3 ms·

There's no way the NRA would let this loophole get closed, right? Also, I'm confused. I tried to look up the legal standing of ghost guns on Wikipedia, and it

There's no way the NRA would let this loophole get closed, right? Also, I'm confused. I tried to look up the legal standing of ghost guns on Wikipedia, and it mentioned that regulating them would violate the Commerce Clause (since they're not articles of commerce), but there's a Supreme Court case on homemade machine guns which upheld those being illegal. What's the deal there?

foota 5y ago
The Commerce Clause can do anything. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wickard_v._Filburn https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wickard_v._Filburn
- dragonwriter 5y ago
  > The Commerce Clause can do anything. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wickard_v._Filburn https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wickard_v._Filburn No, it can’t. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Lopez https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Lopez
- PhantomGremlin 5y ago
  This can't be upvoted enough. Activists love it when judges stretch words far beyond their original intent. Same happened in Roe v. Wade, involving "due process". The majority found a meaning in words far beyond what was there previously. A dissenter said: To reach its result, the Court necessarily has had to find within the scope of the Fourteenth Amendment a right that was apparently completely unknown to the drafters of the Amendment. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roe_v_wade#Dissents https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roe_v_wade#Dissents
rpmisms 5y ago
The NRA doesn't hold much power anymore, but FPC (firearmspolicy.org) will raise legal hell if anyone tries. There's no federal law banning 80% firearms or home manufacture. If there was, then prosecuting it would fall under the same umbrella as the NFA.
speedybird 5y ago
>There's no way the NRA would let this loophole get closed, right? They might, since people making rifles at home aren't buying rifles from manufacturers. Licensed FFLs don't use this 'loophole', it exists for private unlicensed people to use or abuse. A common criticism of the NRA is that it prioritizes manufacturer interests. For instance, (from what I've seen, correct me if I'm wrong) the NRA doesn't seem to do a very good job at protesting import bans that harm collectors but benefit manufacturers.
mike_d 5y ago
There isn't really a loophole to close. People are ironically already selling "0% lowers" for ARs, which are solid aluminum bricks [1]. Everything is made of something, and guns are made of things you can't realistically regulate. 1. https://www.80percentarms.com/products/0-billet-ar-15-lower-receiver/ https://www.80percentarms.com/products/0-billet-ar-15-lower-...
- lokedhs 5y ago
  Yet other countries manage to regulate weapons. It may be politically impossible to do it in the US but it's certainly possible.
dragonwriter 5y ago
> There’s no way the NRA would let this loophole get closed The NRA is busy trying not to be dissolved.

foota 5y ago

The Commerce Clause can do anything. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wickard_v._Filburn https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wickard_v._Filburn

dragonwriter 5y ago
> The Commerce Clause can do anything. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wickard_v._Filburn https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wickard_v._Filburn No, it can’t. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Lopez https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Lopez
PhantomGremlin 5y ago
This can't be upvoted enough. Activists love it when judges stretch words far beyond their original intent. Same happened in Roe v. Wade, involving "due process". The majority found a meaning in words far beyond what was there previously. A dissenter said: To reach its result, the Court necessarily has had to find within the scope of the Fourteenth Amendment a right that was apparently completely unknown to the drafters of the Amendment. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roe_v_wade#Dissents https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roe_v_wade#Dissents

rpmisms 5y ago

The NRA doesn't hold much power anymore, but FPC (firearmspolicy.org) will raise legal hell if anyone tries. There's no federal law banning 80% firearms or home manufacture. If there was, then prosecuting it would fall under the same umbrella as the NFA.

speedybird 5y ago

>There's no way the NRA would let this loophole get closed, right? They might, since people making rifles at home aren't buying rifles from manufacturers. Licensed FFLs don't use this 'loophole', it exists for private unlicensed people to use or abuse. A common criticism of the NRA is that it prioritizes manufacturer interests. For instance, (from what I've seen, correct me if I'm wrong) the NRA doesn't seem to do a very good job at protesting import bans that harm collectors but benefit manufacturers.

mike_d 5y ago

There isn't really a loophole to close. People are ironically already selling "0% lowers" for ARs, which are solid aluminum bricks [1]. Everything is made of something, and guns are made of things you can't realistically regulate. 1. https://www.80percentarms.com/products/0-billet-ar-15-lower-receiver/ https://www.80percentarms.com/products/0-billet-ar-15-lower-...

lokedhs 5y ago
Yet other countries manage to regulate weapons. It may be politically impossible to do it in the US but it's certainly possible.

dragonwriter 5y ago

> There’s no way the NRA would let this loophole get closed The NRA is busy trying not to be dissolved.