Families of shooting victims sue sellers of 'ghost guns

[Aim1]

Well, wonder where this one will go.

I thought the lower had to have a serial number?



https://www.kob.com/national-news/families-of-shooting-victims-sue-sellers-of-ghost-guns/5944902/

 

[Alex Clayton]

These are talking about the guns you make. You so far do not have to number your own. The people being sued were not selling complete lowers, they were selling what the BATF called "80%" lowers. These have been around for a hell of a long time but they finally got attention. I knew sooner or later these would get on the radar and they finally have. Anyone can sue anyone for anything if you have the money to do so. There is a lot of money behind this trying to get the people selling these to just go away and stop. Easier than getting a law passed.

 

[caribou]

80% is not a gun, if they were made for personal use, I do not believe its legal to sell them.

Manufacturers have licensing to be able to sell guns.

Unless the gun blew up, built with the 80% receiver, being defective and hurt/killed someone.

Biden promised legislation like this.

 

[kwguy]

Here we go. Legislating a hunk of metal. What started as a cool sounding catch phrase, “80 percent” is now becoming a “thing”. Next, it’ll be illegal to sell blanks of aluminum because they are “0% lowers”.

 

[FFGColorado]

80% is not a gun, if they were made for personal use, I do not believe its legal to sell them.

Manufacturers have licensing to be able to sell guns.

Unless the gun blew up, built with the 80% receiver, being defective and hurt/killed someone.

Biden promised legislation like this.

So it's already illegal?

POTUS doesn't write legislation. Campaign 'promises' does not laws make. The guy now in the big chair 'promised' all sorts of things like
'take their guns and worry about due process later'...

 

[Alex Clayton]

So it's already illegal?

POTUS doesn't write legislation. Campaign 'promises' does not laws make. The guy now in the big chair 'promised' all sorts of things like
'take their guns and worry about due process later'...

IBTL

Illegal to build out an 80%? Not yet. Several states have been making noise to try to stop the sale of them. My state is one. They made a ham handed attempt a while ago and like often happens the people writing the law know nothing. So what they did manage was to scare some of the people who sell the lowers into no longer selling them here. Some still will sell here. Given enough time I suspect we may well see some Federal laws on them. Some states are already trying. If there is another high profile mass shooting that is done with a gun made this way it will of course speed things up.
As far as selling one you made it's not yet against the law to do as long as you are not playing at manufacturing. This is a very dangerous little game to play though. I have made a few lowers. If I was ever to sell one of the guns I built this way I would never sell a lower. Some do. It's not just the risk of the law trying to make an example of you it's the lawyers too. If you sell one you made and it ends up at some crime they may find some judge willing to let them sue you. Then you of course have to pay for your lawyers. Many do play with this though.

 

[jonnyc]

I'm at least 80% sure that if you build a gun from an 80% frame/lower/receiver and then sell it, it must be engraved with a name and number, and then possibly registered.

 

[Alex Clayton]

I'm at least 80% sure that if you build a gun from an 80% frame/lower/receiver and then sell it, it must be engraved with a name and number, and then possibly registered.

Here is some reading that will get you maybe 50% of the way there.

https://www.80lowerjig.com/80-lower-blog/i-built-an-ar-15-can-i-sell-it/

Bottom line though I personally would not do this. If I ever want to get rid of any of my Casper guns I would sell the parts, and assuming I no longer wanted the lower I would cut it in pieces. As of now it is legal for me to sell but to me it's not worth the potential hassle for the money I would make selling it. Others do so.

 

[jmorris]

Here we go. Legislating a hunk of metal. What started as a cool sounding catch phrase, “80 percent” is now becoming a “thing”. Next, it’ll be illegal to sell blanks of aluminum because they are “0% lowers”.

It doesn’t have to be metal.

There are files out there to 3D print a firearm that will fire at least one round.

 

[kwguy]

It doesn’t have to be metal.

There are files out there to 3D print a firearm that will fire at least one round.

For sure. This leads down a dangerous path, censoring and banning certain types of information and knowledge.

 

[jmorris]

Yep, would lead to book burning, quickly. Starting with ones “they” wrote.

https://www.militarynewbie.com/wp-c...ions-Handbook-1969-Department-of-the-Army.pdf

One could make a “firearm” from a trip to the hardware store, according to the book above. Those of us with machine shops wouldn’t have to travel to obtain the parts and would likely have a much better end product.

 

[CapnMac]

The article in OP demonstrate the empty speciousness of what passes for modern journalism.
Those are opinion pieces based on things the writers know less than nothing about.
Those writers are convinced that universal registration already exists, that nothing occurs without a government permit; and anything without a permit is, clearly, illegal.

These people presume that criminals follow the law, too. Why would a hoodlum go to the effort to build a firearm when they can just buy or steal one. This question is never asked.

Were "ghost guns" an actual issue, where are the photos of them stacked up in arrest photos?

All gun control is about control. And, must needs only be an infringement upon the law-abiding. You cannot discomfit law breakers with more laws.

 

[kfranz]

that's right, you wanna buy a gun...legally...you HAVE TO do that.

The article in OP demonstrate the empty speciousness of what passes for modern journalism.
Those are opinion pieces based on things the writers know less than nothing about.
Those writers are convinced that universal registration already exists, that nothing occurs without a government permit; and anything without a permit is, clearly, illegal.

These people presume that criminals follow the law, too. Why would a hoodlum go to the effort to build a firearm when they can just buy or steal one. This question is never asked.

Were "ghost guns" an actual issue, where are the photos of them stacked up in arrest photos?

All gun control is about control. And, must needs only be an infringement upon the law-abiding. You cannot discomfit law breakers with more laws.

This thread demonstrates that even a fair number of people posting on a gun enthusiast board know very little about the law...

I'm at least 80% sure that if you build a gun from an 80% frame/lower/receiver and then sell it, it must be engraved with a name and number, and then possibly registered.

Where, exactly, does one "register" a Title 1 firearm, aka gun???

 

[Alex Clayton]

The article in OP demonstrate the empty speciousness of what passes for modern journalism.
Those are opinion pieces based on things the writers know less than nothing about.
Those writers are convinced that universal registration already exists, that nothing occurs without a government permit; and anything without a permit is, clearly, illegal.

These people presume that criminals follow the law, too. Why would a hoodlum go to the effort to build a firearm when they can just buy or steal one. This question is never asked.

Were "ghost guns" an actual issue, where are the photos of them stacked up in arrest photos?

All gun control is about control. And, must needs only be an infringement upon the law-abiding. You cannot discomfit law breakers with more laws.

Sadly "journalism" pretty much died a good while back. Now and then you see some rather funny examples of "journalism" people who really believe the propaganda about guns go out and try to buy one. Some of them are truly shocked that they can't just walk in or mail order a gun. Most of them know full well what they are saying is lie's. They want to ignorant public to believe the answer is just more laws, as if none exist.
When I hear someone tell me we need "another law" I will just ask, why don't we pass a law to make it illegal to murder? They of course look miffed, say it is. So when you tell them how is one more law going to change that? About then they start to get mad and ears shut off

 

[Alex Clayton]

This thread demonstrates that even a fair number of people posting on a gun enthusiast board know very little about the law...


Where, exactly, does one "register" a Title 1 firearm, aka gun???

Before Al invented the net it was far worse. People would still come up with all kinds of bizarre beliefs about laws but it was often almost impossible to easily show them what the law really said. Long ago few of us had some FA stuff we would shoot at an old abandoned quarry. Many times some other shooter would run over to tell us what we had was illegal. There was a well known shop in the city. I would ask if they knew of it, they of course did. I would say they are a dealer who can and does sell NFA stuff. Some would call me a liar and jump in their car to run to the nearest phone to call the Police. Police did show up one time, talked to us and left. I could see the guy who had called them standing there with his mouth wide open in disbelief. A lot of shooters who did listen were shocked to know you could legally buy a FA gun.

 

[buddyd157]

buddyd157 said: ↑
that's right, you wanna buy a gun...legally...you HAVE TO do that.

This thread demonstrates that even a fair number of people posting on a gun enthusiast board know very little about the law...
Where, exactly, does one "register" a Title 1 firearm, aka gun???

please show me, where i said that above statement, in this thread..???

why don't you quote the thread where i said that? cuz maybe WHERE I LIVE, i was responding to THAT THREAD..????

 

[buddyd157]

This thread demonstrates that even a fair number of people posting on a gun enthusiast board know very little about the law...


Where, exactly, does one "register" a Title 1 firearm, aka gun???

i checked that, what i had said, YES, on the 4437, you check off in section 21.........

so how was i wrong.>???

 

[Speedo66]

I can see if you sell an 80% gun you finished to perfection, and some yahoo triple charges a hand load and blows himself up, some lawyer will sue you for your negligence in the making of the gun.

You know how that works; no matter what they did, it's not their fault.

 

[loadedround]

As of this posting it is still legal in ''most'' states to sell and manufacture a 80% completed receiver for you own personal use. You may not sell, give away, or trade an 80% completely finished receiver without first engraving a serial number on said receiver and notifying the BATF of such. If you check online sites and reputable parts dealers, you will find 80% AR15, 1911, and Glock receivers for sale, and all is need is a jig and router to complete a fully functional receiver. There may also be other 80 percenters like AK47's out there also. I suspect these 80% receivers will be going the way of the ''bump stocks'' some time soon after the inauguration when Sleepy Joe pushes the BATF to act!

 

[TrickyDick]

You may not sell, give away, or trade an 80% completely finished receiver without first engraving a serial number on said receiver and notifying the BATF of such.

This is not factually correct. You don't HAVE TO serialize it and notify the ATF, it's just strongly recommended. You can sell it, but if you manufacture a 80% to completion with the intent to sell, then you're considered a manufacturer. If you made one 5 years ago for yourself, then decided you didn't want it anymore, you can sell it as is. However, the latter is a tricky situation and the burden of proof may fall into you should you end up in court.

 

[loadedround]

That information can directly from my local BATF office when I called them last year asking that specific question about serial numbers. I don't wish to get into any spitting contests with any of our members, just stating facts as they were presented to me. Just how can you prove that 80% receiver you finished was made one week ago, one year ago, or ten years ago. I would assume the Feds would have you be the proverbial short hairs if they caught you selling a completed AR15 receiver w/o a serial number.

This is not factually correct. You don't HAVE TO serialize it and notify the ATF, it's just strongly recommended. You can sell it, but if you manufacture a 80% to completion with the intent to sell, then you're considered a manufacturer. If you made one 5 years ago for yourself, then decided you didn't want it anymore, you can sell it as is. However, the latter is a tricky situation and the burden of proof may fall into you should you end up in court.

 

[Poper]

If you made one 5 years ago for yourself, then decided you didn't want it anymore, you can sell it as is. However, the latter is a tricky situation and the burden of proof may fall into you should you end up in court.

I always thought the burden of proof was on the accuser (government)? They must prove you violated the law, yes? Innocent until proven guilty and all that stuff.
However, if you kept your receipts, this would probably be sufficient evidence of date and source of the 80% receiver.

 

[mnrivrat]

80% is not a gun, if they were made for personal use, I do not believe its legal to sell them.

Manufacturers have licensing to be able to sell guns.

Unless the gun blew up, built with the 80% receiver, being defective and hurt/killed someone.

Biden promised legislation like this.

That is basically my understanding as well. An 80% receiver is not a gun. If you buy one and finish the receiver for your own use it is legal. (unless you are a prohibited person). If you sell such a completed receiver or gun then you would need a manufacturing license. The only people who are allowed to not comply with 2nd amendment law is the government. That same logic is applied to the printing of worthless money. Remember that up until 1968 firearms were not required to have a serial number. That infringement to our 2nd amendment rights was passed in that year. As far as I know the building of a firearm for personal use has always been legal. I am pretty sure if I posted anything that is not correct ,someone will get all snarky with me. In that case if anything in this post is not correct, then someone else posted this using my user name.

 

[caribou]

So it's already illegal?

POTUS doesn't write legislation. Campaign 'promises' does not laws make. The guy now in the big chair 'promised' all sorts of things like
'take their guns and worry about due process later'...

I should have made myself clear, Its illegal to manufacture an 80% receiver into a gun and then sell it. If the gun was sold and then misused, it would be illegal.

As well,Joe Biden, the possible President Elect, made campaign promises to "go after gun Manufactures", obviously with the help of a Dem House and , possibly, a Dem Senate....we will see....
I feel that it has alot to do withan 80% receiver being built into a gun has sorta the same theme as this thread.

https://joebiden.com/gunsafety/

The relevant tidbit from his gun control promises.

"Hold gun manufacturers accountable. In 2005, then-Senator Biden voted against the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, but gun manufacturers successfully lobbied Congress to secure its passage. This law protects these manufacturers from being held civilly liable for their products – a protection granted to no other industry. Biden will prioritize repealing this protection."

I feel that they lie by omission, not exactly explaining what the law protects manufacturers from, because the law makes sense and repealing does not.

The law he plans to repeal is a protection from civil liability on the manufacturers for criminal misuse of a firearm, after its been sold by the manufacturer.

Here is the first part of the law, the end is the most relevant.

""Public Law No: 109-92 (10/26/2005)
(This measure has not been amended since it was passed by the Senate on July 29, 2005. The summary of that version is repeated here.)

Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act - (Sec. 3) Prohibits a qualified civil liability action from being brought in any state or federal court against a manufacturer or seller of a firearm, ammunition, or a component of a firearm that has been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce, or against a trade association of such manufacturers or sellers, for damages, punitive damages, injunctive or declaratory relief, abatement, restitution, fines, penalties, or other relief resulting from the criminal or unlawful misuse of a firearm. Requires pending actions to be dismissed.""

Imagine that, suing a company that made a gun for some random punk shooting someone else, or something like that.
The familys in the OP are suing for a gun that wasnt manufactured, so its even more ironic....

 

[TrickyDick]

That information can directly from my local BATF office when I called them last year asking that specific question about serial numbers. I don't wish to get into any spitting contests with any of our members, just stating facts as they were presented to me. Just how can you prove that 80% receiver you finished was made one week ago, one year ago, or ten years ago. I would assume the Feds would have you be the proverbial short hairs if they caught you selling a completed AR15 receiver w/o a serial number.

So I went to the ATF regulation guide and they specify licensed manufacturers being required to serialize firearms. However, they make no mention of homemade fireams. In fact, I am convinced they removed that section as to not encourage it. I.e. the rule still applies, but because they don't specify, it is unbeknownst to the average person, but I certainly remember reading about such an exemption. I think it wasn't a big deal before, but with so many 80% receivers, they probably didn't want people to know that they're not privy to the laws regarding licensed manufacturers.