States aim to stop internet release of 3D-printed gun plans

[Judi Lynn]

Source: Associated Press


Martha Bellisle, Associated Press
Updated 11:34 pm CDT, Monday, August 20,

SEATTLE (AP) — A federal judge in Seattle is scheduled to hear arguments Tuesday on whether to block a settlement the U.S. State Department reached with a company that would allow it to post blueprints for printing 3D weapons on the internet.

The federal agency had tried to stop a Texas company from releasing the plans online, arguing it violated export regulations. But the agency reversed itself in April and entered an agreement with the company that would allow it to post the plans. The company is owned by a self-described "crypto-anarchist" who opposes restrictions on gun ownership.

Nineteen states and the District of Columbia sued and last month secured a restraining order to stop that process, and now they want to make that permanent by having the judge convert the restraining order into an injunction. They fear the plans, if disseminated online, could be used by people who are not legally permitted to buy or possess guns. Critics add that because the weapons aren't made of metal, they would be undetectable.

Cody Wilson, owner of Austin, Texas-based Defense Distributed, has said "governments should live in fear of their citizenry." Wilson's lawyers have said the safety risk from the 3D weapons claimed by the states is largely exaggerated because many of the files are already online.

Read more: https://www.chron.com/news/us/article/States-aim-to-stop-internet-release-of-3D-printed-13170309.php

[Onyrleft]

1. The vast majority of the people that these things are going to injure

will be the people who make them.

[truthisfreedom]

2. Boring, stupid. Junk. Useless.

[cstanleytech]

3. Good luck with trying to legislate that because while I am not pro gun

I realize that there are a number of things standing in the way.
The first thing standing in the way is that information can easily be transferred online the other two things standing in the way are the first and second amendment so altogether it's not going to be easy.

[amcgrath]

4. Unsurprisingly

Gun control becomes a major issue, when it is about guns that are not made or sold by the arms manufacturers who fund the NRA - is a crappy plastic single shot gun more dangerous than a bump stock or assault rifle? - only to manufacturers profits

[keithbvadu2]

5. Precedent for gun control.

Precedent for gun control.

The Second Amendment says nothing about a gun being (non) detectable.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

7. Actually, the 2A says nothing, in specific, about guns

The 2A is a general protection for all arms. Interpreting the 2A as a protection only for arms made of metal is an error.
The courts have, including the Heller Decision, have held valid various restrictions on less conventional weapons but have struck down many restrictions on handguns and long guns up to .50 caliber.

[keithbvadu2]

9. "all arms" - Good point... maybe a better point

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

10. Sounds good

Glad you favor an individual RKBA as expressed in the 2A and explained in the Heller decision.

[Sgent]

6. I mean....

the plans are already widely available at the usual torrent sites and elsewhere. Its a bit like a genie at this point.

[LanternWaste]

8. I think you're right.

This seems more like a redo of the entertainment industry's attempt to remove torrents from the internet. It sounds good, but for all practical purposes, it's just too late.