Slashdot Mirror
DOJ Reaches Settlement On Publication of Files About 3D Printed Firearms (joshblackman.com)
He Who Has No Name writes: Those who remember Cody Wilson and Defense Distributed -- the self-described cryptoanarchist and his organization that published plans for 3D printable firearm parts, respectively -- also remember that not long after the plans for the printable Liberator single-shot pistol hit the web, the Department of State seized the Defense Distributed website and prohibited Wilson from publishing 3D printable firearm plans, claiming violations of ITAR -- the International Traffic in Arms Regulation, a U.S. law taxing and restricting the distribution of a wide variety of physical goods listed as having military value. Slashdot covered the website seizure here (the Department of Defense was initially misreported in sources to have been the agency responsible).
In both a First and Second Amendment win, the Second Amendment Foundation has settled with the Department of State after suing on behalf of Defense Distributed. Slashdot reader schwit1 shares an excerpt from the report: "Under terms of the settlement, the government has agreed to waive its prior restraint against the plaintiffs, allowing them to freely publish the 3-D files and other information at issue. The government has also agreed to pay a significant portion of the plaintiffs' attorney's fees, and to return $10,000 in State Department registration dues paid by Defense Distributed as a result of the prior restraint. Significantly, the government expressly acknowledges that non-automatic firearms up to .50-caliber -- including modern semi-auto sporting rifles such as the popular AR-15 and similar firearms -- are not inherently military."
In both a First and Second Amendment win, the Second Amendment Foundation has settled with the Department of State after suing on behalf of Defense Distributed. Slashdot reader schwit1 shares an excerpt from the report: "Under terms of the settlement, the government has agreed to waive its prior restraint against the plaintiffs, allowing them to freely publish the 3-D files and other information at issue. The government has also agreed to pay a significant portion of the plaintiffs' attorney's fees, and to return $10,000 in State Department registration dues paid by Defense Distributed as a result of the prior restraint. Significantly, the government expressly acknowledges that non-automatic firearms up to .50-caliber -- including modern semi-auto sporting rifles such as the popular AR-15 and similar firearms -- are not inherently military."
>"Of course guns are military. What a stupid thing to say. Thanks, Trump!"
? The article said:
"The government expressly acknowledges that non-automatic firearms up to .50-caliber -- including modern semi-auto sporting rifles such as the popular AR-15 and similar firearms -- are not inherently military."
And that is 100% true. It didn't say "guns are military" or "guns are not military", they said that non-automatic firearms UP TO .50 caliber are not INHERENTLY military (IE, exclusively for military use).
I'm guessing no one told the OP of this tread that you can download free PDFs of all metal machine pistols off of the web off of random public and open websites. Such as http://thehomegunsmith.com/
That is true. The Armalite 15 (AR-15) was originally designed as a commercial sporting rifle in the 1950s. Colt liked the design well enough that they bought the patent and reworked the fire control group and upper receiver to make it 'select fire'. Mean it could be either normal semi-auto or full auto. Some of the parts are interchangeable, but the fire control is still regulated as a machine gun.
Except they aren't talking about 'Assault Rifles', or as they are more commonly called... 'machine guns'... which are already heavily regulated.
'Assault Weapons' are the made up term they use today, which encompasses primarily cosmetic features... unless you want to get to the point of cracking down on all semi-automatic handguns... which at last check SCOTUS has ruled a constitutional right to be able to own.
Except the rifles which the left seeks to ban mostly shoot 223... which on average is about half the weight as say... my 270 deer rifle. Both fire a round at about the same speed, however my 270 has about 2x as much muzzle energy.
Take this comparison of a 223 vs 30-06 against a pair of watermelons: the not at all scary looking 'hunting rifle' has far better wide hole leaving abilities: https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Help Brendan pay off his student loans
I use mine for 3-gun competitions but I also do Civilian Marksmanship Program competitions...trying to get on a Navy shooting team to go to the national competition in Camp Perry, Ohio.
Reaching back a bit, but Korean shopowners used them very effectively to defend their shops/homes during the Rodney King riots.
Actually a wounded soldier is more out of it than a dead one, because he'll tie up his buddies who are helping him, and tie up medical resources, etc, and the associated logistics.
In actual combat, most rounds are expended just keeping the other guys' heads down.
-- Alastair