Reagan-Clinton-Bush-NRA "Undetectable Firearms" Ban up for reauthorization

[rambone]

Americans can go to prison for possessing an arbitrary plastic object, and more bans may be on the way.

For the third time in 25 years, a ban on “undetectable weapons” is set to expire and Republicans and Democrats in congress have until December 9th to decide how best to prevent any freedoms to be relinquished into the hands of Americans. The current debate appears to be whether to maintain the already oppressive status quo or to criminalize even more victimless, arbitrary objects and behaviors.

This ban stems back to the 1980s, when for no particular reason, hysterical anti-freedom lobbyists convinced congress that plastic guns were the next great menace to the country. And so, the Undetectable Firearms Act of 1988 was passed overwhelmingly by congress and signed by President Ronald Reagan (R) on November 10th, 1988. The ban came with a 10 year sunset clause.

It became a federal crime to manufacture, import, sell, ship, deliver, possess, transfer, or receive any firearm that is not detectable by walk-through metal detection. A “plastic gun” that does not contain 3.7 ounces of steel could get a person locked in federal prison for 5 years.

Scheduled to expire on November 10, 1998, the two parties once again united to renew the ban. Despite maintaining majorities in the House and Senate, Republicans — led by noted statist House Speaker Newt Gingrich (R) — made no effort to stop it. All but four U.S. Representatives voted for it. It was then signed by prolific gun-grabber President Bill Clinton (D) in October 1998, extending the ban another 5 years.

The process was again repeated in 2003, when Republicans controlled the House, Senate, and White House. In bipartisan fashion, the gun ban was disappointingly renewed for an additional 10 years. President George W. Bush’s (R) signature made it official.


READ MORE: 3-D printing in the crosshairs with federal ban on plastic gun parts | Police State USA

 

[Kirk Freeman]

This ban stems back to the 1980s, when for no particular reason, hysterical anti-freedom lobbyists convinced congress that plastic guns were the next great menace to the country.

Who is telling you this?

Jack Anderson is the reason.

 

[mrjarrell]

They'll all come together, sing Kumbahya and renew the law. The NRA isn't showing any signs of opposing it, so they know their ratings are safe.

 

[BogWalker]

So this law from the 1980s pretty much affects one gun that some guy just made? I think they jumped the gun a bit in manufacturing this crisis.

A wooden knife would be deadlier than a single shot .22 short plastigun.

 

[Tombs]

So this law from the 1980s pretty much affects one gun that some guy just made? I think they jumped the gun a bit in manufacturing this crisis.

A wooden knife would be deadlier than a single shot .22 short plastigun.

Wooden knife?

How about a broken broom stick, or broken glass bottle.

Or for that matter, a shoe string.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

So this law from the 1980s pretty much affects one gun that some guy just made? I think they jumped the gun a bit in manufacturing this crisis.

One gun? Yeah, the Glock pistol that Gaston Glock made.

I forget that I am double the INGO median age.

Here, read this and understand where the hysteria of the UFA came from:

Glock: The New Wave In Combat Handguns: Peter Alan Kasler: 9780873646499: Amazon.com: Books

 

[BogWalker]

One gun? Yeah, the Glock pistol that Gaston Glock made.

I forget that I am double the INGO median age.

Here, read this and understand where the hysteria of the UFA came from:

Glock: The New Wave In Combat Handguns: Peter Alan Kasler: 9780873646499: Amazon.com: Books

Didn't really think of them seeing as we, you know, have them here in spite of this law, or are there certain non-importable models due to this?

I understand Glocks started the fears, but until now there really hasn't been anything I know of that actually falls under the law.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

Ok, the UFA is because of the hysteria caused by Jack Anderson writing about the Glock pistol. So much nonsense was written about the "invisible" Glock that Congress had hearings.

Out of these hearings the moronic UFA was passed in 1988 as it affected no firearms.

Now, thanks to technology, this is changing.

The antis hysteria over the Glock only increased its popularity and sales skyrocketed thanks to Congressional hysteria, the girls at the Gold Club in Atlanta, and movies/television.

The non-importable Glocks are because of the GCA of 1968 (no foreign full autos and the point system for handguns so no .380 Glocks yet).

 

[Kirk Freeman]

What is funny about all this (well, maybe not funny) is that .gov was just telling us last month (November 2013) that plastic guns are so weak that they blow up when fired.

 

[aaron580]

It bans the notorious glock 7 that costs more than you make in a month "you would be surprised what I make in a month"

 

[Viper1973]

Anything that gives an obviously anti-gun administration an opening to impose THEIR interpretation of what is legal and what is not is VERY dangerous! FWIW we should all oppose this extension. Any inch they get they try for the mile! I've already called and email our resident 'Congress critters'.

 

[rambone]

From the GOA, which opposes extension of the status quo.

Unless it existed before December 10, 1988, the plastic gun ban absolutely bans any gun that is not as detectable in a "walk-through metal detector" as a Security Exemplar [18 U.S.C. 922(p)(1)(A) and (6)].

The “Security Exemplar” is a piece of metal that the ATF uses to calibrate how much steel a manufacturer needs to put in the gun to make it beep in the metal detector. Other than the fact that it has to contain 3.7 ounces of steel and look sort of like a gun, anti-gun Attorney General Eric Holder can determine, by regulatory fiat, the characteristics of the Exemplar.
He can determine whether you test guns with a "top flight" metal detector -- or a crummy one. He can determine how many times (or thousands of times) a gun has to pass in order not to be banned.

In addition, every "major component" of every firearm has to pass through an airport x-ray in such a way that its shape is "accurately" depicted [18 U.S.C. 922(p)(1)(B)].

The statute contains a list of parts of guns which are definitely "major components." But is that list exclusive? If we didn't have a President and an Attorney General who have violated and perverted the law again and again and again, we might be able to conclude that it was exclusive. But the language is not so definitive as to protect us against an administration intent on destroying us.

So what if Holder determines that a wooden stock is a “major component”?

According to an expert we consulted, a wooden stock would produce an x-ray image which is "fuzzier" (less "accurate") than a metal gun would produce. Interestingly, a wholly plastic gun would also produce an x-ray image, according to this expert, although it would be "fuzzier" (less "accurate") than that of a metal gun.

So, for those Republicans who are talking about locking us into an extension of this statute that could ban lots of guns ... tell them, “please don't.”

 

[BravoMike]

House votes to extend plastic gun ban

 

[rambone]

Can't wait to see how the votes lined up. Haven't heard a peep of opposition from any Republican leader.

https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/113/hr3626


Look out for bipartisan chicanery...

Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., is among a group of Senate Democrats seeking to amend the law to require that metal has to be permanently attached to the gun, closing what they call a loophole that would allow removable metal parts.

 

[HeadlessRoland]

That's fine, let it be another law on the books that's openly disregarded. Legislating against 3D printing will do no more to stop 3D printing than prohibition stopped alcohol production and consumption, or than the current Scheduling of marijuana as Schedule I has stopped potheads from growing and smoking it. Once more the Congress demonstrates its disconnect from reality and its unawareness of its own impotence.

"The conflict has been building for over half a century, and once again, warning flags are frantically waving, while the instigators rush headlong toward the abyss, and their doom. It is my hope that these people will stop and reverse their course before they reach the point where such reversal is no longer possible." - John Ross

 

[BravoMike]

If you disagree with this, start writing letters to your senators and encourage others to do so.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

Legislating against 3D printing will do no more to stop 3D printing than prohibition stopped alcohol production and consumption, or than the current Scheduling of marijuana as Schedule I has stopped potheads from growing and smoking it.

There is no legislation against 3D printing.

The UFA passed the House on a voice vote. There is ZERO political will not to renew the UFA.

 

[mrjarrell]

So, Kirk. Where's the NRA?

 

[BravoMike]

There is no legislation against 3D printing.

The UFA passed the House on a voice vote. There is ZERO political will not to renew the UFA.

As of now... True.

The he article that I linked above claims that senate dems want to expand the scope of the bill to target 3D manufactured firearms.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

So, Kirk. Where's the NRA?

In Congress advising that there will be no expansion of the UFA.

NRA-ILA | NRA Statement on the Reauthorization of the Undetectable Firearms Act HR 3626