A “Ghost gun” is an assembly kit to make a firearm. However, the catch is that they do not have serial numbers. This new form of gun is therefore untraceable, and has thus become extremely popular among gun owners. However, the untraceable appeal has also attracted attention from criminals as well.

Currently, the federal law does not require firearms to have serial numbers if they are built for personal use. This loophole allows companies to sell the kits online, and does not require a background check.

Police Chief, Thomas Grimaldi, stated, “It’s legal, but it’s almost like a loophole in the law. We’re making it easy for the criminals. I have a concern — a huge concern over that.”

By leaving it unfinished — meaning only partially drilled — it fails to meet the ATF’s requirement of being more than 80 percent complete. Buyers can finish the receivers at home by finishing the drilling.

Amanda Black, the company’s manager, said they used to make aluminum railings, but found that making the untraceable gun parts was a booming business. Black said they sell between 100 and 150 lower receivers each day.


Special Agent, Graham Barlowe of ATF’s field, stated, “When we look at the sales that have been going on —they’re selling on the Internet to people all over the country, and I just can’t imagine that there would be an exception in Florida.”


For more, click here.

  • Lynn McCrann

    I own guns and in fact have a concealed carry permit but this is totally idiotic. Anyone with a criminal record or even a person who had been committed to a mental institution would be able to secure a weapon without that weapon being subject to being traced. My God, when I purchased my 9mm a spent shell casing came with the weapon; another casing was reserved for the purposes of being traced. That did disturb me for I had been vetted as a responsible citizen but this manufacturer although not creating the loop-hole but sure is creating an excuse for the anti-gun people to make their argument that guns are available for anyone, anywhere.

    • InfidelCrusader

      I have some bad news for you Lynn but it has always been the case that anyone with a criminal record or even a person who had been committed to a mental institution would be able to secure a weapon without that weapon being subject to being traced. There are a myriad number of ways that it can be accomplished by anyone determined to do so. Luckily the average criminal or mentally disturbed individual does not possess the skills or technical knowledge to accomplish what this article is describing. In short, it’s not quite as simple as they’re trying to make it sound.

      • Lynn McCrann

        Thanks for the clarification, Infidel.

        • InfidelCrusader

          My pleasure, you’re most welcome.

      • MarkPA

        It IS TRUE that the average criminal is not up to finishing an 80% receiver; but, that’s not particularly relevant. Even the least skilled criminal IS capable of getting the $300 – $600 needed to buy a gun from a trafficker. The relevant question is: What is the black-market wholesale cost of a gun that can’t be traced? A trafficker can buy stolen guns for $100 – $200; whatever the burglar needs for his time and trouble. A trafficker can buy a used gun from an FFL at market price, plus the commission to the straw-buyer; let’s say $50. Today, the straw-buyer of a used gun can’t – as a practical matter – be traced to the particular FFL that sold it (legally); this ready source of guns is now untraceable. UBC, by itself, won’t close the private-sale channel because these used guns won’t be traceable to the FFL officiating in the NICS check. To close that loophole ATF would need a National Registry (of some sort). As soon as they got that implemented, illegal manufacturers (using CNC machines) will simply make HIGH-quality FINISHED frames for popular models of hand-guns. These frames will be sold to traffickers who will use them to launder straw-bought used guns. This novel channel, together with stolen guns, will fully supply the black market. Forget about the criminal-craftsman; it is ILLEGAL MANUFACTURE of FINISHED FRAMES for a few popular handgun models that doom tracing. Even if prosecutors were willing to seriously pursue tracing evidence they could never succeed.

        • InfidelCrusader

          No arguments here. One only has to look north of the border to Canada to see a glaring example of the futility of a gun registry and the dubious value of being able to trace the guns contained in any such registry. After spending more than a decade and billions of dollars creating a national gun registry the effort was abandoned once it became clear that it was a boondoggle that accomplished virtually nothing towards the stated goals of reducing gun crime by holding the criminals who traffic in guns accountable. Any future attempts to create such a registry are equally doomed to failure.

          • Phillip_in_TX

            It sounds a lot like “Obamacare!”

    • Bigjohn

      The government does not need to know if or how many weapons you have. And should not know. That includes state governments.

      • HistoricalConstitutionalRoger

        YEp. Just wrote the same thing the other day, and added,,,, CCW is really an infringement. The ORIGINAL intent was that Citizens should be able to have weapons of the kind that are being used against them. No one should be able to come and get them, which implies that Everyone would probably have them. > Cold blooded Murder is illegal, so those people would be prosecuted. But we have made it Illegal for a “felon” to have a gone. If you mess-up on your taxes and get prosecuted, You Better not Have a Gun. Now that is Crap. >>If you are a Criminal, Drunk Driver ( multiple times ) who has hurt some one, even that does not mean you can NOT protect your family. You need help in another area, but if you are a Citizen…. well, this all gets crazy with the liberals. Surely is funny how the Liberals Surely know how to Legislate THEIR morality, but they Hate the Creator God’s! Our Problems are Moral Issues. Look at those at the top!!! Way to stick with your whoring “husband” HilLiary! Power is her purpose in life.

      • Lynn McCrann

        I was not addressing the citizen but rather the criminal and the mental defective. Perhaps I should have been more clear.
        I have a number of guns. None of my rifles, including one like the weapon my late husband was issued when fighting in Korea, and I would never register any of them. I even have a 38 that I bought many years ago that is not registered. The only weapon I own that is registered is the Ruger 9mm that I bought a couple of years ago and was required to be registered.
        I agree that the ‘progressives’ would use any excuse to limit the ownership of weapons for everyone. I can see the need to forbid a violent felon from being able to own a weapon and I also agree that some felons are not of a violent nature and therein lies the conundrum. I would not go so far as saying that a concealed weapon permit is an infringement for if that were the case then a criminal would also have the right to conceal carry. Unobstructed open carry would answer that dilemma and leave concealed carry to those without a criminal record would be my take.
        I am a firm believer that the founders did not create the 2nd amendment to protect hunters. Their intent if examined closely was to protect the people from a tyrannical government and that means the peoples ability to obtain the same weapons that would be used against them by a tyrant. Fact is that many of the patriots fighting the Brits during the revolution had better and more accurate weapons than did the solders they faced.

        • Bigjohn

          We’re basically on the same page. Though I do not like ccw. It doesn’t stop criminals from carrying, as if it is there intent to commit a crime with a weapon, they don’t care if another charge of carrying a concealed weapon is tacked on to the charges. Open carry does not bother me, though I personally would not do it unless hunting, fishing, or about on my own property. Hey we can’t be all alike, or we would be democrats!

          • Lynn McCrann

            Unlike the criminal, if I shoot someone threatening me I would not be subject to criminal charges unless it can be proven I shot illegally. The same would not be the case with a thug carrying illegally and doing harm to another.
            The only time we carried openly is when we had our guns in the truck on the rack. Usually I carry concealed and always when going into the city.

    • freebirds

      It’s illegal for mental people and criminals to own a firearm. So they would be breaking the law by doing so.
      If a criminal and a mentally disabled individual wants a gun, they will get one. Serial number or not. Hence all the illegal gun crime in Chicago.

    • Phillip_in_TX

      They can go to the local hardware store and “build a gun.” Or, even purchase a “nail gun.” Both will “do the job” if someone is that committed.

  • Loyd Patterson

    I don’t think that having a firearm with out the serial number is a good thing. I might be old school, but if stolen and used in a crime that has murder printed all over it. I just don’t like the implecations involved.I don’t care if it is only being used and owned by one person,if stolen then what?

    • InfidelCrusader

      If it is stolen then it is no different than a gun with a serial number being stolen. There is nothing stopping a criminal from removing the serial number from a gun. Serial numbers on guns do nothing to prevent the guns from being used criminally.

    • freebirds

      Nail the thief to the wall. He’s the one who broke the law.

  • Michael Riley

    What is pictured above will not fire a single round.
    The lower receiver is needed as it houses the fire control group. The 80% part is the lower and requires a lot more precision work than drilling a couple of holes. An additional jig is usually required adding to the cost
    The cost for most of these 80% lowers themselves exceed the cost of a new serial numbered lowers bought through a dealer.
    Criminals would turn to these so called ghost guns rarely if at all.
    For most of the people that buy them the lower remains 80% due to the difficulty of successfully completing the machining.

  • Jon

    I’m not sure what difference a S/N makes. With or without one, a BG is going to use a weapon to hurt others. Only a good guy with a gun, that no doubt has a S/N, is going to stop him. The only real use for that is pulling the government into accountability, like “Fast and Furious” to prove them criminally negligent, which accomplished absolutely nothing anyway. As things are, serial numbers are just a tool for the government to confiscate your weapons. The bad guys are going to get them with or without S/N’s.

  • L Cavendish

    There are also 80% pistol frames as well…

  • truthseeker53

    Few criminals can finish one. Anybody who can and sells it to a criminal is a criminal.

  • Huffer

    First off, if bought on line the Fed already knows you have it!

  • Jeff Horton

    This has been caused by the Government with it’s abusive regulations punishing the honest guy. He is under threat of confiscation of their home and country defense guns. Granted by God to defend yourself. If your sickly, Elderly, or a small woman you need an equalizer that is your choice what to but. Not something substandard forced on you. Soon in California all you will be able to buy will be a revolver. And some people do not have the hand strength to manipulate it.

  • HoldTheLine1

    The reason 80% lowers have become popular, is a good example of Martin Luther King’s Civil Disobedience. Some states (CA) are now wanting to register all firearms, which an educated person as yourself would know was a precursor to most all genocides since the invention of the modern firearm.

    Few criminals have access to the machinery or skillsets required to finish one of these lowers. They are being bought by law abiding citizens that have legitimate concerns that one day the government could require they hand over their rifles, which have serial numbers that are registered to their names. In that event, they will be able to hand over the original lower, then use the crappy 80% lower they had to finish on a friend’s drill press to keep their rifles, and by that their lives and voices, from fading into the ugly histories of the oppressed that lost their abilities to defend themselves and were wiped out. Madeline Albright having half the population in Rwanda disarmed should have been a warning to liberals, but they ignore it.

Become an Insider!

Enter your email address below to stay in the loop and read our latest and greatest updates!

Send this to friend