Colorado bill could criminalize possessing 3D gun files, not just printing them

[Endymio]

Pure hypocrisy when legal aliens without criminal histories are kicked out without due process.

No legal aliens have been kicked out without due process. As for illegal aliens, I remind you this:

""In 1996, Bill Clinton signed the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act (IIRAIRA). This allows for immediate summary removal of certain illegal aliens with no court hearing, including those suspected of fraud and those who lack proof of 2+ years of consecutive residency, effectively bypassing traditional due process...."

 

[godrilla]

10 Million+ illegals under the Biden Admin

Trump: Kick them all out!
Leftists: PoLiCe 3D PrInTeRs!!

not just printers. Leftist already salivating at their hard drives being actively scanned in search for the boogeyman folder. You know because they have nothing to hide so that makes it okay.

If they are untraceable, how did you come to this conclusion?

Unless the Leftist favorite Billionaire oligarch who is besties with Jeffrey Epstein, named Bill Gates has back door via copilot and such.
It's okay because he owns MSNBC so they tell us what to think.

 

[wiyosaya]

Trading away constitutional rights to enable thought crimes is not a good thing, full stop. Unless you want to wind up like China, that is.

What a joke. Constitutional rights are being traded away by the current admin and people piss and moan that gun rights are being traded away? I think we have bigger things to concern ourselves with.

 

[wiyosaya]

No legal aliens have been kicked out without due process. As for illegal aliens, I remind you this:

""In 1996, Bill Clinton signed the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act (IIRAIRA). This allows for immediate summary removal of certain illegal aliens with no court hearing, including those suspected of fraud and those who lack proof of 2+ years of consecutive residency, effectively bypassing traditional due process...."

Right buh, buh, buh, buh, Keep blaming everyone else. Deflection solves nothing.

But more to the point, me thinks you need to re-read my post. It said nothing about illegal aliens. It referred to LEGAL aliens. Was there something you didn't understand?

 

[Endymio]

Ah yes. People still get executed which means that its not an effective deterrent.

Was that a joke? There are nearly five MILLION violent crimes committed each year in the US, of which perhaps 20 (0.0004%) result in executions --- and even those don't happen until 30 or 40 years after the crime was originally committed, and most of those on death row die of old age before their sentence can be enacted.

Punishment is only a deterrent when it occurs swiftly and inevitably upon conviction.

 

[Endymio]

What a joke. Constitutional rights are being traded away by the current admin and people piss and moan that gun rights are being traded away? I think we have bigger things to concern ourselves with.

Fun fact: President Obama still holds the record for most acts judged unconstitutional by the US Supreme Court, with more than 110 adverse rulings, 44 of which were unanimous 9-0 decisions -- even his own appointed justices slapped him down. That's more than Reagan, both Bushes, and Trump all combined.

But more to the point, me thinks you need to re-read my post. It said nothing about illegal aliens. It referred to LEGAL aliens.

Methinks you need to re-read mine. Legal aliens aren't being deported without due process.

 

[wiyosaya]

Is this to whom you're referring?

"Pye and three accomplices abducted and raped [the woman] before taking her to a deserted road where Pye ordered her to lie face down and shot her three times..."

Pye wasn't labeled "intellectually disabled" until his defense attorneys went to work. His first IQ test by them came in at 70 -- too high -- so they found another expert who tested him at 68, just within the 50-69 category of "mlldly intellectually disabled". For comparison, those suffering from Downs Syndrome often have IQs in the 35-49 range ("moderately disabled") or even in the 20-35 range ("severely disabled").

Maybe you should consider doing your own research or just going back into your cave -

Thomas and Gorsuch signal willingness to rethink SCOTUS rulings about executing low-IQ inmates

Over the objection of Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch, the Supreme Court put the execution of intellectually disabled man Joseph Clifton Smith on hold.

lawandcrime.com

Over the objection of the Court's liberal minority, the Supreme Court declined to intervene last January as Alabama used an entirely novel method of execution to put a man to death. Kenneth Eugene Smith became the first inmate put to death via nitrogen hypoxia — a controversial execution method used as an alternative to lethal injection.

 

[wiyosaya]

Fun fact: President Obama still holds the record for most acts judged unconstitutional by the US Supreme Court, with more than 110 adverse rulings, 44 of which were unanimous 9-0 decisions -- even his own appointed justices slapped him down. That's more than Reagan, both Bushes, and Trump all combined.

More Buh, buh, buh?

Methinks you need to re-read mine. Legal aliens aren't being deported without due process.

You certainly have been hiding under a rock somewhere. Oh, that's right. I forgot. If the news doesn't support your view, it must be fake.

 

[Endymio]

Maybe you should consider doing your own research or just going back into your cave -

Thomas and Gorsuch signal willingness to rethink SCOTUS rulings about executing low-IQ inmates

Over the objection of Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch, the Supreme Court put the execution of intellectually disabled man Joseph Clifton Smith on hold.

lawandcrime.com

You should read your links before posting them. Smith hasn't been executed- the Supreme Court issued a stay. Nor does a low IQ automatically translate to being mentally disabled to the point of being shielded from punishment. Smith tested in the 72-78 IQ range, a range that includes 10% of the entire US population. He's miles away from the 35 IQ of a Down's sufferer, and certainly was intelligent enough to understand the difference between right from wrong, which is the true touchstone for capital punishment.

I'd be very interested (and likely quite amused) to hear your reasoning as to why it is "cruel" to execute someone with an IQ of 78, but not someone with an IQ of 100. Be specific.

 

[unoficialoficial]

Crime is like Bremsstrahlung (braking) radiation; you cannot avoid it entirely. Just as Bremsstrahlung radiation is inherent to plasma, crime is intrinsic to social structures. Drawing an analogy with the physics of Bremsstrahlung radiation, a proposed model suggests that crime levels scale with several factors: the square root of temperature (representing human interaction frequency), the square of atomic number (representing average family size), density (a shared variable in both contexts), and a constant (perhaps reflecting cultural or religious factors).

Therefore, minimizing crime according to this model would theoretically require reducing population density, limiting family size, and decreasing interaction rates. However, this strategy is likely to come at the cost of reduced societal productivity.

A key implication of this specific model is the emphasis on family size, as it contributes to the risk squared. Based on this model, if your goal is to reduce the risk of crime through interaction, limiting contact with individuals from larger families might be prioritized. For instance, if you need to rent out property and have one applicant with five children and another with none, choosing the applicant with no children might, according to this model, present significantly fewer potential problems and intrinsic risks. Another example: one politician has kids, don't vote him.

In general, kids are necessary but dangerous for the society, they increase the crime levels, avoid interactions is a smart move for safety. It’s not discrimination, its “physics”.

 

[bclaymiles]

Right - cry Fake News. Except this time, it was easy to verify. What was the difficulty in verifying it? - https://www.prisonlegalnews.org/new...prisoner-executed-after-scotus-denies-appeal/

Well, that's one case.

"Pye was convicted of the 1993 murder of former girlfriend Alicia Lynn Yarbrough. After admitting that another man fathered the child Pye believed was his, he and three accomplices abducted and raped her before taking her to a deserted road where Pye ordered her to lie face down and shot her three times."

I don't care what his IQ was. He committed a heinous crime, that he knew was wrong to commit. What matters is his ability to distinguish right from wrong, and his actions proved he knew the difference.

Buh-bye, Pye.

 

[bclaymiles]

Crime is like Bremsstrahlung (braking) radiation; you cannot avoid it entirely. Just as Bremsstrahlung radiation is inherent to plasma, crime is intrinsic to social structures. Drawing an analogy with the physics of Bremsstrahlung radiation, a proposed model suggests that crime levels scale with several factors: the square root of temperature (representing human interaction frequency), the square of atomic number (representing average family size), density (a shared variable in both contexts), and a constant (perhaps reflecting cultural or religious factors).

Therefore, minimizing crime according to this model would theoretically require reducing population density, limiting family size, and decreasing interaction rates. However, this strategy is likely to come at the cost of reduced societal productivity.

A key implication of this specific model is the emphasis on family size, as it contributes to the risk squared. Based on this model, if your goal is to reduce the risk of crime through interaction, limiting contact with individuals from larger families might be prioritized. For instance, if you need to rent out property and have one applicant with five children and another with none, choosing the applicant with no children might, according to this model, present significantly fewer potential problems and intrinsic risks. Another example: one politician has kids, don't vote him.

In general, kids are necessary but dangerous for the society, they increase the crime levels, avoid interactions is a smart move for safety. It’s not discrimination, its “physics”.

Thanks for the laugh!

 

[bclaymiles]

You should read your links before posting them. Smith hasn't been executed- the Supreme Court issued a stay. Nor does a low IQ automatically translate to being mentally disabled to the point of being shielded from punishment. Smith tested in the 72-78 IQ range, a range that includes 10% of the entire US population. He's miles away from the 35 IQ of a Down's sufferer, and certainly was intelligent enough to understand the difference between right from wrong, which is the true touchstone for capital punishment.

I'd be very interested (and likely quite amused) to hear your reasoning as to why it is "cruel" to execute someone with an IQ of 78, but not someone with an IQ of 100. Be specific.

The article opens with "Georgia executed Willie Pye, 59, on March 20, 2024". Just fyi. However, I agree with the rest of your comments.

 

[Tantor]

This goes far beyond gun files. The goal is to make printers scan files for stuff that threatens the state. It's one more step towards a 1984 totalitarian state.

 

[Endymio]

The article opens with "Georgia executed Willie Pye, 59, on March 20, 2024". Just fyi. However, I agree with the rest of your comments.

I was referring to Joseph Smith, the subject of his second link.

 

[p51d007]

Once the 2nd amendment falls, and, legal citizens have no rights to bear arms, the other 9 bill of rights will fall as well. The 2nd, protects the other 9.
Look in ANY country's history of dictatorship/communism/fascism etc and you will see one of the first rights stripped is the right to keep and bear arms.
"ghost guns" aren't the problem. It's the people who most likely are lawfully prohibited from possessing a firearm that are the problem.

 

[bclaymiles]

I was referring to Joseph Smith, the subject of his second link.

Oops, sorry.

 

[Endymio]

Look in ANY country's history of dictatorship/communism/fascism etc and you will see one of the first rights stripped is the right to keep and bear arms.

Very true. Some people mistakenly claim the Nazis relaxed gun laws, but the reality is different. They first used firearm registration records to round up all the weapons owned by Jews, their political opponents, and other "undesirables". Then, once they were safely ensconced in power, they relaxed gun ownership -- but only for those citizens for whom local authorities would "vouch for the character of" ... which in practice meant other Nazi Party members.

 

[godrilla]

Very true. Some people mistakenly claim the Nazis relaxed gun laws, but the reality is different. They first used firearm registration records to round up all the weapons owned by Jews, their political opponents, and other "undesirables". Then, once they were safely ensconced in power, they relaxed gun ownership -- but only for those citizens for whom local authorities would "vouch for the character of" ... which in practice meant other Nazi Party members.

Exactly hence the horshoe theory.
The right today is just the moderates. Both extremes want the same thing go figure.
Horseshoe theory - Wikipedia https://share.google/sZ9hgS8BcLNQDeKJb

 

[BuckarooBonzaii]

Reminds me of the days when downloading torrents of music and movies were huge and illegal at State and Federal level, but it still captured a wide audience and nothing could stop it. If people want something they'll be creative to make it happen.

 

[wiyosaya]

Once the 2nd amendment falls, and, legal citizens have no rights to bear arms, the other 9 bill of rights will fall as well. The 2nd, protects the other 9.
Look in ANY country's history of dictatorship/communism/fascism etc and you will see one of the first rights stripped is the right to keep and bear arms.
"ghost guns" aren't the problem. It's the people who most likely are lawfully prohibited from possessing a firearm that are the problem.

As I see it, given the current political climate, all the other rights are in far more danger than the 2nd Amendment. Somehow, people see the reverse, and that's fallacy, IMO.

Just because historically, gun rights were the first to fall, doesn't mean that history will repeat itself.
Also, SCOTUS, has affirmed, in some cases, restrictive gun laws.

Very true. Some people mistakenly claim the Nazis relaxed gun laws, but the reality is different. They first used firearm registration records to round up all the weapons owned by Jews, their political opponents, and other "undesirables". Then, once they were safely ensconced in power, they relaxed gun ownership -- but only for those citizens for whom local authorities would "vouch for the character of" ... which in practice meant other Nazi Party members.

in this case what we have is not the elimination of gun rights, but gun rights only for "us" and not "them" which is, IMO, far more dangerous than the total elimination of gun rights.

 

[wiyosaya]

To my point, I'm not the only one who thinks Civil Rights, in general, are in danger given the current political climate. IMO, 2nd Amendment rights are not the only rights to be alarmed about.

Christian leaders denounce Trump actions, warn of 'crisis of faith'

Their statement says Christians have a moral obligation to condemn the demonization of immigrants and attacks on civil rights and diversity.

www.yahoo.com

BTW - Democrats never even suggested they would come for your guns. The current administration's recent statement on Guns and Protests, OTOH, suggests limiting 2nd Amendment rights. https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2026/01/29/donald-trump-you-cant-have-guns/88393696007/

 

[Endymio]

As I see it, given the current political climate, all the other rights are in far more danger than the 2nd Amendment.

The 2nd Amendment has been effectively erased in much of the country. Try getting a gun license in NYC or LA if you disagree. Even if you do eventually manage to do so, look at the list of 100,000+ locations for which you're legally preventing from exercising your right.

BTW - Democrats never even suggested they would come for your guns.

Presidential Candidate Kamala Harris: "We have to have a buyback program, and I support a mandatory gun buyback program," Harris said. "It’s got to be smart, we got to do it the right way. But there are 5 million (assault weapons) at least, some estimate as many as 10 million, and we’re going to have to have smart public policy that’s about taking those off the streets, but doing it the right way."

 

[Endymio]

in this case what we have is not the elimination of gun rights, but gun rights only for "us" and not "them" which is, IMO, far more dangerous than the total elimination of gun rights.

I've heard a lot of Democrat politicians propose gun bans and additional gun restrictions. I've never once heard them suggest that the agents who protect them give up their own weapons.

 

[godrilla]

I've heard a lot of Democrat politicians propose gun bans and additional gun restrictions. I've never once heard them suggest that the agents who protect them give up their own weapons.

My take on this. 2a is like a rock; drop by drop even water can break the toughest rock that is our 2a. The water metaphorically is the legislation that is passed in the name of safety with open borders and defunding the police by replacing them with social workers. How to get the sheep to give up their rights bear arms 101? Just tell them it's for their safety to have open borders and use social workers to quell criminals for their safety while the the same politicians have an armed security detail. We just need a few more Reichstag fires January 6th style false flags and the centralized state sponsored propaganda apparatus to spin the story to completely cause mass hysteria of gun ownership. Rinse repeat until that Rock called 2a breaks. Not against 2a openly just death by 1000 cuts that all.