California 3D Gun Legislation: Leland Yee To Introduce Measure Banning DIY Weapons

[WorldWatcher]

Technically speaking, I don't think the legislation is attempting to ban 3D printers, it's going to attempt to ban using 3D printers to make a firearm. Two different things. If you are using a 3D printer to prototype a widget, not a problem. If you are using a 3D printer to make a firearm, that would be illegal.

You are correct. However, I think the point is that those persons who would use a 3D printer to produce a gun for use in the real world would not be dissuaded by such a law and enforcement of the prohibition would be quite impossible. The guns being produced by this technology are of an extremely low quality which would be nothing but a curiousity... so long as normal firearms are reasonably available.

I don't disagree, I was just pointing out that some were playing like it was the printers that were going to be made illegal, it wasn't it was the product of the print job that is the subject of the law.

>>>>

 

[PaulS1950]

How is the government going to know that you are buying a 3-D printer to make a gun?
The printer is your property. The file to make the gun was released to the public domain - it is free. You are using your property to make something in your home. Is the government going to spy on every 3-D printer to find out who is using one to make a gun?
Are they going to require that you send a list of all the things you used your printer for?
Oh! Wait, that would violate our fourth and fifth amendment rights.

This law is completely unenforceable

our government has already clearly demonstrated our rights are meaningless

and this is OK?

 

[PaulS1950]

Technically speaking, I don't think the legislation is attempting to ban 3D printers, it's going to attempt to ban using 3D printers to make a firearm. Two different things. If you are using a 3D printer to prototype a widget, not a problem. If you are using a 3D printer to make a firearm, that would be illegal.

You are correct. However, I think the point is that those persons who would use a 3D printer to produce a gun for use in the real world would not be dissuaded by such a law and enforcement of the prohibition would be quite impossible. The guns being produced by this technology are of an extremely low quality which would be nothing but a curiousity... so long as normal firearms are reasonably available.

I don't disagree, I was just pointing out that some were playing like it was the printers that were going to be made illegal, it wasn't it was the product of the print job that is the subject of the law.

>>>>

How is the government going to be able to tell if someone makes a gun?
How can they enforce this law?
As long as the gun is not used for criminal purposes why should they care?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

How would they enforce this piece of **** legislation? They can't ban 3-D printers without hurting the entertainment and prototyping industries. What a joke! It is completely legal to make your own gun at home. In the twenty + hours it takes a 3-D printer to print out a gun that will only fire 6 rounds befor it is useless I can make four 12 ga. shotguns that will fire for years and get a good night's sleep.
I suppose they could ban metal tubing and make it harder but I could still build guns at home with simple hand tools.

Technically speaking, I don't think the legislation is attempting to ban 3D printers, it's going to attempt to ban using 3D printers to make a firearm. Two different things. If you are using a 3D printer to prototype a widget, not a problem. If you are using a 3D printer to make a firearm, that would be illegal.



>>>>

Technically, you are an idiot.

How the fuck are they going to enforce it? Are they going to require that everyone who owns a 3D printer register it with the state, and have them keep track of how much plastic they buy, and then register everything they make with it?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

How is the government going to know that you are buying a 3-D printer to make a gun?
The printer is your property. The file to make the gun was released to the public domain - it is free. You are using your property to make something in your home. Is the government going to spy on every 3-D printer to find out who is using one to make a gun?
Are they going to require that you send a list of all the things you used your printer for?
Oh! Wait, that would violate our fourth and fifth amendment rights.

This law is completely unenforceable

So many of our regulatory schemes are built on the assumption of fixed-state, fixed-purpose machines and property. But when a machine can be anything depending on what information is fed to it, that kind of regulation is unenforceable.

Sad thing is, I don't think we'll "get" this for a long while. They're going to keep trying to use the same approach (because it's what they know), and continue failing. The question is, how much authoritarian zeal will they bring to bear before giving up.

Exactly, they are trying to prevent change because they are uninformed. In a few years 3D printers are going to be available to everyone, and the only limit to what you can print will be the size of your printer. This will change everything, and the only option the government actually has is to let it happen.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

You'd think these nerds would bake a 3D vagina to fuck.

You know, something to get themselves off... or wait.... is that the appeal of guns?

If they had a brain, they'd be "printing" something they all need really bad.

As it is, they're just too busy sending these plans to others who value the 2nd amendment just as much as they do.

Really, its a little late to be banning this. The nutters have it and they're busy sharing it. NOT with other nutters. They can git right on down to their WallyWorld and buy a shit gun. Nope, this is important technology to the people who want to do us harm and the damn nutters are so knee-jerk-stupid, they can't see beyond the end of the sawed-off shotgun that they're so proud of because its illegal in their state.

Is it too late to secede from the idiots to the south?

 

[WorldWatcher]

You are correct. However, I think the point is that those persons who would use a 3D printer to produce a gun for use in the real world would not be dissuaded by such a law and enforcement of the prohibition would be quite impossible. The guns being produced by this technology are of an extremely low quality which would be nothing but a curiousity... so long as normal firearms are reasonably available.

I don't disagree, I was just pointing out that some were playing like it was the printers that were going to be made illegal, it wasn't it was the product of the print job that is the subject of the law.

>>>>

How is the government going to be able to tell if someone makes a gun?

They can't.

The print files can be transferred via email, downloaded from the internet, or transferred physically (data stick, CD, etc.)

How can they enforce this law?

Instead of being a primary charge, it will probably be a secondary charge associated with another crime that resulted in the discovery of the illegal firearm. Or if someone turns them in for manufacturing a firearm if they then sell them to someone else.

As long as the gun is not used for criminal purposes why should they care?

You'd have to ask them, I don't have an issue with people lawfully owning guns not used for criminal purposes or if you are barred from owning a firearm for criminal history or mental incompetence. If you want to "manufacture" a gun for your own purposes - so be it. I do think if you "manufacture" your own gun and then allow another person to use it though, and that gun injures or kills that person because it was not manufactured to standards - then you should be held responsible to the highest extend of the law for wrongful injury or negligent homicide. However it it's for your own individual use - so be it.


>>>>

 

[WorldWatcher]

How would they enforce this piece of **** legislation? They can't ban 3-D printers without hurting the entertainment and prototyping industries. What a joke! It is completely legal to make your own gun at home. In the twenty + hours it takes a 3-D printer to print out a gun that will only fire 6 rounds befor it is useless I can make four 12 ga. shotguns that will fire for years and get a good night's sleep.
I suppose they could ban metal tubing and make it harder but I could still build guns at home with simple hand tools.

Technically speaking, I don't think the legislation is attempting to ban 3D printers, it's going to attempt to ban using 3D printers to make a firearm. Two different things. If you are using a 3D printer to prototype a widget, not a problem. If you are using a 3D printer to make a firearm, that would be illegal.



>>>>

Technically, you are an idiot.

How the fuck are they going to enforce it? Are they going to require that everyone who owns a 3D printer register it with the state, and have them keep track of how much plastic they buy, and then register everything they make with it?

In reality it appears you are an asshole, unable to discuss a topic without resulting to name calling and personal insults.

Again through, they are obviously not going to be able to enforce the manufacturing of such a firearm - it will be a charge entered when the completed firearm is discovered in another manner.



>>>>

 

[legaleagle_45]

Really, its a little late to be banning this.

Yep.

Nope, this is important technology to the people who want to do us harm

If that is the best that they have, they wont be able to do much harm. Such a suggestion is idiotic in and of itself. The purpose of the Liberator is similar to its namesake, the Liberator 45 pistol supplied to French Resistance during WWII. In fact, the Liberator of WWII vintage is quite superior, in that it could survive for far many more firings than the 3D print Liberator version. Both weapons could only fire one shot without reloading, both weapons had an effective range of only about 25 to 30 feet and both weapons were not (and are not) considered the "end all" weapon of choice, but merely a means to obtain better weapons. The directive to the French Resistance regarding the Liberator 45 pistol was to ambush a German soldier, kill him up close and then take the German soldier's weapon and throw away the Liberator.

The present 3D project is primarily a political statement.. throwing sand in the face of wacky gun grabbers who dream of a gun free utopia. Harldly anything more than yelling:

NEENER, NEENER!!

Fom a pragmatic standpoint, it would only be useful if all guns were banned and the availability of decent firearms on the black market were non existant. Such a possibilty is devoid of reality in my lifetime. Thus, my conclusion that it is merely a poltical statement akin to yelling

NEENER, NEENER!!

But it is kinda fun watching the gun grabbers have conniption fits over it.

 

[hazlnut]

Democrats wanting to ban something?! What else is new?

It was already illegal under federal law - duh?

Why do you think they added the unnecessary piece of metal?

Maybe you should get all the facts first.... Ya think?

 

[Spoonman]

How is the government going to know that you are buying a 3-D printer to make a gun?
The printer is your property. The file to make the gun was released to the public domain - it is free. You are using your property to make something in your home. Is the government going to spy on every 3-D printer to find out who is using one to make a gun?
Are they going to require that you send a list of all the things you used your printer for?
Oh! Wait, that would violate our fourth and fifth amendment rights.

This law is completely unenforceable

our government has already clearly demonstrated our rights are meaningless

and this is OK?

fuck no. we need to be all over their asses. if its it one of our rights, don't let them touch it.

 

[Spoonman]

You'd think these nerds would bake a 3D vagina to fuck.

You know, something to get themselves off... or wait.... is that the appeal of guns?

If they had a brain, they'd be "printing" something they all need really bad.

As it is, they're just too busy sending these plans to others who value the 2nd amendment just as much as they do.

Really, its a little late to be banning this. The nutters have it and they're busy sharing it. NOT with other nutters. They can git right on down to their WallyWorld and buy a shit gun. Nope, this is important technology to the people who want to do us harm and the damn nutters are so knee-jerk-stupid, they can't see beyond the end of the sawed-off shotgun that they're so proud of because its illegal in their state.

Is it too late to secede from the idiots to the south?

liberals are busy pushing background checks and forgetting all about the people and technologies that will not be impacted by it. you know like criminals and those guys you listed above. liberals don't only close the barn door after the horse is out, the lead the horse out first

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Democrats wanting to ban something?! What else is new?

It was already illegal under federal law - duh?

Why do you think they added the unnecessary piece of metal?

Maybe you should get all the facts first.... Ya think?

It is not illegal. The proof of that is the fact that they are not in jail even though the built one.

 

[Missourian]

Democrats wanting to ban something?! What else is new?

It was already illegal under federal law - duh?

Why do you think they added the unnecessary piece of metal?

Maybe you should get all the facts first.... Ya think?

You never have the facts...you are constantly talking directly out of your ass.

Straight from the ATF:

Q: Does the GCA prohibit anyone from making a handgun, shotgun or rifle?

With certain exceptions a firearm may be made by a non-licensee provided it is not for sale and the maker is not prohibited from possessing firearms. However, a person is prohibited from assembling a non-sporting semi-automatic rifle or non-sporting shotgun from imported parts.
Firearms - Frequently Asked Questions - General | ATF
​

 

[Politico]

Nothing Kommiefornia does surpises me. I still say build a fucking wall around those loons.

 

[zonly1]

California 3D Gun Legislation: Leland Yee To Introduce Measure Banning DIY Weapons

The power of technology was officially pushed to the limit on Sunday when the world's first 3D-printed gun fired a shot.

And California legislators are wasting no time fighting back.

State Senator Leland Yee (D-San Francisco) said in a press release Tuesday that he plans to introduce legislation that would ban using technology to create weapons with 3D printers. "We must be proactive in seeking solutions to this new threat rather than wait for the inevitable tragedies this will make possible," he said.

Defense Distributed, the company behind the D-I-Y weapon, hosts downloadable designs for printable gun parts on its website. Officials claim the practice remains perfectly legal under current law.

"[In the United States] a person can manufacture a firearm for their own use," Donna Sellers of the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives told the BBC. "However, if they engage in the business of manufacture to sell a gun, they need a licence."

On the national level, Senator Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) and Congressman Steve Israel (D-N.Y.) are pushing measures similar to Yee's that would outlaw 3D-printed guns.

But University of Texas law student Cody Wilson, the driving force behind Defense Distributed, thinks lawmakers' efforts will be futile.

"Gun control for us is a fantasy," he said in a documentary showcasing his project. "In a way that people say you're being unrealistic about printing a gun, I think it's more unrealistic, especially going forward, to think you could ever control this technology."

According to Defense Distributed's website, the company's goals include "to defend the civil liberty of popular access to arms" and "to publish and distribute, at no cost to the public, such information and knowledge."

You know who else hated gun control and California -- this guy:

We are all wondering if you take, what ever is left of it, your brain out and play with it?

 

[novasteve]

Libs are poo pushers