|
https://www.nraila.org/articles/20150605/stop-obamas-planned-gag-order-on-firearm-related-speech http://dailycaller.com/2015/06/07/stop-obamas-planned-gag-order-on-firearm-related-speech/ http://bearingarms.com/constitution-obama-plans-muzzle-gun-related-speech/ http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/06/07/obama-to-circumvent-congress-with-gag-order-on-firearm-coverage/ (video autoplays) So, I've got a co-worker totally convinced this is Obama's first step in cracking down on both the 1st and 2nd amendments. I can't really find anything about it outside of the RW echo chamber (links above are a pretty good sample of what Google provides). I'm hoping someone here can break down what this actually is, because the language in the State Department document is too obtuse for me.
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 21:53
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 5, 2024 15:43 |
|
|
I should have invested in .223 ammo back in 2007, I'd be so rich now.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 22:01
|
|
|
Well if we can find a primary source of what exactly is going on besides fear-mongering we might be able to help you.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 22:07
|
|
|
Your coworker is a gullible rube.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 22:12
|
|
|
Watermelon City posted:Your coworker is a gullible rube.  The right has been screeching out this same tune since before he took office, but I'm sure this time it'll actually happen, *pause for emphasis* any day now.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 22:14
|
|
|
Feral_Shofixti posted:
Ahahaha this video is awesome. Let's get a Republican hack and a Democratic hack to weigh in on what noted expert Vince Vaughan says. If you showed clips of American media circa 2015 to somebody from 1970 they would refuse to believe it was real.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 22:14
|
|
|
I agree OP, the federal government should research the effects of firearms.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 22:26
|
|
|
Istvun posted:I agree OP, the federal government should research the effects of firearms.  Seems pretty straightforward, guns are awesome and I like to shoot them in video games a lot.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 22:33
|
|
|
Feral_Shofixti posted:https://www.nraila.org/articles/20150605/stop-obamas-planned-gag-order-on-firearm-related-speech The Administration is trying to tighten up ITAR rules. Right now, ITAR doesn't cover public domain technical data because pre-internet, you had to export the books containing it. Now with the internet, technical data can be published online and is essentially instantly exported. This is for stuff like design blueprints for tanks, planes, nuclear weapons, encryptions standards and methods, etc. Anything regulated as "munitions" under ITAR. The right-wing freakout is just that, because the technical manual (for example) for my Glock isn't covered under ITAR, so regulations wouldn't touch it anyways. Edit: Quick example. Under the current rules, it would be legal under ITAR (but probably otherwise illegal) for someone to publish the blueprints for a krytron switch online. Krytrons are tightly controlled via ITAR since, for the most part, their only use is in triggers for hydrogen bombs. Under the proposed new rules, if you published the plans online, you could be hit with an ITAR violation for "exporting" the plans. CommanderApaul fucked around with this message at 22:44 on Jun 28, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 22:38
|
|
|
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2015-06-03/pdf/2015-12844.pdf Here's the source material.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 23:13
|
|
|
Some of the guys who make 3D mills to produce AR15 receivers at home send the coding for the design on a thumbdrive because allegedly they've been told they can get hit with ITAR violations for putting milling instructions for making an AR15 receiver online. With 3D-printed plastic guns and whatnot, this has been "a thing" since 2013 when the State Department told the guys who made the "Liberator" plastic gun that they needed to take down all their files so State could review them for ITAR violations since they'd "exported" them by putting them on the internet: http://www.forbes.com/sites/andygre...trol-violation/
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 23:23
|
|
|
It's really funny that some people still think gun control can be a thing with technologies like that right around the corner.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2015 23:27
|
|
|
Yeah, ease of manufacture is why we see so many automatic M-16 sears flying around.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2015 00:25
|
|
|
tsa posted:It's really funny that some people still think gun control can be a thing with technologies like that right around the corner. If you could afford a metal-printing 3D home printer doozits, you could probably afford a gun just fine. If you would be getting some lovely plastic zip gun, you'd probably get a lovely plastic zip gun some other way.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2015 00:48
|
|
|
Nessus posted:If you would be getting some lovely plastic zip gun, you'd probably get a lovely plastic zip gun some other way. Especially with the added incentive of the free 3D printed tactical club that comes free with it!
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2015 01:06
|
|
|
TapTheForwardAssist posted:Some of the guys who make 3D mills to produce AR15 receivers at home send the coding for the design on a thumbdrive because allegedly they've been told they can get hit with ITAR violations for putting milling instructions for making an AR15 receiver online. A lot of this (edit: the ar15 plans on thumb drives) also has to do with how the ATF interprets the word "manufacturer" in regards to making a lower receiver. Buy an 80% blank and a jig and still have to do the milling yourself, that's OK. Buy an 80% blank and throw it in a milling machine at a build party where all you have to do is push the button, that's not OK. Someone posting the code for tool passes falls between those two extremes, and no one wants to be the ATF test case for who is considered the manufacturer if you're using someone else's code. CommanderApaul fucked around with this message at 01:26 on Jun 29, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2015 01:11
|
|
|
CommanderApaul posted:A lot of this also has to do with how the ATF interprets the word "manufacturer" in regards to making a lower receiver. Buy an 80% blank and a jig and still have to do the milling yourself, that's OK. Buy an 80% blank and throw it in a milling machine at a build party where all you have to do is push the button, that's not OK. Someone posting the code for tool passes falls between those two extremes, and no one wants to be the ATF test case for who is considered the manufacturer if you're using someone else's code. I'm not sure the ATF part and the ITAR part are really related there. ITAR is concerned with exporting information that could be used to produce a military firearm; though I'm not sure if just printing out M16A4 specs onto blue paper and mailing it to Libya would also run afoul of the law or no. The ATF is a whole separate thing, where they're trying to keep people from abusing the "legal, unserialized, homemade firearm" thing. Which I can see, that's kind of their job. Anecdotally, the most recent I heard was that the milling machines with pre-code are still kosher (and also, you do have to actively work with the machine, unplugging bit A and plugging in bit B, etc when the machine tells you to, it's not push-button-and-walk-away), but afaik they're saying it's not kosher to have build parties where random guys show up and you take turns pressing the button to make "your" own rifle. quote:Yeah, ease of manufacture is why we see so many automatic M-16 sears flying around. I'm not sure which way you're making the argument, but if you mean "with strict enough laws against homemade firearms, it will reduce incentive to make them". Since that's why we don't see tons of full-auto mods to M16s, because for a hobbyist it's taking a huge risk of a federal felony for some small added fun, and for a criminal it adds almost zero to your criminal capability while also turning a local stick-up job into a federal felony. If people really want to have full-auto converted ARs, they have them, same as with suppressors, which anyone who can do any kind of metalwork whatsoever can knock out in a half-hour. But same again, if hobbyists are making unlicensed suppressors they're keeping awfully quiet (  ) about it, and criminals might on really rare occasions (hitmen?) make suppressors, but for the vast majority of the time it's not really a needed criminal capability, and greatly amplifies your legal peril.quote:If you could afford a metal-printing 3D home printer doozits, you could probably afford a gun just fine. quote:If you would be getting some lovely plastic zip gun, you'd probably get a lovely plastic zip gun some other way. This one is pretty bitchin' though: 
TapTheForwardAssist fucked around with this message at 01:25 on Jun 29, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2015 01:16
|
|
|
So, the NRA-ILA article does actually link to the regulation, so you can read it for yourself. I doubt that it's really that big a threat to gunsmiths/reloaders/gun owners--certainly, I doubt the Administration intended to use it that way. But ITAR is a stupid law that's fundamentally difficult to interpret and enforce. There's an enormous lack of clarity as to what is and what is not covered, especially when it comes to technical information; I'm a researcher at a US government lab and all of my output has to be cleared through "export control." The rationale behind their decisions is never clear to me; I think because the law is so vague that the only thing you can really go by is the precedent of similar cases adjudicated in the past. It's also has a chilling effect--I've known several university professors who have backed off fundamental research projects because they were afraid of being prosecuted for ITAR violations.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2015 01:59
|
|
|
TapTheForwardAssist posted:This one is pretty bitchin' though: Mauser Zig-Zag II: Zig Harder.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2015 03:01
|
|
|
OP the proposed regulation clarifies regulations already in-place that prohibit the export of information about weapons systems or defense capabilities to foreign countries. It's got nothing to do with keeping and bearing arms. So you can tell your idiot redneck co-worker that he's a traitor to the US and is weakening the defense capabilities of the United States by opposing this regulatory action that is 100% within the constitutional powers of the Executive Branch.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2015 15:41
|
|
|
I think the legitimate worry is that this is that this is going to set precedent for the government controlling data (and or devices) that would allow you to use a 3d printer (or similar technology) to create things it doesn't like. This may not be a big deal now, but in 20 years? Maybe a very big deal. Considering that just a few years ago 3d printers where huge expensive things that could really only produce novelties "Hey look its some toy gears in a configuration that would be difficult to produce conventionally!!! YEA opps it broke..." to poo poo that fits on your desk, costs about as much as a top of the line computer and can print off functioning guns, in 20 years we may be looking at stuff in the future that can print out pharmaceuticals to Anti-Drone laser weapons. In the confront of your own home!!
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2015 16:02
|
|
|
It's probably a good thing that people couldn't print pharmaceuticals or laser AA guns
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2015 16:12
|
|
|
rscott posted:It's probably a good thing that people couldn't print pharmaceuticals or laser AA guns Why do you hate Freedom? I don't want to live in a world where I can't.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2015 16:14
|
|
|
Being able to print pharmaceuticals would be an amazing thing for the developing world. The people who have patents on drugs would hate it though. They would hammer on about research costs and how the printers couldn't guarantee a safe product and how it means every kid will be printing heroin, but the heart of their argument is 90% going to be about not being able to milk as much money from dying people.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2015 17:14
|
|
|
Guavanaut posted:Being able to print pharmaceuticals would be an amazing thing for the developing world.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2015 18:13
|
|
|
Isn't that how we got da joose?
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2015 19:59
|
|
|
That was the Soviets that did that.Rent-A-Cop posted:Totally unregulated production of pharmaceuticals is already a thing in the developing world.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2015 20:03
|
|
|
rscott posted:Isn't that how we got da joose?
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2015 20:05
|
|
|
Rent-A-Cop posted:Along with various tiger-penis-based concoctions. http://3dprint.com/47469/3d-printed-rhino-horns/
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2015 20:29
|
|
|
Truly a great time to be alive. Seriously though, while I can definitely understand the gov not wanting people to know all about their cool gear just by googling "hydrogen bomb blueprint .pdf", it's rather laughable that anyone thinks small arms data can be controlled, I mean, China makes M4s since the early 80s, so do Russia, Turkey and Germany; Israel makes one with two barrels, Iran's new rifle uses STANAG magazines...
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2015 21:50
|
|
|
How the gently caress do you think that you can just print pharmaceuticals? Do you think you can just arrange together the atoms with a teeny little robot arm to form molecules?
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2015 09:49
|
|
|
Guavanaut posted:3D printed tiger dicks may not be too far off. There will always be a market for "real" rhino horns. The entire thing is a superstition anyway. You're not going to come up with some logic trump card on them because they'll just spin FUD to say there's some kind of bullshit scientifically imperceptible difference between real rhino horn and 3D bioprinted rhino horns. Since it's all superstition anyway, motherfuckers are probably crushing up Tums antacid tablets and selling it as "Genuine Rhino Horn Powder." It's a wonder anyone bothers to poach rhinos at all anymore.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2015 10:04
|
|
|
Phobophilia posted:How the gently caress do you think that you can just print pharmaceuticals? Do you think you can just arrange together the atoms with a teeny little robot arm to form molecules?
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2015 10:09
|
|
|
Phobophilia posted:How the gently caress do you think that you can just print pharmaceuticals? Do you think you can just arrange together the atoms with a teeny little robot arm to form molecules?
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2015 10:10
|
|
|
Nessus posted:Intense reactions in an environment of heavy buzzwording. This is related but not identical to the Liberty Sphere projected by an operational and loaded firearm. My Liberty Sphere intersects with the ground, forming a dome. Iron Dome oh poo poo
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2015 11:46
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 5, 2024 15:43 |
|
|
CommanderApaul posted:Under the current rules, it would be legal under ITAR (but probably otherwise illegal) for someone to publish the blueprints for a krytron switch online. Krytrons are tightly controlled via ITAR since, for the most part, their only use is in triggers for hydrogen bombs. Under the proposed new rules, if you published the plans online, you could be hit with an ITAR violation for "exporting" the plans. It'll be interesting when IGBTs can do it and suddenly the state department/DOD realizes that they're being made in China.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2015 17:22
|
|
