Unmarked assault rifle sales land CNC-mill gunsmith in prison

boing
131

No, most guns aren’t registered. And like I said, those areas with registration are getting them from the outside. Just like Mexico, which has very strict gun laws and some horrible violence with cartels and street gangs.

I think it has more to do with the fact that owning a weapons (gun, knife, bat, sword, car) doesn’t make one more prevalent to committing a crime. If you magically took all the guns away over night, people would still be committing crimes and hurting each other (though I concede possibly less effectively). Just like focusing on the DRUGS isn’t the right method focusing on America’s Drug Problem, I think our efforts are better spent elsewhere to lower crime (which is down dramatically since the 90s with no sweeping reform.)

A market, sure. But criminals aren’t actually using them for crimes. There isn’t evidence of people doing that and then selling to criminals (which IS illegal). If you can find an 80% lower being turned into a functional lower and then used in a crime, you found the needle in the haystack, but why are we focusing on something that NEVER HAPPENS?

And again, even in CA one can buy an AR or just a lower legally with a hassle, but little actual effort. The problem though with all this records and shit is - it doesn’t matter. The criminals go around what ever system you have. And the system we do have we don’t enforce worth shit. 80,000 people a year are DENIED a gun because of the checks we do have in place. Yet there are nearly no arrests and convictions tied to that number. If you want to investigate people owning guns illegally, it seems to me that right there would be a great place to start. (Note not EVERYONE denied deserves jail time, but perhaps say an ex-felon trying to buy a gun warrants looking in to.)

2 Likes
132

I think you and I pretty much agree in reality. ARs aren’t a significant problem. My point is that if someone can make money machining ARs that have no serial, he will almost inevitably branch into making pistols with no serial.

My point with the system of running transactions through FFLs is to threaten straw buyers, and get background checks into more person-to-person transaction. Those are two vectors for guns going from legal ownership to illegal ownership.

The other vector is stolen firearms, and I’m not sure what to do about that. There aren’t solid data for it, but I saw some estimates from law enforcement sources that between 40% and 60% of the firearms used in crimes are stolen.

2 Likes
133

This is small potatoes. What’s needed is a service that converts an 80 percent lower into a class iii lower.

134

They can’t. Not legally. Serial numbers have been required since I think the Gun Control Act of '68. What that guy was doing was illegal, hence why he is in trouble. The exception is that home hobbyist can make them with out, but hey can’t sell them.

A stolen firearm is a stolen firearm. It is irrelevant if you don’t have a number on it, other than good luck getting it back if ever found.

Background checks for private sales most likely won’t do anything for crime either. Would you sell to a squirrely stranger with meth sores? If so, I don’t think a law requiring you to go through an FFL would be something you would bother to follow.

1 Like
135

That would surely depend on intention.
If you were to write a general countdown timer routine, no problem.
But if you were to write it and knowingly supply it to someone who was, say, going to use it to program a microcontroller to detonate an IED - I don’t know about US federal law but in many places it would be conspiracy to cause an explosion. Otherwise it would be possible to create a chain of events designed to cause a disaster in which everybody who took part could avoid liability.

1 Like
136

It’s a chain:
People in Scotland eat such delicacies as haggis.
They drink Irn-Bru to take away the taste of the haggis.
They drink Buckfast Tonic Wine to remove the taste of the Irn-Bru.
Then they drink whisky to forget that they drank the Buckfast.

This reduces alcohol damage because before, they had to drink enough whisky to forget about the Irn-Bru.

3 Likes
137

The Second Amendment doesn’t specify anything about traceability, for or against, so it’s really a moot point. I personally would prefer that the government not know how many/which firearms I may or may not own, just as I would prefer they didn’t have my web browsing data, or health data, or phone call metadata, or whatever. If the information is out there, it will likely be abused.

1 Like
138

Yeah, my goal is to deter the people who would sell to the meth guy, whether they’re true straw buyers or just regular folks with low standards. And if we can’t deter them, we can convict them after the fact. Even if they don’t do prison time, that felony conviction will prevent them from legally purchasing a firearm in future. Like I said, my goal would be to prevent the transition of firearms from legal to illegal possession.

1 Like
139

I agree, but I think it should be possible to reduce the movement of firearms from legal ownership to illegal ownership. The serial numbers on the firearms could be used to do that without ever letting the government know who the actual owners are, unless the government can produce a search warrant.

1 Like
140

The point is you then have a traceable chain of transfers. If you have a break in that chain the last person on file better have a good reason. The straw purchasers could only report so many guns stolen or ‘fell off a boat’ before those excuses run thin.

3 Likes
141

They will just claim, “OH wow, he must have stolen it. I had it locked up in here.” Remember something like 40% of guns come from friends and family. Or they will just say, “I sold it to him, I didn’t realize he couldn’t have it.”

Granted, some times all of these are legit mistakes. But honestly, they don’t seem to pursue these people very hard (and given most gun crime is in poor minority neighborhoods, they get scrutinized a lot anyway.)

Though I do know the ATF does try to keep tabs on the small percentage of shady stores who sell under the table, as well as people who act as “armorers”. That is people with a clean record that will sell to people in the criminal network. I know people who are collectors who have been flagged for buying too much in a few months, and they stopped by for a visit. They also check on this to make sure you aren’t selling guns as an unlicensed business.

Again, I don’t think the problem is we aren’t “cracking down” enough. Look again at the war on drugs and how “cracking down” has done nothing. I think approaching the social ills that cause crime is the best avenue to ending it.

2 Likes
142

Many crime guns aren’t necessarily stolen guns, they are purchased by friends and family for criminals.

Doesn’t matter if the gun is registered if you don’t have it in hand to run a trace on the serial number.

3 Likes
143

That sounds ridiculous. You are saying that open source and open repositories are liable for making bombs if some snippet of their code is used related to a cool clock, or a sports timer, or a GPS reporting system?

1 Like
144

Sorry, did you read my post?

I was going to quote the relevant part, but you already have.

Is this in refutation to what I wrote? Because I’m pretty sure background checks on private sales would stop this one.

You’re right. I worked in a shop for over five years and held the FFL for three of them. There are, in this state, a hell of a lot of unlicensed dealers operating under “private sales.” I would see my customers at gun shows with tables selling firearms I knew they had bought that week, I would see the adds in the newspaper for guns they had on layaway. That shit got a call to FDLE & ATF every-time I saw it and usually came to… nothing. Why? My hunch was nobody took the transfers seriously, maybe it’s time to change that. But here’s the thing: once that firearm left my gun book and entered into the realm of private sales, one transaction out and it’s gone from the system.

I was a hard-case when it came to firearm transfers because it was my liberty and livelihood on the line; I gave no shits about cancelling a sale or pawn redemption the instant someone told me it was really their boyfriend’s, husband’s, whatever. Fudge box 11 a. on the form? No do-overs and that was getting attached to the whatever documentation I needed when I turned it over to, usually, the sheriff’s office. I think you would be surprised by how many people do these purchases thinking it’s not a big deal or get taken advantage of by a partner/spouse, and often are quite honest about what they’re doing because they don’t know to lie. These sales would get stopped.

Okay, but lets use it to go after these guys:

Seems like perhaps this is an issue, see above.

Want to point out to me where I said that, please?

100%.

@Mister44, you know I’m pro 2A but let’s not pretend putting a tourniquet on a severed leg is pointless because we haven’t gotten to the surgeon yet.

5 Likes
145

I drank some Buckfast’s once.

Made me a Satanist.

1 Like
146

I am saying exactly the opposite, that the essential ingredient is conspiracy, i.e. planning together. Responsibility starts at the point at which there is intention. General purpose computing is completely neutral in this regard.
I do wonder if you are deliberately misunderstanding me.

147

I agree with you, when i read your reply to bobtato, it wasn’t clear to me.

148

I am not sure because I get rushed at work typing. And some times my brain follows a line of thought prompted by someones response, but it isn’t a direct reply.

Yes, this would cut down on those types of sales, but I haven’t seen any evidence that type of sale happens very often. That is a clean and clear person with good intentions sells to someone who is prohibited. “Tricked” into it. I am sure it happens, but it is fairly easy to protect yourself from this. Several BST groups I was in even policed members and warned others if someone was shady.

I am sure there are many more sales or “lending” where the person KNOWS the other person can’t buy a gun normally. But I am not convinced if you are willing to straw purchase for you boy friend or cousin or buddy, that an extra law is going to make you stop doing what is already illegal.

That is the grey area for “what constitutes a business”. Selling and flipping guns can be a fun hobby, but if it is a business you need an FFL. There is no hard and fast rule about it, though. IIRC more people had FFLs and were known as “kitchen table” dealers, which allowed them to have things shipped directly to them. But in the 90s they wanted to do away with that and make it so you had to be a legit store front. I know people who are just rabid collectors who get flagged for too many guns in a month, and got a visit from the ATF to confirm they weren’t running a business. Though a lot of times those NEW purchase, vs used. Also many collectors do have a C&R license - curios and relics, allowing them to trade and sell older guns easier.

That is the way it should be, and I think most FFL holders take the task seriously.

I know there are some stores and pawn shops who are known for being lax on things, but I honestly don’t see how the ATF can’t enforce this better. That honestly seems like a great place to focus on.

Again, if you go out of state to buy a gun, and walk out the door with one, you’re breaking the law. I don’t see how a pawn store could sell to an out of state resident. If you go to a different state and see a screaming deal, you can by it, you have to have it shipped to an FFL in your state and run a background check. If it is a private person, most people will ask to see some sort of ID to confirm they are from their state. If they are out of state they would have to ship to an FFL (I think some states allow long gun exceptions, but in gun crime we are mostly talking handguns). Back when Facebook allowed sales, asking for a CCW card was pretty common. Anyone who doesn’t give a shit if you are from one state or another is already breaking the law and I don’t see how adding one more law is going to get them to stop. Especially when they are a minority of all private sales, I see it as extra “security” that doesn’t DO any actual good. (And as an aside, as far as “freaking out” over such a law, I’d disagree with it, but at least it is just a hassle and not a prohibition. But again, I don’t see it doing anything. Just like why I am against surveillance and laws that invade privacy.)

You didn’t, but when it comes to this topic, I think too many people think this is just a matter of one or two “common sense” laws to make America safer (though we are still on a down ward trend crime wise, despite the Orwellian politics telling use danger is behind every corner.)

But I did want to expand on my statement in general (not direct reply to you). I think many people think we need to get “tougher” on gun crime. I agree that it seems like law enforcement doesn’t have it as a #1 priority to hound out people breaking the law. But I also have to ask, do we really want that or at what level is “acceptable”? I mean things like Stop and Frisk were made in part to take weapons off the street. Let’s be honest, that did have SOME effect in that respect. At the same time, it was a horrible program violating the rights of many Americans and unfairly targeted minorities.

I am already treated like a criminal with the drugs I need, it’s annoying to be treated that way with weapons or flying or privacy on my computer/phone etc too.

149

Any idiot with a drill press can do an AR, given enough practice. And any 12 year old with a file can make a single shot zip gun type pistol. Making a reliable semi pistol is much harder. The problem is that the criminals, if they start manufacturing, will almost always make submachineguns. This one is from Argentina:

567257improguns.jpg900×506 149 KB

As I see it, when there are large amounts of money involved, and a demand for product, some person is going to take the cash. I know several people that have the skills to become Heisenberg-type manufacturers of illegal guns (and not the garbage in the image above), but they are super honest, law abiding people. But if there is demand, money to pay, and a willingness to break the law, criminals are going to get guns. They do the straw purchase or stolen gun thing now, because it is their easiest and cheapest option. But if we cut off those supplies somehow, they just switch to importation or manufacture.

150

because guns can be build by professionals it is bad to block easier supply channels? the argument “but the criminals will get weapons anyway” when it comes to more regulation sounded always hollow to me

4 Likes