Sen. Chuck Schumer Seeks To Extend Ban On 'Undetectable' 3D-Printed Guns

SonicSpike writes with this snippet from The Guardian: "As the technology to print 3D firearms advances, a federal law that banned the undetectable guns is about to expire. The New York senator Chuck Schumer says he is seeking an extension of the law before it expires on 9 December. Schumer said the technology of so-called 3D printing has advanced to the point where anyone with $1,000 and an internet connection can access the plastic parts that can be fitted into a gun. Those firearms cannot be detected by metal detectors or x-ray machines. Schumer says that means anyone can download a gun cheaply, then take the weapons anywhere, including high-security areas. The Democrat is pushing the extension along with Senators Patrick Leahy of Vermont and Bill Nelson of Florida. The effort was announced on Sunday."

Comments

Re:Futility of certain laws

[larry bagina]

When the TSA is rooting through your panties looking for cash and drugs to steal, maybe they'll find it. Blind pig, acorn and all.

Number of terrorists caught by TSA: 0

Number of TSA screeners arrested for rape: > 0

Number of TSA screeners arrested for drug smuggling: > 0

Number of TSA screeners arrested for child porn: > 0

Number of TSA screeners arrested for stealing: > 0

Re:Remind me why this is needed?

[Sarten-X]

Allow me to rephrase that for you:

1 - I don't understand law

2 - We shouldn't make stuff I don't understand

3 - Let's just get rid of stuff I don't understand

The majority of every long legal text is there to be explicitly precise about every detail of how it's supposed to work. As new loopholes are found in existing terms, new language is used in future texts to avoid them.

For example, a hundred years ago, it might have been fine to say "buy" in a contract to refer to someone getting something, but thanks to the last hundred years of legal cases, there are many ways to avoid that particular term. You could trade for goods other than money. You could arrange a sequence of gifts. The exchange could be interrupted by a sudden death. Part of the exchange could be specified in a will. Once the trade is made, the items bought could come with attached expectations or conditions, or it could be part of a package deal.

Consider law as a program for illogical machines. Just as any other programming language requires verbosity (or a significant amount of definitions) to achieve precision, so must law. Humans are just particularly good at exploiting bugs.

Re:Liberty is the only thing in danger here.

[Shakrai]

No American jurisdiction that I'm aware of (even the anti-gun New York State, where I currently reside) bans firearms within movie theaters or malls. Those are private property, and private property owners are free to allow or prohibit firearms. A prohibition by the property owner may or may not have force of law, depending on the jurisdiction. Here in New York, "no guns allowed" signs have no force of law, outside of trespassing, i.e., if they ask you to leave and you refuse you've committed a crime. They're effectively in the same league as the sign that says "shirts and shoes required". Other jurisdictions (Ohio, Texas, Tennessee, to name a few) give such signs the force of law, and you can lose your concealed carry license and face criminal charges if you ignore them.

Re:And note it is the Democrats threatening it

[microbox]

As we have seen through history the only real fascists have always been liberal

This is just partisan nonsense. If you actually, you know, read about fascism, you'll learn that it doesn't fit into the current left/right political divide.

People generally think of fascism as far-right because:

• The emphasis on militarism
• The emphasis on nationalism. (Do you here that America was exceptional?)
• The emphasis on colonialism
• The emphasis on mysticism and the state
• The emphasis on warriorship
• Suppression of trade unions
• Foreign policy based on the myth of national power and greatness
• Skepticism in democracy.

These are all defining qualities of facism that you see on the political right *today*

But facism is also leftist in that:

• It broadens the mandate for government intervention in the economy
• It is anti-materialist. (I suppose people in facists states seek spiritual sustenance.)

Furthermore, both the Dems and the GOP (in practice) have an overlapping facist trait: the belief in the states role in monitoring its citizens. This is a true 3rd rail in US politics, since as many Rs/Ds are for it as against it.

Fascism has traits not seen in either the Dems or the GOP, such as endorsing terror to gain political power, and the notion that the entire population should be permanently and emotionally engaged in the political process.

Stop reading just right-wing books, and broaden your horizon a little. Just because you read it doesnt mean you have to believe it. And just because something is written down doesn't make it true. Real scholarship starts when you seek out differing views, and try to understand them.