So, after Joe announces his quickie gun-control plans, his press lady, Jen Psaki (whom I really like) gets into an exchange with a reporter from RCP who challenges her on how many crimes are actually committed with ghost guns. And of course, Psaki doesn’t know because nobody knows.
But just leave it to CNN. They explained ‘ghost guns’ the day before Joe said he wants them to be regulated like any other gun. And CNN’s explanation for what constitutes a ‘ghost gun’ can be read right here. Except there’s only one, little problem, which is that CNN gets it all wrong.
So, the purpose of this column is to straighten out what we mean and don’t mean when we use a phrase like ‘ghost guns,’ before the whole issue gets completely out of control. I note, for example, that a bill to regulate ghost guns has been introduced into the Maryland General Assembly. The bill, as it is currently written, doesn’t regulate anything at all.
The term ‘ghost gun’ refers to any gun which doesn’t carry markings which allow law enforcement or regulatory agencies (ex. ATF) to figure out how and when a crime gun ended up being used in a crime. So, for example, if a ‘ghost gun’ is picked up from a 16-year-old kid wandering down the street in Baltimore, it’s a crime gun because a 16-year-old kid isn’t old enough to own a gun. And since every gun which is manufactured by a licensed gun maker is first sold after a background check, and since the dealer has to keep a record which contains the serial number of that gun, the cops can figure out how the gun moved from ‘right’ to ‘wrong’ hands.
The ‘ghost gun’ bill which has been introduced in Maryland and will be typical of such statutes being introduced elsewhere, requires that the name, address, along with some kind of identifying numeric be stamped on the receiver of the gun. Furthermore, if the person who bought a ‘ghost gun’ kit wants to sell or give the gun to someone else, this transfer must be done through a federally licensed dealer who would only conduct the transfer after the requisite background check is done.
Sounds like a smart and easy way to get rid of ‘ghost guns,’ right? Wrong. And here’s the reason why it’s wrong and not just wrong but actually dumb as hell.
When someone becomes a federally licensed gun manufacturer, his entire operation from end to end comes under the purview and regulatory activity of the ATF. Which means that ATF agents can walk into the Smith & Wesson factory in Massachusetts, or the Sig factory in New Hampshire, or the Glock factory in Georgia and conduct the same inspection which they do when the wander into my gun shop or anyone else who has a federal license to make, import or sell guns.
These licensees must keep very detailed records about every, single gun which passes through their licensed premise, including and most important, the unique serial number of every, single gun. Can Glock and Kahr Arms give their guns he same number? Of course they can. But one gun was made by Glock, the other was made by Kahr Arms. And every gun manufactured under a federal license must also carry the name of the company which made that gun.
So, let’s say I decide to buy a kit and make my own gun. Why would I ever put my real name and address on the gun if I wanted to sell it to someone who couldn’t pass a background check but wanted to own a gun? Am I that dumb?
The only way we can effectively control ‘ghost guns’ would be the same way we need to control all the guns which cause gun violence – get rid of those guns.
Apr 11, 2021 @ 11:14:04
You should practice what you preach, Mike. If you want to ban “assault weapons” and “killer handguns” (where did you come up with that name?!) you should be first in line to turn yours in. But you’re not going to do that.
Apr 11, 2021 @ 13:13:42
The way I see it, with additive manufacturing (AM) technology advancing as fast as it is, I am pessimistic we can put the genie back in the bottle. Indeed, it won’t be long before someone can set up an additive manufactured gun business to evade regulation while making quality stuff. A company called Solid Concepts apparently used Direct Metal Laser Sintering to make an all metal 1911; the story came out in Digital Engineering in 2013! Mind you, its not your couple thousand dollar home plastic AM printer that prints guns that blow up after a few rounds. Its a million dollar technology likely similar to what NASA and GE use to print high stress, high temperature parts in things like rocket engines and airframes. Still, technology trickles down.
But still, if one is not worried about Joe Blow in the backwoods puttering around making himself a gun but instead worrying about some nefarious terrorists, drug kingpins, gang bangers, or left/right wing wackos churning out firearms in underground factories, its going to be increasingly important for the government not to chase down finished product as much as the technology that allows Proud Boys, Antifa, or your local narco-terrorist to churn out 1911s or ARs behind a front factory making, say bicycle frames.
Regarding that first comment. Even if Mike, yours truly, and all the other nice guys turn in their “killer handguns” and ARs, I’m sure anyone out there for whom a gun is one of the tools of the trade will be a little less willing to part with Sam Colt’s Legacy. In places like New Mexico, we frequently treat FIP as not much more than a blip and cut the perps loose without so much as bail.Or as a former police chief in Chicago once quipped, some of these folks are more in fear of being caught on the street without their heat than standing in front of a judge after being caught by the cops with same. One could hope that the theft pipeline would dry up. Other than that, I’m skeptical. Besides, the homicide rate in the US was far higher back in the 70’s before Plastic Fantastic Handguns were in everyone’s sock drawer.
Interesting interview by Michel Martin of Alain Stephens from the Trace on NPR yesterday. Surprisingly, when the interviewer asked the gentleman how to really cut down on gun violence, he waived off all this stuff about “ghost guns” and ARs and instead said something along the lines of (and I am paraphrasing), ‘fix the income inequality and all the other social problems that drive people to shoot each other’. I have lived in or near Los Alamos for twenty years. Still waiting to hear about the first shootout up there. Why is it taking so long? People have good jobs, homes, and a life. Too much to lose and not much to gain by shaking down the local liquor store or getting into a beef with the guy down the street and pulling out your piece.
Sigh.
Apr 13, 2021 @ 08:06:01
I have to agree with the gun guys here for a few reasons: One, you can get a receiver printed with anything you want. What’s to stop someone making receivers that look like legit guns and selling them? I’m not talking stripped. I’m talking about the 80% jobs.
The Second, US gun laws work on a knowledge (scienter) background. They would have to prove that the person who had the gun “knew” it was illegal. Sure, the kid walking down the street with one is committing a crime, but they would have to get the kid to admit the gun was made illegally.
As someone who was involved in enforcing the laws, we would have to get the kid to give up his dealer. Maybe we could make a deal, but that wasn’t always the case.
Parts guns are problematic to say the least.