Bill Regulating 3D Printed Guns Announced In NYC 322
New submitter BioTitan writes "New York City may be the first state to crack down on 3D printed guns. Two pieces of legislation were introduced on June 13, one in the City Council that only allows licensed gunsmiths to print the guns, and another in the State Assembly that would make it illegal for anyone to print a gun. Cody Wilson, creator of the first 3D printed guns, and founder of Defense Distributed, told The Epoch Times, 'Such legislation is a deprivation of equal protection and works in clear ignorance of Title I and II of U.S. gun laws.'"
Fear and Ignorance (Score:1, Insightful)
So it will be legal to build your own guns with metal machining tools, but if you do it with a 3D printer, it will be illegal. I'm sure all the people who want a gun but can't buy one are going to listen. This will just be one more charge after the fact, after someone commits another crime that is already illegal.
Re:Fear and Ignorance (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:It's incredible to me (Score:0, Insightful)
Also typical that this gets auto moderated to -1
But... *COMPUTERS*! (Score:5, Insightful)
The only thing I can't legally do? Sell them.
So I could legally manufacture a more-or-less perfect replica of the gun used in Newtown. But New York gets its knickers in a knot over someone printing out a single-shot low-pressure piece of crap?
Dear politicians - We all know you couldn't think your way out of a paper bag. But can you at least prioritize the crap on which you waste our tax dollars?
Re:Fear and Ignorance (Score:2, Insightful)
This is what I don't understand. Why do we need separate laws about 3D printed guns? Surely if you're not a licensed gunsmith you can't legally make a gun, whatever the particular tools you use to do it?
that's how it is in most of the western world.
however, usa is an exception and it's legal for anyone to make a gun(provided the gun isn't particularly advanced, but still). that's how there can be a place for this law, but it makes little sense in the overall context of new york being situated inside usa.
Re:It's incredible to me (Score:2, Insightful)
It's always funny to see someone suggest that libertarianism eschews religion. Particularly when they conflate political leanings with religious tendencies. Freedom is no less religious than any other political dimension. Pragmatism and many-voice democratism are the only irreligious politics.
What is the difference between the two? (Score:4, Insightful)
Is a weapon that doesn't follow the "normal" market chain.
So they also should regulate, say, hand made knives, archery and even deadly traps.
It looks to me just like a govt response to a buzzword. Just to let people know "we are watching over you".
Re:It's incredible to me (Score:5, Insightful)
"going to give you any protection from anyone armed with more than a saturday night special"
Logical Fallacy. It gives you more protection than having NOTHING, except the broken promises of the government protecting you. And we are seeing exactly how much the government protects you, even as it invades every aspect of your life. But being a good leftist, you must not protest government intrusions into your everyday life, for that is exactly what you're asking for.
Government regulation is government power, more regulation means government has more power. Don't complain when wake up and have no power to stop the government. That is the whole reason for the 2nd Amendment. Power corrupts and all that.
"Trust us, we're from the Government"
Re:It's incredible to me (Score:4, Insightful)
I think you're insane for thinking a gun is going to give you any protection from anyone armed with more than a saturday night special
What are you talking about? Firearms are literally the best thing for defense from armed assailants.
I don't think the constitution says anything about you individually having the right to own a gun,
Then it is clear that you do not have a very good understanding of the Constitution.
Re:It's incredible to me (Score:3, Insightful)
As a Libertarian, I find Libertarians defy most stereotypes. I do say, the Libertarian version of Atheism is much better than the leftist Atheists. Leftist Atheists have replaced GOD with Government as the all powerful being, and that is pretty scary concept. Libertarian Atheists tend towards not giving a shit what others believe and want to be left alone.
Re:But... *COMPUTERS*! (Score:5, Insightful)
But can you at least prioritize the crap on which you waste our tax dollars?
Don't worry, they do. It's just that your choice of priority depends on your final goal.
If your goal is a reduction in gun violence, you might prioritize efforts to reduce poverty, unemployment, and parents lacking time to be parents.
If your goal is to ban firearms, you prioritize the efforts which are achievable in small bite-sized portions.
Re:Fear and Ignorance (Score:4, Insightful)
I think "for your own use" means the same thing that it means in relation to the other two categories of things that the ATF cares about. You can have and make alcohol [beer...not liquor], tobacco [products], and firearms [as long as they're not fully automatic machine guns], it's when you start selling them that oversight gets intrusive.
Gun restriction law is in-and-of-itself perverse (as are the other two categories above). Prohibition's success rate for gun manufacture is only high due to the barrier to learning the process. 3-D printing is getting so much attention because now people who are frightened of guns (instead of people) realize they could be produced without complete government oversight and accountability.
I'm not especially worried about it because the people I'm likely to get shot by will have guns whether there is 3-D printing or not. Banning 3-D printing just means they're more likely to have a reliable gun.
Re:It's incredible to me (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:It's incredible to me (Score:3, Insightful)
You know someone has no basis for their argument when they go to nukes. It's the Hitler of gun debate.
Re:to be expected (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:It's incredible to me (Score:3, Insightful)
Previously, thinking the government was secretly recording all our call and network connection information was "a paranoid view to have." Not sure that's still true.
Similarly, the view you put forth may be paranoid today, but it might be validated in the future.
Re:It's incredible to me (Score:4, Insightful)
How is that? How does a "Left wing" enforce their social economic government structure without a strong powerful government behind it?
You're probably not anti-capitalist, you're probably anti-corporatist, which is different, but looks remarkably similar. Do you believe a committee should tell you how much you should be paid, and how hard you should work and what job you should do? If you say no to each of those, you're a capitalist.
Re:It's incredible to me (Score:5, Insightful)
I am not an Atheist. Libertarian Atheists don't care what I believe. And I don't care what Atheists believe. Leftwing Atheists would rather I not exist, as my belief somehow threatens them. They end up doing things like Jewish Purge of Soviet Union (killing Jews because they are religious), or persecution of the Falun Gong and Christians in China, if they had their way. Atheistic Socialistic States and those of faith don't mix.
The state should be agnostic towards religion (or lack thereof). First Amendment Style.
Re:to be expected (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:It's incredible to me (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't think the constitution says anything about you individually having the right to own a gun
Ahh my favorite argument from people who don't understand this little clause:
Amendment X: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
If the Constitution doesn't say anything about it, that implies it's might right and the government cannot restrict it. However in practice I realize the government could give two shits about the Constitution.
I can't PRINT it? (Score:5, Insightful)
Geez, if I can't print a shitty zip-gun, I guess I'll just have to take 5 mins to MAKE one out of some pipe, a rubber band, a tack, and if I'm feeling fancy, wood for a handle.
Certainly none of these is available at the local hardware store!
I feel safer already.
Fucking morons.
Re:It's incredible to me (Score:5, Insightful)
"the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed"
Nothing about "guns", nothing about "owning"
"Arms" = guns, or more generally any weapon which would typically be carried by infantry. (Yes, this means the amendment is specifically referring to military weapons, not hunting weapons.)
"keep" = own
"bear" = carry in public
The words may be a bit unfamiliar after a few hundred years, but the meaning is obvious to anyone who cares to undertake some honest research.
Re:It's incredible to me (Score:4, Insightful)
You're really pushing this point hard. Sure, the 2nd Amendment could be repealed, assuming anyone was willing to commit political suicide by proposing the repeal of anything in the Bill of Rights, and that three-quarters of the states were willing to ratify the change. That isn't going to happen any time soon.
Anyone in the USA who opposes any change to the second amendment but drinks alcohol is a morally bankrupt hypocrite not worth listening to, which I would imagine is most of them.
This is simply idiotic. Opposing any change to the 2nd Amendment does not equate to opposing the amendment process itself. The fact that the capacity exists to repeal the 2nd Amendment does not automatically make it a good idea. You're just looking for any excuse to tune out those who disagree with you by casting them as hypocrites.
Re:It's incredible to me (Score:4, Insightful)