The US Supreme Court on Monday barred two Texas-based manufacturers from selling products that can be quickly converted at home into firearms called “ghost guns”, granting a request by Joe Biden’s administration to once again block a federal judge’s order that had sided with companies.
The justices lifted Fort Worth-based judge Reed O’Connor’s 14 September injunction barring enforcement of a 2022 federal regulation – a rule aimed at reining in the privately made firearms – against the two manufacturers, Blackhawk Manufacturing and Defense Distributed.
Brit here. I have a couple of questions:
- If they aren’t firearms, then what are they sold as? Replicas?
- If they aren’t sold as weapons, does that mean someone could import one into my own country?
(I have no intention of doing this, in case this triggers some GCHQ bot and my home ends up like Waco but without all the tiddies)
.
Wow what a detailed, well-written and fascinating response. Thank you for writing that, I thoroughly enjoyed reading it.
It would almost be worth putting #2 to the test, just to see what would happen. As you mention it would be a legal minefield.
Interestingly (and I guess this is the same in the US?), it’s illegal to open someone else’s mail. For sure Law Enforcement could get around that, but they would need a court warrant and you’d have to pity the judge whose desk that landed on.
The law states:
84 Interfering with the mail: general
A person commits an offence if, without reasonable excuse, he—
intentionally delays or opens a postal packet in the course of its transmission by post, or intentionally opens a mail-bag.
I think that if the package was innocuous (i.e. didn’t have <b>Jeff’s Gun’s By Post </b> emblazoned on it with a drawing of a strutting Texan blowing the smoke from his revolver), then it could be tough to find “reasonable excuse" to open the package.
Joking aside, if the recipient was a known member of forums promoting hatred or violence then it could be considered reasonable to make at least a cursory examination based on “why was this package received from from there?”.
It’s legislation with good solid intent (IMHO), but it’s so vague that it can’t cover everything.
Nor yet anyway.
As we come from different nations, our feelings on the matter may differ and I don’t really want to discuss that. But thank you, you’ve made it easier to understand the context.
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
-
They can sell parts of a firearm, for instance something like an 80% lower, that may not be regulated the same way as an assembled firearm. They can also sell files if they wished, to print or mill firearm parts.
-
Still depends on UK laws, sorry I’m not familiar with them past (at least I think) the full ban of handguns.
So for UK firearms, you are allowed them for very specific purposes and can’t ever use it outside of those purposes. You have to make your case and get a license before you can buy a gun more powerful than an air rifle/pistol. You can’t carry in public, even concealed.
UK law doesn’t recognise the concept of defensive weapons, so if you use one, even in self defense, and you don’t have any legal context for carrying the gun in the first place, you’re fuuuuucked.
-
I really thought American learned that banning things just makes a black market.
They did, it creates lucrative and profitable enterprises which is why they keep doing it. Oh wait did you mean this as a bad thing? lol
Guess I’ll see you again when they catch a dude printing Glock switches and ar lowers 🙄
Meh they’re not banning firearms just this one method of making them and this market is already somewhat of a black market considering they’re trying to skirt around the laws of the regulated traditional market.
If they prevent these kits from being sold people are just going to get them further outside legal means to get them. Punishing someone harder for the same crime doesn’t fix the issue. It just makes people bitter.
Hell “ghost guns” aren’t even the issue. Allowing charlatans to have whole news stations with no regulations besides being sued is probably the real issue but we’ll sooner solve that issue then the gun violence issue.
That’s how laws work. They make something illegal. You have to break the law to do it. You get punished.
Nobody thinks outlawing something will completely end it. But it will make it duck back into its hole and sometimes that the best we can do.
The supreme court has been corrupted by rich plutocrats.
Somebody is not getting their cut, otherwise the SC wouldn’t block this.
deleted by creator
It has, and yet this specific case they’re siding against the powerful corporate interests.
Likely siding with other corporate interests.
and yet this specific case they’re siding against the powerful corporate interests.
No they’re not. Disarming the populace is the epitome of siding with the rich and powerful.
These are no name companies. Nowhere near big enough to win the government’s favour
They are siding with common sense on this one. We cannot have a society in which anyone can make as many guns as they want in their home with no oversight or accountability. Call it however you want, this stuff is never going to be legal.
We cannot have a society in which anyone can make as many guns as they want in their home with no oversight or accountability
I hate to break it to you, but that’s always been possible. Guns are not very complicated, and are well within the capability of a DIYer with a $500 small lathe.
I think you know that’s not the same thing.
