On September 29, 2020, The Giffords Law Center and the State of California, sued the BATFE, demanding they change their regulations and outlaw "80% receivers". Essentially they are demanding the ATF change the law to outlaw homemade guns.
This is part 2 of the analysis of the false assumptions in the lawsuit.
Part one of the analysis deals with the predicates of the lawsuit, filed against the BATFE by the State of California and others, in the first paragraph.
The philosophical basis of GCA 68 is an affront to the Second Amendment.
The first paragraph claimed restricting access to common weapons was a positive social good. It claimed restrictions on sales had a positive effect on restricting access to firearms by dangerous people. Those are false assumptions.
In Part 2, the second paragraph of the predicates of the lawsuit are examined.
The second paragraph in the lawsuit attempts to show ATF regulations have been weakened, and criminals are gaining access to homemade firearms in significant numbers because of changes by the ATF.
To believe this premise you must believe the GCA 1968 restrictions were effective to begin with. They never were effective. .....
"The premise of the lawsuit, that 80% receivers present some sort of existential threat to people in the United States is absurd. It is based on the simple belief "guns are bad". It is not based on fact. People in the United States have always been legally able to make guns for their own use."