Los Angeles Police Declare Ghost Guns an 'Epidemic,' Citing 400% Increase in Seizures (yahoo.com) 443
The Los Angeles Times reports that homemade (usually 3D-printed) "ghost guns" have contributed to more than 100 violent crimes this year, according to a report released Friday by the Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD)."
Detectives have linked the untraceable weapons to 24 killings, eight attempted homicides and dozens of assaults and armed robberies since January, according to the report.
And police expect the problem to get worse, the report said. During the first half of this year, the department confiscated 863 ghost guns, a 400% increase over the 217 it seized during the same period last year, according to the report. That sharp jump suggests the number of ghost guns on the streets and such seizures "will continue to grow exponentially," the authors of the report wrote.
"Ghost guns are an epidemic not only in Los Angeles but nationwide," the department said...
Because they are not made by licensed manufacturers, they lack serial numbers, making them impossible to track. Felons who are banned from possessing firearms because of previous offenses increasingly are turning to ghost guns, LAPD officials have said. The LAPD's analysis was compiled in response to a City Council motion, introduced by Councilmen Paul Koretz and Paul Krekorian, that calls for a new city ordinance banning the possession, sale, purchase, receipt or transportation of such weapons or the "non-serialized, unfinished frames and unfinished receivers" that are used to make them.
The LAPD said it is "strongly in support" of the proposed ordinance. "Ghost guns are real, they work, and they kill," the agency said in the report.
And police expect the problem to get worse, the report said. During the first half of this year, the department confiscated 863 ghost guns, a 400% increase over the 217 it seized during the same period last year, according to the report. That sharp jump suggests the number of ghost guns on the streets and such seizures "will continue to grow exponentially," the authors of the report wrote.
"Ghost guns are an epidemic not only in Los Angeles but nationwide," the department said...
Because they are not made by licensed manufacturers, they lack serial numbers, making them impossible to track. Felons who are banned from possessing firearms because of previous offenses increasingly are turning to ghost guns, LAPD officials have said. The LAPD's analysis was compiled in response to a City Council motion, introduced by Councilmen Paul Koretz and Paul Krekorian, that calls for a new city ordinance banning the possession, sale, purchase, receipt or transportation of such weapons or the "non-serialized, unfinished frames and unfinished receivers" that are used to make them.
The LAPD said it is "strongly in support" of the proposed ordinance. "Ghost guns are real, they work, and they kill," the agency said in the report.
Seriously? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Typical reporting fuck up. Probably referring to non-firing pieces like the grip or the slide. Rest of a ghost gun is machined metal.
Re:Seriously? (Score:5, Interesting)
Probably referring to non-firing pieces like the grip or the slide.
Unlikely. Grips and handguards are available off-the-shelf. No ID is needed. There is no reason to 3D-print a crappy replica when anyone can buy the real thing.
Rest of a ghost gun is machined metal.
Indeed. You can buy an AR-15 upper receiver online. The lower receiver is the serialized part. You can buy it unserialized and spend a few hours with a Sherline mill to have a fully functional rifle.
Disclaimer: Although I own a Sherline mill, I bought my AR-15 legally.
Re:Seriously? (Score:5, Informative)
Also, there are a few sort of functional lowers [arstechnica.com] out there. Why is it only the lower that needs a serial number in the US? It seems to be the easiest part of the gun to print or tool by hand; the upper and barrel are the parts that require precision manufacturing and undergo significant mechanical stress. Under EU rules, a gun's "essential parts" are considered to be the barrel, the lower, the bolt / bolt carrier. (For pistols / revolvers: the barrel, frame, slide and/or cylinder), and they all have to be marked with a serial number if possible. It's pretty hard here to just mail-order a bunch of parts and spent an afternoon in the workshop to machine the rest. Then again, it's pretty hard here to obtain a firearm legally as well.
Re:Seriously? (Score:5, Informative)
Does it have to be a Sherline mill?
No. But Sherlines [sherline.com] are cheap and easy to use.
I have used mine to machine parts on the kitchen table. My kids have used it to make parts for school projects.
Why is it only the lower that needs a serial number in the US?
That's the way the law works. The part with the serial number is "the gun" and the other components are just "spare parts". For most guns, that works because the serialized part is the hardest to make. But for an AR-15, the serialized lower receiver is relatively easy to make. The hardest part to make is the unserialized upper that has the rifled barrel and chromium-plated chamber. Making that is way beyond my skill level.
Re: (Score:3)
We have had 60 years of legal cases figuring out when a unmachined lower becomes a legal firearm and anyone can own that unmachined lower because legally it is a alloy pap
Re: Seriously? (Score:4, Insightful)
It is highly unlikely any of the guns used in the killings or robberies mentioned in TFA were committed with a rifle, let alone an AR-15. They're going to be pistols, and maybe a shotgun oe two.
Re:Seriously? (Score:5, Insightful)
It is currently perfectly legal to machine your own lower too. It has ALWAYS been legal to manufacture your own firearm (as long as you're legally allowed to own one). You're just not allowed to sell it. Nothing of consequence is 3D printed in a working firearm. However, CNC machines are becoming small and affordable enough to literally make your own lower receiver out of a hunk of aluminum or strong polymer. There are also companies specializing in making jigs so that you can effectively take an 80% finished receiver and use a common hand held router to finish the milling work.
It is impossible to put that technology genie back in the bottle. There are many other uses for CNC machines and they are getting cheaper and more capable by the minute. You COULD do what these folks are trying to do and just make it illegal to possess a "ghost gun" and attempt to control the raw materials to make them. However, those machines and materials are also used to make MANY other things that are perfectly legal. What's next? A background check to buy a CNC machine? Needing to show your passport to buy aluminum bar stock? A permit needed for router or drill bits?
Best,
Re: (Score:3)
Perfectly legal on a Federal level and most states to make your own firearm, just don't violate the NFA (ie, no full auto) or GCA (no prohibited persons) and you can't be making for sale (you'd need a manufacturers FFL/SOT). With an AR15, the lower is the registered part (at the moment....) and the lower really doesn't deal with the massive pressures and such - it is simply to manage the magazine and the trigger group and keep it all in proper alignment. You can make a lower out of aluminum (standard), po
Re:Seriously? (Score:5, Informative)
Out of interest, why did you want an AR-15 anyway?
An AR-15 is an M-16 with the auto option removed. So it is a nice rifle for someone already familiar with an M-16.
It uses standard military ammunition, that is cheap and very widely available.
There are tons of mod kits, scopes, and other accessories. More than for any other rifle, although the Ruger Mini-14 is close.
Re:Seriously? (Score:5, Informative)
The GP specifically said it is not a military weapon -- it does not have the select-fire feature that makes an M-16 an assault rifle.
AR-15s are relatively light, reliable, simple, easy to maintain, and common. The platform is useful for hunting and defense, and awkward for many crimes (handguns are preferred for crime). If you want a longer list and more detail, here you go [americas1stfreedom.org]. Or here [gunsafetysource.com].
Re: (Score:3)
The platform is useful for hunting and defense,
Fair enough. Forgive my cultural differences. Around here, a semi-auto rifle is not considered a sporting one. And keeping it for "defense" would be akin to keeping anti-tank obstacles across the driveway.
Re:Seriously? (Score:4, Informative)
On the defense issue, I'd say that most people around here own rifles more as a "deterrent" than for self defense, since it is understood that breaking into someone's house could see you staring down the wrong end of an AR-15, and the rifle is precise enough that the homeowner won't miss. Most people I know who carry for self defense pack a small caliber handgun concealed on their bodies or in an accessible place in their vehicle.
Re:Seriously? (Score:5, Interesting)
Honestly, rifled intermediate and higher calibre guns are pretty poor for self defense outside either a very rural area with no one around for a kilometre or two, or a literal war zone.
This is because they have too much penetration, which means that whatever you fire has a chance of going through walls (and even your target) and hitting other people around you.
In an urban scenario, the recommended long gun for self defense would be a pump action twelve gauge shotgun with first load or two in the gun being bird shot followed by buck. If the perp doesn't stop and flee upon receiving a cloud of tiny pellets across his face, then you just keep pumping with lethal option of buck that has some minimal ability to penetrate walls. Basically, minimize collateral. It's also far less accuracy-dependent than a rifle, and being too accurate is a problem in tight spaces.
As for "sporting", a lot of nations don't have the same tradition of shooting sports that US has.
Re:Seriously? (Score:5, Insightful)
Honest question, if you're not hunting with rifles what type of weapon is considered "sporting"?.
Hunters here use rifles, but bolt-action, not semi-auto. I'm a city boy, so not personally familiar, only shot on a range.
So I incorrectly referred to the semi-auto as military style. Clearly Americans do not see it that way.
For cultural context, in the part of the US where I live (deep south, gulf coast) when people talk about hunting, usually they mean for deer, and often it's for food more than sport
Feral pigs or roos here. You don't want to eat that. For food, we go fishing. Duck-hunting used to be a thing, but was banned for environmental reasons.
On the defense issue, I'd say that most people around here own rifles more as a "deterrent" than for self defense, since it is understood that breaking into someone's house
We have trouble understanding the self-defense logic. Burglars mostly come when nobody is home, and if you did happen to encounter one, its better that nobody is armed. You scream, they run - its a better arrangement than fantasizing about catching them coming in the window.
It is hard to imagine a realistic scenario where having a gun in the house makes you safer. That's just our culture - I'm not pretending to know what its like in the US.
Re: (Score:3)
Nobody would hunt deer with a handgun or shotgun.
Where I live this is quite common. The deer season opens with bow hunting and muzzle loaded rifles. Then comes the handgun and shotgun season. If there's still not enough deer culled in the season then the state opens up a week or two of rifle hunting. Shotgun hunting requires use of a slug, a single projectile so that the shotgun fires what is effectively a big slow rifle bullet. It's possible to get a rifled slug barrel for popular shotgun models to increase the accuracy. I have a 12 gauge shotgun a
Re: (Score:3)
We have trouble understanding the self-defense logic. Burglars mostly come when nobody is home, and if you did happen to encounter one, its better that nobody is armed. You scream, they run - its a better arrangement than fantasizing about catching them coming in the window.
I suspect that's a cultural thing here in the US. Armed home invasions are not unheard of, and neither is it rare to see signs at the bottom of rural driveways with some variation of "go to church to get to heaven, trespass here to get there sooner". The idea being that paranoid homeowners out in the country (where, ironically, this type of crime is least likely to happen) have a "shoot first, ask questions later" mentality and think that apparently posting your property gives you some legal right to use le
Re:Seriously? (Score:5, Interesting)
We have home invasions here where they specifically look for you to be home so they can terrorize you and force you to reveal where all your valuables, etc. are while they hold a gun to your children's heads. Some friends of mine had exactly this happen. They were super-liberal types who were against guns...until this happened and now they're very pro-gun. Ain't nothing like watching your children be traumatized for a few hundred dollars cash and some jewelry to make you want some justice.
Re:Seriously? (Score:5, Interesting)
If the perp doesn't stop and flee upon receiving a cloud of tiny pellets across his face, then you just keep pumping with lethal option of buck that has some minimal ability to penetrate walls.
Wrong. That's a great way to get yourself sued. You go with buck from the get go, birdshot doesn't penetrate enough, and can and will be used against you by the perps lawyers if you leave them alive. "That's torture, ETC." is what they will use in court.
If you ever are forced to have to defend yourself with your firearm you shoot to kill. Period. Not intentionally wounding without intent to kill. No warning shots. You shoot to kill and eliminate the threat to your person. That's why your firearm is the choice of last resort.
In almost all areas you will get in far far more legal troubles for firing a warning shot instead of shooting the actual threat. Having time to fire a warning shot - which I might add is dangerous to other things and people near you - means your life wasn't in immediate and imminent danger and you had time to try other options like running away / taking cover.
Same goes for leaving the threat alive. A dead criminal can't convince a jury, especially a hand picked hippie anti gun jury that their lawyer will try to get, that "I was just misunderstood when I broke into this persons house and threatened them, and this maniac shot me, give me millions of dollars". Bullshit like that has already won cases for criminals who broke into homes and where injured inside by dogs and / or power equipment. Yes, you read that correctly criminals have sued the homeowners whose house they broke into and WON after getting injured by dogs and power tools.
Fight or Flight (Score:3)
most people around here own rifles more as a "deterrent" than for self defense
Please forgive this ignorant guy from the UK who has never owned a gun, but how does owning a rifle act as a deterrent? In order for that to work, any criminal intending to attack you would have to know you own a rifle. Do you put a notice on the outside of your house?
The deterrent is seeing the armed homeowner. That strongly weighs the criminal's decision toward flight rather than fight. Whether the weapon is an AR-15 or not is irrelevant. Also the rifle may not be solely for home defense, it may be used for various other legal purposes and get re-tasked for home defense in an emergency.
Also the person using the rifle in defense may not be the person who bought it. I've seen many guys who bought the rifle for target shooting take their wives to the range to familiari
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Seriously? (Score:5, Insightful)
Why would you want a sports car? Who are you (or I) to judge what another person "is allowed" to buy? How about going after the criminals rather than the tools they use for their craft? Even though you may not enjoy target shooting or hunting or collecting firearms, there are many people that do.
Best,
Re:Seriously? (Score:5, Insightful)
Many people confuse the "want" with "need". This is a classic one.
You could ask the exact same question about almost anyone buying a motorbike. Or a sports car. Or a fancy suit. Or an outdoor grill. Or many other items we all buy because we want one - not because we need one.
You ask why HE WANTED one, because YOU never saw the NEED for one. It is the wrong way to ask the question, and you will not get a meaningful answer.
Also, you bring up the military aspect. Many people get confused there. Most classic hunting rifles are ALSO military rifles, including most of the common/popular hunting calibers. The AR platform rifles are simply the next generation. And militaries around the world, just like civilians, like to use the latest stuff.
There are many reasons to want one. (fun, sporting, hunting, collecting and so on), And fortunately, some of us live in a society where we are allowed to get things because we want them, not because we need them.
Re: (Score:3)
I didn't expect the answer to such a simple question to be so difficult to answer. I thought he would just say "I'm worried about crime" or something.
By the way I didn't mention the military, that was the OP.
Re:Seriously? (Score:5, Informative)
I didn't expect the answer to such a simple question to be so difficult to answer. I thought he would just say "I'm worried about crime" or something.
By the way I didn't mention the military, that was the OP.
Sorry, seems like I answered two posts in one. While I can't answer for the OP, I can answer for myself.
I own several firearms, for various purposes. Most of it is for hunting purposes. Different firearms are good for different types of hunting. The ability to take a fast second and sometimes third shot is valuable when hunting. Semi-autos do that far better than traditional bolt actions, as you don't have to take your right hand off the handle/trigger. Doing so usually means losing sight picture. And even if you don't have to take that follow-up shot, you always want a new round in the chamber IF you need it. It supports ethical hunting.
I want to use similar rifles for hunting, target practice and sport shooting. Using the same physical layout promotes muscle memory, which is crucial - for accuracy as well as for security.
Re: (Score:3)
If you eat meat, hunting (when done right) is the most ethical way to get that meat. It is also the most sustainable way, as it automatically encourages biodiversity. And being vegetarian kills around 25x more sentient beings than being a meat eater. Large-scale farming is horrible for biodiversity.
As for pest control, it is usually a mix of alternating methods that prove successful. Feral hogs, coyotes etc quickly learn and you have to shift to new locations, new methods. Large-scale poisoning is clearly n
Re: (Score:3)
Why should hunting be limited depending on other food sources being available? Is there really an ethical difference between a person who hunts and brings the meat home (or donates it it a homeless shelter) and a person who pay Ronald McDonald to hit a cow in the head with a hammer as part of the process of making a burger?
Getting shot is more humane? The wild animal didn't have to live in confinement? I'm not saying these are absolutely true but are points to debate.
Re: (Score:3)
Uses for AR-15;
1) Target shooting, formal or informal.
2) Pest control, or hunting if 22 caliber is legal for it. In my State hunting coyotes is a common use. Other places have groundhog or woodchuck problems, and a AR is more than adequate to the task.
3) Deer hunting. Some states allow 22 center fire cartridges for deer. Mine requires at least 6 mm, but you can swap the upper in less than a minute. That means your AR is now deer legal.
Commercially available deer legal cartridges that work in an AR-15 inclu
Re:Seriously? (Score:5, Interesting)
So far for fun, I keep meaning to take up hunting but always have too many projects. I got almost all of them from my father all at once, I bought only the pistol. I even turned down one gun he wanted to give me even though it was valuable because it was illegal, a sawed off pump-action Mossberg pistol grip shotgun.
The pistol I bought for self defense in a SHTF situation, though, it's designed for concealed carry. If everything goes sideways and I find myself bugging out of a firestorm on foot (likely since I live in Cali) I don't want to be unarmed. There's a shitload of wackos out there/up here (northern California is a total shitshow of methamphetamines.) I'd rather people with all kinds of problems get the help they need than cannon up, but it's not up to me. I vote for social relief, but voting means less and less in this country.
Re: (Score:3)
In the UK you usually have the option of keeping your gun at the shooting club, or using theirs.
I guess what I'm trying to understand is why people feel so strongly that they need a personal gun to keep at home, and that there shouldn't be many checks when you buy one, or any kind of licence.
Locks and biometric sensors are also widely opposed, but speedy and reliable access don't seem to be issues at the range.
Re: (Score:3)
Here in Germany you're required to lock up your guns and ammo in separate safes that have to comply to regulations and are inspected, increasing the cost of keeping your fire arms close to you by quite a bit for a beginner. For example the safes that you need to buy may cost about as much as the small caliber rifle you want to start out with.
Yet a lot of people choose to do it this way, despite technica
Re: (Score:3)
I guess what I'm trying to understand is why people feel so strongly that they need a personal gun to keep at home ...
American culture highly values self reliance.
Yes, we have police, but they don't necessarily show up in a timely fashion. As a matter of fact they are not required to show up at all. Google Los Angeles riots of 1992. Various buildings and businesses were saved from looting and arson by owners up on the roof with AR-15 and similar rifles when rioters approached. The rioters got a look and decided to go elsewhere. The recent summer of lawlessness in the US has spurred a spike in firearms sales. Shelves in gu
Re:Seriously? (Score:5, Funny)
That's very unsporting of you. I always carry two knives so that I can throw one to the squirrel for a fair fight. Or we just go fisticuffs.
Re: (Score:3)
The smallest cartridge and caliber that is officially allowed for deer hunting would be the
It still gets a bit more complicated when it comes to cartridge and bullet combination, where you have your lower BC bullets that are good at closer ranges, and higher BC bullet tha
Re:Seriously? (Score:5, Informative)
Fact is that an AR-15 isn't nearly so dangerous as most hoplophobes think. It's a weak cartridge, at best
I will expand on this by pointing out to the OP that the trend in military firearms during and after WW2 was to a smaller, lighter cartridge that you could carry more of. Previously cartridges like the 30-06 or 7.62x54R were high-powered, large (bulky), heavy cartridges with a long effective range. Military planners realized that 1) Most infantry don't act like snipers; they rarely even attempt to engage the enemy at long distances, 2) they're not going to hit at long ranges anyway, 3) it is just as effective, in terms of "stopping the other army from winning the battle", to wound the enemy and thereby consume logistics getting him back to a hospital. You don't have to kill him to achieve that goal, 4) the more rounds you can carry, the more chances you have to put some guy on the other side out of action. So the standard infantry cartridge went on a diet; it became lighter, physically smaller and less powerful, standard magazine sizes increased, etc.
Re:Seriously? (Score:4, Funny)
There are clearly downsides to gun ownership.
None that I can see.
Some places require you to undergo checks
I showed my ID, the guy at the gun shop verified that I was not a criminal, then I paid cash and walked out with my rifle.
Total elapsed time: 5 minutes.
you must store it securely to prevent misuse
A $5 bike lock works well. I also store the BCG, magazine, and ammo separately from the rifle.
So there must be some benefit to you that outweighs all that.
I don't hunt since I am a veggie, and San Jose has very little crime, so the main benefit is to stop the British from taxing my tea.
Re: (Score:3)
An AR-15 is a cheap crappy semi automatic rifle that fires .223 remington which is a civilian caliber distinct from 5.56 NATO. They are so unsuitable to sustained fire that some some mass shooter had many of them because he knew they would jam after few shots in succession.
This information is wrong in every conceivable way. .223 and 5.56 NATO are very close to being the same round, to the point that any weapon chambered in 5.56 can fire .223 safely (not vice versa, however). Most ARs you buy today will be chambered this way - I haven't seen a .223-only AR in a long time. Failure to fire is a function of ammunition quality, rate of fire (not just how many rounds you have put through it), equipment maintenance, ambient dust conditions &c. With a quality, well-maintained AR
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Military ammo is (unless it is anti-materiel) what is called full metal jacket. That means the whole bullet (the part that flies and hits something) has a hard metal shell. When it hits something soft, it retains its shape (it does not deform/expand).
If you compare this to bullets made for hunting, you will see a stark difference. These bullets are made to kill quickly, by causing massive bleeding and hydrostatic chock. They expand rapidly upon impact, mushrooming up to 2x the original diameter. This in tur
Re:Seriously? (Score:5, Informative)
I'd tell you both, personally. I bought a truck so I could move stuff around. Right now it has a topper on it for the winter (it was free, though it needs some work and needed new hinges) so I can move stuff around in the rain. But I got an F-150 because it's the most common model with lots of accessories, aftermarket parts support, etc. There are substantial advantages to getting such an item, notably knowing that you will be able to support it. So maybe someone buys an AR when a lesser rifle will do because they know they'll be able to adapt it to do different jobs in the future. Maybe they want a short-barreled scout rifle to go with their bug-out bag, or conversely they will want to mount a long barrel for long range shooting. Either makes the AR an attractive choice. Whereas if you're absolutely sure you're only going to want to take single shots at long-range prey, you're going to buy a bolt-action rifle... in the US, probably chambered in .308 as it's a very versatile cartridge and very common here. Or possibly in .30-06, if you have other rifles in the same caliber and want them to share ammo. That's a more expensive round, but you could load your own.
People think of the AR-15 as an assault rifle, and while they're not completely wrong, they're not completely right either. What it really is? An affordable rifle with immense aftermarket support, which really does make it comparable to the F-150. I went with the Mustang comparison in another comment for the same reasons, but the pickup comparison is possibly more apt... I just tend to think in terms of sports cars first because I drove them for so many years.
Re: (Score:2)
3D-printed guns have gotten a lot bet
Re: (Score:2)
"Modern 3D-printed guns absolutely do work. But what is important to understand is that you don't turn on the 3D printer, hit start, and end up with a working gun."
Yes, you'd need a 10000$ printer for that and everybody knows cartels and the mob don't have that kind of money.
Re: (Score:3)
The problem - as presented - is not that cartels with deep wallets cannot buy and assemble a workshop and start their own armory. The stated problem is that Joe the mugger can get a cheap printer at home, and print a gun.
Last time I read about California and ghost guns, the problem statement was different. It was that companies online were selling pre-made parts very closely resembling the final product. All without serial numbers. All it takes for Joe the Mugger to complete it is to drill a hole somewhere.
Re: (Score:2)
3d printed guns are moving the needle very little, but home CNC'd guns are probably a bigger and bigger factor. There are now several CNCs designed just for making gun parts.
Re: (Score:3)
Believe what you wish, then take a look at https://ghostguns.com/ [ghostguns.com] to seecommercial provided tools for home ghost gun builders. Even if the firearms are not physically robust and are more likely than most guns to jam, they don't have to work well to be a risk to life and limb.
Yep (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
And you're talking about stockpiles held by legal firearm owners with no criminal record.
Or is merely owning a firearm now criminal in your opinion?
Re: Yep (Score:2)
No. the point is ease of access. Since so many legally own firearms and there is more ammo in circulation, it makes ghost guns easier to use.
I personally like Chris Rock's solution. Want to solve gun control, make every bullet cost $1,000.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Texas beat you to that idea [texastribune.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Want to solve gun control, make every bullet cost $1,000.
My redneck brother-in-law has an IQ of about 65 and has no problem casting bullets and doing his own reloads. If he can do it, anyone can.
Lock, stock and (Score:3)
but where does the barrel come from?
Re: (Score:2)
but where does the barrel come from?
Under Federal law, as long as the receiver is unfinished you can legally sell a gun kit complete with barrel and the nothing has to be identified with a serial number.
The barrel comes with the gun kit.
Ghost gun FAQ [americanprogress.org]
Re: Lock, stock and (Score:2)
For all the felons that love legos with less pieces and easier assembly.
Re: (Score:2)
For an AR-15, the barrel and chamber are part of the upper receiver. They are not serialized and can be purchased by anyone. Legally, it is just a chunk of metal.
Yep here we go again (Score:5, Interesting)
Bad guys are doing crime with untraceable weapons, so pass a law saying all weapons must be traceable. Bad guys will comply. Instant success.
Re: (Score:2)
This sort of comment comes up every time theres a gun control discussion on Slashdot - “you cant do anything because the bad guys wont play along”.
Ok, putting aside the fact that gun crime is significantly less in countries that have had gun control enacted within living memory, and taking the premise that gun control only affects legally held guns, I ask you this:
Whats your solution?
Its obvious America needs one, even if most Americans seem to think there isnt a problem, so what do you suggest?
Re: (Score:2)
Probably just ban the sale of gun kits w/out receiver.
Re: (Score:2)
So if I want to customize my Glock 19x, I have to literally buy another ENTIRE FIREARM?
Re:Yep here we go again (Score:5, Informative)
Ok, putting aside the fact that gun crime is significantly less in countries that have had gun control enacted within living memory
I don't have a solution for you, but thinking that gun control is the solution because "it must have worked elsewhere" is part of the problem. I live in the 2nd most gun friendly country in the world (a few days ago I received an invitation for a "rifle shooting course while flying on a helicopter"), but despite that we're constantly in top 10 safest countries of the world.
I guess one difference is we don't have too many real firearms among criminals. Also, we somehow lack the dumb people placing loaded guns within the reach of toddlers and things like that. Furthermore, no killings at schools, regardless of weapon of choice. Somehow our kids don't feel the need to murder their schoolmates.
We also have almost no knife crime (hello UK!) despite having no laws banning the carry of cold weapons.
I'd personally say the problem is in the people and the society. The use of weapons is just a manifestation of such problems.
Re: (Score:3)
Ok, putting aside the fact that gun crime is significantly less in countries that have had gun control enacted within living memory
I don't have a solution for you, but thinking that gun control is the solution because "it must have worked elsewhere" is part of the problem. I live in the 2nd most gun friendly country in the world (a few days ago I received an invitation for a "rifle shooting course while flying on a helicopter"), but despite that we're constantly in top 10 safest countries of the world.
I guess one difference is we don't have too many real firearms among criminals. Also, we somehow lack the dumb people placing loaded guns within the reach of toddlers and things like that. Furthermore, no killings at schools, regardless of weapon of choice. Somehow our kids don't feel the need to murder their schoolmates.
We also have almost no knife crime (hello UK!) despite having no laws banning the carry of cold weapons.
I'd personally say the problem is in the people and the society. The use of weapons is just a manifestation of such problems.
These are all great points. Here in the USA we lack a strong social safety net, we lack healthcare as a right, and we have a long, historic racism due to hundreds of years of slavery and abuse of indigenous peoples. We have a militarized police force that is completely untrusted by significant populations. We have social problems that don't exist in some countries and its hard for me to believe (well, as a liberal it is) that some of those differences are not as or more reasons why we have more crime iss
Re: (Score:2)
most Americans seem to think there isnt a problem,
Maybe they are right. Gun homicides are far lower than they were a generation ago. Gun suicides outnumber gun homicides.
Gun violence is almost entirely a problem for people who either choose to have a gun or are criminals.
If you aren't a criminal and live in a household that doesn't have any guns, gun violence is unlikely to affect you.
For people who choose to own a gun, it is not your right to tell them how to live their lives.
Re: (Score:2)
I am an European citizen, and therefore only have indirect knowledge of the situation in the US.
If you look at the data, there seems to be two approaches that work: gun control and education.
Gun control in the US seems to be something that will take several generations to produce any effect, given the enormous number of guns out there already.
Education usually takes only about 15 to 20 years to produce societal effects. Reality is, countries such as Switzerland and Israel also have extremely high gun owners
Re: (Score:2)
Whats your solution?
Make America Great At Something Other Than Fuckery, for the first time. America's primary competence has been war. In order to reduce the numbers of people wanting to kill people, we're going to have to get good at something else, like meeting people's needs.
Re: (Score:2)
“And criminals will use whatever weapons are at their disposal - the UK is finding this out now”
Another thing I see trotted out a lot - sure, we have knife crime in the UK, but our murder, assault and other violent crime rates are orders of magnitude lower than the US (and some classes of crime, like home invasion, basically dont exist statistically), which is odd if the argument holds any water considering household knife ownership is pretty much 100%, far beyond US gun ownership rates.
I agree
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
You have more than 350 million firearms in circulation. They are out there. You will never get rid of them.
You don't need to crack down on guns, you need to crack down on bullets and primer. You can homemake bullets (easy) and primers (hard) but I wouldn't fancy firing fully automatic from a homemade primer. Then ensure that lawful owners of these are required to store them securely. It's not about eliminating the threat, it's reducing the damage that can be done so that at least a pair of demented 12 year olds can't pull off a mass casualty incident, whilst still allowing lawful owners their guns.
See the UK has
Re: (Score:2)
If you want to kill a bunch of people in the UK, and you can't afford a black market gun, then you're going to have to use fire, or a bomb, or crash a car into a crowd.
Less people WANT to, in part because you have a working national health care system, although some are continually trying to destroy that. Those people are some of your truest enemies.
Re: Yep here we go again (Score:4, Informative)
The facts that you even brought up full auto shows you don't know what you're talking about. The number of violent crimes(because administrative crimes like not updating your NFA paperwork aren't germane to the discussion) committed with a full auto weapon in the US over the past 4 decades are vanishingly small, as in you'd be hard pressed to hit double digits in total after removing the crimes committed with full auto weapons brought into the country by the various drug cartels in the 80's and 90's and probably wouldn't hit 3. Indeed the closest thing to a full auto crime was the Vegas shooter(who they never managed to figure anything of substance about and his motives remain a complete mystery, funny that). However that could have been accomplished with a shoe string and cheap keyring instead of an expensive bump stock.
Re: (Score:2)
It does seem that whatever you are doing isnt making any headway, and indeed the situation seems to be getting worse overall, so why the aggression around having a discussion about it?
And I think you made up the “defensive use outstrips murder rate” claim, or will trot out figures heavily skewed to fit the narrative (ie use in defence in all circumstances vs just murders committed with guns, rather than all gun crime).
Re: (Score:2)
It's nearly impossible to fix most people past about age 12. For better or for worse, people committing crimes of violence between age 12 and about 30 are pretty much not salvageable. I think closer to 40, most of them probably become more or less a non-factor, but for reasons of public safety you have to keep them locked up which isn't doing much for making them useful after age 40.
Really, we have to dump a ton of resources into kids before they're 12 to avert problems later. A good chunk of the problem
Really ? Just what do they want to ban now ? (Score:5, Insightful)
Plumbing pipe ?
Drill presses ?
Nails ?
You can make a zipgun for less than 10 bucks from materials you can get in any hardware store.
This story is just pandering to fearful people who can't accept the world will never be a safe place until it's a dead place
Re: (Score:2)
Your zipgun will not have same killing capacity as 80% receiver upgraded to full set.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
And yet the police are saying that there are now more home-made guns than before. Why would that be?
You could always make a gun cheaply, but most people didn't for some reason. Probably lack of skills or a workshop, and the low and highly variable quality of the finished product.
Now you can 3D print guns reliably with minimal experience and space.
Clearly something has changed here. If that means something should be done about it is another question, but we should at least have a discussion about it instead
Re:Really ? Just what do they want to ban now ? (Score:4, Insightful)
And yet the police are saying that there are now more home-made guns than before. Why would that be?
Supply increases to meet demand. Why has demand increased?
Um no (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Again, zip guns are cheaper.
Sure, they're not as fancy.
And sure, they might blow your hand off.
But the thing is, they DO work. And it doesn't take lots of money or skill to create one.
Rhetorical question (Score:4, Insightful)
Do traceable guns refuse to fire? Or in other words, how does traceability reduce crime? I can't imagine a baddie going "Oh my! I'd better totally refrain from shooting that guy with this traceable gun I have in my hand. I knew I should have gotten us an untraceable gun. Phew, that was close!"
What the fuzz is complaining about is that they have a harder time linking a gun to a person. But that's nothing new: that's been a thing since someone got the idea of bringing a file to a serial number.
Re: (Score:3)
someone got the idea of bringing a file to a serial number.
Filing off serial numbers stamped into small metal objects is actually quite difficult. The crystalline structure of the metal underneath is stressed, far deeper than the depth of the actual letters/numbers being stamped into the metal. Acid-etching the filed surface usually results in a legible serial number. Removing enough material that this is no longer possible, in many cases, would make the gun structurally unsafe (not to mention, most people filing off serial numbers would not consider this possibili
How about totals? (Score:2)
Conflating data (Score:5, Insightful)
What I'm hearing is... (Score:2)
... as many gun enthusiasts have predicted, stricter gun laws do jack shit about the people who intend to do unlawful things with their guns in the first place.
Insert surprised pikachu face for the memes.
Finally. (Score:2)
The problem isn't the guns... (Score:4, Insightful)
Realistically, the guns aren't going away. However, addressing the real problem is a lot harder. Just what *do* you do with a violent, uneducated underclass that numbers in the millions?
400% Increase in seizures (Score:2)
A 400% increase in seizures? I wonder if there's a link between ghost guns and epilepsy.
This seems pretty overblown (Score:2)
In light of this, 100 ghost guns does not seem epidemic.
Epidemic? (Score:4, Informative)
Detectives have linked the untraceable weapons to 24 killings, eight attempted homicides and dozens of assaults and armed robberies since January, according to the report.
Epidemic? That's a Saturday afternoon in Chicago.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
You mean like a bow that someone recently used to kill 4 people?
Re: (Score:3)
Some 45% of murders in the US are committed with handguns, 4% with rifles and shotguns and another 23% with unknown types of firearms ...
For your reference [statista.com].
Re: (Score:3)
Re:"Ghost guns are real, they work, and they kill" (Score:5, Insightful)
Wait, murderers? You mean a person is the killer, not the tool itself?
Yes. People kill people. That's why you shouldn't allow them to have guns.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:"Ghost guns are real, they work, and they kill" (Score:5, Insightful)
Right, only people that the government decides should have weapons should have weapons.
Yes. That's how the law works: the government says what you can and can't do. As long as the government is democratically elected that's not a problem except for loonies who think the world revolves around them and their anti-social fascist fantasies.
Re: (Score:3)
To think that anti-gun leftists are now worshipping the US government's ability to rule as they wish.
What happened to you people? You remember the US government? The one that napalmed children in Vietnam? And then invaded Iraq? That US government? Suddenly it has democratic legitimacy and if they tell you shit tastes good you'll eat a mouthful?
A few popguns in the hands of idiots isn't going to change that. In fact, the idiots with the popguns supported all of that.
Re:"Ghost guns are real, they work, and they kill" (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
OH, REGULATION is gonna stop MURDERERS from getting guns illegally!
No. It will stop them having guns legally. So when they get drunk or have an argument with their neighbour they can't just reach into their pocket and pull out a gun. They have to pre-meditate, and that makes a huge difference.
Basically your braindead argument is that because people have always committed murder there's no point in making it illegal.
Re: (Score:3)
OH, REGULATION is gonna stop MURDERERS from getting guns illegally!
No. It will stop them having guns legally. So when they get drunk or have an argument with their neighbour they can't just reach into their pocket and pull out a gun. They have to pre-meditate, and that makes a huge difference.
Basically your braindead argument is that because people have always committed murder there's no point in making it illegal.
Norway: Regulates gun ownership strictly, has a healthy gun culture, 0,5 gun killings per 100k citizens.
USA: awash with guns, has completely dysfunctional gun culture, guns are freely available to terrorists, criminals and nutcases by design, 5 gun killings per 100k citizens.
You don't have to be a Nobel laureate to understand that fire arms regulations combined with a sane gun culture actually works. The USA has neither.
Re: "Ghost guns are real, they work, and they kill (Score:2)
I am yet to see a knife or a bow used to kill 61 at a time, but I have seen vehicles killing 84, if numbers is all you are after. And yet, we keep pumping vehicles out to the streets and folks does not go out chanting against vehicles. But hey, this is just me, an unpopular opinion.
Re: (Score:3)
I am yet to see a knife or a bow used to kill 61 at a time, but I have seen vehicles killing 84, if numbers is all you are after. And yet, we keep pumping vehicles out to the streets and folks does not go out chanting against vehicles. But hey, this is just me, an unpopular opinion.
You should look into some failed states where guns are outlawed by dictators.
Re: "Ghost guns are real, they work, and they kill (Score:2)
If there's something strange
In your neighborhood
Who you gonna call?
Ghost butchers