RCCrawler Forums

RCCrawler Forums (http://www.rccrawler.com/forum/)
-   Chit Chat (http://www.rccrawler.com/forum/chit-chat/)
-   -   Department of Justice rules that plans for 3D printed gun parts are protected under f (http://www.rccrawler.com/forum/chit-chat/600389-department-justice-rules-plans-3d-printed-gun-parts-protected-under-f.html)

Ditchrat 07-11-2018 10:06 AM
Department of Justice rules that plans for 3D printed gun parts are protected under f
 
hmmm



Quote:
The Department of Justice has reached a settlement with the Second Amendment Foundation over the distribution of plans to make 3D printed firearms. Under the terms of the agreement, plans for 3D gun parts can be distributed freely online.
The settlement also stated that the Department of Justice did not consider an AR-15 rifle to be an inherently military weapon.
Special: Think Bitcoins dead? Here’s how investors are preparing to make a fortune
What’s the story on Cody Wilson?

Cody Wilson designed and printed his own gun on a 3D printer. Then he decided to share the plans on the internet. While it is still illegal to distribute plans for an entire 3D printed gun on the internet, plans for all the parts can be distributed freely. These parts can then be printed and assembled into a working firearm.
In addition to plans for working guns, including one he designed himself and dubbed “The Liberator” after a classic World War II firearm, Wilson also designed and distributed plans for other gun parts, including high-capacity magazines. He created an organization called Defense Distributed to help distribute these blueprints.


In an interview with TheBlaze in January 2013, Wilson admitted that the ability to make these undetectable weapons made existing gun regulations essentially ineffective.
In May 2013, the State Department’s Office of Defense Trade Controls Compliance ordered Defense Distributed to immediately stop distributing any and all plans for guns and parts. The nonprofit Second Amendment Foundation filed a lawsuit on behalf of Wilson in May 2015.
What did settlement say?

On Tuesday, the Department of Justice and SAF reached a settlement in the lawsuit. As part of the settlement, Wilson will be allowed to once again distribute his 3D printed gun files online. The federal government will also have to pay a portion of Wilson’s legal fees.
Notably, the settlement also stated that it was the DOJ’s position that AR-15s and similar semiautomatic rifles were not considered military weapons.
Wilson argued that his distribution of gun plans is protected by both the First and Second Amendments. Critics point out that criminals and cartels could use the plans to quickly and easily print undetectable guns instead of having to purchase or smuggle them.
Glenn Beck interviewed Wilson in 2013, and asked him whether he considered himself to be a hero or a villain. Wilson said that he didn’t “like the dichotomy” of having just those two choices.

Robbob 07-11-2018 10:11 AM
Re: Department of Justice rules that plans for 3D printed gun parts are protected und
 
Quote:
The settlement also stated that the Department of Justice did not consider an AR-15 rifle to be an inherently military weapon.
WOW ..... wheres the media coverage on that statement. :shock:

hpiguy 07-11-2018 11:24 AM
Re: Department of Justice rules that plans for 3D printed gun parts are protected und
 
The AR15 is not today, and has never been a military weapon. Not sure how people are still confused on this. Now the M4 platform is whole other story.

DukeMinnix 07-11-2018 11:48 AM
Re: Department of Justice rules that plans for 3D printed gun parts are protected und
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by hpiguy (Post 5850356)
The AR15 is not today, and has never been a military weapon. Not sure how people are still confused on this. Now the M4 platform is whole other story.
absolutely 150% correct. Uneducated activist lump the AR platform in with the M4/M16 platform because of the similarity in their appearance. Now, you can interchange a few parts and have yourself a military grade weapon, but you can also turn cow shit into a bomb if you desire. Just because a weapon is a carbine design does not make it a military weapon. Aside from the materials used in their construction and their appearance, your standard AR-15 is less destructive than my Browning 270 I deer hunt with, which is also a semi automatic rifle that is magazine fed.

CREEPERBOB 07-11-2018 12:28 PM
Re: Department of Justice rules that plans for 3D printed gun parts are protected und
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by hpiguy (Post 5850356)
The AR15 is not today, and has never been a military weapon. Not sure how people are still confused on this. Now the M4 platform is whole other story.

Colts carbine is designated an M4.
The loading ramps in the barrel are a "M4" design,,, its called an M4.

JatoTheRipper 07-11-2018 12:33 PM
Re: Department of Justice rules that plans for 3D printed gun parts are protected und
 
I saw this on Facebook. It was a repost from the all too Liberal "Wired" magazine. People were freaking out. I love it! I'm blown away by this ruling, but I surely approve and support it. We need our freedoms preserved.

2mtech 07-11-2018 12:47 PM
Re: Department of Justice rules that plans for 3D printed gun parts are protected und
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by hpiguy (Post 5850356)
The AR15 is not today, and has never been a military weapon. Not sure how people are still confused on this. Now the M4 platform is whole other story.
To the thinking person (yes, I realize what I just said), the AR-15 is obviously a civilian version of its military M-16 counterpart or the M-4 variant. What military would want a battle rifle lacking selective full automatic fire?

Jim85IROC 07-11-2018 01:58 PM
Re: Department of Justice rules that plans for 3D printed gun parts are protected und
 
This decision is great news, but I'm not sure it holds the kind of weight that the conservative sites are touting. If the court had ruled in favor of Wilson, that would be big. If SCOTUS ruled in favor of Wilson, it would be HUGE. The DOJ giving up doesn't really carry much weight.

I suppose it eases the noose a little bit until the next administration takes control of the DOJ.

JatoTheRipper 07-11-2018 02:09 PM
Re: Department of Justice rules that plans for 3D printed gun parts are protected und
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim85IROC (Post 5850413)
This decision is great news, but I'm not sure it holds the kind of weight that the conservative sites are touting. If the court had ruled in favor of Wilson, that would be big. If SCOTUS ruled in favor of Wilson, it would be HUGE. The DOJ giving up doesn't really carry much weight.

I suppose it eases the noose a little bit until the next administration takes control of the DOJ.
I'm not sure it holds any weight because I'm sure it will be overturned or regulated...it's just a matter of when.

hpiguy 07-11-2018 02:49 PM
Re: Department of Justice rules that plans for 3D printed gun parts are protected und
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by CREEPERBOB (Post 5850379)
Colts carbine is designated an M4.
The loading ramps in the barrel are a "M4" design,,, its called an M4.
That must be fairly recent. I know they used to intentionally separate the two. Thanks for correcting me, I learned something on the internet today. "thumbsup" And I mean that sincerely.

Jim85IROC 07-12-2018 06:49 AM
Re: Department of Justice rules that plans for 3D printed gun parts are protected und
 
The only real differences between the select-fire military variants and the semi-auto versions that us common folk are allowed to have, are the trigger group, the bolt, and how the back of the lower receiver is machined. Everything else is the same and interchangeable. You can label it how you'd like, but from a parts compatibility perspective, those are the only differences. From a functional perspective however, those minor differences are obviously quite substantial. :D

DukeMinnix 07-12-2018 07:01 AM
Re: Department of Justice rules that plans for 3D printed gun parts are protected und
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim85IROC (Post 5850596)
The only real differences between the select-fire military variants and the semi-auto versions that us common folk are allowed to have, are the trigger group, the bolt, and how the back of the lower receiver is machined. Everything else is the same and interchangeable. You can label it how you'd like, but from a parts compatibility perspective, those are the only differences. From a functional perspective however, those minor differences are obviously quite substantial. :D
I like to talk to people about it like this...

Honda is big into formula 1 racing and have been for a very long time. A lot of the functional components on those formula 1 cars are similar in design and appearance to those of your run of the mill honda civic. Now, although some similarities exist, some striking and glaring differences also exist that makes the honda formula 1 car and the honda civic two very different animals, one of which is illegal for the average joe to drive, while the other is perfectly legal and well within our grasp. You don't see activists trying to have automobiles outlawed because they share similarities to high performing purpose built race machines. Now obviously this is a far stretch, but you see the point I'm trying to make with the comparison I'm sure.

JatoTheRipper 07-12-2018 07:13 AM
Re: Department of Justice rules that plans for 3D printed gun parts are protected und
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim85IROC (Post 5850596)
The only real differences between the select-fire military variants and the semi-auto versions that us common folk are allowed to have, are the trigger group, the bolt, and how the back of the lower receiver is machined. Everything else is the same and interchangeable. You can label it how you'd like, but from a parts compatibility perspective, those are the only differences. From a functional perspective however, those minor differences are obviously quite substantial. :D
You can get full auto profile bolts. That's actually what most people prefer to run in their AR's because they are said to have more reliable operation. But are those the same as the bolts in automatic ARs or are there still differences?

CREEPERBOB 07-12-2018 07:17 AM
Re: Department of Justice rules that plans for 3D printed gun parts are protected und
 
Part numbers for bolts and trigger groups are different, the bolt is interchangeable but trigger group is not.

Jim85IROC 07-12-2018 09:34 AM
Re: Department of Justice rules that plans for 3D printed gun parts are protected und
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by DukeMinnix (Post 5850601)
I like to talk to people about it like this...

Honda is big into formula 1 racing and have been for a very long time. A lot of the functional components on those formula 1 cars are similar in design and appearance to those of your run of the mill honda civic. Now, although some similarities exist, some striking and glaring differences also exist that makes the honda formula 1 car and the honda civic two very different animals, one of which is illegal for the average joe to drive, while the other is perfectly legal and well within our grasp. You don't see activists trying to have automobiles outlawed because they share similarities to high performing purpose built race machines. Now obviously this is a far stretch, but you see the point I'm trying to make with the comparison I'm sure.
I see your point, but it's different than the point I was trying to make. I fully appreciate that there are significant functional changes that differentiate what we're permitted to have compared to what the ruling class is permitted to have. I was trying to point out that the naming conventions (M4, M16, AR15, etc) are not a clear or accurate way to differentiate between civilian rifles and military select-fire variants because of the significant overlap.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:30 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2004-2014 RCCrawler.com