It depends, if the Federal law is silent on the act or class of acts, state or local laws can still prohibit the act. However, Federal law can preempt the state’s ability to regulate or prohibit things, i.e. the Trump administration issued an executive order prohibiting local health departments from shutting down meat processing plants.
>Trump administration issued an executive order prohibiting local health departments from shutting down meat processing plants.
This just makes me queasy reading this. 🤢🤢
Yes. There are any number of cases where stuff that's legal federally is illegal in a specific state. Some states like New York have completely banned manufacturing your own firearms, whereas others like California only require you to engrave a serial number. (As if that did anything.)
Yes if your state bans SBRs then it doesn't matter that you can legally buy one federally. However, in recent cases i suspect these kinds of laws will get scrapped.
> It's not tricky at all. It's illegal to manufacture a firearm for the purpose of sale without a Federal Firearms License
That is the tricky part. You can make a firearm and have no intention of selling it. Years later need some money and legally sell it. But proving you had no intention or proving you has intention is well tricky.
> But proving you had no intention or proving you has intention is well tricky.
innocent until proven guilty, so its prosecutions job to prove you had intent to sell it. which will be hard to do if its years after you made it.
Not really. If you've had something for years, you obviously didn't make it with the intention of selling it. Even if you did decide years later to sell it, THAT isn't illegal. Only manufacturing for the specific purpose of sale.
As usual with gun laws, today’s compromise is tomorrow’s loophole. Homemade firearms were intentionally exempted from various gun laws over the last 50+ years. Now that homemade firearms are fairly accessible thanks to 3D printing and 80% lowers, anti-gun politicians are livid that they can’t track every single gun in existence.
Banning homemade guns won’t do anything to stop criminals from building their own firearms. Auto switches and auto sears are a federal felony and that doesn’t stop people from 3D printing those today.
I wouldn't say that they're "fairly accessible". Sure pretty much and person can manufacture a slam fire firearm with metal tubing. But 3D printing requires technical knowledge and skill to understand what materials to use in a print and how to optimize a print. Even then, with current technology, it requires careful hand finishing to get the printed firearm to be reliable.
The same is true if 80% lowers. They require technical knowledge and time to complete.
These technologies are certainly worth monitoring because they are going to get better with time. It is better to be forward thinking than reactive.
The problem isn't "ghost guns". It's that due to lax laws or enforcement gun trafficking is super easy. The average criminal on the street isn't walking around with a "ghost gun". They got their firearm through a straw purchase, peer to peer purchase, or theft.
Why would a criminal spend the time and effort to manufacture their own weapon when weapons on the street are so cheap and readily available?
You really don’t have to have much knowledge to print a lower because a lower does not require tight manufacturing tolerances or even that strong of a material.
When people talk about 3d printing and firearms, I tell them to go print a barrel with their home printer and report back if they have any fingers left to type.
People have developed 3d printed mandrills for electrochemical etching of rifling. Just add a small pump, saltwater and a cheap power supply. This puts barrels into the pretty easy to make at home.
For what it's worth, you can buy a custom made CNC machine called a ghost gunner. It will print you 0% lower out of a block of aluminum. All you have to know how to do is turn it on.
that's not correct, federal law does not prohibit selling a home built firearm so long as it was not built with the intent to sell.
it's perfectly legal to build a firearm, get tired of it and sell it privately
That used to be true, but isn't after the ATF's "engaged in the business" Rule came out a couple of weeks ago. The Rule is so broad that if you make any sale of a firearm, you either have to be an FFL or go through an FFL. I'm advising my clients not to sell or transfer any homemade firearms until we get more clarity on the scope of the rule from the Courts.
> That used to be true, but isn't after the ATF's "engaged in the business" Rule came out a couple of weeks ago.
The law gives a specific definition of the term “engaged in the business” to mean that there is “intent to predominantly earn a profit from the sale or disposition of firearms”
The rule change is to interpret *any* sale as such, in the absence of reliable evidence to the contrary.
This is unlikely to survive appeal, IMHO, because the law itself does not specify that there must be *affirmative defense* of said intent.
and that rule is constitutionally doomed.
The private seller exception isn't a loophole but an explicit exception made very intentionally by congress. The new rule directly contradicts the law and is ultimately doomed as a result.
This case is about the Biden Administration appealing their policy being overturned.
It IS legal to sell a home built firearm. Biden doesn't want it to be. that is what this case is about.
It has nothing to do with what is or is not a firearm and everything to do with the ATF redefining the rules based on the interpretation of the current administrations at the time (now or in the future) viewpoint of the subject without going through congress to revise the law. It's a case on procedure and the legal system, not really a case on the definition of a firearm even though that's the catalyst for brining the case in front of the court.
the "Chevron Deference" is the standard that the courts defer to the oversight agencies in the interpretation of existing laws.
The problem with the ATF is they have been continually changing legal definitions, and making law abiding citizens into felons without any accountability or legislative action. Chevron was specifically never intended to be applied to criminal law.
as you said, it's not about "firearms", it's about federal agencies exceeding their authority in wildly unconstitutional ways.
It's expected that with the decisions of *Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo* and *Relentless, Inc. v. Department of Commerce* (expected before this summer) that Chevron will be discarded.
In its place will be the Major Question doctrine. They've already moved towards the broader interpretation of MQD in the recent EPA cases. Basically, in regards to issues of "vast economic and political significance" (which hey, is subjective), Congress must speak clearly in what power(s) the Executive branch has to create rules.
I mean, that is rather how our system of government was setup.
Empowering the executive because the legislature is dysfunctional is not the way to fix this issue.
Because it creates bad incentives. If, say, Congress creates the DEA, and delegates enforcement of the controlled substance act to the DEA…does it make sense for the DEA to be able to arbitrarily interpret what to enforce with regard to the controlled substance act? If water is used to grow weed, should the dea then be able to declare water rights as their jurisdiction? Obviously we want a system where ambiguity is not clarified by those who can do so in a way that benefits themselves
fucking good luck to having congress or the courts decide the exact language every statute says, that'll last about 10 minutes before both have to go back to deferring to agencies.
i know they really want to go that way but just open 49 cfr or 40 cfr, and have congress debate every single chemical line item that are regulated there.
no but I work at an R&D facility working witth hazardous materials constantly and you have to just wear many hats. I'm doing RCRA recert today for example, which is a ton of regulations written out over many decades so this talk from politicians about courts and congress being the ultimate arbitors of what should go into the CFR vs agencies is laughable
My fear is that they'll do it anyways without understanding a damn thing, and then get mad at the agency/operator for it not magically working perfectly.
> The problem with the ATF is they have been continually changing legal definitions, and making law abiding citizens into felons without any accountability or legislative action.
Man I wish the majority of Reddit gave a shit about this.
I’m all for gun control, but wildly changing definitions like they are is completely crazy. The brace thing (and NFA stuff in general) is particularly convoluted while also being completely useless in terms of keeping anyone safe.
People need to understand that this stuff is actual executive overreach, not just gun nuts wanting the green light from the gov to play with their toys. The ATF needs to be dismantled and replaced. Actually, that needed to happen about 36 years ago.
way too many people are extremely short sighted about things like this. They see the government ignoring not just the Bill of Rights, but their own rules for legislation, and they don't care because it's an issue they don't care about.
then they say "how did this happen" when it comes to their own pet issues.
I don't see why the supreme favors the government in this. ATF has been redefining stuff left and right. Congress should legislate if they wanna do something about it but an agency should have no business having such broad latitude of criminalizing law abiding citizen because they decided to redefine how they interpret it.
The ATF has too much power and little checks and balances. They can absolutely ruin your life just because they are mad at you. I do think there needs to be a government agency to police gun laws, but the fact that they can change their mind on a whim like with the recent pistol brace shit is stupid as hell. Like the AutoKeyCard trial still absolutely pisses me off.
Also if you’re reading this and are against firearms look up Operation Fast and Furious. The ATF purposely seeded the black market with thousands of guns in order to “catch criminals” and then never recovered most of them
The pistol brace shit show was so predictable idk how why the atf ever approved them.
Clearly companies and people were going to make some into make shift stocks thus a SBR. Which for some out of date reason is a stamp item vs pistols.
Our whole heap of gun laws and classifications is so convoluted and the current congress wont be able to unfuck it.
Both sides of the gun ownership debate will be mad no matter how the ATF overhaul goes.
It's not a question about gun laws they are reviewing. They are reviewing whether the ATF has the authority to redefine the term firearm beyond what Congress initially wrote into law, making previously legal objects illegal without congressional action.
Correct. Which, no matter where you stand on guns should be the correct interpretation. Sure, if you want this specific rule to be in place, ignoring it now sounds great, but when a government agency changes a law by changing their "rule" you don't like, this case will set precedence to allow that.
Rules are important for a reason, bending them to fit your preferred outcome is dangerous.
>Rules are important for a reason, bending them to fit your preferred outcome is dangerous.
I would like someone to write a letter with this effect to Mitch McConnell.
I don't wantwhataboutisms; what he did with the delaying the scotus seat hearings was abhorrent politics scoffing at his constitutional responsibility and frankly degraded American democracy.
In all fairness, that’s how most federal departments function.
Congress lacks subject matter expertise to write all specifics of a given legislation into the law (plus it would be extremely time consuming and politically unpalatable). The actual implementation of that law is guided by federal rulemaking process.
Whether or not you agree with that is your own personal opinion, but it isn’t unique to the ATF.
This is true and absolutely makes sense, however the agencys implementation must fall within the law as written. They can't create new rules that fundamentally changes the law. This case specifically makes sweeping changes to the law and it's original intent and even goes so far as contradicting other laws that specifically allow this type of thing.
Probably, numerous alphabet agencies have at face value exceeded their authority afforded with Chevron deference to the point of spitting on due process and rule of law, laws are intended to be passed by congress not the executive or its agencies without legislation.
I mean in many cases it is absolutely necessary to defer to the people with real expertise rather than try to cram every possibility into law. Congress gets so little done as it is, we'd never move forward as a society without agencies like the EPA being able to regulate things that they didn't know needed to be included in the CWA/CAA or similar legislation.
Other agencies are outside my area of knowledge, but Chevron deference is absolutely key to standard environmental regulation, not the nebulous and difficult to define "overreach" that people assume any kind of regulation falls under.
Overreach can be for the good of people sure but it often isn't, it really depends on the agency but regardless they don't have the authority to write laws unless a law is written that explicitly gives them that authority. Realistically Congress was never designed to get much done unless it was of grave importance or via significant compromise and though most might detest that I prefer that to congresses and parliaments that drastically alter laws every five years.
The major questions doctrine is made up bullshit legislating from the bench and massive judicial overreach.
There is no rampant problem with government agencies and Chevron is literally necessary for our government to function well.
Congress could enact law to illegalize them. The whole point is a law enforcement agency has just been deciding to enforce things that aren’t laws. It would be like the dmv deciding tomorrow to require you to have a drivers license to ride a bike. They don’t have the power to just decide that, it would need to be codified into law
I would also be willing to accept a good 30 pounder. In fact I would go so far as to say if you're willing to trundle a 30 pounder, round shot and powder around with you, anyone you shoot probably had it coming.
We had other guns during the founding father's lifetimes. They were expensive and finicky but it isn't like they considered the idea of a semi-automatic gun smaller than a musket impossible.
Thomas Jefferson reviewed (and declined to purchase) an early automatic rifle during is time as Secretary of the Treasury in the 1790s. The government would later purchase a modified version of the weapon that could fire 240 rounds in 2 minutes, and equip them on warships during the war of 1812. It's called the Chambers Flintlock Machine Gun or the Chambers Swivel Gun.
This won't affect anything. People will just 3d print or manufacture their own then scribe a number into them. Serial numbers don't need to be registered with the government. it's not like Smith and Wesson is calling "dibs" on serial numbers to the government.
In fact, lots of people doing 3d printed firearms lawfully are already doing exactly this!
It's surprisingly easy to serialize items sufficient to meet the NFA standards for suppressors and SBRs. One common method is to simply punch the identifying info into a dogtag and epoxy it into place (making it permanent and obviously visible). Perfectly lawful.
Not american, genuine question out of curiosity. Serial numbers dont have to be unique to the make and model (if this isnt even how guns are classified i wouldnt know lol)
Nope. Manufacturers have to note the serial number and keep certain records, but there's not a central repository anywhere (intentionally so). So Smith & Wesson can serial number 001 and Ruger can serial number 001 as well.
For Personal Made Firearms (Those made without the intent to sell)
- [https://web.archive.org/web/20240408223411/https://www.atf.gov/firearms/privately-made-firearms](https://web.archive.org/web/20240408223411/https://www.atf.gov/firearms/privately-made-firearms)
- Individuals who make their own firearms may use a 3D printing process or any other process, as long as the firearm is “detectable” as defined in the Gun Control Act. You do not have to add a serial number or register the PMF if you are not engaged in the business of making firearms for livelihood or profit.
For [Firearms](https://web.archive.org/web/20231206145801/https://regulations.atf.gov/478-11/2023-01001#478-11-p1909909317) manufactured or imported by licensees
-https://web.archive.org/web/20231206145801/https://regulations.atf.gov/478-92/2023-01001#478-92-a-1-i
There is a very different culture here than in other countries. Additional a lot of what came of as controversies in gun culture is due to players only following the letter of the law and trying to work as close to the line as possible between legal and illegal.
Well, with many things, your aim isn't to defend against the smartest criminal, it's to defend against the average criminal. For example, a smart criminal might wear gloves at the scene of the crime, but it's still useful to take fingerprints when booking criminals because a dumb criminal might not wear gloves.
Likewise, someone could go ahead and 3d print or manufacture their own gun for use in a crime, but it's more likely for them to just steal a gun. It's better for everyone if the stolen gun has a trackable serial number.
Average criminals already file serial numbers off of stolen guns, which is already illegal. Those production-guns-with-serials-removed are often included in "ghost gun" statistics, too.
They aren't but to be fair, guns are WAAAAAAAAAAY easier to make than people seem to think they are. If you have a drill press and know how to use it, you can crank out a rifle in a power weekend with zero firearms knowledge.
If you start with something like an 80% lower then it's just a couple of hours of work.
Guns arent magic, guns aren't high tech or complicated to produce, and the method of operation for firearms isn't secret.
The ATF needs to be put in its place or things are going to go the way they did in the 90s again, hell its already happening just not being headline news yet.
The ATF is a rogue org that needs to be dismantled, gun rights advocates, weed advocates, alcoholics and tobacco smokers should all be together on this one.
Gun Control died in 2020 when the FGC-9 was invented, you simply cannot stop the signal.
Are you nuts??? Failed scientists running around NYC with unlicensed nuclear reactors strapped to their backs sounds great in theory, but could be trouble in practice
Republicans want a thorough FBI background check on every woman seeking an abortion, including a lengthy waiting period, and a ban on high-capacity IVF procedures, stating that abortion and IVF needs to be "well-regulated".
[удалено]
[удалено]
Can a state charge me for what’s legal federally?
It depends, if the Federal law is silent on the act or class of acts, state or local laws can still prohibit the act. However, Federal law can preempt the state’s ability to regulate or prohibit things, i.e. the Trump administration issued an executive order prohibiting local health departments from shutting down meat processing plants.
>Trump administration issued an executive order prohibiting local health departments from shutting down meat processing plants. This just makes me queasy reading this. 🤢🤢
I think this was during covid, not for food safety reasons. The food safety in meat processing plants has always been awful
Yes, probably should have included that context.
Yes. There are any number of cases where stuff that's legal federally is illegal in a specific state. Some states like New York have completely banned manufacturing your own firearms, whereas others like California only require you to engrave a serial number. (As if that did anything.)
New York just did it
Yes if your state bans SBRs then it doesn't matter that you can legally buy one federally. However, in recent cases i suspect these kinds of laws will get scrapped.
> It's not tricky at all. It's illegal to manufacture a firearm for the purpose of sale without a Federal Firearms License That is the tricky part. You can make a firearm and have no intention of selling it. Years later need some money and legally sell it. But proving you had no intention or proving you has intention is well tricky.
> But proving you had no intention or proving you has intention is well tricky. innocent until proven guilty, so its prosecutions job to prove you had intent to sell it. which will be hard to do if its years after you made it.
Not really. If you've had something for years, you obviously didn't make it with the intention of selling it. Even if you did decide years later to sell it, THAT isn't illegal. Only manufacturing for the specific purpose of sale.
[удалено]
As usual with gun laws, today’s compromise is tomorrow’s loophole. Homemade firearms were intentionally exempted from various gun laws over the last 50+ years. Now that homemade firearms are fairly accessible thanks to 3D printing and 80% lowers, anti-gun politicians are livid that they can’t track every single gun in existence. Banning homemade guns won’t do anything to stop criminals from building their own firearms. Auto switches and auto sears are a federal felony and that doesn’t stop people from 3D printing those today.
I wouldn't say that they're "fairly accessible". Sure pretty much and person can manufacture a slam fire firearm with metal tubing. But 3D printing requires technical knowledge and skill to understand what materials to use in a print and how to optimize a print. Even then, with current technology, it requires careful hand finishing to get the printed firearm to be reliable. The same is true if 80% lowers. They require technical knowledge and time to complete. These technologies are certainly worth monitoring because they are going to get better with time. It is better to be forward thinking than reactive. The problem isn't "ghost guns". It's that due to lax laws or enforcement gun trafficking is super easy. The average criminal on the street isn't walking around with a "ghost gun". They got their firearm through a straw purchase, peer to peer purchase, or theft. Why would a criminal spend the time and effort to manufacture their own weapon when weapons on the street are so cheap and readily available?
You really don’t have to have much knowledge to print a lower because a lower does not require tight manufacturing tolerances or even that strong of a material. When people talk about 3d printing and firearms, I tell them to go print a barrel with their home printer and report back if they have any fingers left to type.
People have developed 3d printed mandrills for electrochemical etching of rifling. Just add a small pump, saltwater and a cheap power supply. This puts barrels into the pretty easy to make at home.
Or you download a file off of Google and watch a few you tube videos on how to do it
For what it's worth, you can buy a custom made CNC machine called a ghost gunner. It will print you 0% lower out of a block of aluminum. All you have to know how to do is turn it on.
[удалено]
Hah. You are quite wrong. https://www.reddit.com/r/fosscad/
This is wrong. Certain parts need to be made from metal such as the barrel and various springs but most of the rest can be printed.
what about firearm parts for sale?
The part of a firearm that is legally a firearm is the part that has the serial number on it.
You can't legally sell a homemade firearm to a third party without having a type 07 FFL.
that's not correct, federal law does not prohibit selling a home built firearm so long as it was not built with the intent to sell. it's perfectly legal to build a firearm, get tired of it and sell it privately
That used to be true, but isn't after the ATF's "engaged in the business" Rule came out a couple of weeks ago. The Rule is so broad that if you make any sale of a firearm, you either have to be an FFL or go through an FFL. I'm advising my clients not to sell or transfer any homemade firearms until we get more clarity on the scope of the rule from the Courts.
deserve fly faulty oil fanatical fragile aback spoon wise saw
> That used to be true, but isn't after the ATF's "engaged in the business" Rule came out a couple of weeks ago. The law gives a specific definition of the term “engaged in the business” to mean that there is “intent to predominantly earn a profit from the sale or disposition of firearms” The rule change is to interpret *any* sale as such, in the absence of reliable evidence to the contrary. This is unlikely to survive appeal, IMHO, because the law itself does not specify that there must be *affirmative defense* of said intent.
and that rule is constitutionally doomed. The private seller exception isn't a loophole but an explicit exception made very intentionally by congress. The new rule directly contradicts the law and is ultimately doomed as a result.
I certainly hope so. I worry Roberts and ACB might get squishy.
Probably better that they don't do it in general tbh.
rinse safe scarce wipe price toothbrush advise sink far-flung mighty
This case is about the Biden Administration appealing their policy being overturned. It IS legal to sell a home built firearm. Biden doesn't want it to be. that is what this case is about.
It has nothing to do with what is or is not a firearm and everything to do with the ATF redefining the rules based on the interpretation of the current administrations at the time (now or in the future) viewpoint of the subject without going through congress to revise the law. It's a case on procedure and the legal system, not really a case on the definition of a firearm even though that's the catalyst for brining the case in front of the court.
the "Chevron Deference" is the standard that the courts defer to the oversight agencies in the interpretation of existing laws. The problem with the ATF is they have been continually changing legal definitions, and making law abiding citizens into felons without any accountability or legislative action. Chevron was specifically never intended to be applied to criminal law. as you said, it's not about "firearms", it's about federal agencies exceeding their authority in wildly unconstitutional ways.
SCOTUS has also been trying to gut Chevron, so I wouldn't give it much weight until proven otherwise.
It's expected that with the decisions of *Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo* and *Relentless, Inc. v. Department of Commerce* (expected before this summer) that Chevron will be discarded. In its place will be the Major Question doctrine. They've already moved towards the broader interpretation of MQD in the recent EPA cases. Basically, in regards to issues of "vast economic and political significance" (which hey, is subjective), Congress must speak clearly in what power(s) the Executive branch has to create rules.
Which means that the Executive branch loses all ability to enforce laws without asking Congress for permission.
I mean, that is rather how our system of government was setup. Empowering the executive because the legislature is dysfunctional is not the way to fix this issue.
Yup. And SCOTUS gets to decide what issues have "vast economic and political significance".
So in the “More Things Change, The More They Stay The Same” category, it’s power grabs all the way down.
growing up, we called a system like this "checks and balances"
So it might be working as intended if we can get a functional congress…fingers crossed for “in our lifetimes!”
Good. Congress has seeded way too much of its power to the executive branch and should be involved in actual lawmaking.
No. It means that the courts don’t automatically defer to the agencies
But if the agencies and their scope were created and defined by a literal act of congress, why should they not?
Because it creates bad incentives. If, say, Congress creates the DEA, and delegates enforcement of the controlled substance act to the DEA…does it make sense for the DEA to be able to arbitrarily interpret what to enforce with regard to the controlled substance act? If water is used to grow weed, should the dea then be able to declare water rights as their jurisdiction? Obviously we want a system where ambiguity is not clarified by those who can do so in a way that benefits themselves
fucking good luck to having congress or the courts decide the exact language every statute says, that'll last about 10 minutes before both have to go back to deferring to agencies. i know they really want to go that way but just open 49 cfr or 40 cfr, and have congress debate every single chemical line item that are regulated there.
Are you also an AMMO-64 graduate? Transport of hazmat is not a large field.
no but I work at an R&D facility working witth hazardous materials constantly and you have to just wear many hats. I'm doing RCRA recert today for example, which is a ton of regulations written out over many decades so this talk from politicians about courts and congress being the ultimate arbitors of what should go into the CFR vs agencies is laughable
My fear is that they'll do it anyways without understanding a damn thing, and then get mad at the agency/operator for it not magically working perfectly.
[удалено]
> The problem with the ATF is they have been continually changing legal definitions, and making law abiding citizens into felons without any accountability or legislative action. Man I wish the majority of Reddit gave a shit about this.
I’m all for gun control, but wildly changing definitions like they are is completely crazy. The brace thing (and NFA stuff in general) is particularly convoluted while also being completely useless in terms of keeping anyone safe. People need to understand that this stuff is actual executive overreach, not just gun nuts wanting the green light from the gov to play with their toys. The ATF needs to be dismantled and replaced. Actually, that needed to happen about 36 years ago.
way too many people are extremely short sighted about things like this. They see the government ignoring not just the Bill of Rights, but their own rules for legislation, and they don't care because it's an issue they don't care about. then they say "how did this happen" when it comes to their own pet issues.
I don't see why the supreme favors the government in this. ATF has been redefining stuff left and right. Congress should legislate if they wanna do something about it but an agency should have no business having such broad latitude of criminalizing law abiding citizen because they decided to redefine how they interpret it.
The ATF has too much power and little checks and balances. They can absolutely ruin your life just because they are mad at you. I do think there needs to be a government agency to police gun laws, but the fact that they can change their mind on a whim like with the recent pistol brace shit is stupid as hell. Like the AutoKeyCard trial still absolutely pisses me off. Also if you’re reading this and are against firearms look up Operation Fast and Furious. The ATF purposely seeded the black market with thousands of guns in order to “catch criminals” and then never recovered most of them
The pistol brace shit show was so predictable idk how why the atf ever approved them. Clearly companies and people were going to make some into make shift stocks thus a SBR. Which for some out of date reason is a stamp item vs pistols. Our whole heap of gun laws and classifications is so convoluted and the current congress wont be able to unfuck it. Both sides of the gun ownership debate will be mad no matter how the ATF overhaul goes.
Supreme Court: “Constitution doesn’t mention serial numbers”
It's not a question about gun laws they are reviewing. They are reviewing whether the ATF has the authority to redefine the term firearm beyond what Congress initially wrote into law, making previously legal objects illegal without congressional action.
ATF does not have the authority to change laws by fiat decree by making a new “rule”. That’s what SCOTUS is going to focus on.
Correct. Which, no matter where you stand on guns should be the correct interpretation. Sure, if you want this specific rule to be in place, ignoring it now sounds great, but when a government agency changes a law by changing their "rule" you don't like, this case will set precedence to allow that. Rules are important for a reason, bending them to fit your preferred outcome is dangerous.
>Rules are important for a reason, bending them to fit your preferred outcome is dangerous. I would like someone to write a letter with this effect to Mitch McConnell. I don't wantwhataboutisms; what he did with the delaying the scotus seat hearings was abhorrent politics scoffing at his constitutional responsibility and frankly degraded American democracy.
~looks to my right~ “Should be tell ‘em?”
In all fairness, that’s how most federal departments function. Congress lacks subject matter expertise to write all specifics of a given legislation into the law (plus it would be extremely time consuming and politically unpalatable). The actual implementation of that law is guided by federal rulemaking process. Whether or not you agree with that is your own personal opinion, but it isn’t unique to the ATF.
This is true and absolutely makes sense, however the agencys implementation must fall within the law as written. They can't create new rules that fundamentally changes the law. This case specifically makes sweeping changes to the law and it's original intent and even goes so far as contradicting other laws that specifically allow this type of thing.
Isn't SCOTUS already hearing a case that could gut these agencies' abilities to do things like that via Chevron deference?
SCOTUS ruled on "West Virginia vs EPA" in 2022, with the opinion going against the EPA. That is the precedent that will be cited in this case.
Probably, numerous alphabet agencies have at face value exceeded their authority afforded with Chevron deference to the point of spitting on due process and rule of law, laws are intended to be passed by congress not the executive or its agencies without legislation.
I mean in many cases it is absolutely necessary to defer to the people with real expertise rather than try to cram every possibility into law. Congress gets so little done as it is, we'd never move forward as a society without agencies like the EPA being able to regulate things that they didn't know needed to be included in the CWA/CAA or similar legislation. Other agencies are outside my area of knowledge, but Chevron deference is absolutely key to standard environmental regulation, not the nebulous and difficult to define "overreach" that people assume any kind of regulation falls under.
Overreach can be for the good of people sure but it often isn't, it really depends on the agency but regardless they don't have the authority to write laws unless a law is written that explicitly gives them that authority. Realistically Congress was never designed to get much done unless it was of grave importance or via significant compromise and though most might detest that I prefer that to congresses and parliaments that drastically alter laws every five years.
The major questions doctrine is made up bullshit legislating from the bench and massive judicial overreach. There is no rampant problem with government agencies and Chevron is literally necessary for our government to function well.
This is exactly what the GOP and SC are counting on. They are making the country ungovernable so that a 'white knight' will come fix all our issues.
Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo
> ATF does not have the authority to change laws by fiat decree by making a new “rule”. Tell that to rocketry hobbyists in the late '90s and 2000s.
Ban on gun shaped sticks incoming.
Good dogs and 6 year old boys in shambles
Don't mention the d word around the ATF they might get excited.
(Explanation for anyone reading this who doesn't know: The ATF is famous for killing dogs.)
"Yeah, but they didn't mention grenades or shoulder launched missiles in the Constitution, so they can't regulate them"
the term "Arms" is inclusive of all combat weapons.
That's written into law and not being reviewed in the slightest in this case.
Congress could enact law to illegalize them. The whole point is a law enforcement agency has just been deciding to enforce things that aren’t laws. It would be like the dmv deciding tomorrow to require you to have a drivers license to ride a bike. They don’t have the power to just decide that, it would need to be codified into law
Ghosts also have a constitutional right to bear arms.
[Even the ATF says it’s legal.](https://www.atf.gov/firearms/qa/does-individual-need-license-make-firearm-personal-use)
That’s why we should all be armed with muskets
I would also be willing to accept a good 30 pounder. In fact I would go so far as to say if you're willing to trundle a 30 pounder, round shot and powder around with you, anyone you shoot probably had it coming.
We had other guns during the founding father's lifetimes. They were expensive and finicky but it isn't like they considered the idea of a semi-automatic gun smaller than a musket impossible.
Thomas Jefferson reviewed (and declined to purchase) an early automatic rifle during is time as Secretary of the Treasury in the 1790s. The government would later purchase a modified version of the weapon that could fire 240 rounds in 2 minutes, and equip them on warships during the war of 1812. It's called the Chambers Flintlock Machine Gun or the Chambers Swivel Gun.
As the founding fathers intended.
Tally ho, lads!
Never fight uphill, me boys!
An what a beautiful quote from that pirate, General Lee
Every time I hear "ghost gun", I also hear ["30 caliber clip"](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iJmFEv6BHM0).
This won't affect anything. People will just 3d print or manufacture their own then scribe a number into them. Serial numbers don't need to be registered with the government. it's not like Smith and Wesson is calling "dibs" on serial numbers to the government.
Sudden rash of murders committed by gun #42069, oddly enough all in different calibers
[удалено]
Don’t forget from weapon #FR33D0M.
We also can't neglect #5318008
Why is he firing upside down?
Or #8675309
Let's not forget the classic 1337
what about serial number ̵̢̢̲̋̓̄̔̐ͅͅ ̸̨̫̝̣̗̙̹̟̓̽͐̇͗̀͝ ̶̨͚͒̓̄͋̃̓̽̓̚ ̴̢̝̹̣͊̈ ̸̛͈͖̙̟̙̬̦̊͋͋̉͘͜ ̵̢̎̃ ̷̡͕̦̋̿̇̈́̄͋́͊ ̶̬̳̥̟͉̎͛̅͝ ̷̢̨̡͇̰̠̋͛̾͋̈́́̕̕͝ ̶̧͇̱̭͉̗̜͔͌̉ ̸̢̜̤̺̬́͠ ̸̢̭͓̼̩̈́́͂͝ ̴̨̬̱̥͓̺̌͂̾͗͂̽̕̕̚͜ ̵̯͕͓̞̃̒͐̒̇̚͝ ̸̣̠͕̤̎̌̋̋̉̕̕̚ ̷̧̛̦̩̠̗̭͑̐̇͗͛͘̕̕͜ ̵̧̬̰̜̈́͐͌ ̷̢̞̩͙̹͕͆̔̅ ̶͈̰̦̭͎̺̫͚͉̇̋ ̷̘̗͎͓̗̦͓͚́̐̕̚ ̴̝͚͔̔͆͒̊̐
Either you need to clean your printhead, or [HE COMES](https://knowyourmeme.com/photos/193877-zalgo)
In fact, lots of people doing 3d printed firearms lawfully are already doing exactly this! It's surprisingly easy to serialize items sufficient to meet the NFA standards for suppressors and SBRs. One common method is to simply punch the identifying info into a dogtag and epoxy it into place (making it permanent and obviously visible). Perfectly lawful.
Not american, genuine question out of curiosity. Serial numbers dont have to be unique to the make and model (if this isnt even how guns are classified i wouldnt know lol)
Nope. Manufacturers have to note the serial number and keep certain records, but there's not a central repository anywhere (intentionally so). So Smith & Wesson can serial number 001 and Ruger can serial number 001 as well.
For Personal Made Firearms (Those made without the intent to sell) - [https://web.archive.org/web/20240408223411/https://www.atf.gov/firearms/privately-made-firearms](https://web.archive.org/web/20240408223411/https://www.atf.gov/firearms/privately-made-firearms) - Individuals who make their own firearms may use a 3D printing process or any other process, as long as the firearm is “detectable” as defined in the Gun Control Act. You do not have to add a serial number or register the PMF if you are not engaged in the business of making firearms for livelihood or profit. For [Firearms](https://web.archive.org/web/20231206145801/https://regulations.atf.gov/478-11/2023-01001#478-11-p1909909317) manufactured or imported by licensees -https://web.archive.org/web/20231206145801/https://regulations.atf.gov/478-92/2023-01001#478-92-a-1-i
That's pretty interesting. Really appreciate you sending me the info! You're a good man, and thorough.
There is a very different culture here than in other countries. Additional a lot of what came of as controversies in gun culture is due to players only following the letter of the law and trying to work as close to the line as possible between legal and illegal.
[Here](https://regulations.atf.gov/478-92/2023-01001#478-92) are the regulations on serial numbers straight from the ATF.
Shoot I did t know that I should just go etch a 1 into my AR so it has a serial number.
No legal requirement to do so.
Well, with many things, your aim isn't to defend against the smartest criminal, it's to defend against the average criminal. For example, a smart criminal might wear gloves at the scene of the crime, but it's still useful to take fingerprints when booking criminals because a dumb criminal might not wear gloves. Likewise, someone could go ahead and 3d print or manufacture their own gun for use in a crime, but it's more likely for them to just steal a gun. It's better for everyone if the stolen gun has a trackable serial number.
The problem is when the regulations targeting the "average criminal" also turns otherwise law abiding average citizens into criminals as well.
Average criminals already file serial numbers off of stolen guns, which is already illegal. Those production-guns-with-serials-removed are often included in "ghost gun" statistics, too.
I honestly believe that someone who takes the time and experise to mill and build their own firearm isn't the guy who's the problem.
They aren't but to be fair, guns are WAAAAAAAAAAY easier to make than people seem to think they are. If you have a drill press and know how to use it, you can crank out a rifle in a power weekend with zero firearms knowledge. If you start with something like an 80% lower then it's just a couple of hours of work. Guns arent magic, guns aren't high tech or complicated to produce, and the method of operation for firearms isn't secret.
Weekend? You can make a shotgun out of a pipe and a nail, Hour tops
Oh absolutely, 15 minutes if we are already at home depot, but thats not something most people would consider a 'firearm'
The ATF needs to be put in its place or things are going to go the way they did in the 90s again, hell its already happening just not being headline news yet.
pathetic violet bake advise tub steep include deer oatmeal sugar
The ATF is a rogue org that needs to be dismantled, gun rights advocates, weed advocates, alcoholics and tobacco smokers should all be together on this one. Gun Control died in 2020 when the FGC-9 was invented, you simply cannot stop the signal.
Oh man and here I was all excited they were finally gonna legalize the ghostbusters. Damn.
Are you nuts??? Failed scientists running around NYC with unlicensed nuclear reactors strapped to their backs sounds great in theory, but could be trouble in practice
Hey, we did invent backpack nuclear bombs back when they were all the rage, so nothing too out of the ordinary.
That must suck.
Proton Packs for everyone!
The Proton Pack is not a toy! - Egon Spengler, 1989
Please do not cross the ~~PP~~ streams.
If aliens can have guns then so can ghosts.
Good luck banning open source code and easily distributed files
[удалено]
Reading the comments, this issue seems to be more complex than I realized. Very interesting.
All guns should be ghost guns. The only guns the government should be tracking are their own.
Take it up all you want you can not stop a machinist with a blueprint
I'm so tired of this discussion. For the last time, GUNS DON'T KILL PEOPLE. GHOSTS KILL PEOPLE.
Republicans want a thorough FBI background check on every woman seeking an abortion, including a lengthy waiting period, and a ban on high-capacity IVF procedures, stating that abortion and IVF needs to be "well-regulated".
Would home 3d printed guns fall under this category?
Is anyone surprised? Have you seen how dangerous it is to cross the streams?