300x250 AD TOP

Saturday, June 6, 2015

Tagged under:

Reporter Shows How He Easily Made Untraceable AR-15 “Ghost” Gun In his Office

 We’ve heard about 3-D printing technology – where almost anything can be created via computer softwear and basic materials.  As one would expect, this has led to many different applications.  That includes the creation of firearms.
It was reported some time ago about a pistol created via a 3-D printer.  Now, a man has made himself a rifle – an AR-15 – with this same kind of technology.

Wired reports:
This is my ghost gun. To quote the rifleman’s creed, there are many like it, but this one is mine. It’s called a “ghost gun”—a term popularized by gun control advocates but increasingly adopted by gun lovers too—because it’s an untraceable semiautomatic rifle with no serial number, existing beyond law enforcement’s knowledge and control. And if I feel a strangely personal connection to this lethal, libertarian weapon, it’s because I made it myself, in a back room of WIRED’s downtown San Francisco office on a cloudy afternoon.
 I did this mostly alone. I have virtually no technical understanding of firearms and a Cro-Magnon man’s mastery of power tools. Still, I made a fully metal, functional, and accurate AR-15. To be specific, I made the rifle’s lower receiver; that’s the body of the gun, the only part that US law defines and regulates as a “firearm.” All I needed for my entirely legal DIY gunsmithing project was about six hours, a 12-year-old’s understanding of computer software, an $80 chunk of aluminum, and a nearly featureless black 1-cubic-foot desktop milling machine called the Ghost Gunner.
The Ghost Gunner is a $1,500 computer-numerical-controlled (CNC) mill sold by Defense Distributed, the gun access advocacy group that gained notoriety in 2012 and 2013 when it began creating 3-D-printed gun parts and the Liberator, the world’s first fully 3-D-printed pistol.
While the political controversy surrounding the notion of a lethal plastic weapon that anyone can download and print haswaxed and waned, Defense Distributed’s DIY gun-making has advanced from plastic to metal.
Like other CNC mills, the Ghost Gunner uses a digital file to carve objects out of aluminum. With the first shipments of this sold-out machine starting this spring, the group intends to make it vastly easier for normal people to fabricate gun parts out of a material that’s practically as strong as the stuff used in industrially manufactured weapons.
 This is bound to have the left howling.  It may mean that people can make their own weapons without them being registered with manufacturers’ serial numbers.
For those who fear government “gun grabs” it is a way around the government knowing who has what weapons.
For those who fear a flood of unregistered weapons on the black market, there may be some truth to that concern.  If terrorists or other criminals get their hands on this technology, then they can produce their own guns for acts of terror or crime.
 But, as Wired explains, even though the 3-D technology is new, the ability to make one’s own guns isn’t:
But the Ghost Gunner represents an evolution of amateur gun-making, not a revolution. Homebrew gunsmiths have been making ghost guns for years, machining lower receivers to legally assemble rifles that fall outside the scope of American firearms regulations. In fact, when we revealed the Ghost Gunner’s existence last year, the comments section of my story flooded with critics pointing out that anyone can do the same garage gunsmithing work with an old-fashioned drill press.
I could hardly judge the fancy new CNC mill in WIRED’s office without trying that method too. Or for that matter, Defense Distributed’s previous trick, building gun parts with a 3-D printer. Before I realized exactly what I was getting into, I determined to try all three methods in a ghost-gun-making case study. I would build an untraceable AR-15 all three ways I’ve heard of: using the old-fashioned drill press method, a commercially available 3-D printer, and finally, Defense Distributed’s new gun-making machine.
 As Wired points out, it is illegal to buy or sell a “ghost gun”, but is perfectly legal to make and keep your own.  And, there really is only one part of the gun that must be self-produced:
Almost no one builds a ghost gun from scratch, and I didn’t either. The shortest path to building an untraceable AR-15 requires only that you build one relatively simple component yourself, a part that’s become the focus of a fierce gun control controversy: the lower receiver.
US gun regulations have focused on the lower receiver because it’s the essential core of a gun: It holds together the stock, the grip, the ammunition magazine, and the upper receiver, which includes the barrel and the chamber where the cartridge is detonated. As Doug Wicklund, senior curator at the NRA museum explained to me, the lower receiver always has carried the serial number because it’s the part that remains when the others wear out and are replaced. Like the frame of a bicycle or the motherboard of a computer, it’s the nucleus of the machine around which everything else is constructed.
And, it is possible to buy a partially constructed lower receiver that doesn’t need to be registered as Wired explains:
There’s even a way to anonymously buy that highly regulated lower receiver—almost. Like many gun vendors, Ares sells what’s known as an “80 percent lower,” a chunk of aluminum legally deemed to be 80 percent of the way toward becoming a functional lower receiver. Because it lacks a few holes and a single precisely shaped cavity called the trigger well, it’s not technically a regulated gun part.

Machining the last 20 percent myself with a CNC mill or drill press would allow me to obtain a gun without a serial number, without a background check, and without a waiting period. I wouldn’t even have to show anyone ID. Law enforcement would be entirely ignorant of my ghost gun’s existence. And that kind of secrecy appeals to Americans who consider their relationship with their firearms a highly personal affair that the government should keep out of.

It will be interesting to see how this new technology changes the firearms’ market and the political debate over the 2nd Amendment. But, it does point to the fact that no matter how much “gun control” is imposed, people will always look for a way around government control of guns.


  1. Guillotine_readyJune 6, 2015 at 9:52 AM

    Controlling the people has been a wet dream of those who wish they rule us forever, too bad it will never work.

  2. This article is total BS!! The issue of serial no. or not is a non-starter. I don't have any numbers to back my claim up, but I would be willing to bet that most of the people who actually construct one of these receivers, either from scratch or an 80%er, will add their own serial number when they are done. It just makes their lives a little simpler when/if they have an encounter with law enforcement while fielding their homemade firearm.

    The real issue is having control of one's own life without being dictated to by the "gumint." Building your own gun is an exercise in freedom, and if you don't exercise occasionally, you will get flabby!

  3. Absolutely not, no one will because as long as you are licensed as appropriate in your state the cop will have nothing to say about it, perfectly legal. You would also need a number approved by ATF and you'd need an FFL manufacturing license to get it.

  4. Really! Perhaps you should check your facts.

    From the ATF:

    "Individuals manufacturing sporting-type firearms for their own use need not hold Federal Firearms Licenses (FFLs). However, we SUGGEST that the manufacturer at least IDENTIFY the firearm with a SERIAL NUMBER as a safeguard in the event that the firearm is lost or stolen. Also, the firearm should be identified as required in 27 CFR 478.92 IF it is SOLD or otherwise lawfully transferred in the future."

    Source: http://www.atf.gov/firearms/faq/firearms-technology.html

    I wasn't trying to get in a pissing match. That (the serial number) was not the point of my comment which you appear to have missed entirely.

    This is all about freedom of expression!

  5. Contrary to what "Wired" is claiming, it's not illegal to sell a "ghost gun"; rather, it's illegal to make one with the intent to sell it to someone else.

  6. 27 CFR 478.92 is about "licensed manufacturers" i.e. you have an FFL manufacturing license. You can't just make up a serial number, it has to be issued or at least approved by ATF. If Ruger lets say wants to build 1,000 of some gun "X" over the next 2 years it requests a pool of 1,000 serial numbers from ATF and then reports them as they are used and actually placed on a weapon. ATF isn't going to issue a non-FFL a number so he can manufacture a gun, kind of defeats the purpose of the FFL. I understood your point. My point was the opposite. It is about hiding the weapons existence from LEO's. When they come for your guns they will have a list. Do you really want them stealing all your guns?? They will also have the combination to your safe unless you changed it BTW.

  7. For your sake, I hope they don't have the access code to your panic room else you'll be totally fubar'd ;-)

  8. As I stated earlier, this entire article is BS! So is the concept of a "ghost gun." More crap from the "haters-of-other-people's-freedom" brigade.

  9. The door is welded shut so no problem.. Government has proven time and time again the it can't be trusted any further than it can be thrown, so I don't trust it. I assume that it lies every minute of every day about absolutely everything. I assume that it has no respect for it's own laws or me. So what it doesn't know it can't use against me. Millions of secret FISA orders have been issued in recent years. You can bet that gun safe manufacturers have standing orders to turn over the combination of every safe they sell so they can be cross referenced to gun ownership and ammunition sales through local fusion centers.

  10. Regardless of whether or not the whole article can be deemed "BS" in some sense, by a reasonable person, "Wired" made a specific, demonstrably false statement that required a specific repudiation.
    And I agree that it's "BS" - in the sense that it's "sensationalist" hype apparently designed to scare the masses of low-information lemmings into supporting whatever gun-grab scam our masters come up with next.

  11. Mr. Smith,

    I should have been more articulate in my response, but it is a bit frustrating being under constant bombardment from these people. I find myself lately simply dismissing everything they say at the first sign of "hype."


Powered by Blogger.