View Full Version : Ghost Guns
This seems to be all the rage since the Democrats what to ban them. Realistically are they actually a problem (assuming that you are in favor of gun prohibition)? Just how practical is it for the average person who has no specialized equipment to build one of these things? Assume a workbench, a simple toolbox (wrenches, screwdrivers, hammer etc. The sort of things found in the beginner tool set you would find in a hardware store) and a power hand drill. As for skills lets assume low (can do simple household jobs but unfamiliar with power tools and has none except for the drill. So how would this person go about building an AR from an 80% receiver and parts? Is it even cost effective? How many guns would you have to manufacture to recover your costs?
They are only a problem for big brother and their control agenda.
I think it's important to understand that gun control groups have almost unlimited resources because of people like Mike Bloomberg, and they have multi-million dollar marketing firms that test the terms they use.
If you notice, they all use the same terms.
Common sense
Military style
Weapons of war
Ghost guns
Universal Background Checks
Red flags laws
Gun safety laws
Most people who aren't gun owners and even the Fudds when asked shouldn't we have common sense gun safety laws?
When you use these terms you don't have to defend the constitutionally or even how they would work.
As to ghost guns, that's a scary term for the unaware.
It's easy to get public support when they make claims that criminals and terrorists can easily get ghost guns etc.
Getting back to the expense, you only need a couple of things. A work bench, a drill press and time.
The 80% lowers have jigs that show you where to mill and drill.
I haven't built on because anything made with a drill press that I make would have some tolerance issues, but I've seen some good mill jobs.
Now that 3D printers are getting better and plastics are stronger gun control becomes more moot5.
Sent from my SM-N986U using Tapatalk
My question is really aimed at the practicality for the novice. So all you need is a drill press and nothing else? What quality drill press? Some are table top and some are heavy precision machine tool types.
You can do it with a sub $100 drill press from Habor Freight.
Sent from my SM-N986U using Tapatalk
Practicality depends on how good you are with your hands. Building things. If you can't cut paper in a straight line with scissors you probably screw up the 80% receiver. I know I would
Sent from my moto z4 using Tapatalk
Every home finished 80% lower I have seen looks like a rat chewed it. If I wanted a ghost gun I would just buy a rifle from an individual. If they ban them it isn't going to matter if the rifle has a serial number or not when you get caught with it. "How many guns would you have to manufacture to recover your costs" If you are planning on breaking the law you shouldn't be discussing it here. It is not legal to convert 80% lowers and sell them.
Has anyone here actually built one of these things?
Has anyone here actually built one of these things?
I have built P80 "glocks". I have a couple forged 80% lowers, haven't built one yet. I have a small mill, so I'm thinking it won't be any trouble. I might grab more if they come available at reasonable prices. If the laws go to hell, I'll be a criminal anyway. Might as well go all in at that point.
The gov doesn't like them because they can't control them and they want to control every aspect of everything...
Well given that you can get finished lowers for $99 and it will cost you at least $100 for a drill press, in terms of cost it wouldn't be cheaper to make only one receiver out of an 80% lower. Then you have to factor in the value you place on your time. So I can see doing one as a hobby or simply to avoid a background check for the principle of the thing. The only way it actually gets cheaper is if you make a lot of them and as has been pointed out, if you sell them without the proper licenses, you are breaking the law. I wonder how many you would have to make to get good enough to make one you would actually like?
I’ve only seen one polymer 80% lower and the guy that finished it told me the safety didn’t work. Sounds pretty useless to me. Maybe aluminum ones are better.
ViperTwoSix
02-28-21, 09:38
The concern with 80% receivers isn’t that law abiding citizens will build them into untraceable weapons and overthrow the government. The concerns is that people who should not have weapons (by law) can pretty easily just make them. Gang members, violent felons, drug cartel members, terrorist cells, etc. Since 80 lowers are not currently regulated any of the above could potentially arm themselves (even if they did turn out crap quality) with weapons to carry out their cause.
Just ask yourself, should EVERYONE be allowed to own firearms without any restrictions whatsoever? If no, and a person should not own a firearm, should they then be allowed to make one anyway? If no, they you probably fall in the group that believes SOME level of restrictions are necessary.
The concern with 80% receivers isn’t that law abiding citizens will build them into untraceable weapons and overthrow the government. The concerns is that people who should not have weapons (by law) can pretty easily just make them. Gang members, violent felons, drug cartel members, terrorist cells, etc. Since 80 lowers are not currently regulated any of the above could potentially arm themselves (even if they did turn out crap quality) with weapons to carry out their cause.
Just ask yourself, should EVERYONE be allowed to own firearms without any restrictions whatsoever? If no, and a person should not own a firearm, should they then be allowed to make one anyway? If no, they you probably fall in the group that believes SOME level of restrictions are necessary.
Criminals that are not 'allowed' to buy guns have still been able to obtain them (easily) long before 80% receivers became available or became a 'thing'.
Banning 80% stuff will not change or solve anything. If a criminal wants to illegally obtain a gun he will find a way regardless of any goofy laws on the books.
Criminals do not give a crap about or abide by laws. The only people that are harmed / affected by these goofy bans and needless restrictions are the people that DO abide by laws.
By your logic there should definitely be a background check required before anyone is allowed to purchase a brick. Because you know, any random criminal could just walk into their local box store, buy one and hit me upside the head with it... We definitely need a law to prevent that sort of stuff from happening. :nono:
While we are at it - The companies that manufacture bricks should be liable for damages when and if some criminal uses that brick in such a way. If they never made that brick to begin with the criminal would have never been able to hit me with it... :angry:
Five_Point_Five_Six
02-28-21, 10:13
The concern with 80% receivers isn’t that law abiding citizens will build them into untraceable weapons and overthrow the government. The concerns is that people who should not have weapons (by law) can pretty easily just make them. Gang members, violent felons, drug cartel members, terrorist cells, etc. Since 80 lowers are not currently regulated any of the above could potentially arm themselves (even if they did turn out crap quality) with weapons to carry out their cause.
Just ask yourself, should EVERYONE be allowed to own firearms without any restrictions whatsoever? If no, and a person should not own a firearm, should they then be allowed to make one anyway? If no, they you probably fall in the group that believes SOME level of restrictions are necessary.
I believe felons and any free man should be able to have guns. I also believe that if someone is too dangerous to own a gun because they can't keep from murdering/raping/assaulting people that they shouldn't be in society at all.
So you could say I don't believe in any gun control or restrictions on what a free man can possess.
Just ask yourself, should EVERYONE be allowed to own firearms without any restrictions whatsoever?
Yes.
I don’t want to get political in here, especially since the OP said don’t. But your natural rights turned into purchased privileges from the government. The BoR was supposed to be untouchable, buts it’s been thoroughly touched. People in this country are voting to criminalize simple speech.
What did you miss when you read “shall not be infringed”
Questions:
1) How often has the serial number alone been used to associate a person to a firearm used in the commission of a crime in order to get a conviction, in the absence of any other physical evidence, i.e., finger-prints on the firearm?
2) How often does a serial number check on a firearm abandoned at a crime scene return a valid suspect?
MA2_Navy_Veteran
02-28-21, 11:03
The concern with 80% receivers isn’t that law abiding citizens will build them into untraceable weapons and overthrow the government. The concerns is that people who should not have weapons (by law) can pretty easily just make them. Gang members, violent felons, drug cartel members, terrorist cells, etc. Since 80 lowers are not currently regulated any of the above could potentially arm themselves (even if they did turn out crap quality) with weapons to carry out their cause.
Just ask yourself, should EVERYONE be allowed to own firearms without any restrictions whatsoever? If no, and a person should not own a firearm, should they then be allowed to make one anyway? If no, they you probably fall in the group that believes SOME level of restrictions are necessary.
There are lots of different "concerns" (depending on the perspective) when it comes to 80% receivers, but the only three that actually matter are:
Firstly - At what point should a simple hunk of metal or plastic be considered to be a "firearm" & regulated? - To which the answer is currently set at ABOVE/PAST/BEYOND 80% completion. This can change by simply lowering the current 80% completion standard to something even less "complete".
Secondly - Does a law-abiding citizen have the inherent right to manufacture a weapon for their personal use? - To which the U.S. Supreme Court (US v Heller among others) has held that they (the law-abiding citizenry) do have such a right, though it is not an unlimited right (in effect, they cannot build NFA items like machine guns, bombs/IEDs, or say - Nukes)
& Lastly - "What can be done to force a criminal to obey ANY gun control law(s)? - To which the answer is simply & incontrovertibly : Not a damn thing. Not now, or Ever.
The Only absolute 100% sure way of keeping guns out of the hands of criminals... is by killing the criminals.
Laws and restrictions only restrict the law abiding. Laws and restrictions do nothing to restrict the criminal element.
There are lots of different "concerns" (depending on the perspective) when it comes to 80% receivers, but the only three that actually matter are:
Firstly - At what point should a simple hunk of metal or plastic be considered to be a "firearm" & regulated? - To which the answer is currently set at ABOVE/PAST/BEYOND 80% completion. This can change by simply lowering the current 80% completion standard to something even less "complete".
Secondly - Does a law-abiding citizen have the inherent right to manufacture a weapon for their personal use? - To which the U.S. Supreme Court (US v Heller among others) has held that they (the law-abiding citizenry) do have such a right, though it is not an unlimited right (in effect, they cannot build NFA items like machine guns, bombs/IEDs, or say - Nukes)
& Lastly - "What can be done to force a criminal to obey ANY gun control law(s)? - To which the answer is simply & incontrovertibly : Not a damn thing. Not now, or Ever.
The Only absolute 100% sure way of keeping guns out of the hands of criminals... is by killing the criminals.
Perfect!!
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Diamondback
02-28-21, 11:46
Has anyone here actually built one of these things?
Writeup on my experience at...
https://redstate.com/diary/diamondback/2017/05/17/watercooler-517-open-thread-lunch-hour-lower-n236831
https://redstate.com/diary/diamondback/2017/05/24/watercooler-524-open-thread-lunch-hour-lower-lessons-learned-n236864
You CAN do it freehand with a cordless hand drill on polymers... doesn't necessarily mean you SHOULD. And a small vise is a REAL big help.
Has anyone here actually built one of these things?
Many. If you use the latest methods like a jig and Router, the work is outstanding.
Drill press method is like 5+ year old technology.
I have milled six 80% lowers into functional lowers. All but one, the first one I milled look and work just as well as any finished lower that I have bought. I used a drill press and jig/router combo. I am far from the most mechanically inclined. Have the correct tools and take your time. Not difficult.
80%or not average criminal does not have money to buy a jig and drill, router, or mill they just steal them , they can steal guns easier
The organized crime have millions to set up a entire machine shop and make what ever they want any way
ViperTwoSix
02-28-21, 14:57
By your logic there should definitely be a background check required before anyone is allowed to purchase a brick. Because you know, any random criminal could just walk into their local box store, buy one and hit me upside the head with it... We definitely need a law to prevent that sort of stuff from happening. :nono:
While we are at it - The companies that manufacture bricks should be liable for damages when and if some criminal uses that brick in such a way. If they never made that brick to begin with the criminal would have never been able to hit me with it... :angry:
Correct, criminals have been able to easily get guns before 80 lowers... theft and straw purchase are both easy. However, they were not able to do it legally. There is always a threat of detection to some extent. That threat of detection is eliminated if I can buy everything need legally.
Correct, some criminals don’t care about laws. Does that mean that laws should just not exist? Just because I do not steal, should there be no law against theft?
Your quote above (as well as mine directly above) are extremes and exaggerate a concept past reasonable logic. I don’t fall in either. I don’t believe 80 lowers should be banned. Buy one and build it if you heart desires. I also don’t like the idea of the meth addict across the street from me with 3 robbery convictions who can’t buy at gun at the shop being able to just build one.
ViperTwoSix
02-28-21, 15:05
There are lots of different "concerns" (depending on the perspective) when it comes to 80% receivers, but the only three that actually matter are:
Firstly - At what point should a simple hunk of metal or plastic be considered to be a "firearm" & regulated? - To which the answer is currently set at ABOVE/PAST/BEYOND 80% completion. This can change by simply lowering the current 80% completion standard to something even less "complete".
Secondly - Does a law-abiding citizen have the inherent right to manufacture a weapon for their personal use? - To which the U.S. Supreme Court (US v Heller among others) has held that they (the law-abiding citizenry) do have such a right, though it is not an unlimited right (in effect, they cannot build NFA items like machine guns, bombs/IEDs, or say - Nukes)
& Lastly - "What can be done to force a criminal to obey ANY gun control law(s)? - To which the answer is simply & incontrovertibly : Not a damn thing. Not now, or Ever.
The Only absolute 100% sure way of keeping guns out of the hands of criminals... is by killing the criminals.
To your first point... I do not know. I am personally fine with the current 80 % standard. Once you complete more than 80, you have manufactured a firearm.
To your second point... the Heller decision solidified the right to keep and bear arms, not manufacture them. Manufacturing can be regulated any number of ways.
To your third point, you are correct to a degree. I agree if someone really wants a gun they can find a way to get one. But what hurdles do they have to jump? How high is the risk of detection and what are the consequences of caught? Is the risk worth the reward?
Correct, some criminals don’t care about laws. Does that mean that laws should just not exist? Just because I do not steal, should there be no law against theft?
Your quote above (as well as mine directly above) are extremes and exaggerate a concept past reasonable logic. I don’t fall in either. I don’t believe 80 lowers should be banned. Buy one and build it if you heart desires. I also don’t like the idea of the meth addict across the street from me with 3 robbery convictions who can’t buy at gun at the shop being able to just build one.
There are laws IF you commit theft. And there are lawd IF a criminal posseses a firearm. BTW....how do you look at black powder and pre 1900/antique things that go pew pew pew?? Neither are considered firearms. So a 1899 Mauser 8mm or a black powder handgun can be had by any criminal. Sure, not as sexy as a 1911 or fast to reload but certainly deadly and capable
Sent from my moto z4 using Tapatalk
ViperTwoSix
02-28-21, 15:24
There are laws IF you commit theft. And there are lawd IF a criminal posseses a firearm. BTW....how do you look at black powder and pre 1900/antique things that go pew pew pew?? Neither are considered firearms. So a 1899 Mauser 8mm or a black powder handgun can be had by any criminal. Sure, not as sexy as a 1911 or fast to reload but certainly deadly and capable
Sent from my moto z4 using Tapatalk
All true. In the state I live in I can also go to the swap meet and buy a rifle with cash and not even get my ID checked. I am not against 80 lowers, or black power, or Curio and Relic firearms.
I am all for liberty and freedom. If you, Arik, want to buy an 80 lower and build a working firearm, I think you, Arik, should be able to do so. Now, if the the meth addicts up the street want to buy an 80 lower and build a working firearm then I have an issue with that. I also understand no law will affect one without the other in that scenario. I do not advocate enacting laws or regulation against 80 lowers, but I also try to understand the point on view of those that do.
Ya'll go ahead and build your fancy Casper rifles. I just want to assemble a slide/slam fire 12 gauge. Why? Absolutely no good reason except I can.
Andy
Arguing laws is ridiculous. We are in a post rule of law society. The laws no longer apply equally and the constitution is no longer followed.
The gun control agenda isn't about preventing crime. Its about control period. Its as much of a scam as racism in 2021.
All true. In the state I live in I can also go to the swap meet and buy a rifle with cash and not even get my ID checked. I am not against 80 lowers, or black power, or Curio and Relic firearms.
I am all for liberty and freedom. If you, Arik, want to buy an 80 lower and build a working firearm, I think you, Arik, should be able to do so. Now, if the the meth addicts up the street want to buy an 80 lower and build a working firearm then I have an issue with that. I also understand no law will affect one without the other in that scenario. I do not advocate enacting laws or regulation against 80 lowers, but I also try to understand the point on view of those that do.
I think we should encourage meth addicts to build and test their own guns. :)
Seriously, do you think a drug addict is going to machine an 80% lower, mail order the remaining parts, purchase the required tools, and assemble an AR? Have you ever met someone addicted to hard drugs?
I would bet 99% of the "ghost gun" builders are 40-60 year old law abiding men.
Andy
ViperTwoSix
02-28-21, 16:52
I think we should encourage meth addicts to build and test their own guns. :)
Seriously, do you think a drug addict is going to machine an 80% lower, mail order the remaining parts, purchase the required tools, and assemble an AR? Have you ever met someone addicted to hard drugs?
I would bet 99% of the "ghost gun" builders are 40-60 year old law abiding men.
Andy
Fair point.
But maybe you’re right... if they do build a firearm maybe they’ll shoot themselves with it. That’s if the home-made lab in the bathtub doesn’t blow them up first.
I know there are reports of cartels with machine shops in Mexico completing 80% receivers, so your concern is not completely unwarranted. Then again, I honestly don't care whether or not we help the cartels kill one another in Mexico.
Criminals in the US take advantage of the theft loophole. No background check, no paperwork, you don't even have to pay taxes. Just let the law abiding suckers go to work and take their stuff.
Andy
Ugh...this place is sounding like TOS more & more every day....I miss the more erudite days here.
I don’t mean to burst anyone’s bubble, but “80% Receivers” are a marketing term—nothing more. The ATF never assessed the incomplete lowers and said they were “80% complete” so a 79% is a work around. The samples were submitted to the The lowers were submitted for assessment as a firearm or not & they are not, based on work done & submitted by a couple different companies in early 2000 based on memory:
https://www.ammoland.com/2014/11/atf-answers-questions-on-80-receiver-blanks/#axzz6noIkIpIP
https://www.pewpewtactical.com/what-are-80-lower-receivers/
ATF Firearms and Ammunition Technology Division (FATD) was asked if the unmachined lowers are firearms per GCA-68, and they aren’t, per ATF. A decade or more ago, there were 80% sellers who never submitted samples to FATD and that caused a shitstorm. The polymer lowers were never formally ok’s by ATF which resulted in raids years ago, too.
For those who don’t recall the Akins Accelerator, it was ok’d by FATD, then they changed their minds & the springs had to be removed & springless bump stocks were born. Then they were outlawed a few years ago, yes by the Republican Donald Trump, which was also supported by the NRA.
My point is that ATF isn’t exactly known for their technical acumen or consistency. They have called rubber bands, shoe laces, wire, hangers & paper clips “machine guns.” They currently look past home hobbyists who make TATP, ETN or other high explosives in small experimental quantities, until someone does something stupid, then they’re charged with making “weapons of mass destruction.”
Under this current presidency, 80% lowers will undergo regulation, if not outright ban; forearm braces will be banned or require AOW stamps and I wouldn’t be surprised if semiautos and mags over 10 rounds are outright banned.
I also wouldn’t be surprised to see the $200 Title II stamp go to $2000+; the equivalent value comparing 1934’s $200 stamp is almost $4000 in today’s Economy.
Criminals by definition do not follow laws. Every time I prescribe a narcotic legally as a physician, they have to sign a “contract” that they won’t misuse or sell them, or let anyone else take them, yet we have ODs daily in our ER. It’s magical thinking to believe that “just the right words” endorsed by politicians will magically stop inner city youths from killing each other in drug/turf wars. And it’s even more absurd to penalize law-abiding taxpaying US citizens and turn them into felons with a pen stroke.
My question is really aimed at the practicality for the novice. So all you need is a drill press and nothing else? What quality drill press? Some are table top and some are heavy precision machine tool types.
Depends on the gun. The glock 80% lowers really don't require that much other than a drill press and some hand tools. Hell you could probably use a drill although I wouldn't recommend it. With the right jigs an 80% ar lower can be done with some pretty basic tools. The P320 80% lower looks like it can be done with their jig, a mallet, Dremel, and hacksaw in addition to a drill or drill press and well a vice.
As someone else pointed out a lot of people screw 80%'s up or they work but look like crap. I've seen some really nice work done though with basic tools and with things like the ghost gunner. With the later you see the layer cuts on the inside but they can do pretty good work overall.
What I was actually trying to find out was if machining a receiver out of aluminum (I should have specified that) was actually practical for the average person. I can see someone doing it who has a lot of money and a fully equipped machine shop, but realistically are all that many people going to tool up (which can be very expensive to only make one of a kind) and actually make the things? And I really didn't want to get into the gun control thing.
But since someone raised the issue: As for background checks I am old enough to remember when we didn't have them and you could order by mail. That's when I got my first rifle a British N4 Mk1 Lee Enfield. That was back when the 2nd Amendment actually meant something. So I am not in favor of background checks/1968 gun control act. All that was a reaction to Kennedy's assassination.
It depends on your work/life experience, I guess.
I used to run the old analog Bridgeport vertical mill & lathes in a machine shop. While I am not trained as a machinist, I understand the basics & could do it. I don’t think it would be very pretty with just a drill press. But I suspect it would work. Steady, horizontal movement, which is what a vertical mill with a moving table & vise is what gives you smooth cuts, assuming proper endmill selection. I don’t know how that would be replicated, unless it was with another purchase: a hand cranked, 2 axis table with vise that would fit the lower.
However, just like reloads—I trust mine, but I wouldn’t trust someone else’s.
I don’t think the average person I interact with daily could make a pretty lower with a drill press, OP. Functional? Maybe. Please don’t take it as a personal slight. The machinist who trained me back in the 1970s could “see” if a part was a few thousandths off—I don’t know if it was a trick or not—but he was like Mozart—but for machining. The man was an artist with steel, aluminum, brass & anything else he worked on. If you have the innate skills he had, maybe you could. All the 80% I’ve encountered look like someone with a Dremel tried to build an ashtray.
ETA: the folks most likely to benefit from an 80% that looks “professional” know someone who has a CNC 3-axis machine & either bought or downloaded the code, so “machining” is a simple push of a button, like the “Ghost Gun” gizmo. Since I know how an analog vertical endmill works, I suspect ATF doesn’t “believe” pushing a button is the same as running an analog machine that took several hours to mill a lower, vs quite literally, the push of a button.
But I suspect our Founding Fathers never would have envisioned this digital forum, either.....
The gov doesn't like them because they can't control them and they want to control every aspect of everything...
absolutely.
titsonritz
03-01-21, 14:52
“This is a ghost gun. This right here has the ability with a .30-caliber clip to disperse with 30 bullets within half a second. Thirty magazine clip in half a second.”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iJmFEv6BHM0&feature=emb_title
What I was actually trying to find out was if machining a receiver out of aluminum (I should have specified that) was actually practical for the average person.
Yes practical and easy for an average person with some mechanical ability to mill out an 80% lower receiver.
Diamondback
03-01-21, 17:18
Yes practical and easy for an average person with some mechanical ability to mill out an 80% lower receiver.
I'd say picking the right tools up front is 80% of building an 80%.
I'd say picking the right tools up front is 80% of building an 80%.
I would agree. I also think that taking your time and having patience helps as well.
Diamondback
03-01-21, 18:07
I would agree. I also think that taking your time and having patience helps as well.
Yup, my first cordless-drill job was eight hours to complete and it looked Amateur Hour, fugly-but-functional. I spraybombed it orange and set it aside for a dedicated .22LR build.
vicious_cb
03-02-21, 02:18
Has anyone here actually built one of these things?
So whats going on in this thead?
https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fcdn0.thetruthaboutguns.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2018%2F11%2Fatf-fence.jpg&f=1&nofb=1
I asked because I am getting lots of opinions and I wanted to sort out pure opinion from those who have actually done the work. But we would be foolish to the extrema not to expect ATF reads these sites and threads. In any event I think my questions have been answered and I thank everyone.
We're fortunate that the pressure bearing parts aren't regulated, which is the only thing that makes 80% viable. If they start regulating pressure bearing parts like other countries do then it's game over on that front.
As far as demonstrating that guns can't be contained, 3d printing and electrochemical etching are far more promising. The sticking point though is always going to be the ammunition, and the biggest challenge on that front is the primer. There's a group claiming to have that taken care of though, so if they can come up with 3d printed cases then it will be possible to make a semi auto pistol out of entirely mundane supplies. The thing about 3d printing is that it doesn't really take any special technical ability, vs. machining. Plus you can get 3d printers for a few hundred dollars, whereas machining a gun would require several thousand dollars in machines and tooling, bare minimum. This will only get more relevant as SLS printers get cheaper and start offering more material choices. I would even go as far as to say that SLS is poised to replace injection molded gun parts entirely.
I asked because I am getting lots of opinions and I wanted to sort out pure opinion from those who have actually done the work. But we would be foolish to the extrema not to expect ATF reads these sites and threads. In any event I think my questions have been answered and I thank everyone.
So if the ATF does monitor this site and others like it, what do you think they are actually trying to get from doing so?
So if the ATF does monitor this site and others like it, what do you think they are actually trying to get from doing so?
The knowledge to buy or build better ARs of course. Just like the rest of us.
Andy
So if the ATF does monitor this site and others like it, what do you think they are actually trying to get from doing so?
Establishing your profile for their data base.
Just ask yourself, should EVERYONE be allowed to own firearms without any restrictions whatsoever?
Yes.
If the person is of age* and not currently incarcerated, then yes. If a person has proven themselves through prior action to be so dangerous that we must remove their Rights and Liberties, they should be incarcerated. But if a person is going to be free to walk around in public basically, yup, guns practically out of a vending machine (just, gotta be an adult or have your parent/guardian involved). It would help if we stopped putting people in jail/prison for shit that shouldn't even be illegal.
*Age being tied to the general age of majority, not a separate firearms age, so, currently in the US, that age would be 18.
Establishing your profile for their data base.
They don't give a dump about us individually. A waste of their time. Better ways to screw us with less effort.
Yes.
If the person is of age* and not currently incarcerated, then yes. If a person has proven themselves through prior action to be so dangerous that we must remove their Rights and Liberties, they should be incarcerated. But if a person is going to be free to walk around in public basically, yup, guns practically out of a vending machine (just, gotta be an adult or have your parent/guardian involved). It would help if we stopped putting people in jail/prison for shit that shouldn't even be illegal.
*Age being tied to the general age of majority, not a separate firearms age, so, currently in the US, that age would be 18.
I totally agree with you. If a person is released from prison/jail, completes their parole/probation, then they should have all rights restored. If they are not safe enough to be trusted they should be incarcerated for life or put to death.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.