California school shooting shines light on murky 'ghost gun' world
reuters.com
reuters.com
Anyways, literally the first sentence of the article is false[1]. Self-made firearms in California are required to have a serial number, must be put into the state registry (a somewhat byzantine process), and are illegal to resell[2]. In other words, the gun is either legal OR untraceable. It can't be both at the same time.
[1]: https://oag.ca.gov/system/files/attachments/press-docs/consu...
[2]: For ones manufactured after 2018, your family can't even inherit them when you die— they have to be surrendered to the police for destruction. If you have a relative you really don't like, you should definitely bequeath them your homemade guns— there's a non-zero chance they'll end up in prison for possession.
I believe OP is right, though I’m not a resident of CA: you can have a non-functional piece of metal or a registered functional “firearm” (which the feds say is the lower). A functional, unregistered lower would be against CA law.
In other states, like neighboring AZ, there’s no issue purchasing an unregistered, non-functional lower, finishing it into a functional piece, and then using it for private use (including non-commercial sale).
In California you need the state DOJ's permission to mill an 80% lower, then they give you a serial number that you have to engrave on it within 10 days.
Other states have different laws. Some are similar to CA but most are less restrictive. There are places where it is true to say that "Such firearms have no serial numbers, and ... legally bypass background checks and registration regulations." But the author is conflating the national laws with the laws for manufacturing in California (without mentioning that what happened in California is actually multiple felonies). It's either ignorant, unintentionally misleading, or pushing a narrative.
I'm a writer. I'm dirt poor. I can't get adequate funding for my blogs. When I complain about my poverty, I get told to "get a real job." When I point out the rise of the Gig Economy and the fact that we have worse income inequality than in The Gilded Age, people mumble some other bullshit excuse and refuse to hear that these supposed (well paid) "real jobs" are in rather short supply, so, no, it's not laziness on my part.
It's a broken model. If we want quality writing, we need to find some way to pay writers for their work so they can fact check and spell check etc.
I'm not sure what can be done about this, ultimately, short of turning society in to a completely totalitarian surveillance state where everyone's actions are fully monitored and controlled by the state and there is effectively no privacy.
Those who are trying to control technology are fighting a losing battle.
I disagree with your worldview in this case, but want to let you know that I respect you for having a well formed and reasonably consistent opinion. I only wish that everyone else who voted took the time to think things through half so thoroughly - the world would likely be a much more functional place.
Illogical. Gun ownership is truely a significant part of the problem. Countries with low gun ownership rates have measurably low rates of deaths by guns. Your meme needs to be eradicated.
"Among developed nations, the US is far and away the most homicidal — in large part due to the easy access many Americans have to firearms." — https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/10/2/16399418/u...
Additionally, the international comparisons ignore the fact that the US, like the rest of the new world, has long had higher homicide rates than Europe, even before gun control and even back when guns were prevalent in Europe.
About 43% of American households own a gun. Norway, France, and Canada are all above 25%. Finland is at 50%. https://www.ippnw.org/pdf/mgs/7-1-cukier.pdf. Articles like those on Vox tend to focus on number of guns (Americans tend to stockpile them), but the figures for percentage of households with access to a gun aren’t as radically different in the US as in some other countries.
But homicide rates in the US are radically different, and always have been. The homicide rate in France has been 1 per 100,000 or less since the 1940s. The lowest the homicide rate in the US has ever been is 4-5x higher than that.
If there were no guns in the US, there would be zero gun homicides.
Therefore guns are part of the problem.
Any statement that says guns are not part of the problem must be incorrect.
If there was no food or water in the US then there would also be zero gun homicides. Food and water are obviously not a cause or related to a problem but the logic is exactly the same.
However, there is a vast difference between having to fire up a lathe and machine a barrel vs putting together a kit of a half-dozen or so primary parts.
By analogy, most people can put together a computer. Only a very few can actually design and manufacture a motherboard even though it is relatively cheap to do so nowadays.
In addition, most people who are going to go on a shooting rampage probably don't have the skills to operate a lathe or milling machine.
I used to be mildly frustrated that my civil rights were being eroded but it was largely an abstract issue. Now, I increasingly wonder how we're going to cope with significantly more accessible and capable technology. It doesn't seem like anyone is putting much effort into discovering or addressing the underlying causes from where I'm standing; I don't see how this can end well.
I don't buy this.
The "average" homicidal person generally isn't that capable. And everything you mentioned requires at least above average skill levels in quite a few different areas.
Yes, a smart homicidal maniac may have a lot more options, but most homicidal people simply aren't that smart.
This stuff isn’t rocket science.
The shooter in the article probably built a 1911 from an 80% kit and the kits are getting easier to finish. The virginia tech shooter used two pistols I believe.
Just stating that some pistol kits are very easy to finish as opposed to an ar/ak
The ATF raided some shop in CA specializing in polymer lowers. Claimed they were too easy to finish, though they still met the 80% standard.
"Infringed" can certainly be read as any process that gets in the way of gun purchasing.
[0] Except in cases where you have a CCW (which you go through a background check to get already), a purchase permit (many states require a check from the sherrif or similar office before buying a handgun) or some other similar stand in that does something significantly similar to the NICS checks.
It’s not a “maximalist” interpretation. With nearly any other federal right, we’d agree that maintaining a registry of people exercising that right would impermissibly create a chilling effect. You can be a member of a minority religion, but only if you place yourself on a registry! You can exercise freedom of speech or assembly, but only if you put yourself on a registry. It’s not maximalist, it’s giving an enumerated constitutional right a full and fair reading.[1]
I do agree that the existing precedent in the area has been impoverished. The Supreme Court has important work to do correcting that.
[1] The framers were gun nuts and would have been troubled by the decline of gun ownership. The idea that you have a civic duty to own firearms would be closer to the original intent than the idea that the government can limit gun ownership to formal militias.
> Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed, as they are in almost every country in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops. – Noah Webster, An Examination of the Leading Principles of the Federal Constitution, October 10, 1787
The US doesn’t keep registries of religious buildings either. There’s obviously titles and whatnot for buildings. But it would likely be deemed a constitutional violation to require registration of every place that would be used to hold religious services. Some in Germany have proposed a “mosque registry”: https://www.dw.com/en/german-politician-wants-islam-law-and-....
A much more accurate analogy might be a registry for religious paraphernalia (crosses, rosaries, etc), including information about the purchaser. Such items are tied to an individual, and thus serve as a very effective proxy.