Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Gunmaking at the Founding
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Gunmaking at the Founding
Do you wish to request the book?
Gunmaking at the Founding
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Gunmaking at the Founding
2025
Overview
Homemade guns are being used in a growing number of crimes across the US, creating what gun control organizations describe as the fastest-growing threat to public safety in America. States and the federal government are cracking down. New laws criminalize gunmaking without a license, prohibit the sale or transfer of homemade guns, and even ban some forms of gunmaking altogether. But the constitutionality of these regulations is uncertain. After the Supreme Court's landmark ruling in 'New York State Rifle and Pistol Association, Inc v Bruen' courts have begun to invalidate rules that are not \"consistent with this Nation's historical tradition of firearm regulation.\" Constitutional challenges to new gunmaking regulations have already created court splits on a pair of key questions commanded by 'Bruen'. First, does the plain text of the Second Amendment cover a right to manufacture firearms? Second, are modern restrictions on gunmaking consistent with this country's historical tradition of firearm regulation? This note begins to answer these questions by recounting the history of gunmaking practices and regulations at the Founding. It uncovers evidence that the Second Amendment as originally understood did not cover gunmaking, and that in any event, early Americans regulated gunmaking extensively. In light of this history, 'Bruen' should permit reasonable modern regulations. This case study makes two methodological arguments relevant to Second Amendment jurisprudence. First, non-statutory sources of law should play a role in illuminating original constitutional meaning. Second, after 'United States v. Rahimi', modern regulations may be upheld by legal principles that emerge from disparate bodies of law.
Publisher
Stanford University Law School,Stanford Law School,Stanford University, Stanford Law School
Subject
