3 ms·

> argued that the potential increase in accessibility of ghost guns presents “a serious threat to public safety” and noted that the weapons have been linked to

> argued that the potential increase in accessibility of ghost guns presents “a serious threat to public safety” and noted that the weapons have been linked to several mass shootings. This reasoning is completely irrelevant as the law in question concerns international arms trafficking, not availability of guns to domestic criminals. Nor did this ruling have anything to do with the Second Amendment or its interpretation. The question was whether or not guns could be exported from the country via the Internet. The State Department exercised its unilateral foreign policy prerogative to remove these prints from the US Munitions List as part of its role in implementing arms treaties. Other state and federal laws regulate who can actually make these guns and what they can do with them.

rsj_hn 5y ago
What a lot of people don't understand is that these are freedom of speech concerns, not second amendment concerns. As an aside, it is already legal in the US to manufacture your own gun at home. There are countless sources of information in printed form that show you how to do that -- gun manufacture for personal use is 100% unregulated by any existing federal law and, as of 2018, in states other than California (Updated - see https://www.criminaldefenselawyer.com/resources/homemade-guns-are-they-legal-must-they-be-registered https://www.criminaldefenselawyer.com/resources/homemade-gun....). It is the sale and distribution of guns that is regulated at the Federal level, and in states other than California. The issue here is whether the state department can take down websites that show instructions for gun manufacturing, whereas no one is arguing that printed books with the same information would be subject to similar bans. But something about the internet makes a lot of regulatory bodies think that freedom of publication and prohibitions on prior restraint just don't apply there, and this ruling is one small step to setting that straight.
- cjhveal 5y ago
  It's definitely not 100% unregulated to produce your own firearm in the United States. It can be very very illegal to do so and it's a really dangerous piece of advice to be giving a bunch of hackers. You must obey state and municipal laws regarding your eligibility to own a firearm at all. The firearm itself must be legal according to your state law. In the entire country, you must apply to the DOJ for a serial number before completion of the firearm and you must have it permanently engraved or imprinted upon the receiver or a piece of embedded steel.
  - rsj_hn 5y ago
    > In the entire country, you must apply to the DOJ for a serial number before completion of the firearm This is incorrect and is itself "bad advice". You do not need a serial number from the DOJ if you are not selling. But as has been stated in the comments, CA does have more stringent local rules and I'll update my comment to reflect that. I also added a link that explains the situation.
    - cjhveal 5y ago
      You're correct on the facts here as they relate to federal law-- I was reacting to the post's previous mention that firearm manufacture for personal use was 100% unregulated by any existing law. You've since edited it to be much more accurate and my comment isn't necessary.
  - seany 5y ago
    The serial number part of this comment is only true if you want to sell a firearm you've made. If you built it for yourself undersized is perfectly fine (at the national level). You also only have to apply for anything unless you become a manufacturer.
    - Rebelgecko 5y ago
      In California you have to buy serial numbers from the government, even if the manufacturing is just for personal use. There's also laws that make it illegal to make guns out of certain materials, and any pistol/handgun is basically required to be single shot/bolt action.
      - seany 5y ago
        Yeah, I was only talking nationally. That said I think CA is the only state like that, so long as you are otherwise allowed to own firearms.
- walterlb 5y ago
  From your link (https://www.criminaldefenselawyer.com/resources/homemade-guns-are-they-legal-must-they-be-registered https://www.criminaldefenselawyer.com/resources/homemade-gun...), it appears there is at least this federal limitation on homemade firearms: "Because the Undetectable Firearms Act makes illegal any firearm that cannot be detected by a metal detector, every firearm must contain some amount of metal. This means that a plastic 3D printed firearm must have a metal plate inserted into the printed body"
  - seany 5y ago
    That plate part isn't quite true, since most firearms will have metal barrels at the very least. Which would found by a metal detector.
  - packetlost 5y ago
    If you're running a gun without a metal chamber, you're probably going to have a bad time (unless it's a very small caliber such as .22LR). I would argue that if you're going to require metal in a gun at all, might as well require it to be the chamber to prevent catastrophic failures.
zionic 5y ago
> and noted that the weapons have been linked to several mass shootings. Um what? A plastic 3D printed gun has been used in a mass shooting? When?
- bseidensticker 5y ago
  I think ghost guns in general, not a 3d printed plastic one. They are probably talking about the ar15 80% lower receiver trick.
  - foolinaround 5y ago
    Ghost guns have never been used in any mass shootings.

rsj_hn 5y ago

What a lot of people don't understand is that these are freedom of speech concerns, not second amendment concerns. As an aside, it is already legal in the US to manufacture your own gun at home. There are countless sources of information in printed form that show you how to do that -- gun manufacture for personal use is 100% unregulated by any existing federal law and, as of 2018, in states other than California (Updated - see https://www.criminaldefenselawyer.com/resources/homemade-guns-are-they-legal-must-they-be-registered https://www.criminaldefenselawyer.com/resources/homemade-gun....). It is the sale and distribution of guns that is regulated at the Federal level, and in states other than California. The issue here is whether the state department can take down websites that show instructions for gun manufacturing, whereas no one is arguing that printed books with the same information would be subject to similar bans. But something about the internet makes a lot of regulatory bodies think that freedom of publication and prohibitions on prior restraint just don't apply there, and this ruling is one small step to setting that straight.

cjhveal 5y ago
It's definitely not 100% unregulated to produce your own firearm in the United States. It can be very very illegal to do so and it's a really dangerous piece of advice to be giving a bunch of hackers. You must obey state and municipal laws regarding your eligibility to own a firearm at all. The firearm itself must be legal according to your state law. In the entire country, you must apply to the DOJ for a serial number before completion of the firearm and you must have it permanently engraved or imprinted upon the receiver or a piece of embedded steel.
- rsj_hn 5y ago
  > In the entire country, you must apply to the DOJ for a serial number before completion of the firearm This is incorrect and is itself "bad advice". You do not need a serial number from the DOJ if you are not selling. But as has been stated in the comments, CA does have more stringent local rules and I'll update my comment to reflect that. I also added a link that explains the situation.
  - cjhveal 5y ago
    You're correct on the facts here as they relate to federal law-- I was reacting to the post's previous mention that firearm manufacture for personal use was 100% unregulated by any existing law. You've since edited it to be much more accurate and my comment isn't necessary.
- seany 5y ago
  The serial number part of this comment is only true if you want to sell a firearm you've made. If you built it for yourself undersized is perfectly fine (at the national level). You also only have to apply for anything unless you become a manufacturer.
  - Rebelgecko 5y ago
    In California you have to buy serial numbers from the government, even if the manufacturing is just for personal use. There's also laws that make it illegal to make guns out of certain materials, and any pistol/handgun is basically required to be single shot/bolt action.
    - seany 5y ago
      Yeah, I was only talking nationally. That said I think CA is the only state like that, so long as you are otherwise allowed to own firearms.
walterlb 5y ago
From your link (https://www.criminaldefenselawyer.com/resources/homemade-guns-are-they-legal-must-they-be-registered https://www.criminaldefenselawyer.com/resources/homemade-gun...), it appears there is at least this federal limitation on homemade firearms: "Because the Undetectable Firearms Act makes illegal any firearm that cannot be detected by a metal detector, every firearm must contain some amount of metal. This means that a plastic 3D printed firearm must have a metal plate inserted into the printed body"
- seany 5y ago
  That plate part isn't quite true, since most firearms will have metal barrels at the very least. Which would found by a metal detector.
- packetlost 5y ago
  If you're running a gun without a metal chamber, you're probably going to have a bad time (unless it's a very small caliber such as .22LR). I would argue that if you're going to require metal in a gun at all, might as well require it to be the chamber to prevent catastrophic failures.

zionic 5y ago

> and noted that the weapons have been linked to several mass shootings. Um what? A plastic 3D printed gun has been used in a mass shooting? When?

bseidensticker 5y ago
I think ghost guns in general, not a 3d printed plastic one. They are probably talking about the ar15 80% lower receiver trick.
- foolinaround 5y ago
  Ghost guns have never been used in any mass shootings.