(80% receivers) Why do law abiding 2nd amendment enjoyers want to ba able to legally buy firearms without serial numbers?

15 comments

1. Part of a registry which is the first step towards confiscation. Besides that, the ghost gun crisis is manufactured by counting guns with defaced serial numbers as part of the number as an excuse to crack down on homemade firearms

2. 80% lowers?

   As far as I know these types of lowers can be bought without registering them and then the rest of the gun bought online. It basically allows you to have an unregistered weapon and you can get it without a background check and more easily transfer it person to person while in most places they’re still legal. (IIRC)

   So the people who advocate for these probably like that the government can’t track or limit their ownership of said weapons.

   (state laws regarding this type of lower receiver will vary based on state laws)

3. Registry -> confiscation.

   If we ever get to that point, I want to be ready for it. I’m a law abiding gun owner up until ownership no longer abides by the law. Then I’ll just be a gun owner.

4. As others have said, registration leads to confiscation, some of us, law abiding as we are, think its none of daddy governments business what firearms we own. This post reminds me I need to get a polymer 80 some time.

5. It can pretty much be boiled down to [this](https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=gE8To7kvH8s).

6. Couldn’t say. As a man with a progressive heart condition, I’m unable to relate to the sentiment of not wanting cops to show up at my door to confiscate my weapons.

7. If all firearm sales were through a dealer, where SN are run along with the buyer’s info, then I would agree with the “confiscation” argument. However, given that private sales do NOT require a background check, the reality is that the government has no idea which firearms are owned by you or by anyone else. I can buy fifteen guns tomorrow from a private party and the government would never know. I could also sell all of my guns tomorrow, and again, they would not know.

   I do understand the confiscation argument overall, but it’s really not much of an argument unless private sales went through a background check.

   To me, the no SN thing is just a way to “stick it to the man”. My concern is this… Although self defense is a right, and you likely would not face criminal charges for shooting someone, you very likely will face a civil lawsuit by the family. If so, it’ll be much harder to justify why you shot him or her with a no SN gun. It makes it look like you “planned” it that way.

8. Building things is fun. You use hand tools to mill out a few holes and channels, then pick your parts from a selection ranging from budget to Gucci and build it from the ground up. Even without 80%, people love building ARs. But ultimately, because you can, and someone wanting to stop that is viewed with suspicion.

   Frankly the public including lawmakers have a view of this influenced by CSI style shows. “Tracing” crime guns isn’t a crucial part of law enforcement.

9. Some people just like making their own guns. The non-serialization isn’t always the major reason for doing it.

10. It leaves us unnecessarily vulnerable to infringement.

11. What is the purpose of registration? Answer that question and the desire to own unregistered guns should be self evident.

    Hint: We don’t like the idea of the jack booted thugs showing up on our doorsteps.

12. No one is asking to buy weapons that do not have serial numbers. What people are opposed to is the government having a list of who owns weapons and what weapons they own. Every time that has occurred in history it was quickly followed by the government confiscating all weapons and then totalitarian oppression if not full on genocide of the populace.

13. >I’m not trying to start a debate against these. I am curious about why this aspect of 80%s seems important.

    A.) Because the ATF is stupid and keep redefining what a gun is. Call it a slippery slope all you want, but 80%s are no more firearms than a block of aluminum. Let the ATF do what it wants, and eventually possessing a soda can will net you an illegal possession of a machine gun charge. They’ve already claimed a picture is a machine gun, they’ve already claimed a shoe lace is a machine gun, they will absolutely declare aluminum ingots to be a machine gun and still think they’re the intelligent ones.

    B.) The government has no right to know what I have.

    C.) The ATF is stupid.

    D.) The ATF is dumb.

    E.) The ATF is idiotic.

    F.) The ATF is moronic.

    G.) ATF agents are the fattest Fedbois.

    H.) The ATF can’t stop munching on chicken tendies.

    I.) The ATF can’t stop losing their own machine guns to robbers because they can’t be assed to put down their tendies that they’re shoving into their fat faces.

    J.) The ATF also loses their Fedboi laptops at an alarming pace because they’re too busy shoving nuggies into their mouths to pay attention.

    K.) When they lose their sidearms, either through theft or just being stupid, they’re too busy becoming fat by shovelling nuggies into their throat by the shovelful to report that their handgun is missing or stolen.

    L.) 80%s aren’t guns.

14. Because the ATF will shoot your dog

15. The only conclusive reason a firearm needs an identifiable number is so that number can be tied to the owner and put on a list identifying the owner as, in fact, owning the gun. And an increasingly tyrannical government knowing which citizens own firearms and which don’t is not a thing an overwhelming number of good Americans want.

    If the government ever decides the totality of its citizens no longer deserve those guns, a list telling them the totality of their nations gun owners is a bad thing.