2/16 Senate Gun Bills Real-Time Discussion

[DC-W]

Here’s what Dick Heller got DC to do. Look at the bottom of page 4 and on where there’s a new Section 202(c) https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.235342/gov.uscourts.dcd.235342.10.1.pdf

Parties are completing terms of settlement. Here’s the docket: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/60369439/heller-v-district-of-columbia/

DC was doing something similar to what is being tried here in MD: killing completely the home completion of firearms.

 

[esqappellate]

As shocking as 2020 was, as shocking as 2021 was, and what a crap show 2022 is starting as,,,,
Yesterday was the truth bombs of all truth bombs for me.

Not a SINGLE Law enforcement representative, not Maryland's AG, not a single State's attorney, not a singe "Mad Mommy", to a single gun safety advocate is in favore of stiff penalties for Felons who use a firearm in the commission of a crime. NOT A SINGLE ONE OF THEM..

When questioned about lack of support of the crime bills, they all refused to answer and shrugged in their seat,, except Frosh who said something to the effect that he does not believe punishment would deter crime?????

This has nothing to do with "gun safety" This vast array and collection of people are in absolute lock step with their agenda,, there is someone, or some group somewhere, behind the curtain dictating all this,, this is all not by chance.

Nothing new. I’m not at all surprised. There is no personal accountability any more

 

[esqappellate]

Here’s what Dick Heller got DC to do. Look at the bottom of page 4 and on where there’s a new Section 202(c) https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.235342/gov.uscourts.dcd.235342.10.1.pdf

Parties are completing terms of settlement. Here’s the docket: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/60369439/heller-v-district-of-columbia/

DC was doing something similar to what is being tried here in MD: killing completely the home completion of firearms.

This settlement is a huge win for plaintiffs

 

[PowPow]

It’s not a compromise when the ATF is about to require serialization of kits regardless of the bill. Such kits won’t be available at all nationwide after the Rule goes into effect My goal was to keep folks out of jail, limit the scope of the bill and protect the right to build into the future. BTW there is no legal argument that there is a right not to have serial numbers. NONE. There is a 2A right to build but the gov can require serial numbers. As to enforcing the existing law, that point is prominent in my testimony both oral and written. My written testimony was 17 pages long single space, more than I have ever written. It took many hours of attorney time to parse and compose. Folks need to read it.

Thanks for your testimony, Mark. Can you help me out with your logic here?

To me, government requiring a serial number to exercise your natural rights creates a burden on those rights. That burden would be an infringement, would it not?

I expect you're not making a judgement based on compelling interest, since that wouldn't be a good place to be for an organization that supports our natural rights. Are there examples in text, history, or tradition to support the government requiring serial numbers on homemade firearms?

 

[teratos]

It’s not a compromise when the ATF is about to require serialization of kits regardless of the bill. Such kits won’t be available at all nationwide after the Rule goes into effect My goal was to keep folks out of jail, limit the scope of the bill and protect the right to build into the future. BTW there is no legal argument that there is a right not to have serial numbers. NONE. There is a 2A right to build but the gov can require serial numbers. As to enforcing the existing law, that point is prominent in my testimony both oral and written. My written testimony was 17 pages long single space, more than I have ever written. It took many hours of attorney time to parse and compose. Folks need to read it.

It seems to me from an originalist perspective that the government requiring registration of all guns would be frowned upon. That is ultimately what they are doing here. That is a classic case of the fox guarding the hen house. Our last defense against tyranny should not be required to be registered with or come to the attention of the tyrants.

 

[esqappellate]

Thanks for your testimony, Mark. Can you help me out with your logic here?

To me, government requiring a serial number to exercise your natural rights creates a burden on those rights. That burden would be an infringement, would it not?

I expect you're not making a judgement based on compelling interest, since that wouldn't be a good place to be for an organization that supports our natural rights. Are there examples in text, history, or tradition to support the government requiring serial numbers on homemade firearms?

Short answer is that under the current state of the law requiring a serial number is not an infringement. Hell the DC cir has sustained DCs registration requirements which is far more of a burden. Remember, the federal gov has required serial numbers since 1968 for manufacturers as part of the GCA of 1968

 

[esqappellate]

It seems to me from an originalist perspective that the government requiring registration of all guns would be frowned upon. That is ultimately what they are doing here. That is a classic case of the fox guarding the hen house. Our last defense against tyranny should not be required to be registered with or come to the attention of the tyrants.

I agree completely. But that’s not where are right now in the law. So the issue is what can I say now to limit the reach of this bill and keep people out of jail and otherwise throw sand in the gears. This is the art of the legally possible.

 

[teratos]

I agree completely. But that’s not where are right now in the law. So the issue is what can I say now to limit the reach of this bill and keep people out of jail and otherwise throw sand in the gears

I get it. Still disappointed in the Unconstitutional laws. I do find these things annoy me a lot less when I resolve to completely ignore them. Thanks for all you do, I know it is no small task you have.

 

[PowPow]

Short answer is that under the current state of the law requiring a serial number is not an infringement. Hell the DC cir has sustained DCs registration requirements which is far more of a burden. Remember, the federal gov has required serial numbers since 1968 for manufacturers as part of the GCA of 1968

The GCQ '68 doesn't see Joe Home Hobbyist and Jack Self Defense as manufacturers just because they have the skill and use it to make their own tools. In fact, it reinforces the status quo that Joe and Jack can do what they do in the manner in which they are accustomed as long as they don't do it with the intent to sell. It says they become manufacturers only if they intend to sell what they make before they make it.

This would seem to impair the use of the GCA '68 as justification for a new serial number regime. The court case against this will be interesting to follow.

 

[dblas]

JESUS! thanks you all,
1st thing I walk in and the wife says "You know you missed a spot when you shaved your head this morning"

Someone could have told me.

Where would the fun in that have been??

Don't feel too bad, welcome to the in crowd.

 

[dblas]

IIRC, she was the target of violent threats from the loving, pacific, inclusive, anti-violence Democrats and their allies, and went on to greener pastures.

She did receive threats (What NRA-ILA Rep hasn't), they weren't why she moved on.

 

[dblas]

Unpopular opinion on MDS forthcoming...
Defending the ability to online order complete P80 kits WILL come back to bite us in the ass. I know I sound like I'm compromising- and I am.
Flame away, and if you have spent anything close to as much time defending our 2A rights as I have, I'll actually listen to what you have to say.
DISCLAIMER- I haven't spent nearly the time that: EsqAppellate, Rack&Roll, DC-W, KNovotny, et al, have dedicated, but I have spent many hours in Analpolis defending our rights.
.
(This was me)
.
.

I don't think it's a compromise, I have yet to buy one online, and if I did buy one, I would probably do it in person. For those that will say "It's cheaper online than in person" that isn't the point.

<dawning fire suit right next to you>

 

[lazarus]

The GCQ '68 doesn't see Joe Home Hobbyist and Jack Self Defense as manufacturers just because they have the skill and use it to make their own tools. In fact, it reinforces the status quo that Joe and Jack can do what they do in the manner in which they are accustomed as long as they don't do it with the intent to sell. It says they become manufacturers only if they intend to sell what they make before they make it.

This would seem to impair the use of the GCA '68 as justification for a new serial number regime. The court case against this will be interesting to follow.

You have to register to vote....

I don't see how serialization and even if it came to pass, registration, would be something most courts, even the pretty right leaning SCOTUS would come up with an argument that it is unconstitutional.

It is something I'd prefer not to see come to pass, but at the same time, I don't know what real legal theory you could advance that requiring a serial number, even on something you build at home, would violate the ability to keep and bear arms.

The SCOTUS decided long ago, that ALL rights must be balanced against the "greater good". Fundamental rights should be strict scrutiny.

Requiring someone who makes a firearm, even for personal use, to put a serial number unique to the manufacturer puts just about zero burden on someone making a firearm. And if the argument is, well I'd need something to inscribe serial numbers with, a set of 1/16th punches is cheap and easy to use. If you want to argue that's a cost, well there is already a cost in making guns that isn't nothing. If you really want to, you can inscribe a crude serial number of a nail and hammer. Requiring someone ELSE to put a serial number on it certainly would put a burden.

Registering, if said registration were free and non-onerous, also does not put any real burden on the ability to keep and bear arms. If the government can come up with some good reason for what is a low burden, such as the greater good of being able to disarm convicted criminals, I'd see that winning even a strict scrutiny test.

The 2A might, by some of the founders, been added in because they didn't want their federal government to get uppity and leave the ability of the people to more easily overthrow it.

However, the 2nd amendment doesn't say anything about the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed, because we don't want the government to ever have any more military power than the people and so they can't take away guns from really dangerous people.

I hear you on "I don't want the government to know what I have, because I don't want them coming door to door and taking my stuff when some day they outlaw my stuff".

Yeah, registration makes that so much easier (if people complied anyway). But, being a non-lawyer, I don't see any good legal theory how serialization and registration would violate the 2nd. I see some very good legal reasons who "assault weapons bans" violate the 2nd. You are getting right down on the core of the whole "keep" bit. The gov't knowing what you have? Doesn't. Unless they decide to upturn the entire constitution.

But its hard to have a solid legal argument of "well if this thing happens, it could make it easier sometime later for the government to do an unconstitutional thing".

By that same logic, having a standing army makes it easier for the government to maybe turn itself against the people. Or there being federal law enforcement. Good luck having that as a winning argument in court.

 

[lazarus]

To further add, what Maryland is proposing IS a significant burden. It is going to involve people needing to run out, probably literally as the time is likely to be short (or non-existent!) from when ATF finalizes regulations and when this MD law would go into effect. It is going to be a non-trival cost. No idea what MD FFLs who decide to get the equipment or have it will charge, but I am guessing it isn't going to be free. And I'd bet it won't even be $10 or $20. I'd be surprised if it wasn't $30-50 EACH. It is extra time and hassle also to try to find any FFL that is going to do this. Then it is finding one that has the time as they get inundated by people trying to comply (those that do). For anyone making their own firearm in the future, the language of the bill makes it almost literally impossible to comply as basically anything that WILL be a firearm some day, needs a serial number before it becomes a thing that is going to be a firearm. Maybe I am misreading it, but it sure doesn't sound like if you were 3D printing or milling something could you just take it to an FFL and get it serialized before you finish. No, a chunk of aluminum billet? Yeah, the moment you are thinking you might CNC that in to a lower? It should have already had a serial number engraved on it. There is no language remotely like "a receiver or firearm in a state such that it is partially machined or formed, but not yet fully functional and requires only minimal work to complete requires a serial number".

That could leave you guessing on just HOW complete it needs to be...but you can be pretty sure an 80 would fall all under that. That billet of aluminum? Yeah you'd probably be just fine machining off one side, getting it serialized and then finishing it. Heck, just look at ATF's proposed regs. Those are much, much clearer on what is covered by needing a serial number.

I'd love to see this go down in flames, forgotten about and never brought up again. I am realistic enough to know there is not a snowballs chance in hell of that. I'd rather see the least bad version of this possible. Reduced penalties to a max of a 1yr misdemeanor would be nice (or heck, just a fine for a first-time offense if there are no other charges, IE possession on its own is a fine. Possession while committing violent crimes or felonies makes it an imprisonable offense). Grandfathering of existing PMFs, or at least as last year's bill required, existing PMFs can be serialized, and the owner keeps the records.

 

[outrider58]

Unpopular opinion on MDS forthcoming...
Defending the ability to online order complete P80 kits WILL come back to bite us in the ass. I know I sound like I'm compromising- and I am.
Flame away, and if you have spent anything close to as much time defending our 2A rights as I have, I'll actually listen to what you have to say.
DISCLAIMER- I haven't spent nearly the time that: EsqAppellate, Rack&Roll, DC-W, KNovotny, et al, have dedicated, but I have spent many hours in Analpolis defending our rights.
.
(This was me)
.
.

You are not alone.

 

[Boxcab]

A serial number engraved or stamped on a gun has never prevented a gun from killing.

I'd like to see the actual numbers of how many crimes have been solved by tracing a S/N to the actual murderer. I'm willing to concede that confirmation of ownership may be obtained, but the S/N can not tell you who pulled the trigger.


.

Sent from my SM-G781U using Tapatalk

 

[DC-W]

A serial number engraved or stamped on a gun has never prevented a gun from killing.

I'd like to see the actual numbers of how many crimes have been solved by tracing a S/N to the actual murderer. I'm willing to concede that confirmation of ownership may be obtained, but the S/N can not tell you who pulled the trigger.


.

Sent from my SM-G781U using Tapatalk

BPD Commissioner Harrison couldn’t (wouldn’t) provide this, nor could/would Frosh yesterday. Others have asked. The answers are not convenient.

Another rep from BPD did tell the Committee yesterday the vast majority of guns seized are stolen, including some of the unserialized guns.

 

[lazarus]

A serial number engraved or stamped on a gun has never prevented a gun from killing.

I'd like to see the actual numbers of how many crimes have been solved by tracing a S/N to the actual murderer. I'm willing to concede that confirmation of ownership may be obtained, but the S/N can not tell you who pulled the trigger.


.

Sent from my SM-G781U using Tapatalk

Which crime.

They are very uncommonly used to solve who might have committed the crime the gun was used in. It DOES happen that law enforcement traces the gun to a straw purchaser or someone who legally loaned or sold the firearm to someone known to them, who turns out to have committed the crime the firearm was used in.

Data? I can't find anything, but I've certainly read about a fair number of individual cases. Anecdotes aren't data though, other than to say it is certainly more than "never". And probably more than "exceedingly rare". But I'd certainly put money that it isn't common.

Though rarely prosecuted, it does often turn up straw purchasers or in some cases individuals acting as FFLs, without registering or performing background checks. A lot of guns turn up with criminals because of people acting as FFLs without registering as such and who then don't run background checks. Somehow the criminals often know how to find those "hobbyists" who are turning over dozens of guns a month at very tidy profits who aren't asking questions.

In rare cases it does also reunite a stolen gun with the owner and very rarely might also catch the criminal too (example, idiot criminal pawns a stolen gun and at some point the serial is checked and it shows up in the database of stolen guns).

 

[esqappellate]

I get it. Still disappointed in the Unconstitutional laws. I do find these things annoy me a lot less when I resolve to completely ignore them. Thanks for all you do, I know it is no small task you have.

I greatly appreciate your understanding! This is just hard sometimes

 

[dblas]

I greatly appreciate your understanding! This is just hard sometimes

That's why we refer to it as playing chess, and not checkers. Some may not like the moves made, because they can't see next moves being set up.

I, for one, appreciate your explanation and approach. I really hate the laws that get suggested and passed, but I get the gamesmanship.