What are the legal implications of selling a railgun?
Yes I know current technology is shitty and impractical. I'm talking about setting regulatory precedent and case law here.
Assume I have a manufacturer licence, it's a single shot gun and the device is otherwise not in conflict with any firearm laws.
How do we make the most of this? With an eye towards future legal battles regarding gun regulations.
>>29515570
set a point now that they are not considered firearms by current laws and that if they want to rewrite laws to include railguns than the malleability of that law also lets you exclude petty bullshit like suppressors and FA.
give and take
take my railgun and give me my FA's and suppressors back
>>29515570
I'd assume you'd be tied up in legal red tape to stall until legislation is passed regarding said railgun
well considering a railgun is not a gun according to the faggots at the ATF Id say your good to go
>>29515678
But I want it to be considered a gun. That way we have precedent that technological improvements in guns are perfectly legal. The idea is that it would open the door to electronic triggers, full auto, and yet unseen tech etc.
>>29515570
Coilguns and railguns aren't guns, much like muzzle loaders and BP revolvers.
As long as you don't actually destroy anything they couldn't give a shit, though if you actually made one that was semi or fully automatic and capable of more than denting cans, they might start looking for a reason.
>>29515707
>I want more regulation on it
For what purpose? Enjoy the fact that in the next few years you might be able grab a full-auto coilgun before the government finds a way to ban them.
>>29515707
the point people are trying to make is that they aren't considered guns at all at this point and development is dependent on more want than anything else at the moment.
The point OP is trying to make is that if railguns were made legal we wouldn't be grabbing for our dicks in the dark hoping that we don't molest our friends. We would know exactly where we lay with the letter of the law
>>29515602
I'm w this guy. Ill disconnect the caps from the scr, thus rendering it inoperable, when I can have fa and silencers.
>>29515608
In which case they would still have to come to an independent judgement because you cannot be tried for an action that was made illegal after you did it.
>>29515894
i think OP is trying to say "what can we do now so that the laws in the future for railguns are in our favor"
common sense says that the muh feels public won't lag very far behind technological advancements on them. I think once we see our first consumer hunting or target railgun we'll see the first laws regarding them right after.
my guess is it will start with the companies limiting sales to 18 or older to prevent instant legal issues and who knows what else later
This is a very crafty way to bring up gun control.
go back to /pol/
>>29515570
Probably labeled Destructive Device.
>>29516498
This is a very crafty way to bring up that you are a faggot
go back to tumblr
it would probably end up be legislated in a similar way to DDs.
for example, any railgun over 5000kw is illegal or something like that.
>>29516578
>UN summit
>everyone given a touchscreen PC with paint
>must make polandballs to show the policy they want
this would be great
>>29516636
fuck, wrong thread.
I need to sleep.
>>29515570
Well it doesn't use a gaseous discharge to accellerate a projectile so its not a firearm so there's nothing they can do until they write a new law to cover EM weaponry. Right now they are not serious enough at the non-governmentally-funded level to be relavent so no law needs to be passed.
>>29515707
Like Sentry Guns, you know when the nigs, spics and grabbers come at night.
>>29516661
Sentry railguns when?
>>29515849
I have access to some transformers and electric motors I'm pretty sure the municipality won't miss, can I make a coil gun with this?
>>29515950
Terminological slight of hand. If senator DeLeon taught us anything it is that they don't know heads from tails with this sort of thing. Time can be bought by focusing their efforts in the wrong direction, like having them focus on batteries when their attention should be on capacitors
>>29515950
>start with the companies limiting sales to 18 or older
Not even close. They'll actively market it to the kiddie demographic. It might have a warning sticker, something about parental supervision blah blah outdoor use only, etc., etc.
Kids will have a blast shooting through car doors and the like, until the CPSC weighs in with some regulations.
It's not a firearm, so the ATF has no regulatory authority.
This will be interesting.
>company builds a full auto rail gun with severe power limitations
>people tinker with it and get it to be useful as a weapon
>one assclown converts his to full energy/freedom
>his dumbass kid shoots up a school with it
>dems and soccer moms go crazy
>laws get passed because muh chillins
>we're left with single shot muzzle loading rail guns
do you even false flag?
>>29516505
What is the legal definition of a DD? Are new technologies automatically destructive devices until proven innocent?
SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED
It doesn't fucking say only chemical propellant based projectile weapons you fags
It doesn't say only muskets
it doesn't say only rocks and sharp sticks
the right to BEAR ARMS shall NOT be INFRINGE
>>29515570
If the atf doesnt say anything about it, then dont worry about it.
If they burn down a religious complex however, its probably your fault somehow.
>>29520412
>It doesn't fucking say only chemical propellant based projectile weapons you fags
That's a dangerous loophole that should be close, though. And you know perfectly fucking well that most suburbanite Americans -- and the vast majority of Millenials -- would have no problem swallowing this.
>>29520441
desu senpai, nah
>>29515707
>But I want it to be considered a gun.
Then you are a fucking idiot.
>That way we have precedent that technological improvements in guns are perfectly legal.
This is some seriously deep autism.
>The idea is that it would open the door to electronic triggers, full auto, and yet unseen tech etc.
Yeah, you don't have a fucking clue. Delete this thread and kill yourself, I don't want this kind of garbage on my board.
In literally every country EXCEPT america, the legal implications of personally owned and operated railguns are very clear, as firearms law is predicated on the definition of a firearm, which is usually a combination of "the object in question projects another object" and "the object projected has a force equivalent to ... "
Death to America.
>>29520666
Hail Satan!
>>29520466
>projecting this hard
How about you take some exlax and get some of that shit out of your system
>>29520412
The term “firearm” means (A) any weapon (including a starter gun) which will or is designed to or may readily be converted to expel a projectile by the action of an explosive; (B) the frame or receiver of any such weapon; (C) any firearm muffler or firearm silencer; or (D) any destructive device.
>>29516661
Sentry guns are illegal because of "muh fireman" and "muh electronic triggers are machine guns".
>>29515602
>tfw plasma guns, antimatter weapons, and railguns are technically all unregulated
>tfw no expansion of supreme court's ruling on tasers as justification for the full civilian legalization of ANY WEAPON EVER (and tool for that matter if they try to ban hard light printers or matter synthasizers because they could make laser guns) that pretty much legalizes the fucking Death Star once we start cranking them en mass in the future 2500s
>>29520916
>>tfw plasma guns, antimatter weapons, and railguns are technically all unregulated
They're literally not and you're a goddamn idiot. Projectile-casting objects are guns, and guns are regulated in a variety of ways.
>b-but muh 2a!!!!
that a gun or firearm has to be defined at all makes it regulated in some capacity.
>>29520995
Holy fuck you're a fucking mouthbreathing retard
https://www.atf.gov/file/58686/download
>The GCA defines the term “firearm” as:
(A) any weapon (including a starter gun) which will or is designed to or may readily
be converted to expel a projectile by the action of an EXPLOSIVE;
>>29520995
>Projectile casting objects are now guns and regulated as such
That's a pretty interesting take on slingshots, nerf blasters, bows, and rugby sticks.
Do I need to get a tax stamp for my SBR Alpha Trooper? Also I think my Mega blaster is destructive devise.
>>29518772
There's a technical legal definition you can look up on wiki, but the effective legal definition is
>"lol whatever we say it is" -ATF
>>29520995
>Projectile-casting objects are guns
lmao not according to the law they're not. As long as there's no chemical propellant, i.e. gunpowder, it's not a gun.
You're a complete fucking retard, we're a nation of laws.
Railguns are probably going to go through a phase just like civilian owned drones are. Namely anything goes until some dumbass does something stupid.
Its going to be a few distinct phases:
Phase 1: tech not fully understood by most people, .22 singleshot equivalent railguns exist, but not really on the radar, maybe the media does a few mild scare pieces regarding cases in which they were used for petty vandalism
Phase 2: practical railguns equivalent to regular firearms are developed, but so new and expensive that few have them, no serious crimes comitted yet, media begins predicting that we will begin seeing crimes with them in scare pieces, early legislation kinda starts up but its hotly debated.
Phase 3: something stupid happens, maybe a guy builds one equivalent to a 105mm canon and blows his neighbors house up, or someedgy teen shoots up a school. Media goes in freakout mode, begins predicting thousands of dead children in the coming railgun holocaust. Libtard states push hardcore bans in a kneejerk across the board.
Phase 4: National Railgun Association lobbies, manages to let us keep some of the stuff we want, but not have access to any of the cool stuff (one trigger pull one shot, projectile kinetic energy limitations, preban full auto and destructive devices utilizing the technology are added to the NFA etc etc)
Phase 5: media routinely runs "were all gonna die" type pieces and generally pouts that they couldnt get a full ban.
>>29521907
>go through a phase just like civilian owned drones are. Namely anything goes until some dumbass does something stupid.
You mean the public getting hysterical about it just because of some imaginary perceived problem?
>Obligatory reminder that in the last 2 years of "drone mania" there hasn't been a single related fatality
>>29521907
>Railguns are probably going to go through a phase just like civilian owned drones are.
No, the only reason drones are going what they're going through is because of the FAA you dumb piece of shit I'm not even reading the rest of your post since the chances of the remainder being just as terribly thought out as the beginning is pretty fucking high I'd say
>>29515570
The general state of US law is that if there's no law explicitly against it it's fair game. As there are currently no laws regarding railguns on the books you're good to go.
>>29521907
This is probably the most accurate prediction ever made(regarding this topic)
>>29520666
>satan trips of truth
In the UK a firearm is defined as a "lethal barreled weapon that discharges a bullet, shot, or other projectile" so a railgun that fires something like a crossbow bolt down a channel is not a firearm.
Looks like I have a new project...
>>29521907
You forgot Phase 6 when said Railgun/Laser NRA takes control of government and then gets rid of all the bans to sell more and more expensive and powerful scifi weapons.
....I hope ;_;.
I mean bows, swords and muskets, used to be banned like a millenium ago, and now no one really cares that much anymore for full on prohibiting them in the vast majority of countries. Because mostly autists and collectors are the ones who buy them now.
I just want a futuristic /k/ube with some gamma matter blasters or whatever built in.
>>29520995
Holy shit no retard fuck off.
By your logic a fucking bow is a gun.
Just shut the hell up if you don't know jack shit about the very definition of a gun itself. Let alone the us legal definition.
Good bait if you were trying though. Gotta admit that.
could we get firearm/rail gun hybrids?
an AR, with a modified barrel, that chambers and fires the round traditionally, but then the rail effect kicks in and accelerates the bullet to mach 3?
the rifling in the barrel would unsure stability.
could a traditional AR platform be modified to become an railgun, retaining the chambering, no that's dumb, no expanding gasses to cycle...
could it be retrofitted with a pneumatic system to cycle the device?
using a standard .22 AR lower and magazines, to fire a .223 sized round, a standard .223 barrel, modified to be a railgun, the chamber would need modification to chamber it, then the trigger just switches on the rail, maybe a standard trigger to push the round into the barrel, then pneumatics cycle the device.
all the mods could be mounted on a rail system, you retain all the current rail accesorry market.
use an 80% lower so it's not an AR at all technically, but still uses mostly ar parts.
the bans would be almost immediate.
>>29520995
Air rifles are legally not firearms.
>>29526474
chemrails when?
>>29526474
You are making me want to create a magnetic assist for already existing rifle technology in order to raise velocity
>>29516649
I appreciated this comment
Now return to /pol/ from whence you came.
