Judge Tosses Trump Administration Agreement On 3D Printed Guns
BY Herschel Smith
5 years ago
Ruling that the Trump administration violated U.S. law, a federal judge on Tuesday tossed out an agreement that last year allowed, for a brief time, an Austin company to publish firearm schematics, including how-to files for 3D-printed guns, online.
U.S. District Judge Robert Lasnik in Seattle had previously blocked publication of the gun plans after Washington Attorney General Bob Ferguson, joined by 19 other states, filed a lawsuit challenging a July 2018 administration agreement that allowed Defense Distributed of Austin to publish gun blueprints online.
In voiding that agreement Tuesday, Lasnik said the policy change was not reported to Congress as required by federal law.
The administration also failed to offer any justification for changing a State Department policy that banned the publication of schematics for 3D-printed guns as “a threat to world peace and the security and foreign policy of the United States,” the judge said.
“Some of its concerns related specifically to the undetectable nature of a gun made from plastic: because they could slip through conventional security equipment, the State Department feared that they could be used in assassination attempts, hijackings, piracy, and terrorist activities,” Lasnik wrote. “Because the agency action was arbitrary and capricious (in changing the policy without justification), it is unlawful and must be set aside.”
Ferguson said the ruling will improve safety.
“It is baffling that the Trump administration continued to work so hard to allow domestic abusers, felons and terrorists access to untraceable, undetectable 3D-printed guns,” Ferguson said. “Even the president himself said in a tweet that this decision didn’t make any sense — one of the rare instances when I agreed with him. I’m thankful the court agrees, too.”
Chad Flores, a lawyer for Defense Distributed, said the ruling will be appealed.
“The First Amendment protects the freedom of speech from all abridgment — including indirect censorship efforts like this one,” Flores said.
Taking a deep dive into politics, are you judge? And since we’re so wrapped around the axle on Trump administration illegality, why don’t you toss the bump stock ruling too, since that was law-making bypassing Congress?
Oh, do your political concerns get in the way of that too?
On November 12, 2019 at 11:02 pm, streaming binary vision said:
Downloaded a tube video that shows an AK being made from an old shovel in a garage machine shop.
A Sten or an old Intratec 9 jam-o-matic (with the wrong rounds) would probably be easy to make as well.
This was DL’ed before the great purge that is ongoing and you can’t use a don’t be evil Google browser plus the downloader always gets broken because tube is not cool with keeping wrongthink thoughtcrime that might fry the mind of a simple Kulak.
On November 12, 2019 at 11:03 pm, Michael said:
The irony is that if they really wanted to successfully press a case for impeachment on Mr. Trump, his bump stock ban is a clear constitutional violation and, in a rational world, should be a slam-dunk. Of course, that would be an admission by the perma-crats that they think that 2A really means what it says.
On November 13, 2019 at 9:19 am, Fred said:
@Michael,
His promotion of Extreme Risk Protection orders, known as Red Flag laws, is a violation of civil rights under 18 U.S. Code Chapter 13 – § 241 Conspiracy against rights and – § 242 Deprivation of rights under color of law. These Red Flag laws overturn more than four centuries of American jurisprudence by effectively nullifying the 6th Amendment, the 5th Amendment, the 4th Amendment, and the 2nd Amendment and where federal agents would conduct such acts as a Red Flag raid they would violate the 10th Amendment as well. These laws replace due process with ‘A’ process. Trump, should be immediately arrested and impeached for the crime of conspiracy to overthrow the government of the United States of America.
You say that he only talked about it and it’s the States that are doing Red Flag laws? WRONG!
And we have the Veterans 2A protection act that Mr. Trump signed into law. What it purports to protect is Veterans from having their rights taken by the VA. Sounds good so far, but the law goes on to say that a judge is the one who strips them of their rights and orders their guns seized. It protects veteran’s 2A rights through the federal government granting itself the right to disarm veterans; no jury, no crime, no evidence, no lawyer. It’s Red Flag laws for veterans.