Amazon has whacked our affiliate account. Hosting Donations/Commitments $2063 of $1920 (Sept 13/18). In Hand $1466 (Lump sum payments minus paypal graft). Paypal Donation Link Here

Gun Politics

For discussion of religion and politics

Moderators: LawBeefaroni, $iljanus

Post Reply
User avatar
Moliere
Posts: 12007
Joined: Sun Sep 03, 2006 10:57 am
Location: Walking through a desert land

Re: Gun Politics

Post by Moliere » Tue May 22, 2018 5:30 pm

Gun Control's Racist History
Today's gun control advocates tend to paint themselves as concerned with the plight of minorities in America. What they don't want you to know is that their movement originated as an initiative to deprive African-Americans of the means to defend themselves. In this episode of The DL, Dana Loesch is joined by NRA personalities and gun-rights advocates to delve into the deeply racist history of gun control and to explain how it continues to disproportionately affect minority communities.
I recently watched Colion Noir on

"The world is suffering more today from the good people who want to mind other men's business than it is from the bad people who are willing to let everybody look after their own individual affairs." - Clarence Darrow

User avatar
Moliere
Posts: 12007
Joined: Sun Sep 03, 2006 10:57 am
Location: Walking through a desert land

Re: Gun Politics

Post by Moliere » Fri Jun 08, 2018 12:53 pm

Knives are too sharp and filing them down is solution to soaring violent crime, judge says
A judge has proposed a nationwide programme to file down the points of kitchen knives as a solution to the country’s soaring knife crime epidemic.

Last week in his valedictory address, retiring Luton Crown Court Judge Nic Madge spoke of his concern that carrying a knife had become routine in some circles and called on the Government to ban the sale of large pointed kitchen knives.

Latest figures show stabbing deaths among teenagers and young adults have reached the highest level for eight years, and knife crime overall rose 22 per cent in 2017.
"The world is suffering more today from the good people who want to mind other men's business than it is from the bad people who are willing to let everybody look after their own individual affairs." - Clarence Darrow

User avatar
hepcat
Posts: 38153
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 3:02 pm
Location: Chicago, IL Home of the triple homicide!
hepcat’s avatar
Offline

Re: Gun Politics

Post by hepcat » Fri Jun 08, 2018 1:26 pm

Too bad the England knife murder epidemic is another Trump falsehood.

I beat a camel to death with a monkey. Can I do that?
-Mr Bismarck

You have to whack a few rabbits before you are ready to punch a camel.
-Coopasonic

User avatar
LawBeefaroni
Forum Moderator
Posts: 46159
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 3:08 pm
Location: Urbs in Horto, where we only use the old smilies

Re: Gun Politics

Post by LawBeefaroni » Fri Jun 08, 2018 2:21 pm

People who believe that London is a knife armed war zone probably also believe that the US is an assault-rifle armed war zone.

The news media does what it does.
" Hey OP, listen to my advice alright." -Tha General
"No scientific discovery is named after its original discoverer." -Stigler's Law of Eponymy, discovered by Robert K. Merton

MYT

User avatar
Isgrimnur
Posts: 60590
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:29 am
Location: Chookity pok
Contact:

Re: Gun Politics

Post by Isgrimnur » Sat Jun 09, 2018 6:43 pm

Florida
A previously unreported Office of Inspector General investigation found that in February 2016 the Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services stopped using a FBI crime database called the National Instant Criminal Background Check System that ensures applicants who want to carry a gun do not have a disqualifying history in other states.

The employee in charge of the background checks could not log into the system, the investigator learned. The problem went unresolved until discovered by another worker in March 2017 — meaning that for more than a year applications got approved without the required background check.

During that time, which coincided with the June 12, 2016 shooting at Pulse nightclub that left 50 dead, the state saw an unprecedented spike in applications for concealed weapons permits. There were 134,000 requests for permits in the fiscal year ending in June 2015. The next 12 months broke a record, 245,000 applications, which was topped again in 2017 when the department received 275,000 applications.
...
Agriculture Commissioner Adam Putnam has made it a priority to speed up the issuing of concealed weapons permits since he was elected in 2010. In 2012, he held a news conference to celebrate the state's one millionth concealed weapons permit, noting the time it took to process an application fell from 12 weeks to 35 days on his watch. There are now 1.8 million concealed weapon permit holders in Florida.

Now running for Florida governor as a Republican, Putnam's campaign touts his expansion of concealed carry permits as one of his top accomplishments.
...
In a tweet posted last July — and a month after investigators found that his office had botched thousands of background checks — Putnam claimed he was a "Proud NRA sellout".
...
In a statement Friday night, Putnam said "a criminal background investigation was completed on every single application."

"Upon discovery of this former employee's negligence in not conducting the further review required on 365 applications, we immediately completed full background checks on those 365 applications, which resulted in 291 revocations," Putnam said in the statement. "The former employee was both deceitful and negligent, and we immediately launched an investigation and implemented safeguards to ensure this never happens again."

Keller added that the NICS database is used for "non-criminal disqualifying offenses" and during this time, the department conducted criminal background checks using two other databases, the Florida Crime Information Center database and the National Crime Information Center database.
Silver - 1k

User avatar
msteelers
Posts: 6190
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 9:30 pm
Location: Port Saint Lucie, Florida
Contact:

Re: Gun Politics

Post by msteelers » Sun Jun 10, 2018 9:46 am

Putnam is so reprehensible of a candidate that at least one of my extremely conservative friends has very publicly thrown his support behind one of the democrats in the race for governor and has changed his voter registration from Republican to Independent (No Party Affiliation, technically).

Putnam's awfulness might also be enough to get me to stop shopping at Publix (popular regional grocery store). The company had given hundreds of thousands of dollars to Putnam, but had announced that they would suspend all political contributions after the backlash began to grow. Just as we finished breathing a sigh of relief and ordered another round of Publix subs...
Spoiler:
News broke that a lobbying group funded almost exclusively by Publix donated another $100k to Putnam's PAC. Six days after the company said they wouldn't do it anymore.
:grund:

User avatar
Fitzy
Posts: 2030
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 4:15 pm
Location: Rockville, MD

Re: Gun Politics

Post by Fitzy » Wed Jun 13, 2018 6:00 pm

Why soldiers don't vote for democrats

Interesting article. Former Marine and a current Democrat, he argues that soldiers don't vote for Democrats because the language used by liberals in discussing gun control is wrong. Implies that more second amendment rights activists might be more inclined to listen to liberals if liberals used the correct language. Though he does admit the conversation would be hard.

I have no idea if he's right. The only thing I know about guns is that I should "savor the last shot before popping the heatsink". However, I've seen people here complain that using "assault weapon" is wrong. Would it make a difference if Democrats got the terminology right? Or is it all just semantics?

User avatar
Rip
Posts: 26884
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 9:34 pm
Location: Cajun Country!
Contact:
Rip’s avatar
NBA 2K19

Re: Gun Politics

Post by Rip » Wed Jun 13, 2018 6:10 pm

Fitzy wrote:
Wed Jun 13, 2018 6:00 pm
Why soldiers don't vote for democrats

Interesting article. Former Marine and a current Democrat, he argues that soldiers don't vote for Democrats because the language used by liberals in discussing gun control is wrong. Implies that more second amendment rights activists might be more inclined to listen to liberals if liberals used the correct language. Though he does admit the conversation would be hard.

I have no idea if he's right. The only thing I know about guns is that I should "savor the last shot before popping the heatsink". However, I've seen people here complain that using "assault weapon" is wrong. Would it make a difference if Democrats got the terminology right? Or is it all just semantics?
I don't think it is so much about the culture of the military turning average joes into more pro 2nd or anything. It likely lies within the mindset of people who join the military. Not many people join in the first place that are liberal minded politically. Most come from rural communities and flyover states. You know, red country.

User avatar
Fitzy
Posts: 2030
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 4:15 pm
Location: Rockville, MD

Re: Gun Politics

Post by Fitzy » Wed Jun 13, 2018 7:26 pm

Rip wrote:
Wed Jun 13, 2018 6:10 pm
Fitzy wrote:
Wed Jun 13, 2018 6:00 pm
Why soldiers don't vote for democrats

Interesting article. Former Marine and a current Democrat, he argues that soldiers don't vote for Democrats because the language used by liberals in discussing gun control is wrong. Implies that more second amendment rights activists might be more inclined to listen to liberals if liberals used the correct language. Though he does admit the conversation would be hard.

I have no idea if he's right. The only thing I know about guns is that I should "savor the last shot before popping the heatsink". However, I've seen people here complain that using "assault weapon" is wrong. Would it make a difference if Democrats got the terminology right? Or is it all just semantics?
I don't think it is so much about the culture of the military turning average joes into more pro 2nd or anything. It likely lies within the mindset of people who join the military. Not many people join in the first place that are liberal minded politically. Most come from rural communities and flyover states. You know, red country.
Maybe. You were in the military so I would expect your perspective to be at least as valid as the author's.

My reading of the article is that the author is saying there are enough people like him that would be willing to consider well thought out and logically consistent arguments on gun control. Whereas the current Democratic narrative of assault weapons = bad, is incorrectly argued, driving some military (and non-military supporters of no gun control I assume) from even considering the idea of gun control.

It sparked my interest since I have seen many gun control arguments here and elsewhere go down in flames based on the definition of assault weapon.

User avatar
Pyperkub
Posts: 18990
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2004 5:07 pm
Location: NC- that's Northern California
Contact:

Re: Gun Politics

Post by Pyperkub » Wed Jun 13, 2018 7:45 pm

Fitzy wrote:
Wed Jun 13, 2018 6:00 pm
Why soldiers don't vote for democrats

Interesting article. Former Marine and a current Democrat, he argues that soldiers don't vote for Democrats because the language used by liberals in discussing gun control is wrong. Implies that more second amendment rights activists might be more inclined to listen to liberals if liberals used the correct language. Though he does admit the conversation would be hard.

I have no idea if he's right. The only thing I know about guns is that I should "savor the last shot before popping the heatsink". However, I've seen people here complain that using "assault weapon" is wrong. Would it make a difference if Democrats got the terminology right? Or is it all just semantics?
Here's the gist:
What makes an AR-15 deadly for a mass shooter—that it is a semi-automatic, detachable magazine rifle firing a medium-power centerfire round—are also likely characteristics of your grandfather’s wooden stock deer rifle. Gun control isn’t just difficult because of the corrosive role of the NRA and the gun industry in politics. Gun control is hard because it requires real trade-offs between the rights of responsible individuals versus the access of criminals to murder weapons.

We must stop hiding from this hard conversation. We should talk about regulating semi-automatic rifles more stringently than bolt-action rifles. We should talk about different regulations for weapons with detachable or high-capacity magazines. We should talk about these things—even when they impact hunters or recreational shooters—because they affect how weapons function.

We will face opposition, not just from the NRA and the industry, but also from responsible Americans who own guns. My Marines might be among them. But we don’t need to convince them to accept our position on gun control—only to recognize that our approach is honest.

America already has a party that dissembles about the impact of its policies, deflects hard decisions by grandstanding, and panders to special interests. That’s Donald Trump and Paul Ryan’s party. We must be better than that.
An interesting take, that I'd be interested more debate on.

My approach is that we should be able to grant temporary waivers to communities to try different approaches, and see what works.

By all means, let's try a couple of communities where they want to arm all of their teachers and the teachers are in - let's find out the real world problems with this approach.

But I also think we should allow communities to get (temporary - say 10 years) waivers to ban guns altogether and find out the real world problems.
There are three ways to not tell the truth: lies, damned lies, and statistics.

User avatar
Rip
Posts: 26884
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 9:34 pm
Location: Cajun Country!
Contact:
Rip’s avatar
NBA 2K19

Re: Gun Politics

Post by Rip » Wed Jun 13, 2018 9:22 pm

Fitzy wrote:
Wed Jun 13, 2018 7:26 pm
Rip wrote:
Wed Jun 13, 2018 6:10 pm
Fitzy wrote:
Wed Jun 13, 2018 6:00 pm
Why soldiers don't vote for democrats

Interesting article. Former Marine and a current Democrat, he argues that soldiers don't vote for Democrats because the language used by liberals in discussing gun control is wrong. Implies that more second amendment rights activists might be more inclined to listen to liberals if liberals used the correct language. Though he does admit the conversation would be hard.

I have no idea if he's right. The only thing I know about guns is that I should "savor the last shot before popping the heatsink". However, I've seen people here complain that using "assault weapon" is wrong. Would it make a difference if Democrats got the terminology right? Or is it all just semantics?
I don't think it is so much about the culture of the military turning average joes into more pro 2nd or anything. It likely lies within the mindset of people who join the military. Not many people join in the first place that are liberal minded politically. Most come from rural communities and flyover states. You know, red country.
Maybe. You were in the military so I would expect your perspective to be at least as valid as the author's.

My reading of the article is that the author is saying there are enough people like him that would be willing to consider well thought out and logically consistent arguments on gun control. Whereas the current Democratic narrative of assault weapons = bad, is incorrectly argued, driving some military (and non-military supporters of no gun control I assume) from even considering the idea of gun control.

It sparked my interest since I have seen many gun control arguments here and elsewhere go down in flames based on the definition of assault weapon.
That much may be true. It all comes down to the details of the "well thought out and logically consistent arguments on gun control". Even asking the question that way is vague and misleading. Different people will have different definitions of exactly what that is.

User avatar
Kraken
Posts: 33952
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:59 pm
Location: The Hub of the Universe
Contact:
Kraken’s avatar
Online

Re: Gun Politics

Post by Kraken » Wed Jun 13, 2018 9:48 pm

Rip wrote:
Wed Jun 13, 2018 6:10 pm
Fitzy wrote:
Wed Jun 13, 2018 6:00 pm
Why soldiers don't vote for democrats

Interesting article. Former Marine and a current Democrat, he argues that soldiers don't vote for Democrats because the language used by liberals in discussing gun control is wrong. Implies that more second amendment rights activists might be more inclined to listen to liberals if liberals used the correct language. Though he does admit the conversation would be hard.

I have no idea if he's right. The only thing I know about guns is that I should "savor the last shot before popping the heatsink". However, I've seen people here complain that using "assault weapon" is wrong. Would it make a difference if Democrats got the terminology right? Or is it all just semantics?
I don't think it is so much about the culture of the military turning average joes into more pro 2nd or anything. It likely lies within the mindset of people who join the military. Not many people join in the first place that are liberal minded politically. Most come from rural communities and flyover states. You know, red country.
Here's a good column on that subject.
hanging over Trump’s attempt to weaponize the armed forces like no president before him — to put soldiers and Marines on the front lines of the clash between red-state and blue-state America — was a heavy irony: The military may, actually, be the best hope we’ve got for mending the cultural and regional divisions the president has exploited politically.

For generations now, the armed forces have provided an opportunity — unmatched in American life — to put very different people in close proximity, and force an explicit reckoning with our most urgent social questions.

Racial integration, women’s equality, the role of gay and lesbian Americans in public life — time and again, the military has played an important, if often reluctant, role in tackling the country’s biggest challenges.

Now, with Trump and the GOP Congress looking to dramatically expand the military, could the armed forces be on the leading edge of the next great reckoning in American life?

Could the military help us close the worrisome gap between red and blue?
It ultimately gets around to the point that you made:
And over the last few decades, it has struggled to maintain that balance. In 2016, just 12.7 percent of new military accessions came from the New England and Middle Atlantic states. That’s just over half the Northeast’s tally from the late1970s.

The South, meanwhile, accounts for some 44 percent of accessions. And conservative states in the western part of the country, like Nevada and Arizona, are sending among the largest proportions of their 18 to 24-year-old populations to the military.

The shift is, in part, about larger patterns of migration to the American Sun Belt. But there are other factors at play, too.
It's worth reading the whole thing if you're interested in this tangent.

User avatar
Rip
Posts: 26884
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 9:34 pm
Location: Cajun Country!
Contact:
Rip’s avatar
NBA 2K19

Re: Gun Politics

Post by Rip » Thu Jun 14, 2018 12:58 am

Interesting. I was just basing my opinion on people I knew. Not many New Yorkers except upstaters, no many LA/San Fran. Tones of the midwestern countryside and southerners. More importantly than region I think though is that a surprising few were city dwellers are there a a number of course but they were clearly a minority and of course most of the population are city dwellers so I was pretty certain Democrats are very under represented on the input side. Not much about the military is likely to turn anyone more liberal during their service.

That said in general I would say most of the military people I knew were fairly apolitical as far as actual activity if not beliefs, particularly the rank and file.

User avatar
Fitzy
Posts: 2030
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 4:15 pm
Location: Rockville, MD

Re: Gun Politics

Post by Fitzy » Thu Jun 14, 2018 10:44 am

This is 4 years old but I was shocked to see the Midwest does not send many people to the military. I grew up in North Dakota and I swear about 25% of my graduating class went into the military in some form, of course that was only 10 people enlisting, well 9, one went to an academy. :D . Maybe the article doesn't include National Guard.
That much may be true. It all comes down to the details of the "well thought out and logically consistent arguments on gun control". Even asking the question that way is vague and misleading. Different people will have different definitions of exactly what that is.
That's very true. Details matter eventually.

User avatar
em2nought
Posts: 3403
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 5:48 am

Re: Gun Politics

Post by em2nought » Tue Jun 19, 2018 3:22 am

GUN CONTROL FAIL: Convicted Felon Allegedly Amassed Arsenal Of Over 550 Firearms
https://www.dailywire.com/news/32004/gu ... n-saavedra
California law enforcement officials seized over 550 firearms at two homes last week and arrested a convicted felon that they claim was responsible for amassing the massive arsenal.

Los Angeles County sheriff's deputies arrested Manuel Fernandez, 66, after state and federal law enforcement officials raided his home and found 523 weapons, the Associated Press reported.
:naughty:
Image

Do we know the serial numbers from Eric Holder's Operation Fast and Furious? :wink:
Waiting for the tide to bring me a sail.

User avatar
GreenGoo
Posts: 40570
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 10:46 pm
Location: Ottawa, ON

Re: Gun Politics

Post by GreenGoo » Tue Jun 19, 2018 3:32 am

So weird.

I assume there is a gun politics point to this, but I also assume it is only known to...other people that aren't me.

Just for the record, I see a felon with an arsenal, I expect more and better gun control afterward, but that can't be the point because...Em2 is not known for calling for gun control. Yet that's what his post implies.

So...little help?

edit: Oh, I get it, this is effective gun control in action, because the felon no longer has guns?

edit2: That can't be it.

User avatar
em2nought
Posts: 3403
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 5:48 am

Re: Gun Politics

Post by em2nought » Tue Jun 19, 2018 3:51 am

California, a state with gun control out the ying yang can't keep guns out of the hands of criminals. Gun control only takes away rights from the law abiding citizens. Oh, and if I had 500 some firearms you can bet I'd have some stashed someplace else as well. They better follow that felon now that they've released him "again". :wink:

Just assuming a modest $300 a pop, that felon had over $150,000 worth of weaponry there. :shock: Not one word about ammunition? You'd think he'd have had tens of thousands of rounds with that many rifles, and they'd definitely tell you if he did. Kinda strange? No ammo in the photo either. He must have that "hidden" elsewhere.
Waiting for the tide to bring me a sail.

User avatar
msduncan
Posts: 14299
Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2004 11:41 pm
Location: Birmingham, Alabama

Re: Gun Politics

Post by msduncan » Tue Jul 24, 2018 3:49 pm

The 9th Circuit just ruled that open carry outside of the home is constitutionally protected.
“We do not take lightly the problem of gun violence. But, for better or for worse, the Second Amendment does protect a right to carry a firearm in public for self-defense.” The ruling for the constitutionality of openly carrying a firearm in public comes a week to the day after a Ninth Circuit panel upheld the ruling which blocked California’s “high capacity” magazine ban.
link
It's 109 first team All-Americans.
It's a college football record 61 bowl appearances.
It's 34 bowl victories.
It's 24 Southeastern Conference Championships.
It's 15 National Championships.

At some places they play football. At Alabama we live it.

User avatar
Isgrimnur
Posts: 60590
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:29 am
Location: Chookity pok
Contact:

Re: Gun Politics

Post by Isgrimnur » Tue Jul 24, 2018 3:53 pm

For those that, like me, need a program on circuits:

Image
Silver - 1k

User avatar
El Guapo
Posts: 32504
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 4:01 pm
Location: Boston

Re: Gun Politics

Post by El Guapo » Tue Jul 24, 2018 4:19 pm

So does this mean that states (at least in the 9th Circuit, for now) are *required* to permit some form of open carry?

User avatar
Isgrimnur
Posts: 60590
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:29 am
Location: Chookity pok
Contact:

Re: Gun Politics

Post by Isgrimnur » Tue Jul 24, 2018 4:42 pm

El Guapo wrote:
Tue Jul 24, 2018 4:19 pm
So does this mean that states (at least in the 9th Circuit, for now) are *required* to permit some form of open carry?
People. People in the 9th Circuit are now required to open carry.
Silver - 1k

User avatar
msduncan
Posts: 14299
Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2004 11:41 pm
Location: Birmingham, Alabama

Re: Gun Politics

Post by msduncan » Tue Jul 24, 2018 5:14 pm

I'm not a legal expert, but I think it means that the law they ruled on in Hawaii that prohibited open carry outside the home was ruled unconstitutional. That overturns that law. That ruling is now held as precedent for similar cases, but of course other circuits could rule differently and thus set up the type of conflicted rulings that move the issue to the SCOTUS.

The important (and surprising) thing about this ruling is that the 9th Circuit is perhaps the most liberal appeals court in the United States.
It's 109 first team All-Americans.
It's a college football record 61 bowl appearances.
It's 34 bowl victories.
It's 24 Southeastern Conference Championships.
It's 15 National Championships.

At some places they play football. At Alabama we live it.

User avatar
El Guapo
Posts: 32504
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 4:01 pm
Location: Boston

Re: Gun Politics

Post by El Guapo » Tue Jul 24, 2018 5:25 pm

msduncan wrote:
Tue Jul 24, 2018 5:14 pm
I'm not a legal expert, but I think it means that the law they ruled on in Hawaii that prohibited open carry outside the home was ruled unconstitutional. That overturns that law. That ruling is now held as precedent for similar cases, but of course other circuits could rule differently and thus set up the type of conflicted rulings that move the issue to the SCOTUS.

The important (and surprising) thing about this ruling is that the 9th Circuit is perhaps the most liberal appeals court in the United States.
FWIW apparently a three judge 9th circuit panel ruled that concealed carry was constitutional in 2016, before being reversed by the full (en banc) 9th circuit. Seems like there's at least an outside chance of that happening here too.

User avatar
Isgrimnur
Posts: 60590
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:29 am
Location: Chookity pok
Contact:

Re: Gun Politics

Post by Isgrimnur » Mon Jul 30, 2018 11:04 am

Printing guns
Defense Distributed, founded by Cody Wilson, provides the means for people to make weapons at home via software and 3D-printing and milling machines. Today that company, along with the Second Amendment Foundation, has sued the attorney general of New Jersey and the city attorney of Los Angeles.

Gurbir S. Grewal, the attorney general of New Jersey, sent a threatening letter to Defense Distributed last week that claimed the company's "plans to allow anyone with a 3D printer to download a code and create a fully operational gun directly threatens the public safety of New Jersey's residents....Posting this material online is no different than driving to New Jersey and handing out hard-copy files on any street corner." [ :roll: -Isg]

Grewal ordered the company "to cease and desist from publishing printable-gun computer files for use by New Jersey residents....Should you fail to comply with this letter, my Office will initiate legal action barring you from publishing these files before August 1, 2018."

Defense Distributed's legal right to post its information was won by the company via settlement this month after a long legal battle with the federal government. Before that settlement, the feds essentially wanted to treat the act of hosting or distributing such files as illegal arms exporting.
...
It reinforced that argument with today's suit against Grewal and Michael Feuer, city attorney of Los Angeles, who issued a similar threat against Wilson's company last week. The lawsuit calls the officials' efforts "an ideologically-fueled program of intimidation and harassment."
...
UPDATE: Within an hour before filing the above lawsuit, Defense Distributed was informed by the state of Pennsylvania that it was seeking a temporary restraining order in federal court to stop it from distributing weapon-making files in that state. During an emergency telephone hearing before U.S. District Judge Paul Diamond (which lawyer Josh Blackman had to participate in from a United Airlines lounge at LaGuardia Airport), Defense Distributed agreed to, at least through next week, voluntarily block Pennsylvania I.P. addresses until the legal issue can be resolved.
Silver - 1k

User avatar
LawBeefaroni
Forum Moderator
Posts: 46159
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 3:08 pm
Location: Urbs in Horto, where we only use the old smilies

Re: Gun Politics

Post by LawBeefaroni » Mon Jul 30, 2018 11:29 am

DD recently settled with the BATFE to allow them to continue. I think because the BATFE were advised that they wouldn't win in court.

The states are trying to bankrupt DD and SAF, probably.


Edit: it was the DOJ (under ITAR) , not BATFE.


FWIW, I would not own/use a home-printed firearm as long as alternatives exist. They're too unreliable and potentially dangerous. Maybe as a range toy but really not my thing.
" Hey OP, listen to my advice alright." -Tha General
"No scientific discovery is named after its original discoverer." -Stigler's Law of Eponymy, discovered by Robert K. Merton

MYT

User avatar
Punisher
Posts: 2274
Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2005 12:05 pm

Re: Gun Politics

Post by Punisher » Mon Jul 30, 2018 8:03 pm

LawBeefaroni wrote:
Mon Jul 30, 2018 11:29 am
DD recently settled with the BATFE to allow them to continue. I think because the BATFE were advised that they wouldn't win in court.

The states are trying to bankrupt DD and SAF, probably.


Edit: it was the DOJ (under ITAR) , not BATFE.


FWIW, I would not own/use a home-printed firearm as long as alternatives exist. They're too unreliable and potentially dangerous. Maybe as a range toy but really not my thing.
Agreed. Making some accessories like rails or something maybe, but not any important components of a firearm...yet... There is some progress in metal 3D printers, but they are a ways off for home users.
All yourLightning Bolts are Belong to Us

User avatar
Rip
Posts: 26884
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 9:34 pm
Location: Cajun Country!
Contact:
Rip’s avatar
NBA 2K19

Re: Gun Politics

Post by Rip » Tue Jul 31, 2018 8:22 pm

I don't get the hoopla. It is illegal to own or print a plastic gun. Why does the availability of plans matter?

The fallacy of the idea that you can prevent data files of plans from spreading is kinda crazy. You can't stop that anymore than you can stop porn, movie/game/music piracy, or any other type of data transfer. State control of information is a pipe dream.

User avatar
LawBeefaroni
Forum Moderator
Posts: 46159
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 3:08 pm
Location: Urbs in Horto, where we only use the old smilies

Re: Gun Politics

Post by LawBeefaroni » Tue Jul 31, 2018 8:34 pm

Rip wrote:
Tue Jul 31, 2018 8:22 pm
I don't get the hoopla. It is illegal to own or print a plastic gun. Why does the availability of plans matter?

Because you can buy a barrel (online, with no regulation) and have a legal and functional firearm. That scares people. People who don't know about polymer 80s and 80% lowers.
" Hey OP, listen to my advice alright." -Tha General
"No scientific discovery is named after its original discoverer." -Stigler's Law of Eponymy, discovered by Robert K. Merton

MYT

User avatar
Punisher
Posts: 2274
Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2005 12:05 pm

Re: Gun Politics

Post by Punisher » Tue Jul 31, 2018 8:45 pm

I think the hoopla is because they are concerned that it will make it easier for criminals to get access to illegal guns..
All yourLightning Bolts are Belong to Us

User avatar
Isgrimnur
Posts: 60590
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:29 am
Location: Chookity pok
Contact:

Re: Gun Politics

Post by Isgrimnur » Tue Jul 31, 2018 9:05 pm

Engadget
Today U.S. District Judge Robert Lasnik granted a temporary restraining order sought by eight state attorneys general and the District of Columbia to block the sale of designs for 3D-printed guns. Based on a settlement between Defense Distributed and the US Department of State, they could have gone on sale starting tomorrow, but now that is on hold.

In both the House and Senate, bills were introduced today to block the sales, and this morning the President tweeted the plan "doesn't seem to make much sense!" The New York Times reports that in his ruling, Judge Lasnik said there are First Amendment concerns, but said the states had established a "likelihood of irreparable harm." State AGs argue that the Trump Administration's settlement "gives criminals and terrorists access to downloadable, untraceable and undetectable 3D-printed weapons." White House spokesperson Hogan Gidley said to the AP that the administration would "will continue to look at all options available to us to do what is necessary to protect Americans while also supporting the First and Second amendments."
Silver - 1k

User avatar
LawBeefaroni
Forum Moderator
Posts: 46159
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 3:08 pm
Location: Urbs in Horto, where we only use the old smilies

Re: Gun Politics

Post by LawBeefaroni » Tue Jul 31, 2018 9:39 pm

Punisher wrote:
Tue Jul 31, 2018 8:45 pm
I think the hoopla is because they are concerned that it will make it easier for criminals to get access to illegal guns..
All it takes is a few hundred dollars to get an illegal gun. Cheaper than a 3d printer.
" Hey OP, listen to my advice alright." -Tha General
"No scientific discovery is named after its original discoverer." -Stigler's Law of Eponymy, discovered by Robert K. Merton

MYT

User avatar
GreenGoo
Posts: 40570
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 10:46 pm
Location: Ottawa, ON

Re: Gun Politics

Post by GreenGoo » Tue Jul 31, 2018 10:55 pm

How much does a means of production cost?

User avatar
Punisher
Posts: 2274
Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2005 12:05 pm

Re: Gun Politics

Post by Punisher » Tue Jul 31, 2018 11:15 pm

LawBeefaroni wrote:
Tue Jul 31, 2018 9:39 pm
Punisher wrote:
Tue Jul 31, 2018 8:45 pm
I think the hoopla is because they are concerned that it will make it easier for criminals to get access to illegal guns..
All it takes is a few hundred dollars to get an illegal gun. Cheaper than a 3d printer.
The 3D printed one will also be untraceable and, if printed n all plastic, harder to detect with metal detectors.
All yourLightning Bolts are Belong to Us

User avatar
Punisher
Posts: 2274
Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2005 12:05 pm

Re: Gun Politics

Post by Punisher » Tue Jul 31, 2018 11:22 pm

GreenGoo wrote:
Tue Jul 31, 2018 10:55 pm
How much does a means of production cost?
If you mean the cost of printing in 3D, then you can get small printers for $150 and larger (12"x12") print beds starting around $400 I believe. Rolls of filament start around $15 per roll.
I currently have 3 3D printers. 2 FDM printers 1 small (about 6"x6" $150) and a larger (12"x12" $400) one. These use the plastic rolls of filament and the 3rd one is a laser SLA resin printer. This uses a liquid resin that is cured by the laser. The FDM ones are used for larger, less detailed prints and the resin one is used for smaller, highly detailed prints, like mini tabletop figures. ($1200)

There are also larger FDM printers available, but I'm not sure on their pricing.
All yourLightning Bolts are Belong to Us

User avatar
Rip
Posts: 26884
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 9:34 pm
Location: Cajun Country!
Contact:
Rip’s avatar
NBA 2K19

Re: Gun Politics

Post by Rip » Tue Jul 31, 2018 11:24 pm

Punisher wrote:
Tue Jul 31, 2018 8:45 pm
I think the hoopla is because they are concerned that it will make it easier for criminals to get access to illegal guns..
It is a lot easier(and cheaper) to get a street gun than a 3D printer.

At the end of the day no matter what they decide it will be no harder to get the plans than it is to get a pirated copy of your favorite game and we all know how easy that can be. Absolute waste of time.
Last edited by Rip on Tue Jul 31, 2018 11:27 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
GreenGoo
Posts: 40570
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 10:46 pm
Location: Ottawa, ON

Re: Gun Politics

Post by GreenGoo » Tue Jul 31, 2018 11:27 pm

Rip wrote:
Tue Jul 31, 2018 11:24 pm
Punisher wrote:
Tue Jul 31, 2018 8:45 pm
I think the hoopla is because they are concerned that it will make it easier for criminals to get access to illegal guns..
It is a lot easier(and cheaper) to get a street gun than a 3D printer.
Once upon a time video games were a lot cheaper and easier to get than a CD writer too.

Don't disagree about the plans however.

User avatar
Rip
Posts: 26884
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 9:34 pm
Location: Cajun Country!
Contact:
Rip’s avatar
NBA 2K19

Re: Gun Politics

Post by Rip » Tue Jul 31, 2018 11:28 pm

GreenGoo wrote:
Tue Jul 31, 2018 11:27 pm
Rip wrote:
Tue Jul 31, 2018 11:24 pm
Punisher wrote:
Tue Jul 31, 2018 8:45 pm
I think the hoopla is because they are concerned that it will make it easier for criminals to get access to illegal guns..
It is a lot easier(and cheaper) to get a street gun than a 3D printer.
Once upon a time video games were a lot cheaper and easier to get than a CD writer too.
Why would you need a CD writer? I just mount stuff to a virtual drive.

User avatar
GreenGoo
Posts: 40570
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 10:46 pm
Location: Ottawa, ON

Re: Gun Politics

Post by GreenGoo » Tue Jul 31, 2018 11:43 pm

Don't be obtuse.

The point being that you don't shoot people with your printer, you shoot them with the hundreds of guns you print from it at a fraction of the cost. If not now, then soon.

User avatar
Punisher
Posts: 2274
Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2005 12:05 pm

Re: Gun Politics

Post by Punisher » Wed Aug 01, 2018 12:17 am

Rip wrote:
Tue Jul 31, 2018 11:28 pm
GreenGoo wrote:
Tue Jul 31, 2018 11:27 pm
Rip wrote:
Tue Jul 31, 2018 11:24 pm
Punisher wrote:
Tue Jul 31, 2018 8:45 pm
I think the hoopla is because they are concerned that it will make it easier for criminals to get access to illegal guns..
It is a lot easier(and cheaper) to get a street gun than a 3D printer.
Once upon a time video games were a lot cheaper and easier to get than a CD writer too.
Why would you need a CD writer? I just mount stuff to a virtual drive.
This was before the days of mainstream mounting software. Think back to the days when tape backups were all the rage.
All yourLightning Bolts are Belong to Us

User avatar
Punisher
Posts: 2274
Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2005 12:05 pm

Re: Gun Politics

Post by Punisher » Wed Aug 01, 2018 12:22 am

Rip wrote:
Tue Jul 31, 2018 11:24 pm
Punisher wrote:
Tue Jul 31, 2018 8:45 pm
I think the hoopla is because they are concerned that it will make it easier for criminals to get access to illegal guns..
It is a lot easier(and cheaper) to get a street gun than a 3D printer.

At the end of the day no matter what they decide it will be no harder to get the plans than it is to get a pirated copy of your favorite game and we all know how easy that can be. Absolute waste of time.
As I mentioned, I paid $400 for my large format 3D printer. I went to the store, paid with my credit card and returned home.
Now depending on how much filament it needs, I could print as many $30 guns as I want (I'm assuming 2 full rolls of filament and it may only require one).
If I wanted an illegal street gun, I'd have to get cash and then somehow figure where to buy an illegal gun...Which also leaves a trail since the seller will know who I am or at the very least, have seen my face. I have no idea on the street value of illegal guns so I can't speak to cost, but my 3D printer option is MUCH easier, more convenient, and once I have it means I can print out future guns much cheaper.
So I firmly believe that once the technology actually gets there, it will be cheaper and easier to 3D print a gun.
All yourLightning Bolts are Belong to Us

Post Reply