Rhode Island passes ban on "ghost guns"...

Its not a preemption problem, the state is simply prohibiting something that is not prohibited by the feds. It only becomes a preemption problem when a state attempts to enact something which is prohibited by federal law. Example: Marijuana. Even if you live in a state which has legalized it, its use is still prohibited by the federal Controlled Substances Act and thus is still a federal crime and a prohibition on purchasing/owning firearms.

Its only unconstitutional when the USSC says it is.

It's more unenforceable virtue signaling.
So make a gun and roll six D10 dice and pound a number on there.
How does that prevent crime?

Take a key and scratch a small "1" into your home made firearm somewhere inconspicuous. Done. Idiots.

Without the exact code to refer to (gee thanks, article writers) we have no definition of "serialize."

As this is virtue signalling and reactionary legislation, it's possible that serialization is not defined. Especially as regards to uniqueness of the serial enumeration.

And, while this is not Legal, with stricter standards, not having the code to know the definitions in use makes this just idle speculation on hearsay, and not reasoned discussion. Sigh.

http://webserver.rilin.state.ri.us/BillText/BillText20/SenateText20/S2004B.pdf

Pretty short by legislative standards, only 6 pages.

From the bill text:

"Ghost gun" means a firearm, including a frame or receiver, that lacks a unique serial number engraved or cased in metal alloy on the frame or receiver by a licensed manufacturer, maker or importer under federal law or markings inaccordance with 27 C.F.R. § 479.102. It does not include a firearm that has been rendered permanently inoperable, or a firearm that is not required to have a serial number in accordance with the Federal Gun Control Act of 1968.

Click to expand...

Funny, the text is very contradictory because the GCA of 1968 does not require home made firearms to have serial numbers. Furthermore, "maker" under the GCA of 1968 is whomever actually makes the firearm. No FFL required to make one for personal use.

Basically all this bill does is compel home gamers to put a serial number on a completed 80% receiver. Even that is questionable because of its exemption for firearms not required to have serial numbers under the 1968 GCA.

General Geoff said:

http://webserver.rilin.state.ri.us/BillText/BillText20/SenateText20/S2004B.pdf

Pretty short by legislative standards, only 6 pages.

From the bill text:



Funny, the text is very contradictory because the GCA of 1968 does not require home made firearms to have serial numbers. Furthermore, "maker" under the GCA of 1968 is whomever actually makes the firearm. No FFL required to make one for personal use.

Basically all this bill does is compel home gamers to put a serial number on a completed 80% receiver. Even that is questionable because of its exemption for firearms not required to have serial numbers under the 1968 GCA.

Click to expand...

Page 4 paragraph (d) bans binary triggers and similar devices.

General Geoff said:

http://webserver.rilin.state.ri.us/BillText/BillText20/SenateText20/S2004B.pdf

Pretty short by legislative standards, only 6 pages.

From the bill text:



Funny, the text is very contradictory because the GCA of 1968 does not require home made firearms to have serial numbers. Furthermore, "maker" under the GCA of 1968 is whomever actually makes the firearm. No FFL required to make one for personal use.

Basically all this bill does is compel home gamers to put a serial number on a completed 80% receiver. Even that is questionable because of its exemption for firearms not required to have serial numbers under the 1968 GCA.

Click to expand...

That paragraph makes it seem like the law nullifies itself with respect to serial number requirements.

Could be the serial number issue was just the legislative pack mule to ban hardware like binary triggers as mentioned by another user.

From the article...
“Banning ghost guns and untraceable firearms in Rhode Island is a major victory, but our work doesn’t end here,” said Gov. Gina Raimondo in a post on....''

Yes yes I've heard it all b4. BAN EVERYTHING! NOTICE: EXCEPTION(S); 1-friends and family 2-military, police (with sworn loyalty to the crown) 3- political allies, with LARGE ENVELOPES (strong emphasis on LARGE) containing green leafy papers, commonly referred to as $dollar$. Further notice, NO CHANGE or FOREIGN CURRENCY(s), unless proof marked silver or precious metals.


Re: ''Page 4 paragraph (d) bans binary triggers and similar devices.''

Pg4 (d) reads...
'' 23 (d) It shall be unlawful for any person to possess a bump-fire device, binary trigger, trigger
24 crank, or any other device that when attached to a semi-automatic weapon allows full-automatic
25 fire. ''

AGAIN...another contradiction. Well, I'm sure the fair & impartial fully separate judicial branch of RI gov will render a decision. After of course, some unsuspecting free citizen goofs.

Rhode Island is Mass light !

General Geoff said:

Basically all this bill does is compel home gamers to put a serial number on a completed 80% receiver. (Emphasis added.)

Click to expand...

This is an important distinction. It means that incomplete 80% receivers can still be sold without restriction. (Such a receiver by definition is "permanently inoperable.") So, serialization is required only at the point of completion, which means in practical terms that it's unenforceable. What the bill does is give prosecutors an add-on charge if the gun is used in a crime, or is seized for another reason. 80% receivers could still be sold by mail, or at gun shows, with no paper trail whatsoever. After all, the buyer could simply say that he was building a "dummy" gun.

Did anyone even bother to read the bill before voting on it? And what are binary triggers anyway?

I don’t believe in ghosts.

Binary triggers is a term someone cam up with for a trigger that fires once when pulled and once when released.

If you have a mini 14 you can do this with a staple. They allow you to turn money into noise, twice as fast.

It's about as enforceable as banning ghosts. But since TAPS (Or Ghost Nation, as they are now known) is based in RI, that won't happen. They're RI's #1 export!

jmorris said:

Binary triggers is a term someone came up with for a trigger that fires once when pulled and once when released.

Click to expand...

In theory, they could double the rate of fire. But there's a safety issue. Once you pull the trigger and fire the first shot, you are committed to firing the second shot (when you release the trigger). I don't see any way you could abort the second shot. And, a shooter unfamiliar with that particular gun's setup would have no way of knowing this. Installing a binary trigger could thus expose you to legal liability if something goes wrong.

Note: I had a reweld M1 Garand that would sometimes double unexpectedly. This was scary, to say the least.

It shouldn't take legislation for shooters to avoid things like binary triggers. They should do so out of a sense of self-preservation.

AlexanderA said:

This is an important distinction. It means that incomplete 80% receivers can still be sold without restriction. (Such a receiver by definition is "permanently inoperable.") So, serialization is required only at the point of completion, which means in practical terms that it's unenforceable. What the bill does is give prosecutors an add-on charge if the gun is used in a crime, or is seized for another reason. 80% receivers could still be sold by mail, or at gun shows, with no paper trail whatsoever. After all, the buyer could simply say that he was building a "dummy" gun.

Click to expand...

I don’t see how it could be used as an add-on charge if “caught” with a home build, since it exempts everything not required to have a serial number under GCA 68. It’s a fluffy cover for a hardware ban.

AlexanderA said:

In theory, they could double the rate of fire. But there's a safety issue. Once you pull the trigger and fire the first shot, you are committed to firing the second shot (when you release the trigger). I don't see any way you could abort the second shot. And, a shooter unfamiliar with that particular gun's setup would have no way of knowing this. Installing a binary trigger could thus expose you to legal liability if something goes wrong.

Note: I had a reweld M1 Garand that would sometimes double unexpectedly. This was scary, to say the least.

It shouldn't take legislation for shooters to avoid things like binary triggers. They should do so out of a sense of self-preservation.

Click to expand...

I don't own a binary but I believe if you flip it to safe with the trigger pulled it won't fire when the trigger is released.
still abless than ideal situation.

AlexanderA said:

Once you pull the trigger and fire the first shot, you are committed to firing the second shot (when you release the trigger). I don't see any way you could abort the second shot.

Click to expand...

Distantly Related Trivia Warning:
A good many Trap shooters have shotguns with release triggers; load the gun, pull the trigger to set it, call "Pull" and let go of the trigger to fire. The idea is to prevent flinching by making the shot a muscular release instead of a contraction.
If you get a broken target out of the house, you can cancel the operation by swinging the top lever of a break action gun, or the action release lever on a pump. I think an automatic with a release trigger will have that control added.

Even more sporty is the doubles gun. It can be had release-pull or double release.

AlexanderA said:

In theory, they could double the rate of fire. But there's a safety issue. Once you pull the trigger and fire the first shot, you are committed to firing the second shot (when you release the trigger). I don't see any way you could abort the second shot. And, a shooter unfamiliar with that particular gun's setup would have no way of knowing this. Installing a binary trigger could thus expose you to legal liability if something goes wrong.

Note: I had a reweld M1 Garand that would sometimes double unexpectedly. This was scary, to say the least.

It shouldn't take legislation for shooters to avoid things like binary triggers. They should do so out of a sense of self-preservation.

Click to expand...

You really should do a bit of research before making comments.

Every binary trigger I'm aware of has a mechinism to stop the second shot. Usually by moving the safety in the case of an AR.

So what happens if you own an older .22 or cheap shotgun produced sans serial number?

Did anyone even bother to read the bill before voting on it?

Click to expand...

What, people know how to read?
If it's on the ballot it must be good for us.
The government knows what's best for us, we are all just to uninformed/ignorant/stupid to know what is best for ourselves.....

For sure most of them failed Logic 101...(at least in CA)
Bears attack people
Bears attack bee hives
Bees make honey
Bears attack bee hives to get honey
So, Pass a law to stop bees making honey and all bear attack problems are solved.....(those evil bees)

I sure this would make perfect sense to the anti gun faction....
Nothing wrong with the above logic

I never really wanted to make one of those until now.

Dudedog said:

What, people know how to read?
If it's on the ballot it must be good for us.
The government knows what's best for us, we are all just to uninformed/ignorant/stupid to know what is best for ourselves.....

For sure most of them failed Logic 101...(at least in CA)
Bears attack people
Bears attack bee hives
Bee make honey
Bears attack bee hives to get honey
So, Pass a law to stop bees making honey and all bear attack problems are solved.....(those evil bees)

I sure this would make perfect sense to the anti gun faction....
Nothing wrong with the above logic

Click to expand...

Here is an article that makes an attempt at explaining the logic outlined above.

https://americanmind.org/essays/the...V4W_qSjDaNKjr-x-XF45R0w1bcsuMfoZ249kM2nSJgQHI

It specifically addresses the idea of "the government knows best" and to a degree why some people are more willing to believe that.

I was always at best mildly amused at the 80% stuff. Never paid any attention, until they started making noise of laws. So had to try of course. First AR was a hell of a lot of fun to do. Even more when it worked and so easy. Sadly as with all "gun law" the places passing law against these have little problem because so few gun owners care. Most who do not own one, don't pay attention, figure it has nothing on them, so do not care sadly. The idea that criminals who can't have a gun in the first place "want" these is so absurd it's sad that it fly's. As if the criminals suddenly can't find illegal guns to buy, but sadly this again comes down to the voters. State of CA is a great example. Supposedly millions of legal gun owners there yet just trying to get them to vote for their best interest is herding cats for the ones who try.

AlexanderA said:

I don't see any way you could abort the second shot.

Click to expand...

Keep the trigger depressed, eject the mag and rack the bolt.

“Release trigger” is the term to search and they are not new, been around for awhile with scattergun folks.