Ghost Guns and the LCM Ban.

Ghost Guns

Americans have always had the ability to legally make firearms on their own and some choose to do so as a hobby. It has not created a wave of “ghost guns.” It has allowed individuals who are passionate about building their own firearms to assemble them in their homes.

However, the overwhelming majority of firearms are bought through commercial sales, produced by manufacturers and sold by retailers that are federally licensed and regulated (NSSF).

What is not legal is manufacturing firearms without a federal license.

Established by the Gun Control Act of 1968, federal law requires a license to engage in the business of dealing firearms (Section 923(a), Title 18, U.S.C.). The phrase at stake is “engaged in the business,” which is defined in current Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) regulations.

The phrase “engaged in the business,” as applicable to a firearms dealer, is defined as a person who devotes time, attention, and labor to dealing in firearms as a regular course of trade or business with the principal objective of livelihood and profit through the repetitive purchase and resale of firearms.

On April 11, the Justice Department announced it has submitted to the Federal Register the “Engaged in the Business” Final Rule, which makes clear the circumstances in which a person is “engaged in the business” of dealing in firearms and thus required to obtain a federal firearms license, in order to increase compliance with the federal background check requirement for firearm sales by federal firearms licensees.?

“Under this regulation, it will not matter if guns are sold on the internet, at a gun show, or at a brick-and-mortar store: if you sell guns predominantly to earn a profit, you must be licensed, and you must conduct background checks,” said Attorney General Merrick B. Garland. “This regulation is a historic step in the Justice Department’s fight against gun violence. It will save lives.” (ATF Press Release, 4/11/24).

According to Reuters, The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday agreed to decide the legality of a federal regulation aimed at reining in homemade "ghost guns" as President Joe Biden's administration combats the increasing use of these largely untraceable weapons in crimes nationwide.

The justices took up the administration's appeal of a lower court's decision finding that the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) exceeded its authority in issuing the 2022 rule targeting parts and kits for ghost guns, which can be assembled at home in minutes.

Despite Joe Biden and his cronies throwing new rules and regulations on the Second Amendment community, criminals will continue to break the law. If the argument is that criminals won’t follow the existing laws and regulations, there is no evidence they will abide by new laws.

Large Capacity Magazine Ban Challenge

The District of Columbia's ban on firearm magazines that hold over ten rounds was the subject of oral argument in the D.C. Circuit on February 13.

The case is Hanson v. District of Columbia, and the appeal concerns the district court's denial of a preliminary injunction against enforcement of the ban.? The circuit panel included Judges Patricia Millett ('13) and Justin Walker ('20), and Senior Judge Douglas Ginsburg ('86) (Reason).

Only one relevant question should have been presented in this case:

Are the banned magazines commonly possessed by law-abiding citizens for lawful purposes?

According to data and studies published by the National Shooting Sports Foundation and the National Rifle Association, the answer is yes.

The common use test is the product of the text first and then history approach the Supreme Court has applied in this context. As we saw in DC v. Heller (2008), the Supreme Court examined the Second Amendment's language to determine that as a matter of plain text "arms" includes (but is not limited to) all firearms.

It then examined history to determine that only dangerous and unusual firearms can be banned. It follows that citizens have a fundamental right to possess firearms that are in common use today, because if they are in common use, they cannot be "dangerous and unusual."

In the end, the Court's decision will boil down to a matter of "common use" for legal purposes. After examining data and studies, large capacity magazines are overwhelmingly used for such purpose.