New Justice Dept. Rule Would Aim to Crack Down on 'Ghost Guns'

Status
Not open for further replies.
I like the concept of an equal playing field. Ever gun I ever bought was through a dealer. Once background checks through FFLs became law I accepted that because I knew I would pass all background checks since I do not meet any of the ‘deny’ criteria. While the vast majority of prospective gun purchasers pass a BC, some do not. Some who should not get approved are through failures of the system. The level playing field I believe in makes me think that gun kit buyers ought to undergo a BC. We do not need loopholes that will allow people who should not have guns to get them. The checks are no guarantee guns will not get into the hands of bad people, but they are all we have to try and keep bad guys from getting guns. It is not a perfect world.
 
News media and DOJ fumbling in unison. Unnamed senior DOJ official says proposed rule was released, but speaks on condition of anonymity, says can't say more until publication, and every news story carries same image, which shows AR type gun atop boxes. Very aromatic.
 
Aim1 said:
Those numbers seem awfully high.
Click to expand...
I think DOJ is combining the figures for 'serial removed' firearms and 'not serialized' guns.
Personally I think a good way to solve this is to require background checks for kits and require anyone manufacturing a firearm to serialize said firearm (listing your name, city, and state on the frame as any other OEM would) and register said firearm if your state requires such for possession. (Not that I want them to require it!) That way it is very slightly harder for those without the ability to possess in a given state to acquire these kits, but anyone who is able to possess legally is not affected. This would of course move the industry from advertising them as 80% firearm kits to 'model/airsoft' gun kits or something similar, but such is how legal matters go....
Similar rules apply for 'experimental' automobiles and aircraft, so I don't see a difference here.
 
RougeLeader1 said:
I think DOJ is combining the figures for 'serial removed' firearms and 'not serialized' guns.
Personally I think a good way to solve this is to require background checks for kits and require anyone manufacturing a firearm to serialize said firearm (listing your name, city, and state on the frame as any other OEM would) and register said firearm if your state requires such for possession. (Not that I want them to require it!) That way it is very slightly harder for those without the ability to possess in a given state to acquire these kits, but anyone who is able to possess legally is not affected. This would of course move the industry from advertising them as 80% firearm kits to 'model/airsoft' gun kits or something similar, but such is how legal matters go....
Similar rules apply for 'experimental' automobiles and aircraft, so I don't see a difference here.
Click to expand...
The second amendment doesn't include the right to drive experimental cars or fly experimental aircraft. What are you, a Biden/Harris voter?
 
What the hell is the matter with us Americans. Everyone is always so ready to comply and bend over for every ignorant law that’s past. Everyone is always so ready to comply and bend over for every ignorant law that’s passed.
The same stupid argument gets repeated over and over. if we just keep regulating ourselves the anti-gunners will somehow be happy. Criminals always get guns, it has nothing to do with background checks. That’s just a bunch of BS.
 
shootbrownelk said:
The second amendment doesn't include the right to drive experimental cars or fly experimental aircraft. What are you, a Biden/Harris voter?
Click to expand...
Correct, but the second amendment also does not, by most legal interpretations, include the right to manufacture weapons commercially. That has long been regulated by the federal government. Now, I agree that citizenry should very much be allowed to build their own firearms (I've built firearms myself!), but regulation of said manufacture as it applies to the involvement of a commercial enterprise is not immediately abhorrent.
And if you must know, no actually I voted for Trump both times and I'd appreciate it if you'd keep personal slights out of the matter.
Steel Horse Rider said:
I think the number of unserialized firearms used in crimes is probably equal to the number of unicorns that can dance on the head of a pin.
Click to expand...
Agreed. Look at their own number of 325. That means that <6% of the firearms counted here had anything to do with a homicide or attempted homicide, and that generously assumes that 4 firearms were involved in every such crime. Not exactly what I'd call super effective.
 
So a criminal with an iq of 50 wants to kill a gang member next door. Does he buy an 80% kit, do the needed work, assemble, test the gun and then go kill the gangster? Does he buy a mini milling machine and mill the frame out of a block of aluminum, assemble, test, kill? No, he steals what he needs to do the job.

Regulating “ghost guns” is just another way for government to clamp down on law abiding citizens.
 
The article says it's illegal to build a gun.
That must either be the authors uninformed opinion or the author is based in an authorization state where normal people are not allowed to build or posses guns and wants to normalize this infringement where it does not exist.
It's not illegal to build your own guns in most states.
 
That is entirely possible, which is why we have laws regarding the reporting of stolen firearms and how/where they should be secured.
It is also entirely possible for a criminal with an IQ of 50 to buy an 80% kit and a drill press and manufacture a firearm. I really do not see what the issue is here. If you are able to lawfully possess a firearm in your state then you would have no problem. If you are not lawfully able to possess a firearm, then you have no business buying any form of firearm DIY kit. Why people would not be lawfully able to possess a firearm is different subject entirely, and one of active debate of course, but I stand by that line.
 
They obviously suffer from the delusion that guns are highly traceable. Some of my firearms I inhereted. A few I acquired in private sales. Several came from dealers 25-30 years ago, where the form 4473 probably no longer exists. Probably about half of them are easily traceable. The rest I think are probably not.
 
Let’s see the actual rule. Next no political insults over voting.

Closed until we see the rules and at that time the discussion will be more than rants.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

A
  • Locked
Proposed 'ghost gun' rule could reshape battle against homemade guns: Experts
2 3 4
Replies
84
Views
4K
Pat Riot
Pat Riot
A
  • Locked
Supplemental Brief in Delaware Court states that Bruen doesn't protect Ghost Guns.
Replies
3
Views
256
Zerodefect
Z
A
Connecticut sues firearm companies in ghost gun crackdown
2
Replies
29
Views
1K
JumboJVT
J
Speedo66
  • Locked
"Ghost Gun" Arrests in NJ
Replies
22
Views
2K
CapnMac
CapnMac
hso
SCOTUS LIFTS O'Connor injunction
Replies
0
Views
299
hso
hso
Back
Top