this post was submitted on 14 Jan 2024
1120 points (97.4% liked)
linuxmemes
20473 readers
1231 users here now
I use Arch btw
Sister communities:
- LemmyMemes: Memes
- LemmyShitpost: Anything and everything goes.
- RISA: Star Trek memes and shitposts
Community rules
- Follow the site-wide rules and code of conduct
- Be civil
- Post Linux-related content
- No recent reposts
Please report posts and comments that break these rules!
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Just an FYI, that's not illegal because it falls under the U.S. Constitutional protection of free speech; so also is printing and constructing them. Selling them or distributing guns as physical products is not protected, and is in fact illegal.
Wait are you telling me it is legal to construct and possess a fully automatic firearm without a class three license?
Or say, already own a firearm, and then construct a modification that makes it fall out of compliance with local laws by making it fully auto, having a magazine that is too large, or a bump stock or things like that?
I am certain the situation is more complex than you seem to think, hence the semi-ironic disclaimer.
While NFA items are a different story, you're generally allowed to manufacture anything you could legally buy in a store. So no suppressors / SBRs / destructive devices without the appropriate paperwork & tax stamps, no machine guns without all that and a time machine, and no fun allowed if you're a prohibited person. Other than that, there's nothing* stopping you from printing, say, a semi-automatic rifle with a 16 inch barrel or a glock frame.
*Federally. Also, I am a dumbass and not a lawyer, do your own research.
So... it is indeed vastly more complicated.
Glad you agree, this is the internet, and I have run into people uh, quite often, who have gotten into trouble via having a simplistic view of very complex topics and believing they will be fine.
Usually this is not on the topic of guns, but as we appear to live in the stupidest possible timeline, I can never be sure these days.
Nowhere in any part of your comment did you explicitly state, nor imply construction of full-auto and those have been illegal since the fucking 80's.
I made a very general joke.
Then you said
'3d printed guns' includes fully automatic guns.
You then said printing or constructing them is not illegal and is protected by Freedom of Speech.
Then I pointed out that 3d printed guns includes automatic weapons.
At this point, I do not actually know if you are aware that you /can/ find designs for fully automatic weapons on some 3d printed gun sites, and that there are, as I mentioned, a lot of people who are very adamant about that being fine and totally legal.
Again, hence my semi-ironic disclaimer to the FBI/ATF.
How do you think I know there are 3d printed full auto designs, usually in .22lr?
I say 'Semi-Ironic' because I may actually be on a relatively low priority watch list simply for browsing such sites.
I promise you are not on a watch list for looking at 3D printer files. This is the kind of shit the ATF likes to spread to scare people.
No.
A semi-auto? Yes.
With your class III SOT? Sure, full auto.
Bump stocks are legal again Mr. Outdated Info, but like I mentioned above, while manufacturing things you're allowed to own is something you're allowed to do, manufacturing something you're not allowed to own is perhaps unsurprisingly not allowed. Wtf are we doing here, really? You couldn't have figured this out?
I mean no not really, these wild claims are yours and yours alone.
Cool, /wasn't replying to you or commenting on the situation generally/.
Glad you felt the need to take my words out of context and then act as if I was being 'wild'.
You are exactly the kind of person I /thought/ the person /I was actually replying to might be/, the kind of disingenuous, abusive, gaslighting, reckless asshole that gives less insane firearms enthusiasts a bad reputation.
I/responded/to/you/,generally/.
I didn't take them out of context, from your statement it is clear you read into the one you replied to and decided it meant he was implying that all other laws and restrictions are null and void simply because some other thing is legal. It's like if he said "you can actually legally put rat poison in peanut butter" in the context of killing rats in their attic and you say "oh yeah well what if you feed it to your neighbor's kid." Obviously the other relevant laws still apply, your comment is not needed at all.
No/u/lol/and/WTF/is/with/the/slashes?
Seems weird it would fall under free speech specifically.
Why?
It's just not how I'm used to thinking of it I guess. Sharing gun designs for 3D printer just doesn't seem like the sort of thing that would be covered by free speech. I always think of sharing your views, opinions, arguing for something and so on as free speech. My reaction would be to consider that other stuff as some sort of publishing or some such thing.
Apologies for my poor reading comprehension, i am kind of dumb; can you please elaborate what you mean by that sentence?
It just feels more like distributing a product or something rather than it being the speech mentioned in free speech. I'm not making a legal argument or anything btw, I'm just talking about what the term brings to my mind.