80% kits DO require background checks!

[FrankenMauser]

shurshot, please provide references for all of the 'gangbangers and prohibited persons' you claim were buying 80% kits.

[Double Naught Spy]

This law is going to do nothing to keep guns out of the hands of criminals.

Is there ANY law anywhere that stops criminals? Speed limits don't stop speeders. Robbery laws don't stop robbers. Domestic abuse laws don't stop domestic abuse. Murder laws don't stop murder.

Laws don't stop crimes. They simple define them and set penalties for committing the crimes.

[shurshot]

FrankenMauser, I have already posted numerous links to various articles on Police arrests, LEO press releases, etc. and the ATF site referencing that subject along the way during the conversation, both in this thread and the closed one TunnelRat linked.

Here is the ATF link again, and it depicts numerous high profile cases involving gangbangers, illegal gun manufacturers, unlicensed dealers, stolen guns and violent felons; https://search.atf.gov/search?query=...&affiliate=atf

Nice to see ATF and the DOJ holding these guys accountable!

[TunnelRat]

If a complete kit is the problem, what’s to stop people from buying the jig and the frame separately? It seems like it would be pretty easy to skirt this.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[5whiskey]

https://www.atf.gov/news/pr/kissimme...ithout-license

The above link references the illicit activity I believe ATF may be most interested in targeting. Unfortunately, the word is out that making firearms is feasible for the home shop in some cases... and some people take that opportunity to make illicit money from it. I do not believe it is rampant and wholesale activity, but that fact that even a handful of criminals here and there churn out hundreds of firearms for sale without a manufacturers license could turn it into a widespread enough problem to warrant enforcement attention in a hurry.

Hopefully ATF takes no drastic actions that permanently inhibits homemade firearms.

[5whiskey]

https://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/...olymer80-kits/

And ATF is quick to use customer records to go after these kits. I will buy my 80% lower separate, and in Aluminum, please!

[HisSoldier]

"I never wanted "additional gun control"... ONLY what we currently have in place, a simple FBI background check / FFL approved transfer."

In my reading of the second amendment every law imposed to infringe in any way upon a citizens right to keep and bear arms is illegal, why would anyone want such laws? Laws should punish criminal behavior, not inanimate objects, and making possession of legal objects is coincidentally illogical and unconstitutional.

In my understanding of the original purpose behind the second amendment any attempt of government to catalog who owns firearms is antithetical to that purpose, ie, an evil government rising up to overthrow our constitutional government could (And will) use it to strip us of our ability to defend our country from "Domestic"enemies. Had the SCOTUS justices at the time of the making of the law requiring serial numbers understood that they would not have allowed it's standing IMO.

[JohnKSa]

Laws should punish criminal behavior, not inanimate objects, and making possession of legal objects is coincidentally illogical and unconstitutional.

To be fair, one of the points of background checks is to punish criminal behavior--to prevent criminals from buying firearms.

I'm not saying it works or that is its only purpose, or even that the people who pushed it didn't have ulterior motives. But there is some component of background checks that is intended to punish criminal behavior in at least some sense.

If a complete kit is the problem, what’s to stop people from buying the jig and the frame separately? It seems like it would be pretty easy to skirt this.

It all has to do with the way the law is worded.

My guess is that the issue is the part of the law that says: "...may readily be converted...". It sounds like they are saying that when it comes all together in a kit that it qualifies as "may be readily converted" but that if you have to buy other stuff separately that it doesn't, in their opinion qualify as "may be readily converted".

Of course it can be circumvented, and easily. But that's not really their problem. They just try to interpret existing laws the way that make sense to them, or in a way that they believe to be enforceable (prosecutable), or perhaps, (more cynically) in a way that supports their agenda.

Or maybe this is just the first step in outlawing the receivers that are (in the BATFs estimation) too easy to turn into guns.

Mostly, what I'm saying is that thinking about it as if it has to make sense from an informed gun owner's point of view probably won't provide much insight into what's really going on.

[FrankenMauser]

I have already posted numerous links to various articles on Police arrests, LEO press releases, etc. and the ATF site referencing that subject along the way during the conversation, both in this thread and the closed one TunnelRat linked.

8 cases in 3 years. That is absolutely nothing.

Please provide references for all of the 'gangbangers and prohibited persons' you claim were buying 80% kits.

8 cases in 3 years is statistically insignificant.

[shurshot]

"Had the SCOTUS justices at the time of the making of the law requiring serial numbers understood that they would not have allowed it's standing IMO."

Hissoldier, I agree with your interpretation of the 2nd Amendment, I read it the same way. And I agree with your above statement pertaining to the SCOTUS, but the fact is, they DID. It's a done deal. It's the law, as are FFL transfer background checks requirements for firearms. I don't like the gun laws, much like speed signs on the highway, but I accept it and can understand why they are enforced when I observe certain individuals driving while texting, speeding, etc.

In a perfect world we wouldn't have, or even need the gun laws, or any laws for that matter. I don't "want" them, but given that we Don't live in a perfect world, the laws are already in place and obviously WORK, at least to some extent, as many prohibited persons are seeking out Ghost guns in order to circumvent the law as they cannot otherwise legally purchase AR-15's, Glocks, via a legal FFL transfer etc. Does it stop every bad guy from getting a gun, no of course not. But it has stopped some.

Just like Highway Patrol stops some reckless or DUI drivers. Do they stop and or get them ALL? No. Are the roads perfectly safe because of existing traffic laws? No. But I'm sure glad the laws are in effect and that they TRY to enforce them!! I don't want my loved ones or anyone else to get hurt during the drive home. Just because a law isn't 100% effective or there are anecdotal examples of its failure, doesn't mean that it isn't a just or worthwhile pursuit to enforce. Imagine for a moment our nation with Zero traffic, civil, criminal or gun laws. It would be far worse than any 3rd world country. Human nature would replicate and magnify itself in its worst form. Like it or not, we as a species need law and order.

If I decide I want to buy an 80% kit in the future and it has a serial number and requires an FFL transfer / FBI check to buy it, I'm ok with that. A small inconvenience as far as I'm concerned, in order to stop violent criminals from easily getting them.

It makes sense to me (and apparently now ATF and DOJ officials), that these 80% kits should be treated like firearms and subject to the FFL transfer and FBI background check.

"8 cases in 3 years. That is absolutely nothing".

Frankenmauser; Sir, you are entitled to your opinion and I see your point, and again... if you read all the links / articles I posted in both threads you may understand what I was referring to.

Apparently ATF and DOJ officials disagree with you that the number of convictions and deaths involving ghost guns is "statistically insignificant", hence the sudden change in interpretation and enforcement.
__________________

[FrankenMauser]

Apparently ATF and DOJ officials disagree with you that the number of convictions and deaths involving ghost guns is "statistically insignificant", hence the sudden change in interpretation and enforcement.

They're trying to justify their existence and future viability by showboating about insignificant issues.
...Just like they did at a certain point in US history with incidents that rhyme with Mako and Tooby Bridge.

[Skans]

Different companies will sell different parts - that's how they will get around this....for a little while. Selling an 80% frame is not the same as selling a kit which contains all of the jigs, drill bits, and parts to assemble a 100% firearm.

[44 AMP]

Lets look at the underlying law and past practices.

Fed law allows a person to manufacture a firearm, for the own personal use, without needing to comply with all the requirements a commercial manufacturers needs to.

Generations of custom riflesmiths made small numbers of guns every year without needing to meet the requirements for being a "manufacturer".

Along comes the AR, and its design allows for simple assembly without gunsmith skills. Ok, fine, you buy a parts kit, and you buy a lower receiver (which is, under the law, the firearm) and put it together. Govt is fine with that. You bought a firearm and followed all the applicable rules.

Then along comes the unfinished lower receiver. I don't know who, or when they decided 80% was the cut off point, but it wasn't a firearm. Once you finished it, it was a firearm under the law and the standard rules applied.

As long as it remained in your possession, the govt didn't care much. You are allowed to sell it (if you got tired of it) at which point it needed a ser# and all firearm rules apply. You are not allowed to make them for sale.

(and yes, some people didn't follow those rules. When caught, they got prosecuted)

You can buy a kit with all the parts (finished receiver) and the jigs and tools needed and that's not a problem IF it is sold as a firearm.

The issue here seems to be that the ATF is looking at a kit with an 80% finished receiver, and all the other needed parts as "readily converted to" being a firearm, and if such kit is not sold as a firearm then its sale is a violation of the law.

In the past such complete kits weren't sold. Finished receivers were sold as firearms and unfinished ones were not. The rest of the parts were sold separately, and by doing so, no laws were violated.

I would point out that in this matter, right now, we do not KNOW with certainty what charges will be brought, or even if any will be. Right now, all we know is that the ATF raided a company selling 80% lowers and all the other needed parts as one kit. People are speculating on what the justification is, and why now.

We won't know that, until the matter goes to court. Personally, I wouldn't trust any ATF official's statement at a press conference even if it was to announce that the sun would rise tomorrow...
They can, and do say anything, what matters is what goes on in Court.

And, please, recognize a couple things and exercise some restraint before automatically condemning the ATF for violating our rights...
The first of which is, that the company raided might actually be breaking the law. The other thing being that the fact of the matter, breaking the law, or not, WILL BE DECIDED IN COURT (assuming it goes that far) and not in our forums or by ATF fiat.

[Mycin]

And, please, recognize a couple things and exercise some restraint before automatically condemning the ATF for violating our rights...
The first of which is, that the company raided might actually be breaking the law. The other thing being that the fact of the matter, breaking the law, or not, WILL BE DECIDED IN COURT (assuming it goes that far) and not in our forums or by ATF fiat.

True, in theory. In fact, it seems that the "law" in this case is whatever the ATF says it is and courts generally give executive agencies great latitude in cases such as this (too much, in my opinion). Maybe it could be overturned on appeal, after a few hundred thousands or millions of dollars are spent in legal fees. The process is the punishment.

[ATN082268]

Federal bureacracies make far more law via regulations than Congress has or ever will. Technically Congress can overrule the bureacracies but often one of the political parties supports the agency's actions, so it rarely happens. I wouldn't look to the courts for gun rights relief as they absolutely hate the 2nd Amendment.

[HiBC]

Shurshot, I'm not with you on this.

I've never bought an 80% or built one. I have bought castings. I was a machinist by trade. Making a gun is just machining parts.(Well ,a little more)

There was/is an 80% copy of an STI 1911/2011 race gun frame I looked at for a while.
I pass background checks. I have no interest in criminal activity.

I prefer to retain my unencumbered freedom to create my own things for my own use.

The presistoric folsom flint knapper did not have to SN and register his spear points.
DeShivs can make his blades. You are messing with " To keep and bear arms shall not be infringed"

And if I choose to make beer or tamales,or horse shoes or rocking chairs,leave me alone.

[Unclenick]

The underlying assumption by gun control advocates is that if only the new ATF rule had been in place for the last three years, those 8 incidents mentioned would not have occurred. People, you see, are expected to behave like robots programmed to do one thing in only one way, and to exhibit no ingenuity in finding workarounds. If you deprive these people of a particular weapon, there is no way they will find some alternate source of weaponry to commit the crime with. This ignores motivation and determination to do the crime. And...wait for it...you can't prove the rule wouldn't have worked because the numbers are less than normal year-to-year crime number variation. That means you can't see a positive difference even if there is one. It also means you can't prove the law didn't help. It's an example of proponents taking the fact a negative can't be proven to celebrate the effects of their work as a presumed victory when there is actually at least equal reason to suppose it was a complete failure based on all the opportunities that exist to acquire stolen guns.

Diane Feinstein's original "Assault Weapon" ban was another example of this. The estimates at the time of its inception were that military-style rifles might be involved in 0.2% of all shooting homicides. Of course, the annual figures randomly vary more than that, so, failure of the law is generally safe from detection by statistical means, allowing its proponents to claim they did great and important and effective work. In this particular case, however, it backfired. As CBS 60 Minutes reported two years after the law went into effect, there had been no measurable effect on the crime rate attributable to the law, but the one measurable difference it did make was that the debate leading up to the enactment of the ban had created so much public interest in military-style semi-automatics that the number in private hands had tripled (and that was just two years in; its much, much more now). The late Morely Safer confronted Senator Feinstein with this fact on camera, and all she could do was bluster "but…but…that's against the spirit of the law!" Well, yes it was. As Hamurabi pointed out 4000 years ago, laws only work when the people perceive them as fair and justly administered. Otherwise, they don't work.

[DT Guy]

There are always those willing to submit to further restrictions on the rights of others, so long as it doesn't impact their rights.

Trap shooters who support banning 'assault' rifles, hunters who support banning handguns, people who can clear whatever various hurdles supporting hurdles for others.

Those people don't really believe in 'freedom', they believe in THEIR freedom.

Larry

[44 AMP]

The sloppy half hearted poorly executed attempt to ban and restrict "assault weapons" was the biggest sales boost ARs and other military LOOK ALIKE firearms could have ever gotten.

I doubt it was Feinstein's gang's intent, but it absolutely WAS the result.

They MADE the AR "the most popular rifle in the country", by creating a huge consumer interest where there had only been a small interest before. Lots and LOTS of people who had never previously been interested in AR and similar "assault weapons" GOT interested, because they were now "Forbidden Fruit".

Demand went sky high, and has stayed high ever since.

As political moves go, the 1994 AWB has got to rank high as one of the stupidest things ever done. It didn't have any effect on crime (the stated purpose), it upset and motivated a large number of people who had previously been quiet and complacent, it created a huge market for the "forbidden fruit" and on top of that, it was done in an election year, the summer before the elections, which meant that the public had not yet forgotten their anger with the party who pushed the law.

The 94 elections took control of Congress away from the Democrats for the first time in 40 years! And they knew it. Never admitted it to the press or the public, but amongst them selves it was recognized.

The only lesson the Democrats seem to have learned from that is not to push major gun control during an election year.

26 years later now, and seems that's still the only lesson they learned from it.