Sigh, it’s the same thing in the sense of people getting in trouble for stuff that is other wise 100% legal.
It isn’t like coke or weed or something that you can’t get by legal means.
2 Likes
This sort of cutesy stuff really irritates me. He’s intentionally putting firearms into people’s hands so that they can either use the firearms in crimes or use the firearms in some sort of dangerous fantasy.
I know a guy who makes and sells fiberglass knives. They’re beautiful objects, and there are legitimate reasons to own a non-ferrous knife. However, most of the people who buy them are doing so in order to sneak them through airport or courthouse security.
I just feel like this is bottom-feeder behavior, when someone operates a business that obviously makes the world a worse place, and hides behind a flimsy layer of “I don’t know what my customers do with these products and I can’t be held responsible for that.”
16 Likes
Two: You forgot penis enhancer…
4 Likes
If YOU own the CNC machine, you can get it to make as many as you want as long as YOU don’t sell them.
CNC is sort of weird area for the law. I mean if it was a drill press and I came over to your garage and did all the work myself on your drill press, that would be legal. Coming over and pushing a button on your CNC machine to start isn’t. Though possibly if YOU set EVERYTHING up in the CNC yourself. That would probably swing with the ATF. One can also write the ATF for clarification first.
But again, where this guy got in to trouble is he is selling his services for you to come in and push the button.
Though lets stress the point that people making ARs and 1911s from 80% blanks aren’t like running weapons dealing rings or taking part in crime. Most do it for the maker aspect, though some are paranoid nuts. It really is a huge PITA that one really has to enjoy hobby machining to make it worth while.
It’s true. Mine now has 3 vibration settings and a little thing that tickles the clitoris.
8 Likes
Exactly. And who did that setup? In this case, not the person who was paying to get the final part. Therefore, the person paying to get the part didn’t manufacture the part for themself.
9 Likes
Naw. ATF took an axe to my still.
3 Likes
Oh, I’m confident that this guy is the worst kind of dick. But if you’re going to make it legal to own an unregistered gun designed for killing in bulk, then there is going to be dickishness.
I submit that the solution is “you have to register automatic weapons, period” rather than “let’s redefine the concept of authorship in sweeping, problematic ways that don’t really change anything to do with guns”.
3 Likes
You are correct Sir or Madam.
2 Likes
I am pretty sure you have to register automatic weapons, period. Certainly where I live, they require 3 licenses to own (according to my gun nut father).
“Assault Rifle” is a term thrown around these days for any rifle that looks sufficiently militant-grade, rather than a strict technical definition which requires things like automatic fire mode. I suspect the ban hammer would have fallen much sooner, and much harder if he was actually manufacturing fully automatic rifles.
8 Likes
Why is it that so-called Conservatives are so liberal when it comes to gun regulations?
7 Likes
WHY DO YOU HATE FREEDOM?
Now, let’s talk about those female reproductive organs, what are they doing with those?
12 Likes
I own a 3D printer, a friend of mine backed on on KS that took his money, but will never ship product.
I told him if he pays for the spool he can 3D print stuff at my house.
He doesn’t own the printer, didn’t celebrate it, or level the bed (he didn’t assemble the printer, but neither did I, my wife did). Does that mean he didn’t do the printing on the things that come out of my printer?
What if the things he prints are like my first test sample, just a raw code file with no editing?
Or if they are like many of my other prints, I load a STL file into the software, rotate it to fit the bed and press “drop to bed” and hit print?
If “the person that actually physically initiates the print” is not the person that “actually makes” the object who is? What part of the process counts and what doesn’t?
(I’m not too worried abut a gun coming out of my printer, it is just an additive ABS plastic printer, not a CNC mill…yes you can make a really really crappy gun in one, but that is an impractical way to make a weapon worse then a zip gun)
Oh, ad do we have a different standard for copyright infringement and gunsmithing? Who makes the gun: “the guy who made the files!”, who violates copyright on pokemon: “who ever presses print!”?
4 Likes
Gun rights shouldn’t be a liberal/conservative issue.
2 Likes
To go the other way, if I work for Ford and my job is to turn on the robots that make cars, do I now own the cars?
6 Likes
Why should they get a pass?
3 Likes
Point your finger and say “BANG!” Easy peasy.
4 Likes
Interesting analogy but I think it fails; a Ford employee is doing work for hire and has no interest in the final work product. If you rented the robots from Ford, and you licensed the design from Ford, or programmed it with your own design, I think you would own the car.
I think this gun CNC thing really comes down to who tells the machine what to do. If I program it, whether that’s “by hand” or with some legally obtained and licensed instructions, then I’m responsible for what it makes.
6 Likes
There are many precedents for this - Kinko’s will not let you make color copies of currency in the U.S. (even if their printers were capable of doing it), the hardware store will not make a key stamped “Do Not Duplicate,” and so on. Business owners have to know the laws, just like everybody else, and abide by them. Not just laws, but norms for their business that aren’t covered by laws. Hell, back in the day, you used to have a hard time finding a pressing plant that would press a record with a locked groove.
6 Likes
If you work for Ford what you do is “work for hire”, they own the results of the labor.
So it is the same if you press a button that causes a machine to make a car, or if you carefully mill it out of a solid block of metal with hand tools. Ford payed you for your work output, Ford owns it.
(so this neither advances the argument that the press is not the work, nor does it advance the argument that the button press was indeed the work)
1 Like
Also, I think this intersects interestingly with the legal question of designing and providing a machine that allows a customer to kill themselves by pressing a button themselves. Pretty sure at least one person has gone to jail for doing that.
4 Likes
