FYSA-SCOTUS hears oral arguments on ATF rule change on "ghost guns"

hso

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Jan 3, 2003
Messages
68,039
Location
0 hrs east of TN
The Supreme Court is hearing its first oral arguments of the 2024-25 term today. The case, Garland v. VanDerStok, surrounds a 2022 regulation on so-called “ghost guns”—untraceable firearm components made through 3D printing, kits, and parts.



At issue is whether the Biden administration overstepped its authority in amending the 1968 definition of a firearm to include parts capable of being converted into a gun in under 30 minutes. The change, by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, requires manufacturers to run background checks on buyers and mark products with serial numbers, among other obligations. The amended rule came after what the administration says was a roughly tenfold increase in the number of ghost guns recovered at crime scenes since 2017, with law enforcement recovering ghost guns in up to 15% of gun-related crimes.
 
parts capable of being converted into a gun in under 30 minutes.

Sounds like a theme for a fun competition. That could be a block of raw material for someone with a CNC. Faster than one could 3D print one from PLA and will be durable as well.

 
The amended rule came after what the administration says was a roughly tenfold increase in the number of ghost guns recovered at crime scenes since 2017, with law enforcement recovering ghost guns in up to 15% of gun-related crimes.
This is a surprise to me, I did not realize that These types of firearms were that common, especially at the criminal level. I must be out of the loop.....
 
There is a bit of "spin" in there too, they really want to get rid of 80% parts (whats in the photo of this "ghost gun" article). Without passing new laws against them, so they just changed what they call them in the "news". "Ghost" does sound more spooky than 80%, I'll give them that.

E4232CB4-0E34-48A7-BB66-3B36B6267229.jpeg

FWIW I never built a firearm (either from scratch or 80%) seeking to use it in a crime. Becoming a criminal has no appeal to me.

That said, the best way to take away rights from honest people, is to tell them you are protecting them from the bad people.

Personally, I'd prefer they just keep them off the streets altogether. Criminals can find lots of ways to harm us.
 
Last edited:
The term Ghost Gun is the new version of Assault Weapon that the gun grabbers use to demonize firearms they don't like.

I have built a few of the Polymer 80 frames and yes one can build one in 30 minutes. Now having a fully functional and safe pistol in 30 minutes is another story. One really does need to have some mechanical skills along with a good understanding of how a Glock works to turn an 80% P80 frame into a safe and functional pistol. One can look at forums like Glock Talk and the Marine Gun Builder to see new builders having all kinds of issues with building their own 80% frame.
 
This reminds me of the day I was getting fingerprinted to submit my application for my FL carry license at a sheriff's office. While waiting for something or other this post-retirement uniformed officer/deputy said to me with a knowing look something like this, "just so you know, the FBI will be doing a background check on you, I hope you don't have any criminal this or that, etc", we both had a good laugh after I told him I couldn't remember my last parking ticket.

I don't think the average criminal miscreant will go about the needed learning or work involved in completing a fully functional, safe, 80% pistol frame. I do think organized groups with criminal intent might find ways to do that because for them it might work out better than theft and resale. It is after all, about greed/money.

My expectation - in keeping with the demise of chevron deference - is SCOTUS will will rule against this new definition. If they do that, I might want to pick up a kit for the tinkering aspect as I like that kind of thing. It would be fun to be able to say I made this :)
 
The ATF calls them PMF's.

The Biden administration want's to eliminate the part in bold, without changing the law. Kind of like Trump did, declaring sliding plastic stocks were machineguns, despite the fact they were not.

Privately made firearms (PMFs) are firearms (including a frame or receiver) that have been completed, assembled or otherwise produced by a person other than a licensed manufacturer. PMFs are also made without a serial number placed by a licensed manufacturer at the time the firearm was produced. However, not all PMFs are illegal and not all firearms are required to have a serial number. ATF has compiled some information on the different types of PMFs and things to consider while owning one.

PMFs are commonly referred to as “ghost guns” because it can be difficult to track them.

 
This reminds me of the day I was getting fingerprinted to submit my application for my FL carry license at a sheriff's office. While waiting for something or other this post-retirement uniformed officer/deputy said to me with a knowing look something like this, "just so you know, the FBI will be doing a background check on you, I hope you don't have any criminal this or that, etc", we both had a good laugh after I told him I couldn't remember my last parking ticket.

I don't think the average criminal miscreant will go about the needed learning or work involved in completing a fully functional, safe, 80% pistol frame. I do think organized groups with criminal intent might find ways to do that because for them it might work out better than theft and resale. It is after all, about greed/money.

My expectation - in keeping with the demise of chevron deference - is SCOTUS will will rule against this new definition. If they do that, I might want to pick up a kit for the tinkering aspect as I like that kind of thing. It would be fun to be able to say I made this :)
I remember my last moving violation...33 years ago... :)
However, FOX reports all the justices, even Gorsuch, were supportive of the Fed overreach. :(
 
I did not realize that These types of firearms were that common,
"Small Number Bias"
Say a thing happens twice in a time period.
If it happens four times in the next time period, that's a 100% increase in the thing.

Where this becomes dicey is if similar things happen at thousands or tens of thousands of events in the same time period.
Every order of magnitude multiplies the bias.

With a large category, 20 things happen, and we isolate 2 of those, that's 10%. If the 2 becomes 4, that's 20% of the whole, but 100% more than the previous 2.
If it's 200 things--on more order of magnitude-- 2 is a mere 1%; 4 becomes 2%, but the increase is still 100%
Bump yet another order of magnitude, that's 2000 things, 2 is all of 0.5%, and 4 is a whopping 1% of the total, but the increase is still 100%.

Now, a an unscrupulous person opining on this can assert the 100% increase for effect, which becomes deceptive, as the casual person may assume thi increase is in the larger thing, not the smaller. Which redoubles if the "audience" is not generally 'good' at math to begin with.

Hence the adage about "Lies, d'mn lies, and Statistics."
 
First… this falls to definition - what is a firearm? Second - when does it become a firearm? Take this to the most extreme, a block of aluminum is a firearm….
 
It's not looking good according to the article on Fox News.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/su...iden-administration-regulation-ghost-gun-kits

Several justices in the 75-minute argument appeared to back much of the Biden administration's arguments, suggesting nearly complete parts meet the ordinary definition of a firearm subject to regulation.

"What is the purpose of selling a receiver without the holes drilled in it?" said Chief Justice John Roberts, rejecting suggestions the kits were marketed at the weekend gun hobbyist. "Drilling a hole or two, I would think, doesn't give the same sort of reward that you get from working on your car on the weekends. My understanding is that it's not terribly difficult for someone to do this."
 
This is a surprise to me, I did not realize that These types of firearms were that common, especially at the criminal level. I must be out of the loop.....
The BATFE considers any firearm without a serial number a ghost gun even if the gun originally had a serial number that was intentionally removed.
 
There is a big difference between removing an existing serial number and having a gun which never had a serial number. Many guns made before 1968 had no serial number, as they were not required until then. Removal or obliteration is a crime, and I believe a serial number is necessary before a PMF is sold or transferred. Otherwise, other laws are likely violated.

Ghost gun is a term coined by those who believe they can control the production and use. That ship has already sailed. The public safety issue is folks who produce guns with no serial number for sale, which is already prohibited by law.
 
From SCOTUSblog
 
Ghost gun is a term coined by those who believe they can control the production and use. That ship has already sailed. The public safety issue is folks who produce guns with no serial number for sale, which is already prohibited by law.
^^^ I agree. I understand the attraction for many, even for non-criminals, is not having the serial number. My concern would be for my heirs upon my death who would either inherit or sell the firearm.
 
This is a surprise to me, I did not realize that These types of firearms were that common, especially at the criminal level. I must be out of the loop.....
I was surprised to read that too, but it makes sense. That's one less potential identifier or connection to a previous owner that could be used to track them down.
 
This is a surprise to me, I did not realize that These types of firearms were that common, especially at the criminal level. I must be out of the loop.....

Ha! it’s paint by numbers gun building. I can buy a complete kit for the same price as the real thing skipping the background check. What did we think would happen?
 
I believe a serial number is necessary before a PMF is sold or transferred
This is not 100% correct. Under the rule change, only manufacturers of 80% frames and FFL's are required to mark PMF's with a serial number. A private individual is not require to do so if selling to another individual. If an individual sells a PMF to or through a FFL, then the FFL is required to engrave a serial number. We had many discussions about the rule change on this and other forums.

We will have to see how the case plays out and if the rule change stands or not.
 
There is a big difference between removing an existing serial number and having a gun which never had a serial number. Many guns made before 1968 had no serial number, as they were not required until then. Removal or obliteration is a crime, and I believe a serial number is necessary before a PMF is sold or transferred. Otherwise, other laws are likely violated.

Ghost gun is a term coined by those who believe they can control the production and use. That ship has already sailed. The public safety issue is folks who produce guns with no serial number for sale, which is already prohibited by law.

The general public isn't aware of nor are they interested in these nuances. Practically every instance of "ghost gun" in the media alludes to an intentionally unserialized firearm, meant to be "untraceable". The emphasis is on the latter, so it sounds ominous and illegal. On a sidenote, one of the local sheriff departments here had a gun buyback recently. I noticed that the pricing tiers lumped "ghost guns" into the same category as AWs on the menu. So normal guns turned in received $100 gift cards, but AWs or ghost guns were worth double that.

As for the supreme court, this case is useful as it informs us to the predictability of the justice's views on the 2A in general. For those who are waiting with bated breath for resolution on the litany of controversies being thrown at the high court to weigh in on, the signal here isn't great.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hso
I have to agree. We have had some wins in our favor. But we have also had some bug losses too. Yes the ATF got spanked (so far) on arm braces but the average American either doesn't know the difference between a brace and a stock or don't care. The idea of untraceable guns is more scary to the average layperson. In fact most are totally surprised when they learn that serial numbers were not required prior to the 1968 GCA. This includes people that do own firearms. It kind of reminds me of all the hype about Glocks being undetectable by metal sectors when they first came out.

One loss was Missouri's SAPA case. And it isn't looking good for the Texas suppressor case either.
 
I’m here for the updates… and because there are several things I still want to build for myself. Seems like the language is primarily aimed at guns in commerce, but the blanket statements of what constitutes an illegal ghost gun are somewhat concerning… any firearm without a serial number…
 
As for the supreme court, this case is useful as it informs us to the predictability of the justice's views on the 2A in general. For those who are waiting with bated breath for resolution on the litany of controversies being thrown at the high court to weigh in on, the signal here isn't great.
Seems that way to me too. A certain amount of backtracking to gun rights is to be expected, as the Justices try to re-establish their "neutrality" bona fides after Bruen. If there must be backtracking, it's better that it be on a "ghost gun" case than on an "assault weapon" case.
 
I’m here for the updates… and because there are several things I still want to build for myself. Seems like the language is primarily aimed at guns in commerce, but the blanket statements of what constitutes an illegal ghost gun are somewhat concerning… any firearm without a serial number…
This is true. I have had to educate local law enforcement about firearms made prior to 1968 not having serial numbers. I also had to explain all of that to the Provost Marshal at Ft Irwin years ago. One officer did not believe me that my old shotguns did not have nor require serial numbers since they were made before 1968. He finally shut after contacting the ATF himself.
 
Scotusblog.com might be "independent", but they are definitely not "unbiased".
 
Back
Top