell. The Heller decision focused on self-defense which generated quite a bit of rationales for weapons type and mag bans in lower courts as 5 is enough, blah, blah.
I simply don't see the argument that doesn't boil down to NO checks vs. NICs or even something stricter.
Heir Kommt Die Sonne
Member
Mike OTDP
Member
You want to kill off the 80% receivers and frames? Stop talking "Ban, ban, ban" all the time! People buy them because they are terrified of any firearm with a paper trail being eventually confiscated.
Polymer 80 will sell you a completed, seriaized, frame for less than the 80% kits. Ditto for the AR receivers.
Polymer 80 will sell you a completed, seriaized, frame for less than the 80% kits. Ditto for the AR receivers.
PS - in TX, with a LTC I didn't have to go through a background check, just fill out the 4473 which the LGS kept, IIRC. Wow, no record but I'm on record as being some kind of gun person. If the confiscatory bans start - they wouldn't miss me - would they? If it came to that level of tyrannical confiscation - yeah my gun fell in the creek. But since you could easily find that I shot lots of carbine matches, and sometimes would be only 3 points down out of 50 targets (must be a dangerous old man). Now, in Erie county, they have records of my handguns but since I have a permit, doesn't take Einstein to know I have some. Long arms - just the 4473 at the store and the background check.
I totally understand the fear of confiscation given the past here and abroad. I simply want to point out the nuances in the arguments beyond the cliches. If you are OK with NICS, then serializing the frames or having a NICS check for the kits is OK with you. If not, then no restrictions for anyone - not just Ward Cleaver buying the Beaver his deer rifle but anyone.
A Scotus decision supporting ownership such that confiscation could not happen, could help if they would get off the butts.
A clear set of Scotus decisions for gun rights is the only solution. There is no hope of legislative solutions on the Federal level. One might speculate that the pro gun folks don't want one as that would impact fund raising. Nasty but true.
I totally understand the fear of confiscation given the past here and abroad. I simply want to point out the nuances in the arguments beyond the cliches. If you are OK with NICS, then serializing the frames or having a NICS check for the kits is OK with you. If not, then no restrictions for anyone - not just Ward Cleaver buying the Beaver his deer rifle but anyone.
A Scotus decision supporting ownership such that confiscation could not happen, could help if they would get off the butts.
A clear set of Scotus decisions for gun rights is the only solution. There is no hope of legislative solutions on the Federal level. One might speculate that the pro gun folks don't want one as that would impact fund raising. Nasty but true.
Phaedrus/69
Member
Kits, IIRC. Not the braced guns. BTW, being on TV promoting gun rights in front of the TX legislature - that takes care of me worrying about a paper trail, think my picture was in American Handgunner or Guns (I forget). I'm screwed. I live by a pond - they gonna believe it was a boating accident - it's rather shallow.
OH, I'm a moderator here - that will take 5 secs to crack for the evil forces.
OH, I'm a moderator here - that will take 5 secs to crack for the evil forces.
Telum Pisces
Member
It's all just mindset! In Europe and other parts of the world where they do not have a second amendment and less friendly to firearms, they require suppressors to keep noise pollution down. But here in the US, they are "silencers" that make a firearm completely silent and they are bad items to be regulated.
Many of the firearm laws on the books in the US resulted from the prohibition days and real organized gangsters etc... They make no real sense and the folks that are scared of firearms just keep repeating the same ole story because it makes them feel good about themselves for some crazy reason.
DustyGmt
Member
But was it 100% reliable and did it pass every function and safety test?
The reason I bring this up is because I see way too many new members on the Marine Gun Builder forum that have function and/or safety issues with their first builds. There is actually a bit of hand fitting with both the front locking block rail and rear rail. There is more to building a Polymer 80 pistol than just drilling 6 holes, removing 5 plastic tabs, and inserting parts to have a 100% safe and functioning pistol.
While some can complete a P80 pistol in under 30 minutes, myself included, most people that are totally new to the process can't do it. I can finish one in 30 minutes which includes taking my time to polish the frame to a nice sheen. But then I am also a retired machinist/tool and die maker and gun smith too.
Elkins45
Member
Yes.
Saying it actually takes an hour (or two, or whatever) vs 30 minutes to build one of these “ghost guns” won’t win over someone who wants to ban them. It’s a non-issue.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
