Skip to main content

View Diary: Printable Guns - now approved by the ATF (27 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  It is not 100% legal (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    it is 100% legal to assemble a gun from parts, but not to make the "firearm" part, in this case the Lower Receiver.  that is the part that is stamped with a reported serial number. (the ATF tracks the numbers of all firearms made in the US...for now).  

    Wilson had this crazy idea that it is legal to make the controlled part with out a permit as long as he promised to not sell it or use it.  Wiser legal minds said no and took away his 3-d printer he had leased so they would not be held responsible.  

    Stratasys’s legal counsel wrote: “It is the policy of Stratasys not to knowingly allow its printers to be used for illegal purposes. Therefore, please be advised that your lease of the Stratasys uPrint SE is cancelled at this time and Stratasys is making arrangements to pick up the printer,”

    yet the ATF, who should be as wise as a for profit company, went ahead and granted Wilson permission to build away and develop new ways to get around the existing gun laws.

    Stupid question hour starts now and ends in five minutes.

    by DrillSgtK on Mon Mar 18, 2013 at 12:03:20 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  Re: (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      gerrilea, Neo Control, KVoimakas

      It is entirely legal to make your own lower receiver.  You just can't sell it without an FFL (and I'm still unclear as to whether the lower is actually the regulated part).

      Stratasys was out of its mind when it revoked its lease, but that doesn't matter anymore.  DD purchased one outright, and now Wilson can make and sell his product.

      When God gives you lemons, you find a new god.

      by Patrick Costighan on Mon Mar 18, 2013 at 12:53:34 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  its not a crazy idea (4+ / 0-)
      Wilson had this crazy idea that it is legal to make the controlled part with out a permit as long as he promised to not sell it or use it.
      That is true.  If he is not selling it, he can make anything he wants.  And while the printing company is free to make any decision regarding its equipment and the leases it signs, the whole reason they pulled it (aside from just not wanting to be associated with this) is because he didn't have a license. he applied to get one.

      Even with this, he has stated that hes not going to sell anything unless and until he gets Class 2 Special Occupational Taxpayer status.  

      For personal use, what would a law prohibiting this even look like?  The government will tell you what you can or cant PRINT in your house?  Are the digital plans themselves illegal?  How would this be remotely enforceable?  I can see them making all kind of felony offenses for the sales and distribution of these things but no way in hell can/should the government try to block individuals from making things at home for their own use.  

      Красота спасет мир --F. Dostoevsky

      by Wisper on Mon Mar 18, 2013 at 01:08:32 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Let this go dude. (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      theatre goon, KVoimakas

      You're wrong. Manufacturing a firearm for your own use is perfectly legal.

      The lower receiver cannot be sold without a license, and must be semi-auto, but outside of those limitations you can do as you please.

      As it should be.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (151)
  • Community (59)
  • Baltimore (38)
  • Civil Rights (37)
  • Bernie Sanders (33)
  • Elections (29)
  • Culture (29)
  • Economy (28)
  • Law (25)
  • Texas (23)
  • 2016 (21)
  • Rescued (21)
  • Labor (19)
  • Environment (19)
  • Hillary Clinton (18)
  • Education (18)
  • Racism (17)
  • Politics (17)
  • Freddie Gray (17)
  • Barack Obama (16)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site