Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 16 submissions in the queue.
posted by Fnord666 on Friday February 17 2017, @11:19PM   Printer-friendly [Skip to comment(s)]
from the courts-aren't-buying-it dept.

It's still illegal to manufacture firearms for others without a license.

A Sacramento, California man was sentenced Thursday to over three years in prison for unlawful manufacture of a firearm and one count of dealing firearms.

Last year, Daniel Crownshield, pleaded guilty to those counts in exchange for federal prosecutors dropping other charges. According to investigators, Crowninshield, known online as "Dr. Death," would sell unfinished AR-15 lower receivers, which customers would then pay for him to transform into fully machined lower receivers using a computer numerically controlled (CNC) mill. (In October 2014, Cody Wilson, of Austin, Texas, who has pioneered 3D-printed guns, began selling a CNC mill called "Ghost Gunner," designed to work specifically on the AR-15 lower.)

"In order to create the pretext that the individual in such a scenario was building his or her own firearm, the skilled machinist would often have the individual press a button or put his or her hands on a piece of machinery so that the individual could claim that the individual, rather than the machinist, made the firearm," the government claimed in its April 14 plea agreement.

So, if he taught a class in how to do it would he also then be a criminal?


Original Submission

Related Stories

Ghost Gunner Software Update Allows the Milling of an M1911 Handgun 91 comments

The Ghost Gunner has been updated to allow the CNC milling of a much more popular and accessible form of firearm: a handgun:

For the past five years, Cody Wilson has applied every possible advance in digital manufacturing technology to the mission of undermining government attempts at gun control. First he created the world's first 3-D printed gun, a deadly plastic weapon anyone could print at home with a download and a few clicks. Then he started selling a computer-controlled milling machine designed to let anyone automatically carve out the body of an untraceable AR-15 from a semifinished chunk of aluminum, upgrading his provocations from plastic to metal. Now his latest advance in home firearm fabrication allows anyone to make an object designed to defy the most basic essence of gun control: A concealable, untraceable, and entirely unregulated metal handgun.

On Sunday, Wilson's gun rights advocacy group, Defense Distributed, announced a new release of software for his computer-controlled milling machine known as the Ghost Gunner. The new code allows the 1-foot-cubed tabletop machine—which uses a spinning bit to carve three-dimensional shapes with minute precision—to not only produce untraceable bodies of AR-15s but to carve out the aluminum frame of an M1911 handgun, the popular class of semiautomatic pistols that includes the Colt 45 and similar weapons. Wilson says he plans to follow up soon with software for producing regulation-free Glocks and other handgun models to follow.

Wilson's goal now, he says, is to do for small arms what Defense Distributed did for AR-15s when it first released the $1,500 Ghost Gunner milling machine exactly three years ago to the day: Give people the ability to make a lethal weapon at home with no regulation whatsoever.

M1911 pistol.

This story came out before the mass shooting in Las Vegas, on the third anniversary of the initial release of the Ghost Gunner, just in case you were wondering.

Also at Ars Technica:

"It's a certain type of person who builds and enjoys an AR-15—that's a lot of gun, and most people don't feel the need to have a big ol' battle rifle," Wilson says. "But we believe lots of people are interested in the conversation about an untraceable, concealable handgun. It's been on the roadmap the whole time for this project. It's just always been a question of how we get there, and it ended up being very, very difficult—kinda like the brass ring of the project, if you will."

Previously: FedEx Refuses to Ship Defense Distributed's Ghost Gunner CNC Mill
Man Who Used CNC Mill to Manufacture AR-15 "Lowers" Sentenced to 41 Months


Original Submission

[Updated] Defense Distributed Releasing Gun Plans, President Trump "Looking Into" It 76 comments

Trump says public availability of 3D-printed guns 'doesn't seem to make much sense'

President Donald Trump said Tuesday that he is "looking into" the availability of plans for the 3D printing of guns, writing on Twitter that he had already been in touch with the NRA on the issue.

"I am looking into 3-D Plastic Guns being sold to the public. Already spoke to NRA, doesn't seem to make much sense!" the president wrote on Twitter Tuesday morning.

After a years-long legal battle, Defense Distributed, a Texas-based group, has announced plans to release instructions on Wednesday for guns that can be created by a 3-D printer, including a handgun and parts for a semi-automatic assault rifle. Although plans were not supposed to be available until Wednesday, instructions have already begun to appear online for download, CNN reported Tuesday.

Landmark Legal Shift for 3D-Printed Guns 92 comments

For those in the US with a combined interest in 3D-Printers, intersections of the 1st and 2nd Amendments, and legal precedents; Cody Wilson has been fighting the US Government for half a decade.

Short version: after Wilson uploaded his 3D pistol plans to his site, over 100,000 people downloaded it - this drew the attention of the US authorities, who tried to use the International Trade in Arms Regulations (ITAR) to force a take-down.

The authorities argued that by posting the 3D printer plans for a firearm, Mr. Wilson was effectively exporting firearms, and subject to federal regulation. Eventually the Department of Justice dropped the case, paving the way for DIY'ers to publish such things freely.

The article cites 'promises' made by DoJ to move the regulations to another department.

Wired's article: A Landmark Legal Shift Opens Pandora's Box for DIY Guns (archive)

Related: The $1,200 Machine That Lets Anyone Make a Metal Gun at Home
Japanese Gun Printer Goes to Jail
Suspected 3D-Printed Gun Parts and Plastic Knuckles Seized in Australia
FedEx Refuses to Ship Defense Distributed's Ghost Gunner CNC Mill
Man Who Used CNC Mill to Manufacture AR-15 "Lowers" Sentenced to 41 Months
Ghost Gunner Software Update Allows the Milling of an M1911 Handgun


Original Submission

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by richtopia on Friday February 17 2017, @11:29PM

    by richtopia (3160) Subscriber Badge on Friday February 17 2017, @11:29PM (#468401) Homepage Journal

    Does anyone know what the law is in the USA? From the article it seems like any unlicensed manufacture of firearms is illegal. Given the gun culture in the USA I'm actually surprised by that, unless becoming licensed is as easy as buying a gun (a phone call for a fast background check).

    • (Score: 4, Informative) by richtopia on Friday February 17 2017, @11:42PM

      by richtopia (3160) Subscriber Badge on Friday February 17 2017, @11:42PM (#468406) Homepage Journal

      To try to answer my own question, it looks like manufacture is covered under the Federal Firearms License, which was created in response to the assassinations of the Bobby Kennedy and Martin Luther King, Jr. However the Wikipedia article reads as if it covers only businesses which manufacture/sell firearms, so I'm not sure if it would apply to an individual making a weapon for personal use.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_Control_Act_of_1968 [wikipedia.org]
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Firearms_License [wikipedia.org]

      • (Score: 2, Informative) by DaTrueDave on Friday February 17 2017, @11:47PM

        by DaTrueDave (3144) on Friday February 17 2017, @11:47PM (#468408)

        It's my understanding (recollection based on looking into this years ago) that no license is needed to make a firearm for yourself, but if you wish to transfer (sell) it, it has to be done through someone with a Federal Firearms License (FFL).

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 17 2017, @11:55PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 17 2017, @11:55PM (#468412)

          When you make a firearm, it does not get a serial number and it's illegal to sell. I'm sure you could pay the ATF ALOT of money and get it serialized but, it's usually not worth it. Only you can [legally] own that gun.

          • (Score: 2) by FakeBeldin on Saturday February 18 2017, @08:56AM

            by FakeBeldin (3360) on Saturday February 18 2017, @08:56AM (#468532) Journal

            Only you can [legally] own that gun.

            What happens after your passing away? The gun becomes de facto illegal?

            • (Score: 2) by linkdude64 on Saturday February 18 2017, @01:05PM

              by linkdude64 (5482) Subscriber Badge on Saturday February 18 2017, @01:05PM (#468571)

              I don't know, but to all the world it would look like a gun whose serial number was scratched off (i.e. it's a murder weapon), so you could either pretend that you made it yourself, or chop it into tiny pieces and scatter the bits into recycling bins over the course of a month or two. If you lived in California, I'd say it's not worth the risk, because this state is really like its own separate nation within the US.

      • (Score: 1) by Ethanol-fueled on Friday February 17 2017, @11:59PM

        by Ethanol-fueled (2792) on Friday February 17 2017, @11:59PM (#468415) Homepage

        I don't claim to be an expert, but it seems that if you buy an 80% lower and finish it yourself, then do a system build on it, then it might be legal to have an unserialized firearm, depending. Based on the exhaustive internet research I've done on the matter, it seems that both federal and state law as well as the mood of the local ATF are all factors assuming that you are leaving it up to others to have any involvement in your system build other than your purchasing of the unfinished lower receiver.

        Amusingly, ARES armor was raided by the ATF [bearingarms.com]. Of course, when your radio ads sound something like, "Are you tired of the NSA spying on you?" you're gonna get their attention. Now they have some big conglomerate-looking website [americanweaponscomponents.com] but I cannot speak as to whether or not "they" are monitoring your purchases of unfinished 80% lower-receivers.

        If you want to find out whether or not you're on their shit-list, try to order a finished lower-receiver. If you succeed, then you aren't on the government's shit-list...yet.

    • (Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 18 2017, @12:03AM

      by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 18 2017, @12:03AM (#468419)

      This is a case of "what's right" vs "what the government can get away with".

      Constitutionally the government has no right to regulate, or license firearms. But who is going to stop them?

      • (Score: 2) by DeathMonkey on Saturday February 18 2017, @05:12PM

        by DeathMonkey (1380) on Saturday February 18 2017, @05:12PM (#468639) Journal

        The 2nd says keep and bear, not manufacture or sell.

        The courts tend to frown on semantical BS law "workarounds."

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 18 2017, @05:15AM

      by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 18 2017, @05:15AM (#468492)
      You can make your own gun.

      But if you SELL it.. Oh now you're in deep rules shit.
  • (Score: 2) by looorg on Friday February 17 2017, @11:47PM

    by looorg (578) on Friday February 17 2017, @11:47PM (#468409)

    So, if he taught a class in how to do it would he also then be a criminal?

    Probably not. Wouldn't that more or less be a shop class? Learning how to use a CNC machine or a Lathe? Hard to see that not being legal.

    While anyone could mill their own AR-15 lower using either hand tools or a CNC, paying for someone else to do it constitutes a sale, which requires the seller hold a Federal Firearms License (FFL). Crowninshield did not have a FFL. Wilson, by contrast, does. However, Wilson does not take payment for milling nor does he transfer milled firearms.

    So from a quick read of the article it does appear that the problem is that he sold the receivers and he didn't have the proper license for that. Not that he made them. Which makes me wonder what would have happened if he gave them away for free.

    • (Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 18 2017, @12:01AM

      by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 18 2017, @12:01AM (#468417)

      "So, if he taught a class in how to do it would he also then be a criminal?"

      Nope, he can teach/show all day long but, if he sells, gives away, or finishes the machining for someone else, he's illegal. He can teach a class and finish as many 80% recievers as he wants as long as he doesn't transfer them to someone else. (Finishing the machining process for someone is a transfer).

      "Wilson does not take payment for milling nor does he transfer milled firearms."

      Doesn't matter. Transferring a firearm does not mean selling, it means physically giving it to someone. If you buy a gun mail order, the gun HAS TO BE shipped to a FFL holder. That FFL holder HAS TO run a background check on you (even though it's already your gun). If you fail that background check and he gives you the gun, he's guilty of illegally transferring a firearm.
      Same at gun shows (which is why the "Gun Show Loophole" is a complete lie).

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 18 2017, @12:16AM

      by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 18 2017, @12:16AM (#468425)

      "it does appear that the problem is that he sold the receivers and he didn't have the proper license for that."

      No.
      ANYONE (including felons) can own and sell 80% receivers because by law, they are not firearms. As far as the law is concerned, they are just hunks of metal.

      • (Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Saturday February 18 2017, @03:01AM

        by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Saturday February 18 2017, @03:01AM (#468471) Homepage Journal

        "because by law, they are not firearms"

        Ditto for muzzle loaders. They are not legally firearms, and you may possess them in any jurisdiction which has not passed it's own laws, specifically targeted at muzzle loading guns.

        --
        “If everyone is thinking alike, then somebody isn't thinking.” ― George S. Patton on Ukraine
        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 19 2017, @01:00AM

          by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 19 2017, @01:00AM (#468792)

          Not true. Take no legal advice from Runaway.

          • (Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Sunday February 19 2017, @01:51AM

            by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Sunday February 19 2017, @01:51AM (#468819) Homepage Journal

            https://www.quora.com/Are-modern-muzzleloaders-legally-considered-firearms-in-the-U-S [quora.com]

            https://www.jobsforfelonshub.com/can-felons-muzzleloader/ [jobsforfelonshub.com]

            Open mouth, insert foot, AC. Note that I specifically stated that some local jurisdictions may have passed more restrictive laws than the federal government. But, a muzzle loader is NOT A FIREARM, legally speaking.

            --
            “If everyone is thinking alike, then somebody isn't thinking.” ― George S. Patton on Ukraine
            • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 19 2017, @07:19AM

              by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 19 2017, @07:19AM (#468886)

              Open mouth, insert foot, AC. Note that I specifically stated that some local jurisdictions may have passed more restrictive laws than the federal government. But, a muzzle loader is NOT A FIREARM, legally speaking.

              You should read the entire page you quote.

              Muzzleloaders are considered deadly weapons in all states from a law enforcement perspective.

              And do you know who answers questions on sites like "quora"? Yes, people just like you, Runaway1965! Would you take legal advice from someone as knowledgeable as you?
              .
              (And BTW, what are you doing hanging out on a site like "jobsforfelons.com"? Answers that cop or criminal question, it does.)

    • (Score: 2) by hemocyanin on Saturday February 18 2017, @03:53PM

      by hemocyanin (186) on Saturday February 18 2017, @03:53PM (#468604) Journal

      The whole bit about having a customer press a button is an example of how trying to be really clever and lawyerly about the text of a statute really misses the point of law in America (and likely elsewhere) -- the law is about power (not justice, not fairness). If you don't have actual political power, they'll fuck you over no matter how clever you think you are.

  • (Score: 4, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 17 2017, @11:51PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 17 2017, @11:51PM (#468411)

    I'm pro-guns but, the guy is guilty as hell.

    You can manufacture and keep guns that you make yourself if:
    1) They are not full auto
    2) They do not have a silencer
    3) The barrel is longer than 18inches (if a long gun)
    4) You're not a felon or someone prohibited from owning guns.

    What the guy did was he sold 80% receivers (perfectly legal) but then HE FINISHED THEM instead of the purchaser (very illegal). Therefore he was making firearms without a license (a BIG no-no). The end user can finish the machining and be perfectly legal (as long as it doesn't violate the 4 above rules).

    • (Score: 2) by takyon on Saturday February 18 2017, @12:36AM

      by takyon (881) <{takyon} {at} {soylentnews.org}> on Saturday February 18 2017, @12:36AM (#468433) Journal

      Maybe what he was doing was just barely legal (and untested in court), but the government sent in a sting operative openly posing as a former felon and being incredibly lazy/lax about pushing the button or renting the CNC mill or whatever the scheme was. All while recording the encounter and gathering evidence to lead to a conviction. There's not too many details in the article and federal law enforcement agencies tend to let those details slip... especially when the "guilty" party agrees to plead guilty. The government also turns innocents and the mentally ill into terrorists, and nailed Doug Williams in their war against polygraph countermeasures [bloomberg.com].

      --
      [SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
      • (Score: 2) by Sulla on Saturday February 18 2017, @02:03AM

        by Sulla (5173) on Saturday February 18 2017, @02:03AM (#468456) Journal

        No. In agreement with the AC above. Guilty as hell based on current laws. He could have become an FFL but opted not to. He even made the distinction between the selling of 80 lowers and the finishing of the lower. FFL requird to transfer a lower completed more than 80%.

        I considered becoming an FFL for the hell of it and I do not recall it as being that difficult.

        How this could have been legal?
        -Sell 80 lowers he manufactured
        -Give away or sell classes on how to mill the remaining 20
        -Sell, rent, or loan the mill to the person
        -End user completes the lower themselves

        --
        Ceterum censeo Sinae esse delendam
        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 18 2017, @05:50AM

          by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 18 2017, @05:50AM (#468496)

          And doing it in CA to boot. Last place to even want to be public with firearms. The only dumber state would be NY.

    • (Score: 3, Insightful) by wisnoskij on Saturday February 18 2017, @01:10AM

      by wisnoskij (5149) <reversethis-{moc ... ksonsiwnohtanoj}> on Saturday February 18 2017, @01:10AM (#468439)

      Semantics.
      Their exists some ritual that they could of gone through, that was practically identical to this one, that would of passed muster. It sounds like this would of been cleared up by renting the mill to the customers for a few hours, and just providing the cnc file and a tutorial on how to run a mill, or something of that magnitude. But it is all legal semantics, there is a legal way to do this, and since he did all this in good faith believing that his ritual went far enough, it seems pretty unjust to punish him.

      We have something similar to this for raw milk in Canada, since people kept pushing and getting arrested we eventually learned exactly what ritual had to be followed for it to be considered legal.
      1. You have to own, at least partially, the cow.
      2. You must do all the transporting of the milk yourself off of the original farm.

      • (Score: 2) by bob_super on Saturday February 18 2017, @01:30AM

        by bob_super (1357) on Saturday February 18 2017, @01:30AM (#468446)

        Civilizations are full of little absurd rituals which mark the boundary between being jailed/stoned or congratulated for the same exact actions.

        • (Score: 4, Insightful) by art guerrilla on Saturday February 18 2017, @03:09AM

          by art guerrilla (3082) on Saturday February 18 2017, @03:09AM (#468476)

          when the system don't work, you gotta work the system...

      • (Score: 3, Insightful) by FakeBeldin on Saturday February 18 2017, @09:24AM

        by FakeBeldin (3360) on Saturday February 18 2017, @09:24AM (#468539) Journal

        since he did all this in good faith believing that his ritual went far enough,

        Trying to exploit legal loopholes is not "good faith".

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 18 2017, @01:58AM

      by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 18 2017, @01:58AM (#468452)

      Shall not be infringed.

      This guy should have gone out in a blaze of glory.

    • (Score: 3, Insightful) by Runaway1956 on Saturday February 18 2017, @03:04AM

      by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Saturday February 18 2017, @03:04AM (#468472) Homepage Journal

      OK, you are pro-gun, and you have parsed the law pretty well. But, you're not saying whether you think the law is just. I consider the laws to be unjust, as they exist today. It's none of government's business who owns what kind of gun. The second amendment wasn't written for hunters and sportsmen, after all.

      --
      “If everyone is thinking alike, then somebody isn't thinking.” ― George S. Patton on Ukraine
      • (Score: 4, Interesting) by Hairyfeet on Saturday February 18 2017, @07:05AM

        by Hairyfeet (75) <{bassbeast1968} {at} {gmail.com}> on Saturday February 18 2017, @07:05AM (#468513) Journal

        They are not only unjust but most of the gun laws? Are just outright racist as fuck. I urge everyone to look up and watch the documentary "fear of an armed negro" about the passage of the early gun laws and...wow, they didn't even try to pretend they weren't racist, those lawmakers were open as hell about how they didn't want "them coloreds" being able to defend themselves. Its also why they picked guns like the "Saturday Night Special" to demonize, which anybody like me who has actually fired a late 50s/early 60s model could tell you were well made affordable self defense weapons....which is why they targeted them, it was a "poll tax" to make sure blacks and poor whites wouldn't be able to afford anything that was actually useful for defense.

        Today you get much more subtle racism, things like "the soft bigotry of lowered expectations" but back then when they passed those first gun laws? Yeah just watch, they don't even try to be an itty bitty bit subtle about what they think about blacks being able to fight back, its scary to know that these were the people in power and that others still defend laws written by such cartoonishly racist men.

        --
        ACs are never seen so don't bother. Always ready to show SJWs for the racists they are.
        • (Score: 2) by Nobuddy on Saturday February 18 2017, @07:56PM

          by Nobuddy (1626) on Saturday February 18 2017, @07:56PM (#468705)

          Make sure you note it is Ronald Reagan and the NRA pushing for those gun control laws to disarm black people.

          • (Score: 2) by Hairyfeet on Monday February 20 2017, @03:34AM

            by Hairyfeet (75) <{bassbeast1968} {at} {gmail.com}> on Monday February 20 2017, @03:34AM (#469153) Journal

            So its okay to be racist as fuck because the other guy was racist as fuck? Is that how that works? I don't give a shit if it was Ronnie Raygun or Bozo the clown who originally passed that racist shit, it was racist then and now sadly its the DNC that has taken being racist as fuck to all new levels [youtube.com] and I don't give a single fuck whether its the left or the right racist shit is still racist shit.

            --
            ACs are never seen so don't bother. Always ready to show SJWs for the racists they are.
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 18 2017, @12:10AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 18 2017, @12:10AM (#468423)

    Because of technology, laws are interpreted to the point of absurdity now (but they have to be). Cody Wilson's "push one button to finish your receiver" is perfectly legal and Cody is not breaking the law by selling it as long as he's NOT the one pushing the GO button on someone else's receiver. With automated machining, the person pushing the GO button is the manufacturer.

    Crownshield would have been okay if set up a CNC machine to go as long as the owner [of the 80% receiver] had put it in the CNC machine and pushed the GO button himself.

    • (Score: 2) by takyon on Saturday February 18 2017, @12:28AM

      by takyon (881) <{takyon} {at} {soylentnews.org}> on Saturday February 18 2017, @12:28AM (#468428) Journal

      Cody Wilson pushed the boundaries just enough without going too far, since the 80% lower trick existed before he came along with Ghost Gunner. Crownshield took that extra step in order to attract even lazier customers, and got wrecked by the government for it.

      That said, maybe Crownshield did do just enough to shield his ass, but the government stung him and managed to get him to slip up, like they did with Doug Williams [bloomberg.com].

      --
      [SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 18 2017, @01:29AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 18 2017, @01:29AM (#468445)

    It appears legal to make a 'gun' for yourself using a CNC machine and a hunk of metal that is 80% completed.
    Note that the legal definition of this 'gun' is just the one particular piece which has the serial number.
    The other parts appears unregulated and freely purchasable.
    Talk about having a strange set of rules to enforce...

    So if you buy the CNC and blank and watch the Youtube video probably using the CNC's customer support, it's ok.
    Note that these days, their customer support could be pretty good with Skype allowing somebody to watch every step to keep your required skill level really low.
    About the only thing the support can't do is reach out and touch, at least today.
    Once you get bored, it should be ok to sell the CNC to somebody else.
    That's kind of like renting the CNC.
    So we have low cost, low skill, definitely definitely an end run around the high bar to entry of real gunsmithing.
    Probably makes lawyers rich and enforcers grumpy...

    So if you go to a machine shop and rent time on their CNC using their tooling and their folks as customer support why is it different?
    Assuming the customer is renting the shop and at risk to pay for anything he breaks, the thing that stands out is reaching out and touching.
    In this case, the person from the shop put the blank in the jig for the CNC.
    That makes lawyers rich and enforcement folks happy...

    What to do?
    I think skilled gunsmithing is beneficial to the country because it encourages real skills like stem.
    But the benefit comes from actually doing the craftsmanship.
    A high bar encourages this.
    Perhaps the rule should be that you have to finish at least 80% of the surface of all the parts you use to make a gun.
    Finish means remove at least the last hundredth of an inch of material.
    All the parts means everything, not something silly like just the receiver.
    That should make it a legal gun to have but not sell, unless you get the paperwork.
    This is a clear, measurable line between ok and not ok.

    Given a legal gun, you can still buy finished parts to repair it, but doing 20% of the work on one part should not qualify as gunsmithing.
    (Just think of all the other neat stuff you will be able to make with the CNC machines that would be available to make a whole gun. ;-)

    Perhaps the new rules should only apply if you use CNC.
    The skill bar is already high enough for folks doing gunsmithing manually.

    • (Score: 2) by bob_super on Saturday February 18 2017, @02:00AM

      by bob_super (1357) on Saturday February 18 2017, @02:00AM (#468453)

      Because of interchangeable parts (for fun or for ageing), the receiver is legally "the gun".
      Other parts (except suppressors) are just metal stuff which attach to a gun.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 18 2017, @02:11AM

      by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 18 2017, @02:11AM (#468458)

      "Note that the legal definition of this 'gun' is just the one particular piece which has the serial number."

      The portion of the gun that is the magazine or allows a detachable magazine connect to is "the firearm". This is the receiver (or frame on small arms like pistols).

        A legally manufactured firearm by an FFL holder will have the serial number on this part. Firearms made from 80% parts won't have a serial number.

      • (Score: 2) by computersareevil on Monday February 20 2017, @05:47PM

        by computersareevil (749) on Monday February 20 2017, @05:47PM (#469348)

        That is not true for all guns.

        On many SIG rifles, for example, the upper receiver is the serialized "firearm". It does not have a magazine nor accept a detachable magazine. Which part is serialized is up to the manufacturer, within boundaries set by the BATFE.

    • (Score: 5, Insightful) by mhajicek on Saturday February 18 2017, @02:26AM

      by mhajicek (51) on Saturday February 18 2017, @02:26AM (#468463)

      If we're going with "should", any law which limits the manufacturer of firearms should be consider to be infringing on the right to keep and bear arms. Of course we should start with the "laws"* that limit the kinds of weapons that can be owned and carried.

      * A law which is in violation of the constitution is inherently invalid, and enforcing it should be a crime.

      --
      The spacelike surfaces of time foliations can have a cusp at the surface of discontinuity. - P. Hajicek
      • (Score: 2, Informative) by qzm on Saturday February 18 2017, @04:16AM

        by qzm (3260) on Saturday February 18 2017, @04:16AM (#468487)

        In what way?

        This is a restriction on the right to obtain arms.. care to point out where that is listed as a right?
        Keep arms clearly means to retain ownership and possession of arms you have obtained (legally of course).
        Bear arms clearly means to carry them.
        Hell, the government could quite correctly ban the sale of ALL new guns without crossing the line, by your constitution...

        Personally I couldnt care less, as I live in a much more sane country, but what you are trying to claim is just foolishness.
        The gun posturing in the US does look kind of foolish to the rest of the world though, I must say.

        • (Score: 2) by mhajicek on Saturday February 18 2017, @09:16AM

          by mhajicek (51) on Saturday February 18 2017, @09:16AM (#468537)

          How do you keep and bear something if you can't buy or make it in the first place? Also, as gun laws have been getting more permissive here crime rates have been dropping. Still sound crazy?

          --
          The spacelike surfaces of time foliations can have a cusp at the surface of discontinuity. - P. Hajicek
          • (Score: 2) by FakeBeldin on Saturday February 18 2017, @09:28AM

            by FakeBeldin (3360) on Saturday February 18 2017, @09:28AM (#468542) Journal

            How do you keep and bear something if you can't buy or make it in the first place?

            How's that the problem of the lawmakers?
            This is a pretty common regulation tactic: you're allowed to possess something, but not to acquire it or create it yourself.

            Also, as gun laws have been getting more permissive here crime rates have been dropping. Still sound crazy?

            Call me when your crime rates start beating those of less weaponized countries.

            • (Score: 2) by mhajicek on Saturday February 18 2017, @07:38PM

              by mhajicek (51) on Saturday February 18 2017, @07:38PM (#468695)

              The problem is that it was obviously the intent of the founders that the people be armed, in large part to keep the government in check. This is made plain if you read their letters. They made it clear that they expected another revolution to be needed eventually. One without the right to be armed is not truly free, and as someone who has never experienced freedom you cannot be expected to understand.

              Sneaky workarounds like banning manufacture or banning ammunition should be seen as the violations they truly are.

              --
              The spacelike surfaces of time foliations can have a cusp at the surface of discontinuity. - P. Hajicek
              • (Score: 2) by FakeBeldin on Saturday February 18 2017, @08:01PM

                by FakeBeldin (3360) on Saturday February 18 2017, @08:01PM (#468707) Journal

                Indeed, that is how I understood the common view of the intent of the 2nd amendment is indeed.
                Unfortunately, the 2nd amendment doesn't prevent the sneaky workarounds.
                In a case of blistering irony, getting rid of such sneaky workarounds will probably require a revolution.

            • (Score: 3, Interesting) by Runaway1956 on Saturday February 18 2017, @10:39PM

              by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Saturday February 18 2017, @10:39PM (#468750) Homepage Journal

              You are being called.

              The crime rate in America is on par with the criem rate in Europe. That is, all of America, is roughly equal with all of Europe. The size of Europe and the US are roughly equal, the diversity of the populations of the US and Europe are roughly equal, and the crime rate is roughly equal.

              If you are going to cherry pick one, or five, or twelve countries within Europe with low crime rates, then I can do the same for the US. I can find one, or five, or twelve states or cities with very low crime rates.

              I am so very tired of people making the claim that the US should have the same crime rate as Country X, especially when we have counties larger than Country X. We have states as large as most countries in Europe.

              When we begin to compare apples to apples, the United States has nothing to be ashamed of. So long as you are comparing apples to tangerines, and insist that tangerines are better, then there can be no reasonable argument to your own irrational argument.

              Also - https://soylentnews.org/~Runaway1956/journal/1674 [soylentnews.org]

              In at least some cases, the reported low crime rate is a lie. Lies were used to establish gun control, and they lie to "prove" how effective gun control is.

              Rinse your mind of the mass media brainwashing, then take another look at the issue.

              --
              “If everyone is thinking alike, then somebody isn't thinking.” ― George S. Patton on Ukraine
            • (Score: 3, Interesting) by Runaway1956 on Saturday February 18 2017, @10:53PM

              by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Saturday February 18 2017, @10:53PM (#468756) Homepage Journal

              https://www.numbeo.com/crime/gmaps_rankings_country.jsp [numbeo.com]

              Hover over the US - you get a crime index of 48.76.

              UK 41.19
              France 43.66
              Russia 46.05
              Italy 44.66

              HOLY CRAP LOOK AT AUSTRIA AT 19.25!

              Switzerland is quite respectable at 22.45

              https://www.numbeo.com/crime/indices_explained.jsp [numbeo.com]

              Crime Index is an estimation of overall level of crime in a given city or a country. We consider crime levels lower than 20 as very low, crime levels between 20 and 40 as being low, crime levels between 40 and 60 as being moderate, crime levels between 60 and 80 as being high and finally crime levels higher than 80 as being very high.

              Again - my nation spans a continent. It occupies a significant portion of a continent. If you want to compare Europe to the US, then you must compare in an equitable manner. The landmass and diversity of all of the US and all of Europe are roughly equal. Let's compare the whole damned nation to the entire continent, and we find that the numbers aren't very dissimilar. Most efforts at comparison are exercises in dishonesty.

              --
              “If everyone is thinking alike, then somebody isn't thinking.” ― George S. Patton on Ukraine
              • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 19 2017, @12:37AM

                by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 19 2017, @12:37AM (#468780)

                Correct number: United States Crime rate: 48.76 Safety Index:51.24
                                                                        Khazakhstan 48.29 51.71

                Well, at least the US is only slightly more criminal and less safe that Khazakhistan!

                • (Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Sunday February 19 2017, @12:47AM

                  by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Sunday February 19 2017, @12:47AM (#468784) Homepage Journal

                  What did I say about exercise in dishonesty? You can't compare a continent spanning nation to some little fuckistan. Compare to EUROPE, not to one dinky country. Don't be a dink.

                  --
                  “If everyone is thinking alike, then somebody isn't thinking.” ― George S. Patton on Ukraine
                  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 19 2017, @01:04AM

                    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 19 2017, @01:04AM (#468794)

                    Admit it, Runaway, you have no idea where Khazakhistan is, let alone how large of a country it is, do you?

                    • (Score: 3, Insightful) by Runaway1956 on Sunday February 19 2017, @01:41AM

                      by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Sunday February 19 2017, @01:41AM (#468814) Homepage Journal

                      http://www.mylifeelsewhere.com/country-size-comparison/united-states/kazakhstan [mylifeelsewhere.com]

                      And, again, you're trying to compare the entire US to one nation that is only as large as one of our regions.

                      Worse, Kazakhstan isn't even part of Europe, so now you're trying to compare apples to some kind of melon, rather than to tangerines or apricots.

                      And, going back to my other post - the US and Europe have comparable crime statistics. Go ahead, point your fingers at the US, and laugh at the relative crime statistics in comparison to Kazakhstan. YOU DON'T RANK ANY BETTER IN THE SAME COMPARISON!!

                      Is English your first language, or maybe your second or third .... or twentieth?

                      Let me make this as clear as possible: Almost every published comparison of crime in the US and any European country is a lie. Certain places in the US are relatively unsafe, while other places in the US are very safe. Certain places in Europe are well known to be unsafe, while there are very safe places in Europe. OVERALL, neither the US or Europe is especially safe. Both the US and Europe are generally safer than most of Africa, the mideast, and much of Asia, or South America. That's about as much as all those comparison get right - we both enjoy more safety than third world countries.

                      --
                      “If everyone is thinking alike, then somebody isn't thinking.” ― George S. Patton on Ukraine
              • (Score: 2) by FakeBeldin on Sunday February 19 2017, @06:34PM

                by FakeBeldin (3360) on Sunday February 19 2017, @06:34PM (#469012) Journal

                Fine, let's compare it to Europe, shall we?

                Inhabitants Europe, according to Google's definition of "Europe": 743 mln.
                Inhabitants USA (again, according to Google): 318 mln.
                As their surface area is comparable, Europe has roughly double the population density of the USA.

                Europe is a continent with 45 nations, with about 225 languages spoken. The USA is one nation, with English as official language, Spanish now 2nd, and a smattering of immigrant languages. Almost no one identifies as European, while inhabitants of the USA proudly proclaim to be US citizens. Power of Europe's president is minor compared to the power of the heads of individual states (Case in point: have you heard of Angela Merkel? Have you heard of Herman van Rompuy? exactly.)
                Europe has places where people drive on the left, and others where people drive on the right.

                Yeah, comparing the USA to Europe is an exercise in extreme dishonesty.

                Thinking the USA must be incomparable to countries in Europe just because it's so big is sheer hubris. Thinking the USA is much more diverse than any country in Europe underscores just how little you know these countries.
                Case in point: there is a country in Europe that has both industrialised areas and rural (agricultural) areas. touristy and abandoned areas, has harbours and through-roads, has a city with political influence over the continent, where in some parts the main language of the nation is just not understood, has dirt-poor areas and rich areas, plains and mountains, and has complex politics with national, federal and local government interfering with each other's operations.
                It's called Belgium - one of the smaller nations in Europe, by the way.

                Let's toss in China for the comparison. Almost equal surface area, slightly more people. Most folks there have shared origins, just like inhabitants in the USA. (Not saying they all get along: in the USA, this background means some were North, some were South. Some were KKK, some were hanged by the KKK, etc. Same is true for China)

                Number of guns per capita [wikipedia.org]
                China: 4.9
                USA: 112.6
                Europe: <30 (average)

                Crime rate according to your link:
                USA: 48.76
                China: 33.9
                Europe: about 40 (estimate)

                Conclusion:
                Just looking at the number of guns per capita should already underscore how incomparable the USA is to other countries. It should also underscore that other nations have found vastly different solutions to problems that the USA addresses with guns. Proudly proclaiming that more guns will solve those problems just shows how completely ignorant you are of the existence of other solutions.
                *Maybe* it's the best for the USA given its current inhabitants and culture. So let's hear arguments why that would be fundamentally the case.

                • (Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Monday February 20 2017, @02:18AM

                  by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Monday February 20 2017, @02:18AM (#469135) Homepage Journal

                  So, bottom line, China is safer than Europe, and you want to make excuses. And, the excuse you have decided on, is that you have "diversity".

                  Let me point out, virtually all Europeans are caucasians. Europeans share one religion, for the most part. That "diversity" thing you're bragging on isn't so very diverse as you would have us to believe.

                  But, go ahead, feel superior to the US.

                  Oh yeah - who started both world wars? It wasn't the US, was it? And, who colonized Africa and the Americas, along with much of Asia? That wasn't the US was it? Hell, man, the US was one of the colonies, until we revolted.

                  --
                  “If everyone is thinking alike, then somebody isn't thinking.” ― George S. Patton on Ukraine
                  • (Score: 2) by FakeBeldin on Tuesday February 21 2017, @09:13AM

                    by FakeBeldin (3360) on Tuesday February 21 2017, @09:13AM (#469628) Journal

                    So, bottom line, China is safer than Europe,

                    Yes.

                    and you want to make excuses.

                    No, I don't.

                    And, the excuse you have decided on, is that you have "diversity".

                    "We" do.
                    Me myself, not so much though.

                    Let me point out, virtually all Europeans are caucasians.

                    Most Europeans are actually not from the Caucasus [wikipedia.org]. Neither are they white Americans. Or do you use that term to refer to "White People [wikipedia.org]"? As Wikipedia puts it:

                    "White people is a racial classification specifier, used for people of Europid ancestry,"

                    If you're using the term "caucasian" to refer to "people of Europid ancestry", then yes. Most Europeans are of European ancestry. Tautology man strikes again.

                    Europeans share one religion, for the most part.

                    Again, I have no clue how you define "one religion". One way could be "a group willing to bash in another group based on the other's perceived religion." In that case, no, we didn't have one religion in the past, and those divisions that we had evolved to stop bashing each other's brains in, not to be "one religion".

                    But, go ahead, feel superior to the US.

                    Not so much, actually. Europe is different from the USA.
                    The whole point of the message was that some of the challenges are similar between them, but some of the solutions are radically different. Instead of railing against it and shouting at the top of your lungs how America is Great, you should look into what others are doing and how it's working for them and how it could apply to your country.

                    • (Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Tuesday February 21 2017, @03:07PM

                      by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday February 21 2017, @03:07PM (#469701) Homepage Journal

                      "shouting at the top of your lungs how America is Great,"

                      I don't think I've posted much of that kind of crap. But, you remind me of one of Walton and Johnson's cute little bylines. "We've got the greatest douchebags in the world!" When I heard that little tagline once again, abour half an hour ago, I thought about putting it in my signature here.

                      --
                      “If everyone is thinking alike, then somebody isn't thinking.” ― George S. Patton on Ukraine
          • (Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Saturday February 18 2017, @12:56PM

            by Phoenix666 (552) Subscriber Badge on Saturday February 18 2017, @12:56PM (#468567) Journal

            I have a pig that grows firearm-shaped scales and drops them all over the yard. It was quite a surprise when we learned the gol-darned things can fire bullets. That's how we get our guns. Doesn't everybody?

            --
            Washington DC delenda est.
          • (Score: 2, Insightful) by aristarchus on Saturday February 18 2017, @08:30PM

            by aristarchus (2645) on Saturday February 18 2017, @08:30PM (#468719) Journal

            Also, as gun laws have been getting more permissive here crime rates have been dropping. Still sound crazy?

            Yes? Repeat after me: Correlation does not imply causation.

            --
            #Freearistarchus, again!!!!!1!!
            • (Score: 3, Insightful) by Runaway1956 on Saturday February 18 2017, @10:28PM

              by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Saturday February 18 2017, @10:28PM (#468743) Homepage Journal

              Enough empirical evidence can establish a strong correlation. A strong correlation suggests that there is some causative factor. A wise person will begin investigating whether there is a cause when he discovers a strong correlation. Only a fool will steadfastly deny that there can be any causation involved, unless and until he proves that there is no causation.

              Criminals aren't complete idiots. They may well be fools who are gaming a system, but that doesn't necessarily mean they are stupid. They are capable of deducing the obvious. If you are a rich bastard, with armed guards patrolling your property 24/7, the stupidest of criminals knows that he will probably be apprehended, if not killed, trying to burgle the place. Likewise, criminals know that they are likely to be shot if the break into an occupied residence in a state or city where guns are commonplace. The same criminal knows that he is highly unlikely to meet armed resistance in cities with stringent gun control.

              I insist that there is some causation involved in the gun laws and crime statistics ratios. So-called social scientists simply haven't been able to define or measure that causation.

              --
              “If everyone is thinking alike, then somebody isn't thinking.” ― George S. Patton on Ukraine
              • (Score: 2, Troll) by aristarchus on Saturday February 18 2017, @11:12PM

                by aristarchus (2645) on Saturday February 18 2017, @11:12PM (#468760) Journal

                So-called social scientists simply haven't been able to define or measure that causation.

                That is because there isn't one. So-called gun lovers like so-called Runaway1956 seem to want to assume that loser gun laws reduce crime rates, so they can carry around compensation for their cowardice, but there is no such recurring correlation, and definitely no causation.

                --
                #Freearistarchus, again!!!!!1!!
                • (Score: 2, Offtopic) by mhajicek on Sunday February 19 2017, @12:07AM

                  by mhajicek (51) on Sunday February 19 2017, @12:07AM (#468770)

                  False. The US cities with the most violent crime are those with the most stringent gun laws, such as Chicago. You obviously haven't actually done the research. I have.

                  --
                  The spacelike surfaces of time foliations can have a cusp at the surface of discontinuity. - P. Hajicek
                  • (Score: 1, Troll) by aristarchus on Sunday February 19 2017, @12:29AM

                    by aristarchus (2645) on Sunday February 19 2017, @12:29AM (#468777) Journal

                    The US cities with the most violent crime are those with the most stringent gun laws, such as Chicago.

                    True? But obviously you need a rebuttal, and the obvious rebuttal is that that is not why. Besides, you are not very wise in the way of reason. Even if your false, or at the very least unsubstantiated, correlation was true, just because strict gun laws correlate with higher crime, that does not means that loser gun laws would correlate with reduced crime. I seriously doubt you have done any research, beyond reading NRA child-killer propaganda. Citations needed! And are you talking about all violent crimes? Or just fatalities, or ones involving firearms? And did it ever occur to you that Chicago is not isolated from the rest of gun-crazy ammosexual death-eating Trump-pumping America? Or that it could be that the true causes of crime are poor moral compasses, racism, poverty, and ignorance such as you yourself exhibit. No, you obviously just love your weepons, and are not too smart. Best to just be honest about that, like Runaway is.

                    --
                    #Freearistarchus, again!!!!!1!!
                    • (Score: 2, Flamebait) by Runaway1956 on Sunday February 19 2017, @01:18AM

                      by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Sunday February 19 2017, @01:18AM (#468804) Homepage Journal

                      "the obvious rebuttal is that that is not why"

                      Find some proof to support your "obvious" rebuttal.

                      "Besides, you are not very wise"

                      Assuming the name of a well known philosopher doesn't make you wise, nor does it qualify you to judge other people's wisdom.

                      There IS one obvious correlation that holds true across America: The lowest crime statistics are found in those areas with the most lenient gun laws, and the highest crime statistics are found in those areas with the strictest gun control laws. The correlation is much to strong to shrug off. You might explain it away in a number of ways. Here, let me help you: "Most criminals hear the news of strict gun laws, so they move to the cities with the strictest gun laws to avoid being shot while they commit crimes." Of course, there is nothing to support that idea, but it does explain high crime rates in strict gun control cities. Your turn - you offer us some other nonsense explanation for the statistics.

                      --
                      “If everyone is thinking alike, then somebody isn't thinking.” ― George S. Patton on Ukraine
                      • (Score: 1, Insightful) by aristarchus on Sunday February 19 2017, @01:31AM

                        by aristarchus (2645) on Sunday February 19 2017, @01:31AM (#468808) Journal

                        More hillbilly logic, Runaway? Seriously?

                        The lowest crime statistics are found in those areas with the most lenient gun laws, and the highest crime statistics are found in those areas with the strictest gun control laws.

                        The highest crime rates are found in the areas with the highest rates of higher education! Colleges cause crime! Lower crime rates are found in areas with higher populations of livestock! See, all we need to do is move some sheep and pigs and turkeys into those "carnage" places, and crime will go down! See, it has nothing to do with guns, nothing to do with your mirroring of the criminal mind (though it is curious how easily you do so. . . ), and nothing to do with gun laws. Crime has fallen dramatically in the US since the sixties. You should read a book, or get someone to read it to you, The Better Angels of Our Nature: Why Violence Has Declined [wikipedia.org]. Has actual facts and stuff, not just a presumption based on paranoia.

                        Even wonder why the places with the loserest gun laws also have the lowest population? Is there something about rural places that only correlates with guns, but is not actually an effect of guns? Could you be committing a "false cause" fallacy, like the well known "Texas Marksman" fallacy? Or maybe it is because there are so many guns that there are so few people? Correlation that strong strongly suggest a causal relation! Just how many Hatfields and McCoys are left, anyway?

                        --
                        #Freearistarchus, again!!!!!1!!
                        • (Score: 2, Offtopic) by Runaway1956 on Sunday February 19 2017, @01:54AM

                          by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Sunday February 19 2017, @01:54AM (#468821) Homepage Journal

                          Please, try to familiarize yourself with rational thought. It isn't necessary that you make contact with reality, but you could get close enough to have a shouting match with those of us who live in reality.

                          --
                          “If everyone is thinking alike, then somebody isn't thinking.” ― George S. Patton on Ukraine
                          • (Score: 2, Funny) by aristarchus on Sunday February 19 2017, @07:28PM

                            by aristarchus (2645) on Sunday February 19 2017, @07:28PM (#469039) Journal

                            When some realize that they have lost an argument on the internets, they go Godwin. Runaway appeals to reason and facts.

                            --
                            #Freearistarchus, again!!!!!1!!
              • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 20 2017, @08:57AM

                by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 20 2017, @08:57AM (#469211)

                Strict gun control laws are often a result of high levels of violent crime in an effort to reduce levels of those crimes. Is that difficult to understand?

                • (Score: 3, Insightful) by Runaway1956 on Monday February 20 2017, @11:59AM

                  by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Monday February 20 2017, @11:59AM (#469241) Homepage Journal

                  No, it isn't difficult to understand, at all. "We have a terrible situation, and we need to DO SOMETHING!!" The problem is, that "something" is misguided. Disarming the citizenry only creates more potential victims.

                  But, let's go back. "we need to DO SOMETHING!" Who is it, exactly, that does something? Politicians, of course. And, wannabe politicians. District attorneys play the "get tough" game, hoping to impress his superiors, as well as the public. Mayors lobby the city councils, in an effort to show voters that he has got crime "under control". State lawmakers and governors play the same game. "We've got to DO SOMETHING!" or else the voters will put us out of office! And, of course, each of those state lawmakers and governors hopes to show off a record that will open doors at the federal level. "DO SOMETHING!"

                  And, there is not one single instance in American history that can conclusively state that this measure or that measure actually reduced crime.

                  At best, various lawmakers and law enforcement can point to instances where their measuer COINCIDED WITH a drop in crime. Again and again, a law is passed, and/or a "get tough on crime" candidate takes office, and crime statistics drop a little. However, when compared to crime statistics state-wide and nation-wide, crime statistics also dropped by comparable percentages in states and cities which took no measures against crime.

                  Ultimately, individual laws and "get tough" measures have little to no effect on crime. COLLECTIVELY, however, the tougher lawmakers and law enforcement get on gun laws, the higher the crime rates go. That is precisely why Chicago has the worst crime rates in the nation. The city of Chicago, and Cook County have a bunch of authoritarians in charge, who insist that citizens be dependent on the city, the county, and the state for their protection. And, those authorities are incapable of providing the protection they promise.

                  And, once again, I remind you that those laws are aimed predominantly at one very special group of people. Dark skinned people are not trusted to own weapons, they are not deemed responsible enough to handle a weapon. Gun laws are racist. Stick that into a search engine, see what you get - gun laws are racist. Where black people are in the majority, or even when they are a very large minority, strict gun laws are passed. Where black people are only a small minority, the gun laws are very lax.

                  But, you'll never get those liberal/progressive leaders of Chicago, or any other city or state, to admit that they fear black people. Fear is the root of racism, after all. "Oh, no, we're not racist, we've just got to take care of them there darkies, 'cause they don't know any better!"

                  I insist, progressives are bigger racists than all of that imaginary "alt right" combined. Racist sons of bitches are afraid of black people!

                  --
                  “If everyone is thinking alike, then somebody isn't thinking.” ― George S. Patton on Ukraine
        • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 18 2017, @07:30PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 18 2017, @07:30PM (#468687)

          Care to point out where in the constitution the government is granted the power to restrict the right to manufacture or obtain arms?
          The US constitution is a grant of specific powers to the federal government. If it is not listed as a power they have, then they do not have it.

          (I would guess that they would once again use the ridiculously stretched and abused commerce clause. They really should rename that the Goatse Clause)

        • (Score: 2) by deimtee on Saturday February 18 2017, @07:36PM

          by deimtee (3272) on Saturday February 18 2017, @07:36PM (#468693) Journal

          This is a restriction on the right to obtain arms.. care to point out where that is listed as a right?

          That would be the Tenth Amendment to the US Constitution..

          --
          No problem is insoluble, but at Ksp = 2.943×10−25 Mercury Sulphide comes close.
  • (Score: 1) by varsix on Saturday February 18 2017, @02:00AM

    by varsix (5867) on Saturday February 18 2017, @02:00AM (#468454)

    tl;dr: Guy cuts in on the profits of gun manufacturers and gets shut down under the pretext of ensuring safety.

    • (Score: 3, Insightful) by Runaway1956 on Saturday February 18 2017, @03:19AM

      by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Saturday February 18 2017, @03:19AM (#468477) Homepage Journal

      I really don't think the gun manufacturers care about people making their own guns. All of the butt-hurt over guns comes from the left/liberal/progressive portion of society. The more reasonable parts of society only get indignant when a real crime is committed - theft, robbery, rape, murder, whatever - and a gun is used during the commission of that crime. Owning and carrying a weapon should be no more remarkable than owning and carrying a screwdriver, a pen, a cane, or any other non-contraband possession. That is the only reasonable interpretation of the constitution. There are no special laws concerning the manufacture of your screwdriver, etc. You can go into business making screwdrivers tomorrow. Pay your taxes, don't defraud anyone with your advertising efforts, and you're good to go. Sell ten, sell hundreds of thousands, sell millions - no one gives a damn, except your customers who will evaluate the quality of your screwdrivers.

      --
      “If everyone is thinking alike, then somebody isn't thinking.” ― George S. Patton on Ukraine
      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 18 2017, @09:54AM

        by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 18 2017, @09:54AM (#468546)

        Fuch you, Runaway!

        All of the butt-hurt over guns comes from the left/liberal/progressive portion of society.

        No, the butthurt is all these authoritarian worshiping wanna be military types that for some reason want to make a .22 caliber rifle that has no serial number! What is their problem? Are they like the Runaway, 4F under the old draft code, too stupid to be in the Navy, god forbid! I mean, maybe smart enough for the Army. Marines, definitely, only only if disciplined. But in all these cases, wanting a standard issue military weapon, meant for the dumbest of the dumb, infantrymen. From the "In", and "fant" as in "infant", as in "not able to speak". But they can obey orders. Why would any self-respecting patriot want to encumber themselves with such a pitiful weapon? You might say, "ammo compatibiity", but I would say, why go NATO, when they are just Ripping Us Off, when you could go Warsaw! Besides, the gas powered AK-47, or the Kalishnikov on which it is based, is a much more reliable weapon, if somewhat less accurate. So Runaway, you gonna suck up to the US Military? Or to the Russian one? Trump has already decided. Choose wisely.

        • (Score: 3, Funny) by Runaway1956 on Saturday February 18 2017, @02:36PM

          by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Saturday February 18 2017, @02:36PM (#468588) Homepage Journal

          Well, good day, "Anonymous". Do you feel better now that you've had your rant? I don't understand why on earth you don't post these crazy posts while you're logged in. Your crazy condition can't be cured until and unless you own the condition. Come on, man up. Or, in your case, Greek up. Stop posting anonymously.

          --
          “If everyone is thinking alike, then somebody isn't thinking.” ― George S. Patton on Ukraine
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 18 2017, @06:35AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 18 2017, @06:35AM (#468507)

    Reminds me of the script kiddy scene in the 1990s.

  • (Score: 2) by RamiK on Saturday February 18 2017, @07:29AM

    by RamiK (1813) on Saturday February 18 2017, @07:29AM (#468517)

    when you can fabricate AKs chambered for 5.56 for half the effort and quarter the price.

    --
    compiling...
  • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 18 2017, @09:04AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 18 2017, @09:04AM (#468534)

    "Criminal" is a label given by the ruling class to those they find threatening or capable of becoming threatening.

    Gun-making is able to get out of control of the ruling class and able to threaten them, so they deem it criminal activity. They sold the idea that making guns is illegal, wrong, corrupt, immoral, criminal, ....

    The people could innovate and make something that ends the tyranny of the ruling class. This is why they punish those who break (or bend) even the tiniest of those scummy "one-sided rules".