You know, it’s a little bit frustrating to be sitting in this chair as a United States District Court judge and seeing this is an issue that should be solved by the political branches of government. And I really hope and wish that the executive branch and Congress would face up to this and say, it’s a tough issue, but that’s why you got into public service to begin with.
U.S. District Court Judge
August 21, 2018
3D-printed guns: Federal judge in Seattle frustrated over case, could make decision by Monday
[My initial response was, “The issue was resolved long ago and is still resolved. There is no Federal law against 3D-printing a gun. Therefore there isn’t anything the court can say except, ‘Case dismissed.’”
But reading a little closer it appears the argument of the anti-freedom people is a little more twisted:
The legal dispute before the court centers on ITAR, a law that involves regulating the export of certain weapons — not the potential dangers that may result if criminals print out guns and later use them to commit offenses.
Okay, unless ITAR is directly challenged, which it is not, the court has to assume ITAR is valid law. And then the question, “Is the Federal government following the letter of that law?” is a fair question that is a valid for the court to get involved in.
Wilson’s lawyer has to be scoring some points with this argument:
Chad Flores, a lawyer representing Wilson, also raised the arguments that other files for 3D guns are already available online, and Wilson could simply disseminate his plans legally by other means.
My client could mail the files at issue to everyone in the country and violate no law.
Next week we find out which side is more convincing to Judge Lasnik.—Joe]
The notion that ITAR applies here is utterly absurd. ITAR means “International Traffic in Arms Regulations”. And (a) clearly state officials have no authority over international trade, and (b) they are attempting to stop distribution within the country, not internationally.
Do the plaintiffs even have legal standing for an ITAR case?
No. Absolutely none.
Then the case should be dismissed forthwith for lack of standing. In the past, the courts have not been slow to dismiss cases for lack of standing, but only, apparently, where Leftist values are not harmed.
If the judge weren’t a left wing sympathizer, this suit would have never made it past the first 5 minutes. The problem is that most judges neither understand the Constitution, nor support it.
Okay, block foreign IPs. Case dismissed.
Recalling the days of AOL discs being handed out with every videotape rented at Blockbuster, I can imagine a day when a thumb drive for your arsenal could be kept ready for use in your 3D printer, should need arise. Ha!
The anti-freedom, anti-rights, anti-American, anti-constitutional conspirators, including the courts, know full well that they’re operating outside the law and in opposition to the founding principles. They’re playing games, hoping we’ll fall for it by entertaining their arguments and thus forgetting all about the Supreme, overriding Law of the Land. They have every reason to believe they’ll succeed. Either today or next year it does not matter.
They know they’ll succeed because we have no solid foundation in the fundamental principles. They know they have us exactly where they need us; standing on sand rather than rock, arguing syntax and irrelevant nuances with muggers.
They punch us in the face, we criticize their swing. They break into our homes and steal our life savings, we nit-pick over the amount taken, get them to give back ten percent, and we declare victory. Lather, rinse, repeat.
Get back to me when thousands of them are in prison for conspiracy. Oh wait, yeah that’ll never happen because they’ll never be charged. We can’t define the crime because we can’t define the law, We’re too busy criticizing their robbery methods.
……it’s a tough issue, but that’s why you got into public service to begin with……
Don’t ever forget that “service” has meaning in the livestock breeding industry…..
I’ve read the complaint. Aside from some posturing about the 10th amendment, the heart of the states’ claim is that the .gov failed to comply with the Administrative Procedures Act in settling the lawsuit filed by DD. ITAR is very broad and to the extent it currently covers distribution of technical data concerning firearms (hopefully this will soon change) to “foreign persons” it would prohibit the unlicensed distribution of CAD files over the internet But the .gov essentially gave a license to distribute (I.e. deregulated). It can do that. IMHO, this lawsuit is purely a political stunt.
Pingback: Preliminary injunction on 3-D printed guns granted | The View From North Central Idaho
Pingback: Quote of the day—FedUp | The View From North Central Idaho