I suspect this was a machined lower - possibly using a ghost-gunner.
CNC machines, while computer-controlled and similar in utility, are not really 3d printers. A 3d printer is generally an "additive manufacturing" device, whereas a CNC machine is subtractive.
There are examples out there of true 3D printed AR lowers (the part actually considered the firearm (serialized by manufacturers)...that you can bolt an upper and other parts kits too and have a functioning AR.
However, while novel....I'd not trust one of those yet long term....I'd definitely go for the 80% metal lowers you can buy and finish milling out yourself like you mentioned above.
But the 3D printed stuff is getting there.....and you can make one that functions today.
While I"m glad they got this fella...sounds like the unhinged type that should not have a firearm....
I"m a bit puzzled about the charge they convicted him of..."unregistered firearm".
I thought this was TX, and I don't believe you have to 'register' your firearms there, right?
Also, as the law stands federally and in most states, you can make your own firearms, and as long as they are not NFA items (short barreled shotgun, short barreled rifle, etc)....you do NOT have to serialize them, or register them or tell any government entity that you have built and own this weapon.
And for more firearms, like the AR platform...the only normally serialized part of the gun is the lower receiver....which you can 3D print, somewhat these days.
Anyway, with that in mind, I'm curious of the law they convicted him of on that front.
Now, as I understand it, he's not allowed legally to posses any firearm, and that's cool.....but I hope they didn't bend a law that's not applicable to convict him, that presents a dangerous precedent.
Nobody has been seriously talking about bringing Socialism to this country,
Man, turn on your TV, you must have missed the two leading poster children for bringing the US to socialism:
Bernie Sanders
AOC (Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez)
They are both blatant about it....listen to AOC on recent talk shows...openly professing to want "democratic socialism"...which is....socialism.
There are others that are scarily agreeing largely with this, which is amazing, in that only a few short years ago, no one like this would have even gotten close to power, much less actually elected!!!
Yes, it is something to worry about. It will bring about the destruction of the US as we know it.
Frankly, I feel safer in my state, where the gun laws are not restrictive at all for the legal to own citizens....I can own what I like for protection, and for recreation.
I can assure, you, to date, none of my firearms have spontaneously become animated and caused violence against any person, or animal so far.
I"d be open to hunting, but just never have gone....most people I know have not had any problems with their weapons causing problems either.....
And a 30 round magazine for a rifle is a standard capacity magazine....not "high" capacity...
...the right to vote while not being white, the right to due process even if poor, the right to abortion, the right to have an unpopular religion, and so forth."
Err, these are all available in all US states....right to vote is not tied in any way to race, geez, where did you get this from?
You get due process if poor....you just may not get the best lawyer, but that applies to all states.
I will give you that abortions are getting more restricted in a few states, and I disagree with that, however, the ones that trying to truly almost deny you one, are being taken to court and their laws are on hold till adjudicated.
You can have any religion you want in any US state, as long as it doesn't break any laws, I mean, no human sacrifices, but aside from that you can be just about what you want to be in any of the states.
I"m not sure where you're pulling this stuff from....
Hey, we can just keep it simple.
Most of the states fully support and try to make sure their citizens are protected especially for the full Bill of Rights....except a few like CA, NJ and NY and pretty much MA too....for some reason, they pick ONE of the amendments out to try to remove from citizens....the 2nd.
Trouble is...if you get rid of the 2nd...eventually, they'll come for the 1st and others, and there will be nothing there to stop them.
How do you pull all of this off? You want low taxes, but at the same time you want to offer a load of services that would have to be paid for with taxes.
There's plenty of cities in different states, that have MUCH lower taxation, yet are able to provide plenty of city services (police, fire, schools, etc).
These places also don't tell you how to run your business.
Well, it is believed that the ritual of smoking is a significant contributor to the addiction.
Oh, absolutely the ritual.
While I'm glad I quit smoking....it really WAS nice to smoke in bars while drinking. You can still in most places down here....and it is tempting.
There's also the social aspect of it....maybe diminishing,
BUT...I found at work as they made you smoke outside, I often was talking with co-workers I don't sit near and getting scuttlebutt, I also found myself talking with people MUCH higher up on the totem pole than I, and while I had their ear, I'd give my views on things as well as getting inside info on how things were going. Often I got selected for things due to familiarity driving I believe in part, by them knowing who I was out in the "smoke hole" with them.
So no, nicotine minus the tar, particulates, and carbon monoxide is NOT associated with an increased of cardiovascular risk.
BUT...you don't get the enjoyment of lighting one up on the vape thing.
What was half the fun of smoking real cigarettes....carrying lighters, firing it up, etc....
I guess the vape things are ok for quitting smoking....but really, once you get off the nicotine, they aren't nearly so much fun as real smoking that uses real fire, and other things like flicking ashes, etc...it kept your non-drinking hand busy.
That's only the case because major corporations refuse to pay taxes anywhere.
Well, if a corporation refuses to PAY taxes they owe, I doubt they'll be in business very long.
However, all businesses (and rightly so) try to minimize their tax obligations by every legal means available.
A company is created with the sole intention of making a profit. That's it, plain and simple.
And especially if it is a publicly traded company, they are legally obligated to their shareholders to try to maximize the profit to their legal ability.
If you don't like all the legal ways they can minimize their taxes...then change the tax laws.
How about a big overhaul and make tax codes simpler. You make X in profit....you pay Y in taxes.
Hell, do that for everyone and we'd be much better off.
But you cannot blame a company (or any individual for that matter) for attempting to pay ONLY the minimum amount of taxes that are legally required.
If you want to pay more, I believe there are lines on the US Tax forms that will allow you to do so, but you cannot possibly expect people or businesses to pay more than they absolutely have to...it goes against nature.
As someone who grew up in New York, I have to say that Amazon would be a weird fit. New York is one of the last places in American where a small business owner... well where you can be your own person and own your own company without being a slave to a franchise.
New York is maybe the only place left in the entire U.S. that I've seen that people protect their family owned stores and prefer paying an extra 10% if it means shopping for groceries at a store where you know the owner personally.
Come visit New Orleans....very much like that here too.
Especially on the restaurant side of things...when in NOLA proper, I rarely see a chain restaurant place to eat, unless it is a local chain.
That is by far the strongest appeal of a system like this. It all removes the inefficient black markets that foodstamps create. If I could ever believe this would be done instead of all the existing welfare programs and EITC, I'd be all for it.
But, what do you do with the significant number of people that, rather than spend their UBI on food, shelter and other necessities of life....they BLOW it on drugs or other bad choices?
What if they do this for 2-6 months or more in a stretch?
Do you then let them starve on the street? What about their kids, these people fuck too you know.
Then they starve to death and cease to be a drain on society. End of problem.
But....people have tried to say that TODAY, when people fuck up, and someone says "well, let them starve to death"....and you are painted as a horrible person.
Also, "what about the children"?
Do you let the kids starve too, or, do we also take on the added expense of keeping them?
How do we keep the person we're talking about...from reproducing even more???
That's the thing....you can't force everyone to be taken care of. At some point, you have to allow that some people are fuck ups, and let them do what they are trying to do to themselves, and quit paying for them, no matter what system you have.
But too many will say "oh, you can not do that in a civilized society"...and if you can't then, well, you are stuck paying and paying and paying....with no end in sight.
And when others see them get away with it, they'll start doing it too, it is human nature.
At $700 per month, the cost isn't that high. If you did that in the U.S. it comes out to $2.7 trillion which is about the same as mandatory spending (Social Security, Medicare, etc.) in the U.S. Federal budget.
Trouble is, if you're using something like UBI to replace SS, or food stamps, etc....what happens with irresponsible people (and yes, there are a number of them today on these welfare programs), goes out 2-3 months in a row and blows their entire UBI income check on drugs, partying, etc.?
SO, no you have given this person money, they blow it and now have no money for food, shelter, etc.
Do you now give them MORE money or just let them starve on the street.
Legal? You're absolutely right. But if your ethics allow you to say "I know a way to harm many, many people. There's an action I could take, requiring very little time or effort, which could mitigate that. But I choose not to do it unless I get paid." then you're pretty much a piece of shit, ethically speaking.
Well, a fella has to make a living somehow.....
You gotta pay the bills and this kind of work takes time and effort, so.....
This is exactly why recreational drugs should be legalized, and regulated. Only then can you be assured that what you've got is actually what the label says you've got.
I'm thinking this is largely why someone like Keith Richards survived so many years of heroin use.
From what I read, back in his day, he could afford to get pharmaceutical grades of things like coke and his heroin was pure, rarely bought from any low end street dealers, etc.
Likely the purity of the stuff he did, was largely responsible for his surviving being an addict for so long.
"The Electoral College is not going any where, period."
Probably. It's horribly complex and ingrained. "
Well, it is there for a very GOOD reason. Remember this is the United STATES of America. States rights, eh?
This is there to give ALL states a more proportional ability to choose the president. If it weren't there, you'd have basically 2-3 massive states deciding for the rest of the states, and that is not fair. This is a vast country and a state like MO has vastly different concerns than CA, and the electoral college is there to help balance things a bit on the state level.
The Dems latest plans to tax the hell out of the rich and medicare for all (I mean, who would argue against that except the rich?) plus the MASSIVE tax cuts just handed away to the rich by trump is going to be a disaster for him and the right next election.
There are some troubles for you on this one. First, what is the definition of 'rich'? $250K/yr? $150K/yr?
And, even if you drop the definitions of rich to those levels, you can't get enough money to fund medicare for all, and people realize this just isn't something the US can afford.
And the ultra-rich, well, if you start trying to tax them at 90%, which would still not pay for 'free education and medical for everyone)....those folks can afford to move out of the US to escape it. That just leads the upper middle class to pay it all, and that isn't fair, it will just decimate the middle class even more.
Slashdot Mirror
LINKY
Ok, I'm curious about this one...how would a movie theater know who I am or what movie I watch, etc?
I certainly don't fill out any forms or give them any way to know who I am when I go see a movie.....
There are examples out there of true 3D printed AR lowers (the part actually considered the firearm (serialized by manufacturers)...that you can bolt an upper and other parts kits too and have a functioning AR.
However, while novel....I'd not trust one of those yet long term....I'd definitely go for the 80% metal lowers you can buy and finish milling out yourself like you mentioned above.
But the 3D printed stuff is getting there.....and you can make one that functions today.
I"m a bit puzzled about the charge they convicted him of..."unregistered firearm".
I thought this was TX, and I don't believe you have to 'register' your firearms there, right?
Also, as the law stands federally and in most states, you can make your own firearms, and as long as they are not NFA items (short barreled shotgun, short barreled rifle, etc)....you do NOT have to serialize them, or register them or tell any government entity that you have built and own this weapon.
And for more firearms, like the AR platform...the only normally serialized part of the gun is the lower receiver....which you can 3D print, somewhat these days.
Anyway, with that in mind, I'm curious of the law they convicted him of on that front.
Now, as I understand it, he's not allowed legally to posses any firearm, and that's cool.....but I hope they didn't bend a law that's not applicable to convict him, that presents a dangerous precedent.
Man, turn on your TV, you must have missed the two leading poster children for bringing the US to socialism:
Bernie Sanders
AOC (Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez)
They are both blatant about it....listen to AOC on recent talk shows...openly professing to want "democratic socialism"...which is....socialism.
There are others that are scarily agreeing largely with this, which is amazing, in that only a few short years ago, no one like this would have even gotten close to power, much less actually elected!!!
Yes, it is something to worry about. It will bring about the destruction of the US as we know it.
I can assure, you, to date, none of my firearms have spontaneously become animated and caused violence against any person, or animal so far.
I"d be open to hunting, but just never have gone....most people I know have not had any problems with their weapons causing problems either.....
And a 30 round magazine for a rifle is a standard capacity magazine....not "high" capacity...
Err, these are all available in all US states....right to vote is not tied in any way to race, geez, where did you get this from?
You get due process if poor....you just may not get the best lawyer, but that applies to all states.
I will give you that abortions are getting more restricted in a few states, and I disagree with that, however, the ones that trying to truly almost deny you one, are being taken to court and their laws are on hold till adjudicated.
You can have any religion you want in any US state, as long as it doesn't break any laws, I mean, no human sacrifices, but aside from that you can be just about what you want to be in any of the states.
I"m not sure where you're pulling this stuff from....
Hey, we can just keep it simple.
Most of the states fully support and try to make sure their citizens are protected especially for the full Bill of Rights....except a few like CA, NJ and NY and pretty much MA too....for some reason, they pick ONE of the amendments out to try to remove from citizens....the 2nd.
Trouble is...if you get rid of the 2nd...eventually, they'll come for the 1st and others, and there will be nothing there to stop them.
I think you mean they have more anti-citizen intrusion into your 2A rights.
There's plenty of people that would want to move to more free states where they respect ALL of your rights as a citizen.
There's plenty of cities in different states, that have MUCH lower taxation, yet are able to provide plenty of city services (police, fire, schools, etc).
These places also don't tell you how to run your business.
Or, even better....make companies ask me to OPT IN if they want to use my data.
jk
Oh, absolutely the ritual.
While I'm glad I quit smoking....it really WAS nice to smoke in bars while drinking. You can still in most places down here....and it is tempting.
There's also the social aspect of it....maybe diminishing,
BUT...I found at work as they made you smoke outside, I often was talking with co-workers I don't sit near and getting scuttlebutt, I also found myself talking with people MUCH higher up on the totem pole than I, and while I had their ear, I'd give my views on things as well as getting inside info on how things were going. Often I got selected for things due to familiarity driving I believe in part, by them knowing who I was out in the "smoke hole" with them.
BUT...you don't get the enjoyment of lighting one up on the vape thing.
What was half the fun of smoking real cigarettes....carrying lighters, firing it up, etc....
I guess the vape things are ok for quitting smoking....but really, once you get off the nicotine, they aren't nearly so much fun as real smoking that uses real fire, and other things like flicking ashes, etc...it kept your non-drinking hand busy.
Well, if a corporation refuses to PAY taxes they owe, I doubt they'll be in business very long.
However, all businesses (and rightly so) try to minimize their tax obligations by every legal means available.
A company is created with the sole intention of making a profit. That's it, plain and simple.
And especially if it is a publicly traded company, they are legally obligated to their shareholders to try to maximize the profit to their legal ability.
If you don't like all the legal ways they can minimize their taxes...then change the tax laws.
How about a big overhaul and make tax codes simpler. You make X in profit....you pay Y in taxes.
Hell, do that for everyone and we'd be much better off.
But you cannot blame a company (or any individual for that matter) for attempting to pay ONLY the minimum amount of taxes that are legally required.
If you want to pay more, I believe there are lines on the US Tax forms that will allow you to do so, but you cannot possibly expect people or businesses to pay more than they absolutely have to...it goes against nature.
Come visit New Orleans....very much like that here too.
Especially on the restaurant side of things...when in NOLA proper, I rarely see a chain restaurant place to eat, unless it is a local chain.
But, what do you do with the significant number of people that, rather than spend their UBI on food, shelter and other necessities of life....they BLOW it on drugs or other bad choices?
What if they do this for 2-6 months or more in a stretch?
Do you then let them starve on the street? What about their kids, these people fuck too you know.
But....people have tried to say that TODAY, when people fuck up, and someone says "well, let them starve to death"....and you are painted as a horrible person.
Also, "what about the children"?
Do you let the kids starve too, or, do we also take on the added expense of keeping them?
How do we keep the person we're talking about...from reproducing even more???
That's the thing....you can't force everyone to be taken care of. At some point, you have to allow that some people are fuck ups, and let them do what they are trying to do to themselves, and quit paying for them, no matter what system you have.
But too many will say "oh, you can not do that in a civilized society"...and if you can't then, well, you are stuck paying and paying and paying....with no end in sight.
And when others see them get away with it, they'll start doing it too, it is human nature.
Not really, at least on the Federal end of things.
Especially if it has any security requirements at all, you have to be a US citizen....contractor or govy.
Trouble is, if you're using something like UBI to replace SS, or food stamps, etc....what happens with irresponsible people (and yes, there are a number of them today on these welfare programs), goes out 2-3 months in a row and blows their entire UBI income check on drugs, partying, etc.?
SO, no you have given this person money, they blow it and now have no money for food, shelter, etc.
Do you now give them MORE money or just let them starve on the street.
If you say the former...then, when does it stop?
These would not be isolated cases mind you.
I just make sure to NOT have an active camera on my work computer.
No picture available....no issues.
Well, a fella has to make a living somehow.....
You gotta pay the bills and this kind of work takes time and effort, so.....
ONce Adobe does this, they can RENT not only their software to you, but also their hardware!!
I'm thinking this is largely why someone like Keith Richards survived so many years of heroin use.
From what I read, back in his day, he could afford to get pharmaceutical grades of things like coke and his heroin was pure, rarely bought from any low end street dealers, etc.
Likely the purity of the stuff he did, was largely responsible for his surviving being an addict for so long.
Even in NON-poor countries, they are having trouble keeping up healthcare for all and the costs are starting to weigh in heavily.
Healthcare problems in the UK
Canada isn't that much better than US
Well, it is there for a very GOOD reason. Remember this is the United STATES of America. States rights, eh?
This is there to give ALL states a more proportional ability to choose the president. If it weren't there, you'd have basically 2-3 massive states deciding for the rest of the states, and that is not fair. This is a vast country and a state like MO has vastly different concerns than CA, and the electoral college is there to help balance things a bit on the state level.
There are some troubles for you on this one. First, what is the definition of 'rich'? $250K/yr? $150K/yr?
And, even if you drop the definitions of rich to those levels, you can't get enough money to fund medicare for all, and people realize this just isn't something the US can afford.
And the ultra-rich, well, if you start trying to tax them at 90%, which would still not pay for 'free education and medical for everyone)....those folks can afford to move out of the US to escape it. That just leads the upper middle class to pay it all, and that isn't fair, it will just decimate the middle class even more.