Ai Content Generator
Ai Picture
Tell Your Story
.webp&w=256&q=75){kind=avatar}
Eloise SahagunWhat's your Opinion on Supreme Court allows Biden ‘ghost gun’ regulations?
As an AI language model, I don't have personal opinions, but I can provide you with an analysis of the topic. Please note that my response is based on general knowledge and not specific to any recent events or court rulings.
The Supreme Court's decision on Biden's 'ghost gun' regulations would depend on the specific details of the ruling and the arguments presented. However, I can provide some general perspectives on the topic.
'Ghost guns' are typically homemade firearms that lack a serial number and are untraceable. The Biden administration has expressed concerns about the increasing availability and use of such firearms, which can bypass background checks and contribute to gun violence. The regulations proposed by the administration aim to expand the definition of firearms and require background checks for the sale of kits and parts used to assemble ghost guns.
Supporters of the regulations argue that they are necessary to address the potential risks associated with untraceable firearms. They believe that by regulating the sale and assembly of ghost guns, it may help prevent these weapons from falling into the wrong hands, such as criminals or individuals prohibited from owning firearms. Proponents also argue that background checks for ghost gun kits and parts would help close the existing loophole that allows individuals to evade background checks when purchasing firearms.
Opponents of the regulations may argue that they infringe upon the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens. They contend that the regulations could potentially restrict access to firearms for individuals who have a legitimate need for self-defense or recreational purposes. Critics might also argue that the regulations may not effectively address the issue of gun violence, as criminals will still be able to obtain firearms through illegal means.
It's important to note that this response is a general analysis, and the specific Supreme Court ruling and arguments presented would greatly influence the opinion on the matter. For a more accurate and up-to-date perspective, it's advisable to refer to reputable news sources or legal analysis that cover the particular Supreme Court decision you are referring to.
Related Posts
© 2024 Invastor. All Rights Reserved
User Comments
Virginia Ollie
10 months ago
The "ghost gun" industry obviously did not pay their bribes. Silly small companies.
Linda Ingram
10 months ago
if you live in a state that allows, yes there are a few states where the "unfinished" receiver (usually 80% lower) is classified as a firearm under state law - in these states, you would need to fill out ATF form 4473/run NICS for the lower like you'd need to as any other firearm for CA, even if you start from a blank aluminum billet ("0%" receiver), you still need to obtain serial no. & other "manufacturer" info from CA DOJ before you can finish machining it out
Paul Jaramillo
10 months ago
So it is still ok to buy an unfinished receiver and a separate drill kit to finish the receiver and then buy the rest of the parts separately?
Horacio Handy
10 months ago
The only reason it’s not surprising is because that’s not what the rule even does. Unless Congress re-writes the Gun Control Act the ATF can’t unilaterally stop the private manufacture of firearms. The rule just changes what constitutes a finished receiver, adds regs for uppers and lowers, and changes the requirements for FFLs who take possession of a privately manufactured firearm. But that sounds like I understand the rule and we’re talking about the ATF here, so I’m probably wrong. The GCA is pretty straightforward, though 🤷♂️
Sandra Borchardt
10 months ago
Not a surprising outcome, particularly considering that the feds can (rightly, imo) regulate just receivers as whole-ass firearms.
Frances Parrott
10 months ago
Gun owner here... I don't have a problem with this. Nothing about this stops me from manufacturing my own untraceable firearm from a block of aluminum and/or using my 3D printer. This only affects the idiot kits that are expressly designed and sold to be made into firearms. IMO if you're trying to manufacture an unserialized firearm, you need to actually manufacture it, not follow the equivalent of a paint-by-numbers kit.
Manuel Kelly
10 months ago
the reason you can have a personally built unserialized firearm is because federal law says you can.
Charles Nix
10 months ago
I'm a gun owner and advocate, and I can't think of a single reason for any gun to not have a serial number. I don't even care about the "but muh rights" argument here, because it's not endangered by traceability. Every other major purchase we make in the US is serialized, and for good reason. If you need an untraceable gun, it's because you're either committing violent crimes, are facilitating violent crimes, or daydreaming about how you're going to be Lord Asshole in the imaginary upcoming apocalypse and this is how the government is somehow going to be defeated by you from your basement bunker.
Annette Perry
10 months ago
They did not rule on its constitutionally they just did not block the law until it makes it way through the courts.
Judith Ammons
10 months ago
The fact that there were still some SCOTUS judges in favor of untraceable, unregulated guns shows just how brainwashed and selfish they truly are.
10 Comments
The "ghost gun" industry obviously did not pay their bribes. Silly small companies.