Posted on 12/01/2013 8:12:11 AM PST by marktwain
DOJ began a PR push last week to find legislative traction for a set of proposed bills that would criminalize the individual production of rifle receivers and magazines with 3D printers. Sections 4 and 5 of the proposed House bill directly criminalize 3D printed receivers and magazines, and mandate an arbitrary amount of metal be part of their fabrication. Beyond suffering from fatal Due Process and GCA problems, the bill’s prohibitions are not extended to manufacturers because (hint) there isn’t actually a security issue at stake. The bad faith and fraud required to hide this from the current public discussion is of course par for the course. The media organs have dutifully repeated the official account.
The NRA used to say “no inroads.” You can make gun parts on 3D printers now, just like you can and have been able to mill them for about the last few hundred years. Guns aren’t allowed on airplanes and in courthouses. Now that it has reached a new level of visibility and popularity, the usual suspects would like to suppress the adoption of the digital manufacture of firearms. The goal of a new Undetectable Firearms Act is to make development and experimentation with these computer-aided devices fraught with danger and difficulty for the common man; to raise again the lowered barrier to entry to DIY gunsmithing, and to enable a means for arbitrary and capricious enforcement- like any good police state should.
Ceterum censeo
It is sad to see otherwise well informed people, such as Emily Miller, be taken in by the hype about “undetectable” guns.
They will add a whole plethora of stuff to this bill.
what? they use polymer bullets?
how undetectable is lead?
I would be very curious under what provision of the constitution the Feds can ban manufacture of what is otherwise a legal product? As was noted in the article - you can make those parts legally by machining them. What is the difference between machining and 3D printing (hint: none, from a logical viewpoint).
logic thought is not the hobby of tyrants!
whats good for the goose..and all that.
The bad guys are going to have undetectable firearms. There’s no getting around this.
The good guys don’t need to have undetectable firearms, but there’s no reason they shouldn’t have them.
That makes the issue moot, except that banning them is one more restriction on law abiding citizens.
The laws about this are anti-second amendment maneuverings.
They no longer follow the Constitution. After all, who is going to stop them?
Very. It's used to sheild items from scanner-view.
Just kidding. Lead shows up just fine on all X-Ray type scanners.
;-\
“what? they use polymer bullets?”
Probably could if need be. Certainly some kind of non metallic stuff could fill the bill.
Do what most patriots would do, and ignore the unconstitutional mandates. If you’re wringing your hands over the prospect of violating a federal decree, then the enemy has already won. Die on your feet, or spend the rest of your miserable existence licking the boots of your masters, like the conquered people that you are.
With that said, unregistered firearms are going to be the least of their worries if the powers to be decide to go full tilt socialist. These people seem to forget just who exactly built their military infrastructure, and those same people can wreck it just as easily.
Consider it an insurance policy against potential tyranny.
OK Florida FReepers— Sen. Bill Nelson, the whore of babylon former insurance commissioner and close friend of Debbie- Wassamatta-Shulz, and an ULTRA=left police state WASP— he has been on FL media talking about “undetectable 3D firearms”.. ad nauseum.
Somebody— contact this old moron and tell him to retire. He is no friend of the 2nd Amendment or for that matter any civil rights his socialist party doesn’t deem OK for “us” peons.
Yes. Because so many inner city yutes are going to fork out 1000 bucks and learn all that engineering stuff to make themselves printed plastic guns.
Exactly. Since manufacturing your own firearm using traditional fabrication technologies is legal, to criminalize doing the same thing on a 3D printer is a disingenuous move that would result in a loophole (”loophole” = government pulls a logical non-sequitir and ends up with inappropriate powers as a result). What do you want to bet if they’re allowed to get away with this, they’ll suddenly notice the discrepancy and move to get rid of it, not by reversing this rights theft, but by committing another to match. They always want to do it that way.
Might not be a bad idea. Can you prove incontrovertibly that the government won't decide to start detecting firearms for unConstitutional reasons?
Which brings us neatly to:
;^)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.