Gun Control 2022 (IV) - Gun Rights, Control, & Government

[Paddy O Fernature]

7: Closing "Gun show" loophole. Mandatory BGC's on ALL sales of firearms, including private at gun shows and online.
( He literally is lying he fucking ass off on stats here)
8: Closing the "Charleston loophole"... FBI background check changed from 3 days to indef... they can now take as long as they want.

More incoming....

[Paddy O Fernature]

AWB!

THE FUCKER IS PROPOSING AN AWB!

Also abolishing gun manufacturer protections as well!

[Grinning Dragon]

7: Closing "Gun show" loophole. Mandatory BGC's on ALL sales of firearms, including private at gun shows and online.
( He literally is lying he fucking ass off on stats here)
8: Closing the "Charleston loophole"... FBI background check changed from 3 days to indef... they can now take as long as they want.

More incoming....

LOL, loophole. What fucking loophole. If it's defined in law, it isn't a loophole.
But I get it, anything that's legal and they don't like it, is a loophole.
What a fucking cunt our prez is.

[Paddy O Fernature]

And that's about it.

Good lord, I can hear the lawsuits being filed already over these proposed changes. So much unconstitutional overreach here it's surreal.

[Dresderstan]

And that's about it.

Good lord, I can hear the lawsuits being filed already over these proposed changes. So much unconstitutional overreach here it's surreal.

I'd wait until the gunshots in DC start to pour out and the sounds of war and revolution swing across the capital.

[Paddy O Fernature]

And that's about it.

Good lord, I can hear the lawsuits being filed already over these proposed changes. So much unconstitutional overreach here it's surreal.

I'd wait until the gunshots in DC start to pour out and the sounds of war and revolution swing across the capital.

To be fair, all I heard were sirens in the background during most of that live feed.

Also.. Wh.Gov had 416 likes and over 9k dislikes before being cut off mid stream.

So much for transparency.

[Grinning Dragon]

And that's about it.

Good lord, I can hear the lawsuits being filed already over these proposed changes. So much unconstitutional overreach here it's surreal.

Well when you are surrounded by men who are armed it's pretty easy to shit all over constitutional rights over those who cannot afford protection.

[Miku the Based]

just a bunch of white supremacists could be grounds for a lawsuit (assuming the accuser can prove they are not a bunch of white supremacists)

So guilty until proven innocent? I'm unfamiliar with civil lawsuits and don't know what it takes to be successful for a anti-defamation lawsuit.

[Washington Resistance Army]

And just like that, the Republicans have secured the House in the midterms.

[Kernen]

So far.. in a nutshell....

1: Kits to manufacture firearms now fall under the GCA and require both serial numbers, BGC's, and such before they can be bought or sold.
2: Online Sales of firearms (including BP) and ammunition now fall under the GCA and require a FFL transfer.
3: Pistol braces now fall under the NFA and require a $200 tax stamp.
4: Red Flag Law is now Federal/National and have been expanded so that even a friend that knows you can report you know.

And he is now taking about suicide prevention among blacks in America.... no clue where he is going with it.

Hmm, 1-4 is some serious over reach, which requires congress' action.

I'm not sure that 3 is, legally, a violation of the separation of powers. The ATF has enough leeway on that to skate by, and Biden can tell the ATF what to do, effectively.

I don't know enough about how the red flag laws operate federally to comment.

1 and 2 sound like they bump against the statutes and not ATF rules, so they are pretty suspect.

[The Two Jerseys]

I'd wait until the gunshots in DC start to pour out and the sounds of war and revolution swing across the capital.

To be fair, all I heard were sirens in the background during most of that live feed.

Also.. Wh.Gov had 416 likes and over 9k dislikes before being cut off mid stream.

So much for transparency.

Silly Paddy, it's only wrong when Republicans hide negative feedback!

[Kernen]

And that's about it.

Good lord, I can hear the lawsuits being filed already over these proposed changes. So much unconstitutional overreach here it's surreal.

I'd wait until the gunshots in DC start to pour out and the sounds of war and revolution swing across the capital.

That seems vanishingly unlikely.

[Dresderstan]

And just like that, the Republicans have secured the House in the midterms.

God it's like the Dems want the GOP to win, they're that incompetent. Hope the military and it's generals execute order 66 on this godforsaken waste of a government, I'd sooner choose a military junta/dictatorship over such inebriated fuckhounds in power.

[Grinning Dragon]

Hmm, 1-4 is some serious over reach, which requires congress' action.

I'm not sure that 3 is, legally, a violation of the separation of powers. The ATF has enough leeway on that to skate by, and Biden can tell the ATF what to do, effectively.

I don't know enough about how the red flag laws operate federally to comment.

1 and 2 sound like they bump against the statutes and not ATF rules, so they are pretty suspect.

After thinking about #3, I came the conclusion that they could be reworked as SBRs.
1. doesn't even come close to the definition of a firearm as defined in the GCA and if anything is going to rebrand 80% as 79% and perhaps a reduction on parts in a kit where it would require an additional purchase of separate kit instead of just one.
2. As far as I can recollect, there isn't anything about ffl transfers and background checks for ammo in the gca68, so I don't understand how ammo in this sense would fall under the gca, let alone be able to withstand a challenge. IRC, the gca does deal with ammo manufacturer, ammo importer, age restrictions on purchase of some types of ammo, sale/possession of ammo by prohibited persons.
4. is just another "take the guns first, then due process"

[Window Land]

just a bunch of white supremacists could be grounds for a lawsuit (assuming the accuser can prove they are not a bunch of white supremacists)

So guilty until proven innocent? I'm unfamiliar with civil lawsuits and don't know what it takes to be successful for a anti-defamation lawsuit.

No, it wouldn't be guilty until proven innocent. The burden of proof is still on the accuser in a civil suit, and in this case, the accuser would be the one who has been slandered. One of the parts of proving you have been wronged is proving that the slander is false. This means that if you were suing based on the fact that someone called you a white supremacist one of the first steps would be proving that you weren't a white supremacist.

[Kernen]

I'm not sure that 3 is, legally, a violation of the separation of powers. The ATF has enough leeway on that to skate by, and Biden can tell the ATF what to do, effectively.

I don't know enough about how the red flag laws operate federally to comment.

1 and 2 sound like they bump against the statutes and not ATF rules, so they are pretty suspect.

After thinking about #3, I came the conclusion that they could be reworked as SBRs.
1. doesn't even come close to the definition of a firearm as defined in the GCA and if anything is going to rebrand 80% as 79% and perhaps a reduction on parts in a kit where it would require an additional purchase of separate kit instead of just one.
2. As far as I can recollect, there isn't anything about ffl transfers and background checks for ammo in the gca68, so I don't understand how ammo in this sense would fall under the gca, let alone be able to withstand a challenge. IRC, the gca does deal with ammo manufacturer, ammo importer, age restrictions on purchase of some types of ammo, sale/possession of ammo by prohibited persons.
4. is just another "take the guns first, then due process"

I mean, I agree with you on 2 & 4.

I think I've noted before how red flag laws are not prima facie illegal under the constitution, but it is affording due process after the fact. That's just not always illegal.

1 is going to be interesting. I'm fairly sure the feds can treat assembly of a lower receiver as manufacturing a firearm. I wonder if they can allow sale but require the end user to serialize it. Otherwise, you're right. I'm not sure how you can ban the sale of kits without banning the sale of the composite parts.

[Grinning Dragon]

After thinking about #3, I came the conclusion that they could be reworked as SBRs.
1. doesn't even come close to the definition of a firearm as defined in the GCA and if anything is going to rebrand 80% as 79% and perhaps a reduction on parts in a kit where it would require an additional purchase of separate kit instead of just one.
2. As far as I can recollect, there isn't anything about ffl transfers and background checks for ammo in the gca68, so I don't understand how ammo in this sense would fall under the gca, let alone be able to withstand a challenge. IRC, the gca does deal with ammo manufacturer, ammo importer, age restrictions on purchase of some types of ammo, sale/possession of ammo by prohibited persons.
4. is just another "take the guns first, then due process"

I mean, I agree with you on 2 & 4.

I think I've noted before how red flag laws are not prima facie illegal under the constitution, but it is affording due process after the fact. That's just not always illegal.

1 is going to be interesting. I'm fairly sure the feds can treat assembly of a lower receiver as manufacturing a firearm. I wonder if they can allow sale but require the end user to serialize it. Otherwise, you're right. I'm not sure how you can ban the sale of kits without banning the sale of the composite parts.

Manufacturing is also defined in the gca as one who is in the business to turn a profit. Seeing as how home built firearms aren't for profit but for personal use, that is going to be a tough sell, let alone home built firearms are defined also in law as a legal activity.
Then we have the issue of table top CNC machines becoming more and more affordable and efficient enough that I foresee a time when a person just goes and buys aluminum stock and CNC a lower completely bypassing the 80% route. What then, all aluminum bar stock will need to be serialized and subject to a bgc?

[Paddy O Fernature]

I mean, I agree with you on 2 & 4.

I think I've noted before how red flag laws are not prima facie illegal under the constitution, but it is affording due process after the fact. That's just not always illegal.

1 is going to be interesting. I'm fairly sure the feds can treat assembly of a lower receiver as manufacturing a firearm. I wonder if they can allow sale but require the end user to serialize it. Otherwise, you're right. I'm not sure how you can ban the sale of kits without banning the sale of the composite parts.

Manufacturing is also defined in the gca as one who is in the business to turn a profit. Seeing as how home built firearms aren't for profit but for personal use, that is going to be a tough sell, let alone home built firearms are defined also in law as a legal activity.
Then we have the issue of table top CNC machines becoming more and more affordable and efficient enough that I foresee a time when a person just goes and buys aluminum stock and CNC a lower completely bypassing the 80% route. What then, all aluminum bar stock will need to be serialized and subject to a bgc?

My take while listening to his speech was that he was going to try and regulate the actual kits themselves thus making them harder to acquire and thus hindering people actually being able to build anything with them in the future.

Though in full disclosure I could be wrong, as listening to Biden stumble through speech is an exercise in patience in of itself.

To be fair, all I heard were sirens in the background during most of that live feed.

Also.. Wh.Gov had 416 likes and over 9k dislikes before being cut off mid stream.

So much for transparency.

Silly Paddy, it's only wrong when Republicans hide negative feedback!

And to think there are still people who deny that the left is censoring media across multiple platforms and in the same breath call the right fascist.

[Grinning Dragon]

Manufacturing is also defined in the gca as one who is in the business to turn a profit. Seeing as how home built firearms aren't for profit but for personal use, that is going to be a tough sell, let alone home built firearms are defined also in law as a legal activity.
Then we have the issue of table top CNC machines becoming more and more affordable and efficient enough that I foresee a time when a person just goes and buys aluminum stock and CNC a lower completely bypassing the 80% route. What then, all aluminum bar stock will need to be serialized and subject to a bgc?

My take while listening to his speech was that he was going to try and regulate the actual kits themselves thus making them harder to acquire and thus hindering people actually being able to build anything with them in the future.

Though in full disclosure I could be wrong, as listening to Biden stumble through speech is an exercise in patience in of itself.

Silly Paddy, it's only wrong when Republicans hide negative feedback!

And to think there are still people who deny that the left is censoring media across multiple platforms and in the same breath call the right fascist.

It still baffles me in how a build kit is a firearm when it clearly isn't. If I remember correctly the BATFe(ARBF) jackbooted cunts, went after a company that sold build kits and declared that kit a "readily complete firearm" when it clearly wasn't. If readily complete means spending hours drilling and milling out the fire control, then final polish of the metal, then assembling the components to complete the lower.
I can also say with certainty that after dipshit's porky pig stammering today, 80% pieces are probably all but impossible to buy online as people went on a buying frenzy.

[Grinning Dragon]

Some good news for the day.
NRA-backed Constitutional Carry Signed in Tennessee

[Adamede]

AWB!

THE FUCKER IS PROPOSING AN AWB!

Also abolishing gun manufacturer protections as well!

I’ve still yet to see a good explanation of how an AWB will make anyone safer.

[The Chuck]

So. On a related topic to recent happenings, what are all of your folks thoughts on 3D printed firearms technology? I GHR'd this topic a bit back to see what I could and couldn't bring up and it was ok'd to discuss stuff without actually linking to it. For me, I was primarily interested by the development of 3D printed swift links and resin/filament printed suppressors. Both of which are categorized as NFA items as many of you know. What does this mean for the future of the argument and battle over firearms and firearms technology control and what does it mean on the law aspect regarding lawsuits being tossed back and forth by developers of these items and proponents of gun control?

WRA, I'm looking more at you since you've made mention in the past regarding working with 3D printed technology. Thanks in advance for your input.

[Galloism]

So. On a related topic to recent happenings, what are all of your folks thoughts on 3D printed firearms technology? I GHR'd this topic a bit back to see what I could and couldn't bring up and it was ok'd to discuss stuff without actually linking to it. For me, I was primarily interested by the development of 3D printed swift links and resin/filament printed suppressors. Both of which are categorized as NFA items as many of you know. What does this mean for the future of the argument and battle over firearms and firearms technology control and what does it mean on the law aspect regarding lawsuits being tossed back and forth by developers of these items and proponents of gun control?

WRA, I'm looking more at you since you've made mention in the past regarding working with 3D printed technology. Thanks in advance for your input.

I watched a documentary on this, where they interviewed a guy in "Western Europe" (even voice masked we recognized his accent, but I'll leave it at that). In his country, guns are banned basically wholesale.

He was talking about his FGC-9, which he printed basically all of besides a few off the shelf metal pieces and springs you can buy at any hardware store.

Let's just say the "Fuck Gun Control 9" is aptly named. How do you control guns when everyone can just start printing them?

[Pax Nerdvana]

AWB!

THE FUCKER IS PROPOSING AN AWB!

Also abolishing gun manufacturer protections as well!

I’ve still yet to see a good explanation of how an AWB will make anyone safer.

It will do jack. Criminals will still get guns, probably from South America.

So. On a related topic to recent happenings, what are all of your folks thoughts on 3D printed firearms technology? I GHR'd this topic a bit back to see what I could and couldn't bring up and it was ok'd to discuss stuff without actually linking to it. For me, I was primarily interested by the development of 3D printed swift links and resin/filament printed suppressors. Both of which are categorized as NFA items as many of you know. What does this mean for the future of the argument and battle over firearms and firearms technology control and what does it mean on the law aspect regarding lawsuits being tossed back and forth by developers of these items and proponents of gun control?

WRA, I'm looking more at you since you've made mention in the past regarding working with 3D printed technology. Thanks in advance for your input.

I watched a documentary on this, where they interviewed a guy in "Western Europe" (even voice masked we recognized his accent, but I'll leave it at that). In his country, guns are banned basically wholesale.

He was talking about his FGC-9, which he printed basically all of besides a few off the shelf metal pieces and springs you can buy at any hardware store.

Let's just say the "Fuck Gun Control 9" is aptly named. How do you control guns when everyone can just start printing them?

They can’t stop it. All those files are already out there, and that’s a good thing. Once something’s on the internet, it’s there forever.

[Grinning Dragon]

AWB!

THE FUCKER IS PROPOSING AN AWB!

Also abolishing gun manufacturer protections as well!

I’ve still yet to see a good explanation of how an AWB will make anyone safer.

It won't. Then again, dipshit stood up there telling one bold face lie after another and without the media questioning his lies, he can make it seem it will work this time, when dipshit knows the whole time its just another fucking lie.