The Senate and Ghost Guns by Tom Reynolds
On May 7th, the Department of Justice published its proposed new rules for 80% lowers and frames, what politicians have derisively dubbed “ghost guns”, in order to demonize home-built firearms. The proposed rules would significantly broaden the definition of a firearm; any part that can be “readily completed” into a receiver will now be treated as a receiver and regulated as a functional firearm, complete with serialization and background check requirement.
The very next week, on May 11th, in the Senate Judiciary’s Subcommittee on The Constitution’s hearing titled “Stop Gun Violence: Ghost Guns”, there was some interesting testimony surrounding so-called “ghost guns” and the Department of Justice’s proposed rule to redefine a firearm; testimony you will not hear about in the main stream media.
Senator Ted Cruz (R-Texas) led the pro-gun charge by challenging the idea that the hearing was intended to reduce crime because it was really about gun registration and eventual confiscation. He said, “They want a registry of every firearm in America…when you see countries enact registries of firearms, the next step is confiscation. And numerous Democrats on this committee have advocating confiscating firearms.”
Anyone doubting Cruz’ statement about confiscation only needs to see California Senator Dianne Feinstein 1995 “60 Minutes” TV interview in which she said about guns, “If I could have gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States for an outright ban, picking up every one of them…turn them all in.”
Cruz continued his attack from a legal standpoint, “Homemade firearms…are treated like any other firearm under the law. If a person commits a crime with a homemade gun, they will be prosecuted just the same as anyone else. If a felon makes a homemade gun, he’s a felon in possession of a firearm and will be prosecuted. If a person sells a homemade gun to a criminal, that person will be prosecuted.”
Ashley Hlebinsky, a noted firearms historian, demolished the anti-gun left’s use of language as a weapon in her keynote testimony. She said, “I will not be using the term ghost gun and that’s because as a historian I try to be as precise as possible and the term is used more as a rhetorical tool, a marketing tool and because of that, it can create a false sense of authority on the subject.”
Of course, the left wants to use the “ghost gun” because it creates the impression of being untraceable.
Both Hlebinsky and Senator Mike Lee of Utah pounded on the point that innovations and improvement have, historically, gone through private experimentation before a product is developed that is patentable. Hlebinsky said, “I know a lot of people here don’t necessarily like some of the technology that exists today, but I really want to make the point that innovation also means making firearms safer.”
Hlebinsky and Lee also pointed out that these changes only affect the law-abiding citizen and not the criminal. Lee summarized this well when he said, “I’m convinced that proposals like the proposed rule the Biden administration issued on Friday will affect those law-abiding Americans who use 80 percent lower receivers or receiver blanks while doing very little to stop criminals who want to use guns in order to hurt other people”. Hlebinsky added, “It’s interesting and important to understand that these things can affect both sides, criminalizing those that would otherwise be considered innocent and opening the door for loopholes and litigation, and worst of all, continued violence.”
Hlebinsky and Lee had reiterated what SCOPE has always saying about gun control laws, “Criminals don’t obey laws”. That, of course, comes as a shock to many on the left.
There can be no doubt that the Biden administration is radically anti-gun and will continue to use every weapon at their disposal to neuter and eventually destroy the 2nd Amendment and the right it protects.
