Will the plans eventually ever get released?
https://nypost.com/2020/03/10/judge...trations-bid-to-release-3d-printed-gun-plans/
https://nypost.com/2020/03/10/judge...trations-bid-to-release-3d-printed-gun-plans/
Judge blocks Trump administration’s bid to release 3D-printed gun plans
- Thread starter Aim1
- Start date
- Status
mcb
Member
The plans and files have been out there on the internet since 2013 and have never NOT been publicly available on the internet since their inceptions. A 5-minute google search will put any number of files onto you computer if you want them. In May 2013 there was one proven design. There are now hundreds of proven designs (some sketchier than others).
The government is wasting huge amounts of YOUR tax dollars arguing over something they have next to no control over. The ruling can go either way and it won't change anything meaningfully. The data is out there, the data is growing in size and avalability and the community that generates it is getting more and more proficient at it.
The disconnect between the government agencies arguing about 3D printed firearms and the news agency reporting about 3D printed firearms and reality is staggering.
The government is wasting huge amounts of YOUR tax dollars arguing over something they have next to no control over. The ruling can go either way and it won't change anything meaningfully. The data is out there, the data is growing in size and avalability and the community that generates it is getting more and more proficient at it.
The disconnect between the government agencies arguing about 3D printed firearms and the news agency reporting about 3D printed firearms and reality is staggering.
Tommygunn
Member
This really needs to be pushed to appellate court as prior restraint is clearly unconstitutional in this case. See Near v. Minnesota and extreme case of U.S. v. Progressive where a judge issued a temporary injunction to prevent a magazine from printing open sourced article article on how to make a hydrogen bomb. https://infogalactic.com/info/United_States_v._Progressive,_Inc. The case was dropped when other publications happened dealing with a similar claim by another author.
mcb
Member
That aspect is near the core of this debate. The pro-2A/pro-3D printing side argues that the data files to print the guns are the same as any number of other instructions for potential illegal devices that you can buy, download.
Code is free speech!
The Progressive article had diagrams of how to build your own hydrogen bomb as did the Hanson letter derived from public source information. That judge and the states might just get the SCOTUS to have to review the case under prior restraint laws. The argument from the censorial side is that the Small Arms Treaty overrides FOIA but diagrams, etc. are widely shared on other firearms designs. The judge is probably going to be reversed at the appellate level as this did not have the implications that the national security compelling interest did in Progressive.
The closest corollary would be the guy in Missouri that was rooting around in old government translations of Nazi government documents that had the simple formula for making crystal meth that had been lost. That spread around and probably did so on the old usenet and other forums at the time in the early 90's as well. The previous formulations were more expensive and centered on Hawaii (ice) and motorcycle gangs on the West Coast. There was never a court case about it.
mcb
Member
I agree many aspect are similar. The challenge for the government in this particular case is that even if the government decided sharing files for 3D printed firearms is illegal there is very little they can do to stop it. The very nature of the internet and this information makes enforcing a ban on 3D printer files nearly unenforceable except as an add on crime in another case.
Last edited:
- Status
