A Manifoldly Unconstitutional Bill

I have a legislative alert for SurvivalBlog readers: H.R. 7115, the “3D Firearms Prohibitions Act” is on its face perhaps one of the most unconstitutional laws ever written. It is sponsored by Congressman Frank Pallone, Jr., Democrat, of New Jersey. It will most likely be reintroduced in the 116th Congress. This proposed law, introduced on November 2, 2018, is purported to ban 3D printed guns. But it is actually about milling (subtractive) technology rather than 3D printing (additive) technology. I have news for Mr. Pallone: All guns are “3D”, once they are off the drawing board!

Pallone’s bill goes far beyond milling machine processes. It would ban firearms parts kits, ban electronic publishing about 80% receivers offered for sale, require the owners of receiver blanks to beg the issuance of a serial number before then can be milled, and even retroactively bans unserialized receivers that have been made since 1968. It also arbitrarily sets a 90 day limit for number stamping/engraving and completion of the receiver. You can read the full text of the bill, here.

The summary preamble to H.R. 7115 reads: “To prohibit the sale, acquisition, distribution in commerce, or import into the United States of certain firearm receiver castings or blanks, assault weapon parts kits, and machinegun parts kits and the marketing or advertising of such castings or blanks and kits on any medium of electronic communications, to require homemade firearms to have serial numbers, and for other purposes.” But even a cursory reading of Pallone’s bill shows that it is blatantly unconstitutional, in many ways. Here are a few:

  • The proposed law violates the 1st Amendment by making it illegal to communicate to others about the availability of certain gun parts.
  • The proposed law violates the 2nd Amendment. If anything, battle rifles deserve the strongest protection of the 2nd Amendment, since those are the guns most suitable for use by the citizen militia. But Pallone’s law focuses on them and their component parts as a supposed “banned hazardous products”.
  • The proposed law violates the 4th Amendment because it eliminates the inherent privacy of citizens in assembling guns from parts of their own manufacture or that have no bearing on interstate commerce. It also violates our privacy by forcing us to beg for serial number assignments for already legally-possessed guns from Federal Firearms License holders.
  • The proposed law violates the 5th Amendment by requiring the owners of post-1968 unserialized privately-made guns (or receivers, or receiver blanks, or parts sets) to report themselves to Federal authorities, possibly incriminating themselves.
  • The proposed law also violates the 5th Amendment’s “Takings” clause, because it bans “certain firearm receiver castings or blanks, assault weapon parts kits, and machinegun parts kits” without leaving any viable  market. It is a ban without compensation.
  • The proposed law exceeds the mandate of the Commerce Clause (Article 1, Section 8, Clause 3 of the U.S. Constitution) by creating new over-reaching Federal authority on 50-year-old gun receivers and other gun parts that can date back more than 100 years. These parts clearly have long been out of Interstate Commerce and thus have no Federal nexus whatsoever. (That is private intrastate commerce.)
  • The proposed law violates the Ex Post Facto Law Clause by retroactively creating the crime of owning a post-1968 unserailized firearm receiver. This is a gross violation of Article I, Section 10, Clause 1, of the U.S. Constitution. That clause prohibits the enactment of ex post facto laws.
  • The proposed law is also void for vagueness. According the Cornell Law School web site, this is “a constitutional rule that requires criminal laws to state explicitly and definitely what conduct is punishable.  Criminal laws that violate this requirement are said to be void for vaguenessVagueness doctrine rests on the due process clauses of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments of the U.S. Constitution.  By requiring fair notice of what is punishable and what is not, vagueness doctrine also helps prevent arbitrary enforcement of the laws.”  In this instance the law bans “parts sets” without properly defining how many parts constitutes a “set”. The law is also horribly vague in that it does not define what percentage of completion constitutes a “receiver blank”.  It is 80%? It doesn’t say. Not does it define what percentage constitutes a completed “receiver”. Is that 81%? Or 90%? Or 99%? Or 100%?  Again, it is quite vaguely written.

All in all, this proposed law is grossly unconstitutional on several levels and in several respects.  Under the traditions and standards of American Jurisprudence, we are not bound to obey this law, and it cannot be enforced. (Lex Mala, Lex Nulla.) It is null and void, even before passage.

This bill will get a new number when it is re-introduced. Be forewarned that it may be slipped into a large legislative package, such as an omnibus funding bill. Please contact your Congesscritter and Senator to mention this particular legislation. While you are at it, remind them that “universal background checks” is a gun-grabbers’ code phrase for “banning private party sales.” Also, be sure to mention: I oppose any and all new gun laws and Red Flag laws!  – JWR

Note: Permission is granted for re-posting of this entire article, but only if done so in full, with proper attribution to James Wesley, Rawles and SurvivalBlog, and only if the included links are preserved.)


  1. Thanks to Mr. Trump’s illegal actions regarding a firearms accessory, a newly emboldened and Democrat controlled Congress will keep pushing blatently unconstitutional bills in hopes to get something pushed through. Never mind the Federal constitution and actions that lead the populace closer to a hot civil war.

  2. Any person/persons or entities that pursue such blatantly unconstitutional legislation should be placed on the terrorism watch list for… seditious activity against the people and nation of the United states. No other cause be necessary and no due process.” What’s good for the goose is good for the gander!”

  3. The individual rights of American citizens to defend themselves and their families are being consumed and destroyed in dribs and drabs, not from frontal assault on the Second Amendment, but on gun features and accessories. The general public is mostly ignorant of these things and therefore more likely to be in favor of such moves categorized as increasing public safety. We haven’t seen the worst of it, and at some point important personal decisions will be required.

    It is heartening to learn that patriots in NJ are in defiance of the imbecility of the NJ legislature and Governor regarding the high-cap mag ban. With the stroke of a pen the Governor created over one million new felons out of law abiding citizens.

    Never comply!

  4. What part of, “Shall not be infringed” is not being understood? we all have an obligation to make things like this an issue in the public discourse- everywhere!

  5. My experience of writing to my congressman wasn’t very good when I wrote to out then congressman Tim Johnson ( D ) and Tom Daschle ( D) years ago. Whenever I would write or mail to Tim Johnson about control issues of any kind, I would get back a really snotty, shitty, very nasty answer about being pressured into voting against gun controls issues that were being put out by a ” radical ” organization. And Tom Daschle would always answer me with a very nice, polite letter, but would be unable to vote against any gun control legislation. My experience with writing to congressman about issues that concern me hasn’t been good. I don’t what these guys that we have now are like, but time will tell. ( don’t even get me started about that clown George McGovern )

    1. Yeah, I wrote many letters, made many calls and sent emails to politicians in CT reminding g them that the post Sandy Hoax gun/msg registration was UN Constitutional and an assault on Liberty……….nothing got done, I Just received canned , boiler plate responses thanking me for contacting them

  6. “Oath of Commissioned Officers

    I ___, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God. (Title 5 U.S. Code 3331, an individual, except the President, elected or appointed to an office of honor or profit in the civil service or uniformed services) ”

    The only words I really remember from that day are “I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic…”

    Words have meaning.

  7. I believe, instead of fighting all the proposed legislature on gun control (all inclusive), it would be much easier to ban the Democratic Party (and Republican Party) as well as prosecute anyone belonging to those parties under the treason and sedition acts. Our so called elected officials, swearing to support and defend the Constitution of the United States have certainly violated their sworn oath. You cannot interpret the Constitution to support the agenda or beliefs you think it should mean. If that were the case, out of roughly 330 million people in this country, there would have to be 330 million different interpretations. Now that would really work out swell don’tcha think!

  8. Please, my friends. We have all seen this coming since Bush#1. The Paper Tiger which is the NRA will huff and puff, but “The Fudds”, as they are referred to on other websites, do not really have a dog in this fight, as they have been waffling and selling gun owners down the river for years.
    If you and your tribe have not made preparations in anticipation of the dark decade which is upon us, you have NO ONE to blame but yourselves. Get needful things while you can, go gray, stay gray, confide in NO ONE. The Leviathan does not have enough uniforms to go door-to-door everywhere. But, with the way the economy is turning out, the Leviathan does have enough funny money to buy people off to snitch on their neighbors and family members. Such snitch tactics are taught in: “America’s Public School System.” Be warned.

  9. seems that the demon rats are again and continue to be out of control as if mentally unbalanced!

    Would seem that simply saying no until the time they come to collect em will suffice. We have given these morons more then nuff notice that they are acting criminally and need to stop thier Treasonous activities.

    Just remember that when they come for the guns……………GIVE THEM ALL OF THEM!!!!!!!!!

    The little local moron that wished to collect your property is simply as the government calls it “collateral damage”. The real problem is the Moron that passed the Statute and will also need to be shown a good discussion on the point of WHAT PART OF INFRINGED DONT YOU SEEM TO UNDERSTAND.

  10. A New Jersey demo*rat. Would you expect anything less?
    If they pass it in the house, Hopefully the senate will kill it. But nowadays, who knows?
    If Trump signs it, then it’s up to the states to nullify it.
    We really are on a steep downhill track as a republic.

  11. Quite obvious we are at the “Jury Box” level of the boxes . Report for jury duty, cast your not guilty verdict. I doubt these days will be able to produce an unanimous dismissal through total jury nullification, but it does provide us an opportunity, to at least hang the case and demonstrate that we will not accept Constitutional infringement. Those are my plans anyway.

  12. My “Foxfire 5” book has a section beginning on page 208 called “Gunmaking”. Is that book going to be illegal and banned in New Jersey? Would ownership of the book be a felony? If I got rid of the book but retained the know-how in my head, could I be charged with a ‘thought crime’? Are these laws retroactive? I ask because I made a CO2 cartridge gun when I was 12 years old, do I need a lawyer?

  13. This legislative attack will be fueled by ignorance and emotion (as usual). The hue and cry will be, “criminals can make their own guns just by buying the parts online! They can make guns without a license or background check!”

    The implication being that criminals will go to the trouble of acquiring tools and skills needed to build a gun when they can just buy one off the street. Worse yet, the implication will be that ONLY criminals want to build “ghost guns” to rob banks and shoot up grade schools. Normal, law abiding people don’t need to build their own guns.

    The soccer moms, snowflakes and pajama boys who don’t know anything about guns will of course think there is some sort of “crisis” that needs to be stopped now.

    The great fear is that the Republicans will bargain this away, once the congressional researchers tell them there is actually a very small number of people who build their own guns. They can safely throw those “gun nuts” to the wolves and not really have to worry about it affecting their re-election. They also will think they can buy positive news coverage with the Liberal media, even though it never happens. They will call it “reasonable gun control” even though reason has nothing to do with it.

    I second, what Dweezil said. Buy your stuff now. Keep your mouth shut. Hide it if you feel you have to. Don’t forget the tools to finish those 80% receivers. And buy reference books. Download PDF files before the info. is outlawed. Expect Google/Amazon/etc. being pressured by Bloomberg and a few other nameless anti-gun organizations to remove gun building and reloading information from their sites.

  14. I have to agree with John Boy! Why can’t folks see that anyone against the US Constitution is seditious and should be dealt with for crimes!!! THEY are coming for any one with common sense, love for the LORD, and who enjoy the freedoms of AMERICA.

  15. Nature gave You your ever evolving self defense and protection ability as conditions require.
    All living things have it by natures design, It did Not come from gods or governments, Nature alone.
    All the paper work is mind control insulting traitor betrayal garbage. The stalking of the prey. Exhausting the herd.
    Those who limit or deny your Nature given life protection ability do not Respect you, your life or family
    and could care less if you live or die. You are negotiating from the position of a prisoner, you have met
    the enemy, Your life and all that matters in your life is now on the table. Choose very carefully.
    Their intentions are stated and you are in the process of being run to the ground. Talk is your defeat.

  16. Is the term “United States” defined in this bill? What is the United States? There are some 20 or 30 definitions for the United States in the statutes. Will United States be changed to UNITED STATES in the final version of the bill? Most likely. No matter, the United States is NOT The United States of America, it is generally defined as the District of Columbia. When referred to in treaties and such it is defined as the government for The United States of America, a creation of the states of America, united.

    The UNITED STATES is the corporate municipal government of the District of Columbia and THE STATE OF OHIO is a corporate franchise of that entity and resides in the District of Columbia. These distinctions are not to be brushed away as mere sophistry, they are realities in law. So the question is: Where do you live, in the United States or on the soil of one of sovereign nations of The United States of America? Are you a US citizen (an employee of the UNITED STATES) or, are you one of the people of the United States of America? If you don’t know the answers to these questions, a bill like this may have you screaming about your constitutional rights.

    I’ve got news for you, you don’t have constitutional rights. You were not and are not party to that document. The Bill of Rights restricts the power of the United States, the government of The United States of America as created by the States united and applies only to that government. The question is, which “government” is proposing this bill? Most likely it is the UNITED STATES which is a corporation styled as a democracy (not a republic) and exists in the District of Columbia. It falls under Article 1, section 8, clause 17 of the constitution which grants congress plenary power within the District of Columbia. In other words, within DC congress can pass any law it wants without the restrictions of the constitution. Does that apply to you?

Comments are closed.