Nine states sue to prevent 3D-printed gun plans going online

Vulcanproject said:
I'll phrase this question more clearly for you: "So, laws are to be rewritten to work for the time period?

Hell yes! In context of the age and intent that particular amendment was written for compared to the time we live in now, it's crazy to not carefully consider the validity or relevance of it today. You would have to be certifiable to not think that you need to review and amend for sociocultural evolution.

As an aside by asserting the "USA [is] the best and most powerful country" then I immediately wonder if you have ever travelled very much to judge for yourself, and help you define what you really mean by 'best'. I am disinclined to throw a blanket over everything with that kind of statement, since I have travelled.

That particular 200 year old principle as the right to bear arms certainly didn't make the USA 'the most powerful' or 'the best'. In any case there have been far more powerful, longer lasting empires governed in various ways, before the USA emerged as a superpower in 1945. Right now we're speaking in an era where the USA's global power and influence has already peaked some time ago, and is inevitably waning.
Click to expand...
Peaked and waning? Would that be why when people all over the world need asylum, they run to here? Is that why we keep sending trillions of dollars to support all the other economies? Is that why it takes our military to go into places to free the oppressed and clear out the savage regimes? I am sorry, but removing peoples rights with "new" laws is not the right thing to do. The people need to wake up and smell the BS, giving up rights and freedoms for security is how dictators rise to power. It is also wrong to presume evil acts from people before they think them. Preventing someone from acting on an impulse not there, is a sure way to prevent freedom of thought. Laws should be in place to help keep our freedoms and liberty, not remove them. Just as Patrick Henry said 200 years ago, "Give me freedom or give me death", I stand up and say the same! He didn't say " Give me security from death and responsibility and some freedoms" which is what the world chants daily!! MAGA!!
 
treetops said:
You can legally buy a gun at a gun show with no background check what is the diff? Oh wait no lobbyist involved.
Click to expand...
This is a blatant lie! The lobbyist are not an issue. You cannot purchase a firearm at a gun show from a dealer without a background check. You can purchase a firearm from an individual anywhere without a background check. The gun control Nazis want this to be changed so that if you purchase a gun from an individual they have to run a check, that is fine, except who regulates the paperwork and how does the seller know the person is who they say they are? What about handing down your weapons to family members or friends? Look, people killing people has been going on since the beginning of time, what tool is being used is not the issue, how do you stop people from doing it is the question. Firearms are only weapons if used as such, until then, they are firearms. A gun is a tool, just like a hammer. Hunting or protection, just as the hammer is for nailing or destruction.
 
TomSEA said:
"These downloadable guns are unregistered and very difficult to detect, even with metal detectors, and will be available to anyone regardless of age, mental health or criminal history," said Washington State Attorney General Bob Ferguson.

I live in Washington State and Bob Ferguson is a ***** bucking for political office. He spends more time suing the feds to keep his name in the paper than paying attention to his own state. This quote shows just how uninformed he (and everyone else who is suing) is.

First of all, you need a $100k+ 3D printer to create one of these. Secondly, if you are stupid enough to pay $100k to buy a 3D printer to make one of these, the "gun" is good for about one, very inaccurate shot. Lastly, you can get plans to make REAL guns virtually anywhere. And bombs and missiles for that matter.

Listening to the uninformed, you'd think that all of a sudden, you can now 3D print a .50 caliber Browning machine gun while waiting for your coffee to percolate.
Click to expand...
From what I know, there are ways that you could print this on a cheap printer, then "smooth" the surface chemically. No, you won't get the quality that you would with a $100K printer, but I bet using this type of process, it would still fire at least one bullet. It does not take much to fire a bullet. Targeting accuracy may suffer without that pricy printer, but it would still fire at least one bullet.
 
CBTex said:
Isn't this more of a First Amendment issue?

These attorneys general want to block someone from disseminating the plans.

When has stopping ideas and thoughts ever worked?
Click to expand...
It hasn't. However, a clever person might argue that this is inciting violence. SCOTUS has ruled that the sharing of ideas does not require inciting violence and speech that incites violence is unconstitutional.
 
VBKing said:
You seem to think that after the military went to 100 houses and took all the guns they found, that the rest of the country would just sit still and do nothing and let them come take their guns too. That's when Civil War 2 would break out. The gun owners wouldn't be going after or up against the military... they would be going after the government whether it be local, city, state or national. All hell would break loose. No politician or their family or relatives would ever be safe. There wouldn't be enough police and military to protect everyone. And also, you'd have to brainwash every military and police who are trying to take the guns, because many of them believe in the 2nd Amendment. It's not as simple as someone just SAYING all guns should be removed. Trying to do it impossible and would result in widespread bloodshed, looting, torched buildings and homes and utter chaos. There is NO simple solution, nor is there a complex solution either.
Click to expand...
We fought against the most powerful army in the world in 1772-1776 and beat them. No army could stand against the British for a hundred years prior to then, the difference, the people. Every day Joe's with the gun he used for hunting and the knife he used for cleaning the game. To say no matter what we do we would lose is what the citizens who stood against the Kings mighty forces heard from thousands of people and yet they di and they won. To give up your rights and freedom because there is no chance to win is paramount to sure failure. You will not win if you quit. Also, you will surely lose if you know you cannot win!!
 
Robertrogue said:
Vulcanproject said:
I'll phrase this question more clearly for you: "So, laws are to be rewritten to work for the time period?

Hell yes! In context of the age and intent that particular amendment was written for compared to the time we live in now, it's crazy to not carefully consider the validity or relevance of it today. You would have to be certifiable to not think that you need to review and amend for sociocultural evolution.

As an aside by asserting the "USA [is] the best and most powerful country" then I immediately wonder if you have ever travelled very much to judge for yourself, and help you define what you really mean by 'best'. I am disinclined to throw a blanket over everything with that kind of statement, since I have travelled.

That particular 200 year old principle as the right to bear arms certainly didn't make the USA 'the most powerful' or 'the best'. In any case there have been far more powerful, longer lasting empires governed in various ways, before the USA emerged as a superpower in 1945. Right now we're speaking in an era where the USA's global power and influence has already peaked some time ago, and is inevitably waning.
Click to expand...
Peaked and waning? Would that be why when people all over the world need asylum, they run to here? Is that why we keep sending trillions of dollars to support all the other economies? Is that why it takes our military to go into places to free the oppressed and clear out the savage regimes? I am sorry, but removing peoples rights with "new" laws is not the right thing to do. The people need to wake up and smell the BS, giving up rights and freedoms for security is how dictators rise to power. It is also wrong to presume evil acts from people before they think them. Preventing someone from acting on an impulse not there, is a sure way to prevent freedom of thought. Laws should be in place to help keep our freedoms and liberty, not remove them. Just as Patrick Henry said 200 years ago, "Give me freedom or give me death", I stand up and say the same! He didn't say " Give me security from death and responsibility and some freedoms" which is what the world chants daily!! MAGA!!
Click to expand...
People are flocking to other countries in the world, too.

If America is so great right now, why chant MAGA? What greatness has America lost that it needs to made great again?
 
wiyosaya said:
People are flocking to other countries in the world, too.

If America is so great right now, why chant MAGA? What greatness has America lost that it needs to made great again?
Click to expand...
Not sure what other countries people are flocking to, not heard of any. Making America Great Again by way of lower taxes, more jobs, more opportunity, more income, more freedoms and less socialism, to begin with. How bout that?
 
Robertrogue said:
wiyosaya said:
People are flocking to other countries in the world, too.

If America is so great right now, why chant MAGA? What greatness has America lost that it needs to made great again?
Click to expand...
Not sure what other countries people are flocking to, not heard of any. Making America Great Again by way of lower taxes, more jobs, more opportunity, more income, more freedoms and less socialism, to begin with. How bout that?
Click to expand...
Look it up! People are flocking to European countries, too.

As I see it, the only tax laws that need to be changed are those that favor American companies shipping jobs overseas.
 
wiyosaya said:
Look it up! People are flocking to European countries, too.

As I see it, the only tax laws that need to be changed are those that favor American companies shipping jobs overseas.
Click to expand...
Really? You need more research. The tax laws are crazy and it is because the government will not cut spending in fear of pissing off voters!!
 
As far as who can download the guns doesn't matter. Cartels and gangs have been trading illegal arms for years. Anybody who's gone to the trouble of purchasing a printer and attempting to print a gun is most likely a gun enthusiast. Criminals and those with a nefarious intent will turn to tried and true methods of procurement. The basic Constitution is as relevant today as it ever was. Technology doesn't change legal philosophy as progressives would like to think, which is curious since socialist ideals are well over a 100 years old and progressives are still clinging to it. Technology does introduce new challenges by new ways of encroachment on privacy, dependence on energy to maintain modern lifestyles and machinery, and a host of other things. Laws have to be passed to control these things from interrupting the protections enshrined in the Constitution. It's tiresome with a government bureaucracy that's bent on governing from the top and ignoring the will of the people. Large-scale confiscation presents the question of if it's worth the chaos that will inevitably result. Progressives like to frame everything as for the good of the people but we all know that's it's always has been and will always will be power moves. They are really drunk on themselves. Does it mean that they never have any to offer? Not saying that at all. I do agree on certain things if it pass the test of reason, but only because I see it as beneficial knowing full well that they are likely coming from a different place. It also doesn't mean I'm fully on board with conservative agenda. I will freely play both against each other to get the Constitutional result that I'm looking for. Republicans dance to the tune of corporate power brokers and Democrats dance to the tune of big government draconianism. Neither is acceptable to the extreme. Immigration for example: Democrats are looking for cheap votes and the Republicans (not Trump) are looking for cheap labor. With that, both citizens and immigrants lose.
 
Robertrogue said:
This is a blatant lie! The lobbyist are not an issue. You cannot purchase a firearm at a gun show from a dealer without a background check. You can purchase a firearm from an individual anywhere without a background check. The gun control Nazis want this to be changed so that if you purchase a gun from an individual they have to run a check, that is fine, except who regulates the paperwork and how does the seller know the person is who they say they are? What about handing down your weapons to family members or friends? Look, people killing people has been going on since the beginning of time, what tool is being used is not the issue, how do you stop people from doing it is the question. Firearms are only weapons if used as such, until then, they are firearms. A gun is a tool, just like a hammer. Hunting or protection, just as the hammer is for nailing or destruction.
Click to expand...
. So you think it is OK to be able to give a 5 year old your handgun or sell it to him because you don't even need to ask for ID with current laws? The DMV regulates the sell of a car, I think we can do a better job with guns. They are just tools for protection it's not my fault if they get misused. With that logic you could say why not Bazookas, grenades, bombs, nuclear weapons and landmines?

I am not really pro or anti gun. But when the UK banned guns they saw 10% less murders and stopped mass shootings, just something to think about. Maybe only woman should have guns beyond hunting rifles? idk they are way less likely to commit murder.

Trump received 30 million from the NRA (please ignore the Russian money part it was the first google result)
https://www.vanityfair.com/news/201...0-million-to-elect-trump-was-it-russian-money

2 Million to Congress
https://www.opensecrets.org/industries/summary.php?ind=Q13++
 
treetops said:
. So you think it is OK to be able to give a 5 year old your handgun or sell it to him because you don't even need to ask for ID with current laws? The DMV regulates the sell of a car, I think we can do a better job with guns. They are just tools for protection it's not my fault if they get misused. With that logic you could say why not Bazookas, grenades, bombs, nuclear weapons and landmines?

I am not really pro or anti gun. But when the UK banned guns they saw 10% less murders and stopped mass shootings, just something to think about. Maybe only woman should have guns beyond hunting rifles? idk they are way less likely to commit murder.

Trump received 30 million from the NRA (please ignore the Russian money part it was the first google result)
https://www.vanityfair.com/news/201...0-million-to-elect-trump-was-it-russian-money

2 Million to Congress
https://www.opensecrets.org/industries/summary.php?ind=Q13++
Click to expand...
Wow, lobbies spend money and it goes to members of congress and senate, this is normal on every cause. It is not the reason, it just happens to be the way it has always worked. Now, the article on the 30million to Trump is misleading and almost an outright lie. It specifically states that it looks like the NRA spent 30 million in helping to elect President Trump, no where does it say they gave 30 million to Trump. Besides, the NRA always supports a candidate that will help prevent taking our gun rights away. Point two, you are an *** if you think people give a 5 year old a handgun, however, I did teach both my children how to properly handle and shoot a firearm, both rifle and handgun at 5 and through today. The DMV regulates cars because you do not have the "right" to own a car or drive it on the roads. I won't even address the stupid remarks after that one. Point 3 The UK banned guns and yes the murder rate dropped 10% the first two years and now has bypassed the original numbers but people are now being murdered by other means. Also, guns are not the only mass murder weapon, how about the hundreds killed by vehicles over the last few years?
 
Robertrogue said:
Wow, lobbies spend money and it goes to members of congress and senate, this is normal on every cause. It is not the reason, it just happens to be the way it has always worked. Now, the article on the 30million to Trump is misleading and almost an outright lie. It specifically states that it looks like the NRA spent 30 million in helping to elect President Trump, no where does it say they gave 30 million to Trump. Besides, the NRA always supports a candidate that will help prevent taking our gun rights away. Point two, you are an *** if you think people give a 5 year old a handgun, however, I did teach both my children how to properly handle and shoot a firearm, both rifle and handgun at 5 and through today. The DMV regulates cars because you do not have the "right" to own a car or drive it on the roads. I won't even address the stupid remarks after that one. Point 3 The UK banned guns and yes the murder rate dropped 10% the first two years and now has bypassed the original numbers but people are now being murdered by other means. Also, guns are not the only mass murder weapon, how about the hundreds killed by vehicles over the last few years?
Click to expand...
You gave your 5 year old guns, there is no law against it. There is no law against just handing it to him and walking away. There is no law against putting it under his pillow. There is no law against selling anyone of any age a gun at a gun show as a private seller you are not required to ask for id or anything. If there is show me? Why wouldn't you want background checks on all gun sells just like how the DMV regulates cars? Responsible gun owners don't want gun stores to sell guns without a background check and the same should apply to private sellers. It has nothing to do with the second amendment. It's common sense just like not letting people own arms such as grenade launchers and bazookas.

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.

Murder rate's are still down by 10%...........
http://www.nationmaster.com/country...ent-crime/Murder-rate-per-million-people#1995
 
Last edited:
treetops said:
You gave your 5 year old guns, there is no law against it. There is no law against just handing it to him and walking away. There is no law against putting it under his pillow. There is no law against selling anyone of any age a gun at a gun show as a private seller you are not required to ask for id or anything. If there is show me? Why wouldn't you want background checks on all gun sells just like how the DMV regulates cars? Responsible gun owners don't want gun stores to sell guns without a background check and the same should apply to private sellers. It has nothing to do with the second amendment. It's common sense just like not letting people own arms such as grenade launchers and bazookas.

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.

Murder rate's are still down by 10%...........
http://www.nationmaster.com/country...ent-crime/Murder-rate-per-million-people#1995
Click to expand...
Umm, driving a car is not a right. Besides, background checks work great when a lawful citizen is purchasing a gun. The statistics are overwhelming that where a handgun has been used in a crime it was not purchased by the perpetrator, it was stolen. There has been less than 1% of crimes involving a weapon legally purchased by the perpetrator. Also, there has been no murders by any NRA members that I can find in the last 30 years. So, instituting background checks is just like giving out 5th thru 10th place trophies, it is just a "feel good" gesture. Real reform would be to allow law abiding citizens continue to do what we have been doing and allow us to protect ourselves and families with the very weapons you expect Police to have to protect you and themselves.
 
mailpup said:
States take the position that driving is a privilege.
Click to expand...
That is why I said I beg to differ. That is also why I added the notion that rights can be revoked the same as privileges. So all in all there really is no difference looking at it from a political perspective. You could even compare driving to gun rights, the right to bear arms has to be bought the same as driving.
 
cliffordcooley said:
That is why I said I beg to differ. That is also why I added the notion that rights can be revoked the same as privileges. So all in all there really is no difference looking at it from a political perspective. You could even compare driving to gun rights, the right to bear arms has to be bought the same as driving.
Click to expand...
"eye roll" You do have your rights revoked if you are convicted of a felony, however, you can drive a car if you are a felon. Wow, your argument is very off base when comparing the two.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

A
An experimental 3D printer will melt steel to create new objects... in space
Replies
2
Views
197
erickmendes
erickmendes
midian182
California considers "right to disconnect" bill to prevent bosses contacting workers out of hours
Replies
23
Views
290
takaozo
takaozo
Daniel Sims
EU right-to-repair regulations: manufacturers would be liable for 12 months after repairs
Replies
1
Views
180
JCChua
JCChua

Latest posts

Back