That is what the Media is reporting. Just in case, if you have been thinking about getting a couple of 80% lowers and have not done it yet, it may be a good idea to order before they disappear or become expensive.

I do not think they will demand serialization of parts or background checks for non-firearm parts. I don’t think it would be legal, but then again, this administration has a history of butt wiping with the letter of the law and then shoving int on your face.

Spread the love

By Miguel.GFZ

Semi-retired like Vito Corleone before the heart attack. Consiglieri to J.Kb and AWA. I lived in a Gun Control Paradise: It sucked and got people killed. I do believe that Freedom scares the political elites.

4 thoughts on “White House to take on eeeevil Ghost Guns today.”
  1. IL just jammed through a ‘ghost gun’ bill in the middle of the night. It was so badly written, even the authors admitted it will be challenged and likely defeated in the courts but they passed it anyway. And criminals will just ignore it.

  2. Unfortunately for them, US law defines a firearm based on the functioning part known as the receiver or frame. These parts, while not simple to make, always have a point at which they are not a firearm. At what point does the government start demanding that a hunk of aluminum coming out of a foundry be tracked as a firearm?

    In Europe they track the pressure bearing parts of a firearm as the firearm. The barrel, bolt, and chamber if I got things right.

    And at this point I find it much easier to make a good receiver from hunks of metal than to make a good barrel.

    Though it would not surprise me to someday be able to buy a “thick walled tube” that has exactly the right bore diameter to be rifled. It also begs the question of where do they put the serial number on a barrel blank? If I take a barrel blank and turn it down, the serial number will be removed.

    Ok, this is a stupid game to play and I don’t want to play it. They can’t stop the signal all they can do is mess things up.

  3. Having read the proposed rule (full IANAL notice in effect here), I do not see it as standing. The rule uses a lot of terms that are not defined. What does “readily” mean? As in “can be readily converted to a firearm.” Not defined, and if challenged, the ATF will lose in court.
    .
    However, it has to make it to a court, and until then, the 80% dealers will have to abide by the rule, or get shutdown.

    1. The government goes by the Humpty Dumpty school of English: “When I use a word it means exactly what I choose it to mean, neither more nor less”.

Login or register to comment.