DOJ, Second Amendment Foundation Reach Settlement In Defense Distributed Lawsuit

In both a First and Second Amendment win, the Second Amendment Foundation has settled with the Department of State after suing on behalf of Defense Distributed.

Defense Distributed was in trouble for distributing plans for a 3d printable Liberator single shot pistol, with the Department of State claiming violation of ITAR.

From the SAF's press release:

"Under terms of the settlement, the government has agreed to waive its prior restraint against the plaintiffs, allowing them to freely publish the 3-D files and other information at issue. The government has also agreed to pay a significant portion of the plaintiffs' attorney's fees, and to return $10,000 in State Department registration dues paid by Defense Distributed as a result of the prior restraint.

Significantly, the government expressly acknowledges that non-automatic firearms up to .50-caliber -- including modern semi-auto sporting rifles such as the popular AR-15 and similar firearms -- are not inherently military."

http://joshblackman.com/blog/2018/07...buted-lawsuit/

Seems to be a lot of good news lately!

This was kind of an edge case (IMHO) but the precedent and statements may help us a great deal.

That is a huge win, especially the definition of military arms vs civilian

[Awesom]..

GREAT JOB SAF - keep it up.

Where specifically does it say , "Significantly, the government expressly acknowledges that non-automatic firearms up to .50-caliber – including modern semi-auto sporting rifles such as the popular AR-15 and similar firearms – are not inherently military."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rucker61

Where specifically does it say , "Significantly, the government expressly acknowledges that non-automatic firearms up to .50-caliber – including modern semi-auto sporting rifles such as the popular AR-15 and similar firearms – are not inherently military."

---

The very center paragraph of the document linked in the OP.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sawin

The very center paragraph of the document linked in the OP.

---

Sorry, I didn't type clerarly - where does the government actually say this, rather than this second hand report?

I would expect you could find the actual documents at either the SAF or DD websites.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Justin

I would expect you could find the actual documents at either the SAF or DD websites.

---

There's nothing there - we need a lawyer on this, but as far as I can tell, the claim that "the government expressly acknowledges that non-automatic firearms up to .50-caliber – including modern semi-auto sporting rifles such as the popular AR-15 and similar firearms – are not inherently military" is based on transfer of jurisdiction regarding the 3D codes from State to Commerce.

No idea. Without reading the actual docs, I don't care to speculate.

Unfortunately, I don't have the time to go dig them up right at the moment.

https://www.wired.com/story/a-landma...-for-diy-guns/

This article is funny.

But in all seriousness, the positions laid out in this judgment are extremely favorable to the 2A community.

Good article.

And, FYI, there's more discussion here in case you missed it: https://www.ar-15.co/threads/169609-...ibuted-Lawsuit

Right this moment, somebody out there is duplicating the Manhattan project with a 3D printer. I'll be really impressed when a molecular printer is perfected. It could make a hell of a drug. Anything to stop these headaches.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bailey Guns

Good article.

And, FYI, there's more discussion here in case you missed it: https://www.ar-15.co/threads/169609-...ibuted-Lawsuit

---

My bad.

Hadn't seen that. I did think the wired article was worth sharing though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BushMasterBoy

Right this moment, somebody out there is duplicating the Manhattan project with a 3D printer. I'll be really impressed when a molecular printer is perfected. It could make a hell of a drug. Anything to stop these headaches.

---

Recently finished a book about chemistry that has a story about a teen that collected smoke detectors and was actually on the right track to fusion before the gov stepped in. I think this was pre internet. Imagine what he could do with this.
They are already printing food. And they are really in high gear in molecular science. Exciting times.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ben4372

Recently finished a book about chemistry that has a story about a teen that collected smoke detectors and was actually on the right track to fusion before the gov stepped in. I think this was pre internet. Imagine what he could do with this.
They are already printing food. And they are really in high gear in molecular science. Exciting times.

---

He wasn't developing a fusion reactor, he was trying to build a breeder reactor.

Also, he's dead.


https://arstechnica-com.cdn.ampproje...ied-at-age-39/

So is your link.

Musta been this guy

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Hahn

Glad to see his death was not radiation related. Either way I appreciate ambitious, young innovators.

I wouldn't be so sure that it wasn't at least a factor, judging from his mugshot a few years ago, which can be seen at the following link.

https://talesfromthenuclearage.wordp...-scout-part-4/

Radiation or meth?

In terms of the Wired article, it was interesting to learn about that guy, but boy their slant was blatantly obvious.

Wired has been freaking out about 3D printed guns and Cody Wilson for the better part of five or six years now.

No surprise, given that they're owned by Conde Nast, a legacy media company that has no love for the 2nd.

Yeah, I've been following Cody Wilson for a while (not in a creepy stalker way)...

And Wired seems to think he's the inventor of Skynet or something like that...

Yeah, their bias is quite clear.

Frankly, between the annoying political articles and the fact that the rest of Wired reads like an issue of Skymall for people who think they're a techie because they have a Gmail account, I gave up on them long ago.

Anything Conde Nast runs nowadays just completely sucks; this includes all of their print publications as well as Reddit and Ars Technica.

Probably a bad idea to cremate that guy. Just bury in a lead lined coffin.

So, I'm not sure if we ever had a thread about the states suing to stop this guy (done after the settlement had been reached with the DOJ), but yeah, states tried to stop this guy. Apparently the judge put an injunction in place banning online distribution or somesuch. However, per DD, "The court permitted the email, mail, sale and other transfers of the files," so he put them up on the web for sale. It has a suggested price of $10, but you can pay just a penny and still get the files.

Moreover, if you live in certain states, he forbids the sale, with a great message, "Oops, you're behind the blue wall. Your masters say you can't be trusted with this information. Sorry, little lamb."

I like the stones of this guy! https://www.cnet.com/news/3d-printed...s-court-order/

Like the Liberator is a high capacity repeater or something...

It's still legal to make a firearm for personal use. Not sure I'd want to use a plastic gun for any purpose other than the original Liberator. Something for close range use that can give you a chance to get a better gun from your oppressors.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by foxtrot

IIRC it is illegal to possess a firearm that cannot be detected in airports. Just a FYI. So as far as I can tell, the product is already illegal (unless like some designs, it incorporates a metal core) but the plan is not.

---

Firing pin enough to be detectable? Or bullets?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by foxtrot

IIRC it is illegal to possess a firearm that cannot be detected in airports. Just a FYI. So as far as I can tell, the product is already illegal (unless like some designs, it incorporates a metal core) but the plan is not.

---

From ATFE faq page
Is a firearm illegal if it is made of plastic?
It is unlawful for any person to produce a firearm as proscribed in 18 U.S.C. 922(p).
 "It shall be unlawful for any person to manufacture, import, sell, ship, deliver, possess, transfer, or receive any firearm—
(A) that, after removal of grips, stocks, and magazines, is not as detectable as the Security Exemplar, by walk-through metal detectors calibrated and operated to detect the Security Exemplar; or
(B) any major component of which, when subjected to inspection by the types of x-ray machines commonly used at airports, does not generate an image that accurately depicts the shape of the component. Barium sulfate or other compounds may be used in the fabrication of the component."
Last Reviewed September 23, 2016
https://www.atf.gov/firearms/qa/fire...t-made-plastic

What am I missing here that allows plastic lowers as legal firearms?

they have enough metal in them to be detectable when assembled into a functioning firearm.

They are also designed to accommodate an otherwise non-functional six ounce steel block to comply with the metal detector law.

Jokes on the ATF, becuase I own a Glock 7...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Scanker19

Jokes on the ATF, becuase I own a Glock 7...

---

Just don't drop it. It's made of porcelain.

Sent from my electronic leash using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gman

Just don't drop it. It's made of porcelain.

Sent from my electronic leash using Tapatalk

---

And costs more than you make in a month.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Justin

And costs more than you make in a month.

---

You'd be surprised what I make in a month, Mclane.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ridge

You'd be surprised what I make in a month, Mclane.

---

If it's more than a dollar ninety-eight I'd be very surprised.