>From what I've heard (which really isn't much), it sounds like the judge's
order was actually based on export restrictions, but I certainly got the
impression that it was about restricting it inside the US. It seems to me
that it will be difficult to keep a ban like that in place. I'm not trying
to get into the question of whether or not things like that should be
restricted, I just don't see how it can be under current law.

On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 6:46 PM <ch...@wbmfg.com> wrote:

> I get ITAR.  I have built software that was restricted.
> I remember not being able to sell to Vietnam.
>
> But if they really want to restrict knowledge of gun designs, they would
> have to bar the viewing of patents too.
>
> I think the judge was being emotional and political rather than logical
> and legal minded.
>
> *From:* Chuck Macenski
> *Sent:* Wednesday, August 1, 2018 5:40 PM
> *To:* af@af.afmug.com
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] OT 3d printing and guns
>
> If the "law" in question is that the export of a 3D printed design is an
> ITAR violation, then that's what the discussion (in the courts) should be
> about. Having said that, it is my limited understanding that the judge in
> the case was more worried about its use inside the US. To me, that seems
> like a stretch. You should not read my personal position on whether this is
> a good idea into this comment; I just wish people would argue about
> controversial issues honestly rather than, as an example, using an ITAR
> restriction to control distribution within the US. This is far from the
> only issue where people argue their position based on one set of facts when
> their real concern is something quite different.
>
> On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 3:22 PM justsumname <unixday...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> In response to OP:
>> “....Regardless of what a person may be able to publish on the Internet,
>> undetectable plastic guns have been illegal for 30 years.  Federal law
>> passed in 1988, crafted with the NRA’s support, makes it unlawful to
>> manufacture, import, sell, ship, deliver, possess, transfer, or receive an
>> undetectable firearm.”
>>
>> In response to my Nanny State comment:   I am offended by victimless
>> felonies.   They trigger me.   And when I think about them, I feel
>> micro-aggressed.
>>
>> My understanding is that there is NO "plastic gun" even in question.
>> Even a 3-D printed 'firearm' will not function without a few metal parts,
>> such as, a chamber.   Or maybe perhaps a trigger spring.   Or a barrel.
>>
>> Ya know, if you make a gun wrongly, you might discover how to make a
>> bomb.   And that's illegal already, too.
>>
>> --Damn It
>>
>>
>> --
>> AF mailing list
>> AF@af.afmug.com
>> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
>>
> ------------------------------
> --
> AF mailing list
> AF@af.afmug.com
> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
> --
> AF mailing list
> AF@af.afmug.com
> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
>
-- 
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com

Reply via email to