|
|
|
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 |
| I do believe that where there is a choice only between cowardice and violence, I would advise violence. Thus when my eldest son asked me what he should have done had he been present when I was almost fatally assaulted in 1908 [by an Indian extremist opposed to Gandhi's agreement with Smuts], whether he should have run away and seen me killed or whether he should have used his physical force which he could and wanted to use, and defend me, I told him it was his duty to defend me even by using violence. Hence it was that I took part in the Boer War, the so-called Zulu Rebellion and [World War I]. Hence also do I advocate training in arms for those who believe in the method of violence. I would rather have India resort to arms in order to defend her honor than that she should in a cowardly manner become or remain a helpless witness to her own dishonor. — Mohandas K. Gandhi, Young India, August 11, 1920 from Fischer, Louis ed.,The Essential Gandhi, 1962 |
|
|
