Posts Tagged cad files

Bill Attacks First and Second Amendment By Calling For CAD File Ban

From Ammoland:

The bill reads: “It shall be unlawful for any person to intentionally distribute, over the internet or by means of the World Wide Web, digital instructions in the form of Computer Aided Design files or other code that can automatically program a 3-dimensional printer or similar device to produce a firearm or complete a firearm from an unfinished frame or receiver.”

, , , , , , , , , , , , ,

No Comments

Gun Control Is Dead Thanks To 3-D Printing

From Bearing Arms:

I’ve long argued that 3D-printed guns represent the death of gun control. After all, if the purpose of gun control is to keep firearms out of the hands of certain people–be that just criminals or, in time, everyone–the existence of 3d printers and the files one would use to make firearms means you’ll never accomplish that goal.

Anyone who wants a gun can get a gun and there’s absolutely nothing anyone can do to stop it.

, , , , , , , ,

No Comments

NY Attacks First and Second Amendment With One Law

From Ammoland:

New York is tackling the 3D-printed gun community by trying to ban the 3D printing of firearms and prevent the sharing of computer-aided design (CAD) files.

New York State Senator Brad Hoylman is sponsoring the bill. The Democrat says he wants to “attack the manufacture” of 3D Printed firearms. It would not only make it a felony to print guns but also ban the intentional sharing of files, raising First Amendment concerns. Writings like the Anarchist Cookbook and the guide to build a Luty machine gun have been determined to be protected speech. Many believe that these files are also protected speech.

, , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

No Comments

Judge Says There Should Be A License For 3D Printing Software

From Reason:

This week, Judge Robert A. Lasnik of U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington, in deciding on motions for summary judgment in that suit, State of Washington et al. v. U.S. Department of State et al., agreed that removing those files from the USML was unlawful based on the APA arguments (though not the 10th Amendment ones), and reversed the federal government’s choice to allow free distribution of the files.
As discussed in Lasnik’s decision, the federal government’s initial reaction to the states’ suit “justified the deregulation of the CAD files [that could help make weapons]…by pointing to a Department of Defense determination that the items ‘do not provide the United States with a critical military or intelligence advantage’ and ‘are already commonly available and not inherently for military end-use.'”

, , , , , , , , , ,

No Comments