testtest

California Attorney General Sues to Force ATF to Amend Its ‘Ghost Gun’ Ruling

BET7

BET7

Ronin
Founding Member
Another State that want regulations on 80% Receivers. In Pennsylvania, the State's AG ruled that 80% receivers and frames should now be considered to be firearms. This ruling is being contested. Now it's California's turn on the subject.
It seems like these type of rules or laws should be written and passed by congress (and State legislators) and not the ATF or States Attorney Generals. But that's strictly my opinion.

www.gunsamerica.com

California Attorney General Sues to Force ATF to Amend Its 'Ghost Gun' Ruling

The California attorney general filed a lawsuit in federal court this week to force the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms (ATF) to categorize 80-percent receivers as firearms under the Gun Control Act of 1968.
www.gunsamerica.com www.gunsamerica.com
 
Well thankfully it looks like the new SCOTUS judge is going to be seated. With any luck some of the first rulings are some of these gun cases. They need to clarify once and for all. These state AGs and governors are just passing whatever laws they want and riding it out until if/when they get slapped down by the SCOTUS.
 
The entire argument may very well be moot. At least 5 criminal defendants in various Federal Courts have successfully argued that a lower receiver for an AR15 does not meet the requirements to be considered a firearm under 27 C.F.R. § 478.11. This does not count the undocumented number of times that federal authorities have quietly dropped charges regarding lower receivers in order to avoid concrete rulings that could jeopardize enforcement nationwide.

I did not have time to look up the individual cases, but the AP gives a good summary in this article: https://apnews.com/article/396bbedbf4963a28bda99e7793ee6366
 
Annihilator said:
Good article BET7, seems here lately as the country goes to pot.....all they want to do is pass more and more gun laws....just doesn’t make sense.
Click to expand...
Thanks Anni. I'd like to see some statistics that these type guns are used in crimes. Most criminals don't care if the gun is serialized or not, as it's probably stolen. It might help authorities track the gun make to it's original owner, but I don't see criminals taking the time to build a gun from an 80% lower (plus ordering parts to complete it), versus buying a stolen one on the streets. Now maybe an organized criminal outfit might make them in mass to sell on the streets or black market, but it would be nice to see some crime statistics on all of this.
 
BET7 said:
Thanks Anni. I'd like to see some statistics that these type guns are used in crimes. Most criminals don't care if the gun is serialized or not, as it's probably stolen. It might help authorities track the gun make to it's original owner, but I don't see criminals taking the time to build a gun from an 80% lower (plus ordering parts to complete it), versus buying a stolen one on the streets. Now maybe an organized criminal outfit might make them in mass to sell on the streets or black market, but it would be nice to see some crime statistics on all of this.
Click to expand...

That’s the rub. Any gun found at any crime scene that is traced back to the original owner is almost certain to fail to find the perpetrator. It simply doesn’t matter since nearly no criminals commit crimes with guns that are registered to them. And if they tried to come back on the original owner all they have to do is say they sold it. Nothing illegal about that.
 
wmg1299 said:
The entire argument may very well be moot. At least 5 criminal defendants in various Federal Courts have successfully argued that a lower receiver for an AR15 does not meet the requirements to be considered a firearm under 27 C.F.R. § 478.11. This does not count the undocumented number of times that federal authorities have quietly dropped charges regarding lower receivers in order to avoid concrete rulings that could jeopardize enforcement nationwide.

I did not have time to look up the individual cases, but the AP gives a good summary in this article: https://apnews.com/article/396bbedbf4963a28bda99e7793ee6366
Click to expand...
BET7 said:
Another State that want regulations on 80% Receivers. In Pennsylvania, the State's AG ruled that 80% receivers and frames should now be considered to be firearms. This ruling is being contested. Now it's California's turn on the subject.
It seems like these type of rules or laws should be written and passed by congress (and State legislators) and not the ATF or States Attorney Generals. But that's strictly my opinion.

www.gunsamerica.com

California Attorney General Sues to Force ATF to Amend Its 'Ghost Gun' Ruling

The California attorney general filed a lawsuit in federal court this week to force the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms (ATF) to categorize 80-percent receivers as firearms under the Gun Control Act of 1968.
www.gunsamerica.com www.gunsamerica.com
Click to expand...
 
Agree on the law. FYI the AR lower court decision was based on incomplete and opinionated information from a person who convinced a judge. The truth is as far as AR15 lowers and the law definition it can be applied for either the upper or lower. The lower has been designated the receiver since the inception of the AR10/15/M16 in the late 1950’s when the Stoner team was developing the weapons system and the legal definition could fit the lower or the upper. The lower was chosen because there was more room for markings and easier to mark.
 
Any time people start yapping about more gun laws...this is my mindset.

1601647209772.png
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top