Well for one thing: the 14th has pretty much gutted the 10th when it comes to the states rights. And regarding the 2nd specifically the McDonald v.Chicago ruling extended the 2nd onto the States.
While it's never been challenged in court and might not hold up under a strict interpretation of the 2A. The prohibition on "undetectable" firearms is manufacture and possession.
Actually it's more like trying to stop the publication of the Anarchists Cookbook in the 60's. The feds lost that case. Or stop the publication of plans for a Nuclear bomb in the 70's. The feds lost that one. Or publish the code to PGP privacy in the 80's, the Feds lost that one.
This is why the State Dept. was about to settle and allow publication. Because the courts have previously ruled that the government can't silence speech even if that speech includes plans, diagrams and instructions for weapons and explosives. Such information is speech and the government can't block it. The states will lose when it gets to a court that will look at the long standing legal precedents rather than just rule based on political views.
Unless you put a serial number on it. Say 1776, 1789, or just a number 1 on it. I've never seen any requirement to actually register said serial anywhere. The weapon just has to have a SN on it.
It is and does, but it's a last defense. We don't reach for the guns right off, we try to fight in in the courts and politically first and too many citizens are complacent and think this stuff makes us safer.
Tyranny is hardest to fight when it's imposed slowly and subtly and with the support of a large portion of the populace who thinks it makes them safer.
Contrary to they Hype and fears when Glocks first came on the market, they have never been even remotely difficult for metal detectors and these scanners to detect. Low metal content is an issue for metal detectors anyway not these millimeter wave scanners. Any sufficiently solid object will trigger them. Not long ago I got sent through the scanner at the airport and my military issue plastic web belt with plastic buckle that I wore specifically to not have to take off, triggered the scanner. It was too dense, so I got the hands on molestation treatment.
A Glock has a great deal of polymer, but the barrel, chamber, magazine, trigger mechanism, springs and firing pin, as well as all the bullets are metal and will set off a metal detector, The polymer and all the metals make for a rather solid, gun shaped mass that the scanners will see.
They stick out quite clearly on the x-ray scanners your carry on items go through as well. In 2002 my Nat Guard unit was doing security at the Olympic village, working with Secret Service agents; during a slow time they showed us how effective the x-ray machines were, one of the SS agents put her firearm (a glock btw) through the scanner, there was no question there was a gun in that backpack she put it in to run it through the scanner. The shape was obvious as was the stack of bullets in the magazine and even the one in the chamber was visible (jacketed lead slugs tend to show up very well).
Even the current "undetectable" scare about 3-D printed firearms is bogus again because they have metal components and the ammo that will trigger a metal detector and the large mass of Gun shaped plastic will stand out on the scanners.
And if the other party sees no reason to come to the negotiation table what then? Canada and Mexico had no interest in redoing NAFTA, now they do, and have agreed to negotiations.
The EU had no interest in negotiating, but now they've agreed to eliminating or reducing some tariffs and negotiations on others. China is still playing tough, and still shows no interest in negotiating. So how to you bring a country that has no interest in negotiating cuts to their tariffs to the table?
You are correct in your theory, and in many areas prescribed burns do happen every year helping to prevent the big ones like we are seeing. But starting in about 2012, new regulations came in to play that made it much harder to conduct such burns. And California's environmentalists have opposed and fought these controlled burns in the courts for years, especially when near communities. This has resulted in a substantial drop in the number of prescribed burns that actually get to happen. And now we are seeing the result. But we aren't necessarily learning the lesson.
After last year's fires in Montana the state decided to initiate a much more aggressive prescribed burn effort. They were basically stopped cold in the courts.
So we see more and bigger fires. Last year Utah had a fire that demonstrated the difference beautifully. The Brian Head fire started on private property, for three days it burned across private and state properties that had regularly cleared of excess fuels through logging, as well as prior prescribed burns on the state land. In that three days it burned just over 600 acres, barely news worthy. Then it reached National Forest service lands. Forests that hadn't been cleared of excess fuels in decades, if ever since the NFS was established. A forest full of beetle killed pine trees. It hit that forest rich with fuel and exploded in size. Before it was stopped a month later it had burned over 70,000 acres.
It's too easy to stop prescribed burns in the courts. Yes even controlled burns occasionally get out of control, but far more don't and if we were properly burning, logging and cleaning the forests in a more timely manner even those that escaped control wouldn't reach such epic sizes.
They wear out or get lost or forgotten somewhere. I've bought a few store ones when desperate for a cable. But mostly if a factory cable wears out I buy an Anker Cable, they are much sturdier construction and I've yet to have one wear out.
Except that the EU trade deal is already a done deal, so evidently his strategy is working just fine with many nations. Canada and Mexico are also talking bilateral deals.
Bingo, Heck for about $200 you can buy an epoxy resin kit that will allow you to mold several 100% Lowers. And the Epoxy resin isn't expensive to keep making more.
Just mold your completely legal lower, buy rest of the unregulated parts and assemble your AR's. All legal requiring no special tools other than the mold that comes with the kit.
No, we already pay an 11% excise tax on all firearm and ammo purchases. (This money goes to conservation, yet another way that hunters and shooters do far more to conserve wildlife and nature than those that whine about needing to conserve nature) Trying to tax ammunition out of affordability is no more legal than excessive taxes on firearms.
Ammo is a component of the concept Arms that we are entitled to keep and bear. The founding fathers knew this very well. The first shot of the Revolution at Lexington was due to the Brits trying to seize ammo. Specifically the British troops had marched out to seize community stores of Powder and lead. These stores were kept by the communities as your average citizen didn't keep sufficient for a pitched battle on hand. Thus the villages kept a ready store for their militia to use should the militia be needed to fight off native attackers or a foreign power. Or in that case government forces trying to disarm the local militia by taking their ammo reserves.
Ammo is part of the concept of Arms as protected by the 2nd Amendment, as are bladed weapons. The 2nd Amendment doesn't refer just to guns.
And the basic idea behind the Liberator is that it only needs to last for a shot or two. It's modeled after the single shot pistols the allies tried to smuggle into the Jewish Ghettos in Poland. They didn't get enough smuggled in to the ghettos in time to make a difference and allow for effective resistance, but the idea was that the single shot gun would allow one to surprise armed police/soldiers killing them when not expected and taking their combat weapons to be used later. Or to mount a last ditch defense, that single shot may allow the user to escape and survive.
The Defense Distributed plans already include an AR Lower receiver. Your argument is moot.
There is already at least one 3D printer design that prints all but the circuitry and a few very basic metal parts for itself. The circuitry needed is an arudino or raspberry pi or similar micro-computer board a couple cheap electric motors available at any hobby/electronics shop. And the metal pieces are readily available at any hobby/electronics/hardware store.
In short you can already print more 3D printers. You might be able to control the printer media, but all the non-firearm uses for such printers make that a no-go. Not that they couldn't put controls on the sale of such media, but there is nothing that indicates what said media will be used to print. Is it for prototyping, printing key fobs, making art, or printing a firearm?
The cat is out of the bag on this one. The government can't prohibit publication of information, they lost that battle with the Anarchists's Cookbook and again with PGP. And you can't control the spread of printers when you can print your own printers. And the print media is mostly used for too many other purposes to be able to block it's use for firearms.
Sure, we can market those magical rounds next to the Unicorn feed and Hyperspace drives at the local Walmart. If I'm in a defensive situation I don't want to wait two days for my attacker to be stopped. The 100 lb coed does not want her rapist to have two days to complete the rape before magically falling dead.
A firearm fires a small dense mass into the target, if target is a living being it exerts force of impact (that can kill on the spot if in the right location) and as the bullet penetrates the target it causes physical damage that can also kill.
But the purpose of using a gun is not to kill. It is to stop the threat, Then and there. If I shoot and just wing the attacker but they turn and run, that is a successful defensive use. If I just draw the weapon and they back down that is successful. If I put them into the hospital in critical condition but they pull through the gun has still done it's job. And if protecting myself and or others from harm by the attacker results in the death of that attacker, so be it. The gun did the job.
You don't shoot to kill, you shoot to stop the threat. Even the military recognizes that a wounded enemy takes one or two additional enemy soldiers out of the battle at least briefly while they render aid and evacuate the wounded.
Expecting to wait two days is a joke. And death is not the goal. Incapacitation is. Two days later does nothing for the raped coed, or my bashed in skull. That and your magic bullet doesn't exist.
Mostly I agree with your point but one correction. Sandy Hook was not a failure by any federal or local government agency, policy or procedure. The shooter was autistic, not mentally ill. He was not a prohibited person under the law. And on top of that, the firearms he used were not his, they were his mother's lawfully obtained and owned weapons. And when he decided to commit mass murder he first killed her in order to take those weapons.
It's not illegal to shout fire in a crowded theater. Go watch a performance of Les Misérables, a cast member shouts "Fire" quite loudly during the show. Not a crime. it's also not a crime if there is a fire. Nor if the theater is mostly empty. It's only illegal if done falsely so as to create a panic that may cause people to be harmed. It's not actually the speech that is prohibited at that point but the results of the speech.
No it's not. I figured out how to override it on my phone after being woken up a two am with and again at 4 am by the horrid alert tone, that I couldn't silence for an Amber alert for kids taken by their father in a custody dispute 500 miles away.
If I could trust it to be used wisely and I could set the warning tone to one of my choice it might be tolerable. But as the alerts are continually misused, no way, this needs to be shot down.
I'm not saying they won't try to legislate it away. But don't toss Congress in with the FBI yet. The head of the FBI saying he'll get legislation is different from him actually getting it passed. Not when Google, Apple et al have very, very deep pockets for buying congress critters. And even if it passes will it stand up to constitutional challenge as a violation of the freedom of speech and of the right to privacy.
Honestly it could go either way with congress. There are multiple prominent congress critters who would oppose this already, even before any effort to buy them off by the industry. But a few billion here, and a few billion there and that legislation is dead in the water no matter how much Mr. Wray cries for it.
The theaters with the reclining leather loungers were built new with them in the last decade. The founder of the Miller Megaplex Theaters (Headquartered in Utah, not sure how far outside of Utah they've expanded) wanted to make coming to the theaters fun again. So when he started his chain 20 years ago he started with extra comfy reclining seats with cupholders in each armrest. And as the chain has thrived and expanded they've kept looking for new ways to make it better. Restaurants in the lobby so you can make it a real dinner and a movie (fast food/mall food court quality but still all at one place) This chain now consistently has several of it's locations in the top 10 theaters for the various big releases.
Comfort, convenience and reserved seats works. And no the seating choice installed was not because of bedbugs.
And thus the proof to the argument that if a backdoor or entry method exists for the authorities, it will get out to the criminals. Someone considered 'trustworthy' will have a price. or will be greedy or disgruntled.
The only time a plate follows a driver is a Dealer Plate, and that's really the business not the driver. Otherwise the plate is the car's registration proof, not the drivers. Plates don't follow drivers, not even in large fleets.
Slashdot Mirror
Well for one thing: the 14th has pretty much gutted the 10th when it comes to the states rights. And regarding the 2nd specifically the McDonald v.Chicago ruling extended the 2nd onto the States.
While it's never been challenged in court and might not hold up under a strict interpretation of the 2A. The prohibition on "undetectable" firearms is manufacture and possession.
Actually it's more like trying to stop the publication of the Anarchists Cookbook in the 60's. The feds lost that case. Or stop the publication of plans for a Nuclear bomb in the 70's. The feds lost that one. Or publish the code to PGP privacy in the 80's, the Feds lost that one.
This is why the State Dept. was about to settle and allow publication. Because the courts have previously ruled that the government can't silence speech even if that speech includes plans, diagrams and instructions for weapons and explosives. Such information is speech and the government can't block it. The states will lose when it gets to a court that will look at the long standing legal precedents rather than just rule based on political views.
Unless you put a serial number on it. Say 1776, 1789, or just a number 1 on it. I've never seen any requirement to actually register said serial anywhere. The weapon just has to have a SN on it.
How does CA enforce a 24 mile sea border when international law only recognizes 12?
It is and does, but it's a last defense. We don't reach for the guns right off, we try to fight in in the courts and politically first and too many citizens are complacent and think this stuff makes us safer.
Tyranny is hardest to fight when it's imposed slowly and subtly and with the support of a large portion of the populace who thinks it makes them safer.
Contrary to they Hype and fears when Glocks first came on the market, they have never been even remotely difficult for metal detectors and these scanners to detect. Low metal content is an issue for metal detectors anyway not these millimeter wave scanners. Any sufficiently solid object will trigger them. Not long ago I got sent through the scanner at the airport and my military issue plastic web belt with plastic buckle that I wore specifically to not have to take off, triggered the scanner. It was too dense, so I got the hands on molestation treatment.
A Glock has a great deal of polymer, but the barrel, chamber, magazine, trigger mechanism, springs and firing pin, as well as all the bullets are metal and will set off a metal detector, The polymer and all the metals make for a rather solid, gun shaped mass that the scanners will see.
They stick out quite clearly on the x-ray scanners your carry on items go through as well. In 2002 my Nat Guard unit was doing security at the Olympic village, working with Secret Service agents; during a slow time they showed us how effective the x-ray machines were, one of the SS agents put her firearm (a glock btw) through the scanner, there was no question there was a gun in that backpack she put it in to run it through the scanner. The shape was obvious as was the stack of bullets in the magazine and even the one in the chamber was visible (jacketed lead slugs tend to show up very well).
Even the current "undetectable" scare about 3-D printed firearms is bogus again because they have metal components and the ammo that will trigger a metal detector and the large mass of Gun shaped plastic will stand out on the scanners.
And if the other party sees no reason to come to the negotiation table what then? Canada and Mexico had no interest in redoing NAFTA, now they do, and have agreed to negotiations.
The EU had no interest in negotiating, but now they've agreed to eliminating or reducing some tariffs and negotiations on others. China is still playing tough, and still shows no interest in negotiating. So how to you bring a country that has no interest in negotiating cuts to their tariffs to the table?
You are correct in your theory, and in many areas prescribed burns do happen every year helping to prevent the big ones like we are seeing. But starting in about 2012, new regulations came in to play that made it much harder to conduct such burns. And California's environmentalists have opposed and fought these controlled burns in the courts for years, especially when near communities. This has resulted in a substantial drop in the number of prescribed burns that actually get to happen. And now we are seeing the result. But we aren't necessarily learning the lesson.
After last year's fires in Montana the state decided to initiate a much more aggressive prescribed burn effort. They were basically stopped cold in the courts.
So we see more and bigger fires. Last year Utah had a fire that demonstrated the difference beautifully. The Brian Head fire started on private property, for three days it burned across private and state properties that had regularly cleared of excess fuels through logging, as well as prior prescribed burns on the state land. In that three days it burned just over 600 acres, barely news worthy. Then it reached National Forest service lands. Forests that hadn't been cleared of excess fuels in decades, if ever since the NFS was established. A forest full of beetle killed pine trees. It hit that forest rich with fuel and exploded in size. Before it was stopped a month later it had burned over 70,000 acres.
It's too easy to stop prescribed burns in the courts. Yes even controlled burns occasionally get out of control, but far more don't and if we were properly burning, logging and cleaning the forests in a more timely manner even those that escaped control wouldn't reach such epic sizes.
They wear out or get lost or forgotten somewhere. I've bought a few store ones when desperate for a cable. But mostly if a factory cable wears out I buy an Anker Cable, they are much sturdier construction and I've yet to have one wear out.
Except that the EU trade deal is already a done deal, so evidently his strategy is working just fine with many nations. Canada and Mexico are also talking bilateral deals.
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/jul/25/donald-trump-strikes-trade-deal-eu/
Bingo, Heck for about $200 you can buy an epoxy resin kit that will allow you to mold several 100% Lowers. And the Epoxy resin isn't expensive to keep making more.
Just mold your completely legal lower, buy rest of the unregulated parts and assemble your AR's. All legal requiring no special tools other than the mold that comes with the kit.
No, we already pay an 11% excise tax on all firearm and ammo purchases. (This money goes to conservation, yet another way that hunters and shooters do far more to conserve wildlife and nature than those that whine about needing to conserve nature) Trying to tax ammunition out of affordability is no more legal than excessive taxes on firearms.
Ammo is a component of the concept Arms that we are entitled to keep and bear. The founding fathers knew this very well. The first shot of the Revolution at Lexington was due to the Brits trying to seize ammo. Specifically the British troops had marched out to seize community stores of Powder and lead. These stores were kept by the communities as your average citizen didn't keep sufficient for a pitched battle on hand. Thus the villages kept a ready store for their militia to use should the militia be needed to fight off native attackers or a foreign power. Or in that case government forces trying to disarm the local militia by taking their ammo reserves.
Ammo is part of the concept of Arms as protected by the 2nd Amendment, as are bladed weapons. The 2nd Amendment doesn't refer just to guns.
And the basic idea behind the Liberator is that it only needs to last for a shot or two. It's modeled after the single shot pistols the allies tried to smuggle into the Jewish Ghettos in Poland. They didn't get enough smuggled in to the ghettos in time to make a difference and allow for effective resistance, but the idea was that the single shot gun would allow one to surprise armed police/soldiers killing them when not expected and taking their combat weapons to be used later. Or to mount a last ditch defense, that single shot may allow the user to escape and survive.
The Defense Distributed plans already include an AR Lower receiver. Your argument is moot.
There is already at least one 3D printer design that prints all but the circuitry and a few very basic metal parts for itself. The circuitry needed is an arudino or raspberry pi or similar micro-computer board a couple cheap electric motors available at any hobby/electronics shop. And the metal pieces are readily available at any hobby/electronics/hardware store.
In short you can already print more 3D printers. You might be able to control the printer media, but all the non-firearm uses for such printers make that a no-go. Not that they couldn't put controls on the sale of such media, but there is nothing that indicates what said media will be used to print. Is it for prototyping, printing key fobs, making art, or printing a firearm?
The cat is out of the bag on this one. The government can't prohibit publication of information, they lost that battle with the Anarchists's Cookbook and again with PGP. And you can't control the spread of printers when you can print your own printers. And the print media is mostly used for too many other purposes to be able to block it's use for firearms.
Sure, we can market those magical rounds next to the Unicorn feed and Hyperspace drives at the local Walmart. If I'm in a defensive situation I don't want to wait two days for my attacker to be stopped. The 100 lb coed does not want her rapist to have two days to complete the rape before magically falling dead.
A firearm fires a small dense mass into the target, if target is a living being it exerts force of impact (that can kill on the spot if in the right location) and as the bullet penetrates the target it causes physical damage that can also kill.
But the purpose of using a gun is not to kill. It is to stop the threat, Then and there. If I shoot and just wing the attacker but they turn and run, that is a successful defensive use. If I just draw the weapon and they back down that is successful. If I put them into the hospital in critical condition but they pull through the gun has still done it's job. And if protecting myself and or others from harm by the attacker results in the death of that attacker, so be it. The gun did the job.
You don't shoot to kill, you shoot to stop the threat. Even the military recognizes that a wounded enemy takes one or two additional enemy soldiers out of the battle at least briefly while they render aid and evacuate the wounded.
Expecting to wait two days is a joke. And death is not the goal. Incapacitation is. Two days later does nothing for the raped coed, or my bashed in skull. That and your magic bullet doesn't exist.
Mostly I agree with your point but one correction. Sandy Hook was not a failure by any federal or local government agency, policy or procedure. The shooter was autistic, not mentally ill. He was not a prohibited person under the law. And on top of that, the firearms he used were not his, they were his mother's lawfully obtained and owned weapons. And when he decided to commit mass murder he first killed her in order to take those weapons.
It's not illegal to shout fire in a crowded theater. Go watch a performance of Les Misérables, a cast member shouts "Fire" quite loudly during the show. Not a crime. it's also not a crime if there is a fire. Nor if the theater is mostly empty. It's only illegal if done falsely so as to create a panic that may cause people to be harmed. It's not actually the speech that is prohibited at that point but the results of the speech.
No it's not. I figured out how to override it on my phone after being woken up a two am with and again at 4 am by the horrid alert tone, that I couldn't silence for an Amber alert for kids taken by their father in a custody dispute 500 miles away.
If I could trust it to be used wisely and I could set the warning tone to one of my choice it might be tolerable. But as the alerts are continually misused, no way, this needs to be shot down.
I'm not saying they won't try to legislate it away. But don't toss Congress in with the FBI yet. The head of the FBI saying he'll get legislation is different from him actually getting it passed. Not when Google, Apple et al have very, very deep pockets for buying congress critters. And even if it passes will it stand up to constitutional challenge as a violation of the freedom of speech and of the right to privacy.
Honestly it could go either way with congress. There are multiple prominent congress critters who would oppose this already, even before any effort to buy them off by the industry. But a few billion here, and a few billion there and that legislation is dead in the water no matter how much Mr. Wray cries for it.
The theaters with the reclining leather loungers were built new with them in the last decade. The founder of the Miller Megaplex Theaters (Headquartered in Utah, not sure how far outside of Utah they've expanded) wanted to make coming to the theaters fun again. So when he started his chain 20 years ago he started with extra comfy reclining seats with cupholders in each armrest. And as the chain has thrived and expanded they've kept looking for new ways to make it better. Restaurants in the lobby so you can make it a real dinner and a movie (fast food/mall food court quality but still all at one place) This chain now consistently has several of it's locations in the top 10 theaters for the various big releases.
Comfort, convenience and reserved seats works. And no the seating choice installed was not because of bedbugs.
Buy online or stop by the box office a few days in advance where I'm at for the reserved seating.
And thus the proof to the argument that if a backdoor or entry method exists for the authorities, it will get out to the criminals. Someone considered 'trustworthy' will have a price. or will be greedy or disgruntled.
And all security is then nullified.
What's he doing driving in the UK?
The only time a plate follows a driver is a Dealer Plate, and that's really the business not the driver. Otherwise the plate is the car's registration proof, not the drivers. Plates don't follow drivers, not even in large fleets.
Umm use your thumb to wipe the grime off no need for a wet cloth, and why do you need to remove the plate to put a new annual sticker on it?