|
|
|
NOTE!
This is a real-time comments system. As such, it's also a
free speech zone within guidelines set forth on the Post
Comments page. Opinions expressed here may or may not
reflect those of KeepAndBearArms staff, members, or
any other living person besides the one who posted them.
Please keep that in mind. We ask that all who post
comments assure that they adhere to our Inclusion
Policy, but there's a bad apple in every
bunch, and we have no control over bigots and
other small-minded people. Thank you. --KeepAndBearArms.com
|
The
Below Comments Relate to this Newslink:
'Ghost gun' crackdown proposal issued by Department of Justice
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
For the first time since 1968, the Department of Justice's Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives is seeking to update the legal definition of firearm in an effort to crack down on "ghost guns."
The proposed rule seeks to redefine "frame or receiver" as well as classify more firearm kits as "complete" firearms, making them subject to more regulation and oversight. It also seeks to legally define terms such as "complete muffler or silencer device" as well as "privately made firearms." |
| Comment by:
PHORTO
(5/8/2021)
|
The only constitutional approach to home made guns in general, and "ghost guns" in particular, is heavier penalties when they are used to commit a crime.
The rationale that the reg's purpose is to keep criminals from making them by invoking prior restraint fails constitutional muster.
What statists (and Democrats almost exclusively) reject is the principle that the government has no legitimate power to attenuate natural rights of peaceable people who have no criminal or mental history, based on the mere possibility that some 'might' use those rights to commit crimes. |
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| "Some people think that the Second Amendment is an outdated relic of an earlier time. Doubtless some also think that constitutional protections of other rights are outdated relics of earlier times. We The People own those rights regardless, unless and until We The People repeal them. For those who believe it to be outdated, the Second Amendment provides a good test of whether their allegiance is really to the Constitution of the United States, or only to their preferences in public policies and audiences. The Constitution is law, not vague aspirations, and we are obligated to protect, defend, and apply it. If the Second Amendment were truly an outdated relic, the Constitution provides a method for repeal. The Constitution does not furnish the federal courts with an eraser." --9th Circuit Court Judge Andrew Kleinfeld, dissenting opinion in which the court refused to rehear the case while citing deeply flawed anti-Second Amendment nonsense (Nordyke v. King; opinion filed April 5, 2004) |
|
|
