SCotUS hears case on "ghost guns"

[M14 Shooter]

Case: Garland v. VanDerStok
Text of oral arguments: https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/2024/23-852_ca7d.pdf

Subject of case: The 2022 ATF interpretation of the Gun Control Act of 1968 with respect to 'ghost gun' kits -- package of parts that allow the creation of an unserialized firearms -- the ATF holds that such kits are, themselves, firearms, and if for sale, must be serialized and then sold like any other firearm, including a background check.

Most people do not understand the issue here -specifically, what a "ghost gun kit" is and how it "works".
I shall explain:

In general, with a 'ghost gun' kit, you get these, or similar, parts:

You also get a part similar to this:

What do you have when you put them together?

Nothing.
In fact, you --can't-- put them all together.
And so, unarguably, you do not have a firearm.
But the ATF wants to -call- it a firearm and -regulate- it like a firearm.
Even though you cannot put the parts together, and you cannot shoot anything through it.

This is an obvious case of ATF overreach, and will be struck for the same reasons as the court struck the bump-stock ban --- Congress can, and did, define the terms it used in its legislation and the ATS does not get to change those definitions to suit its purposes.

 

[progressive hunter]

Case: Garland v. VanDerStok
Text of oral arguments: https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/2024/23-852_ca7d.pdf

Subject of case: The 2022 ATF interpretation of the Gun Control Act of 1968 with respect to 'ghost gun' kits -- package of parts that allow the creation of an unserialized firearms -- the ATF holds that such kits are, themselves, firearms, and if for sale, must be serialized and then sold like any other firearm, including a background check.

Most people do not understand the issue here -specifically, what a "ghost gun kit" is and how it "works".
I shall explain:

In general, with a 'ghost gun' kit, you get these, or similar, parts:

View attachment 1025246

You also get a part similar to this:

View attachment 1025247

What do you have when you put them together?

Nothing.
In fact, you --can't-- put them all together.
And so, unarguably, you do not have a firearm.
But the ATF wants to -call- it a firearm and -regulate- it like a firearm.
Even though you cannot put the parts together, and you cannot shoot anything through it.

This is an obvious case of ATF overreach, and will be struck for the same reasons as the court struck the bump-stock ban --- Congress can, and did, define the terms it used in its legislation and the ATS does not get to change those definitions to suit its purposes.

is it only about the kits or any gun even if you make it from scratch at home,,

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

In fact, you --can't-- put them all together.
And so, unarguably, you do not have a firearm.
But the ATF wants to -call- it a firearm and -regulate- it like a firearm.

And correctly so, as there is no other use for any of it.

 

[progressive hunter]

thios scares the hell out of me

The Gun Control Act imposesstraightforward but essential requirements.Firearms sellers and manufacturers must marktheir products with serial numbers, maintainsales records, and conduct background checks.The industry has followed those conditionswithout difficulty for more than half a century,and those basic requirements are crucial tosolving gun crimes and keeping guns out of the

 

[M14 Shooter]

is it only about the kits or any gun even if you make it from scratch at home,,

The kits.

 

[M14 Shooter]

And correctly so, as there is no other use for any of it.

What uses are there for a non-firearm?
Paperweight?
Mantle ornamentation?
Theatrical prop?

The clear and simple fact it cannot be used to fire a projectile necessitates that it does NOT meet the definition of a firearm as Congress defined it.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

What uses are there for a non-firearm?
Paperweight?
Mantle ornamentation?
Theatrical prop?

What use is the object intended for?

The objects in your post are intended to be a firearm.

 

[M14 Shooter]

thios scares the hell out of me
The Gun Control Act imposesstraightforward but essential requirements.Firearms sellers and manufacturers must marktheir products with serial numbers, maintainsales records, and conduct background checks.The industry has followed those conditionswithout difficulty for more than half a century,and those basic requirements are crucial tosolving gun crimes and keeping guns out of the

M'kay...
But these kits aren't firearms.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

M'kay...
But these kits aren't firearms.

*yet

But will be, if used as directed

 

[progressive hunter]

The kits.

I think its more important to focus on the restriction/requirement aspect over is it a full gun or operable,,

there are to many laws that did nothing and we need to focus on repealing laws,,


hopefully this goes the right way,,

 

[progressive hunter]

M'kay...
But these kits aren't firearms.

shouldnt matter,,

2nd A says arms not guns partial or in whole,,

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

The ghost gun fetishists will lose this suit, with Roberts and Barrett making it 5-4.

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

I guess auto parts stores need registrations and tags.

 

[daveman]

Behold, a firearm!

 

[M14 Shooter]

*yet
But will be, if used as directed

"Yet". "Will be"
But, as manufactured, advertised, packaged, and sold, are not.
As they are not firearms, they cannot be regulated as such.

 

[M14 Shooter]

The ghost gun fetishists will lose this suit, with Roberts and Barrett making it 5-4.

You have no factual or rational basis for this position.

 

[whitehall]

A competent machinist can make this stuff in a day. What can the Supreme Court do about it?

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

I guess auto parts stores need registrations and tags.

Did you mean... serial numbers?

Focus.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

You have no factual or rational basis for this position.

Except for all of the facts available.

"The chief justice and the Trump appointee sided with the government in earlier litigation on regulating the weapon kits. "

John Roberts and Amy Coney Barrett could vote to uphold Biden’s ‘ghost guns’ regulation

The chief justice and the Trump appointee sided with the government in earlier litigation on regulating the weapon kits. They might do so in the final ruling, too.

www.google.com

 

[M14 Shooter]

What use is the object intended for?

Irrelevant to the law.
What ARE they when sold?
Not a firearm.

The objects in your post are intended to be a firearm.

But, at the time of sale, they are not, and it is impossible to assemble them as such.
Someday, they might be, but not at that point.