San Diego County jumped into California’s sprawling ghost gun fight this week, suing a 3-D printing filament manufacturer it says hocks material for homespun firearms in violation of state law.
Working with the Giffords Law Center, the county counsel sued manufacturer Polymaker, alleging the company made a “strategic business choice” to market and sell 3-D printer filament to Californians for the express purpose of building illegal weapons. The polymer filament is sold in spools that feed into 3-D printers, allowing the devices to form designs created by their owners.
maybe we should be printing these
They’re trying to make this a case over marketing and intent rather than materials.
The actual types of filament they’re concerned with are carbon fiber nylon (sold by many brands) and “PLA Pro” which is just a bit better regular PLA.
These are sold by tons of brands all across the internet.
Don’t tell them about pipes.
I believe they’ll eventually come for those too.
IMO the real end goal of these laws isn’t to ban ghost guns, it’s to ban plebs from being able to build or create anything at all. 3D printing a plastic piece to fix a broken tab in some gizmo cuts into corporate profits so a manufactured moral panic about ghost guns appears. I’m sure they’ll eventually get to a pipe rifle moral panic at some point to lock down DIY plumbing.
" Oi, you got a licence for that sewage mate? "
I am skeptical about that, though the visual is funny.
We’ve been there before.
So they’ll make black iron pipe illegal and require it to be replaced with plastic flex hose.
i hope.polymarket fights this. this law ia wrong and should be challenged in court
you mean polymaker
yeah, typo
Por que no los dos?
They are going about this all wrong. Just make possession a crime and enforce it.
But then I’d be guilty! I have some Polymaker filament right here! It’s still new in the box and everything…
Shit, maybe there’s a sketchy filament black market where I can fence it…
Sorry I misspoke. It’s fixed. Basically illegal firearms should be enforced better.
all firearms are legal.
the difference, is that some firearms require certain permits to possess under the 1986 Hughes amendment to the NFA.
for possession of a machine gun, you either need a transferrable (any registered MG pre May 1986, extremely rare, and this in good condition are literally worth more than most houses), or an FFL-31-SOT, which allows you to manufacture “dealer samples”.
Suppressors (AKA Silencers), and Short Barrel Rifles/Shotguns are now fully transferrable under a form 4473; due to the recent Texas ruling against the NFA.
the requirement for Form 4473s; however, are likely to change due to the semi recent elimination of most of the tax stamp requirements for transferring NFA items; which was only allowed (per the supreme court) because congress has the constitutional power to enact and enforce taxes, but they do not have the power to regulate firearm circulation. the NFA is on its last legs. I will celebrate the day it is finally killed. The victims of the ATF’s enforcement over the years deserve renumeration… or at the very least, an apology.
I can’t possess some firearms legally, therefore many firearms are effectively not legal. How it came to be like that is largely irrelevant.
I’ll be surprised if that changes.
Getting your FFL-31-SOT is pretty easy. It’s just some paperwork. The tricky part is the taxes and license fees; which are admittedly pretty stupidly high. IIRC they’re somewhere in the range of 4 digits - 5 digits.
using what the ATF classifies as “Destructive Devices” (40mm grenades, mortars, etc) requires tax stamps still, and some paperwork, registering who has it and where it is, etc… but they are legal.
If you’re a convicted Federal Felon who has served their sentence, you can petition the courts to have your right to possess firearms reinstated. Of those who petition, most get their right reinstated; in the pro-gun areas. You only get one shot though IIRC; so you should go to a court in a heavily red state to have the best chance. It’s a federal-level decision, so pretty much any federal court should do.
With the way the current administration is going; as much as I disagree with some of their decisions, the NFA is well and truly on its way to the grave.
Every law abiding citizen should be able to possess and operate any firearm, regardless of fire rate, caliber, or form factor.
Good luck, brother.
Freedom doesn’t include asking for permission and paying for the privilege to do so.
Shall not be infringed!
How? Already If you want a above board gun you will just buy actual gun. If you are up to some shady shit or just an enthusiast, you go for 3d printed guns. You can’t effectively enforce this especially in the US unless you ban printers, preferably federally and ban 3d printing as a practice. You can’t effectively scrub the models from the internet, you can’t stop people from printing and you can’t really enforce distribution because everybody with a printer, will and a little knowhow can make their own.
The real news here is the filament company are complete doofuses if they are marketing their high strength filament especially for gun making. That’s just like if OpenAI was marketing their new cutting edge image gen AI model as something meant for making deepfake P*rn of celebrities. One would think that they would cover their asses with more neutral wording and description regarding their product. That is a PR and legal problem bound to happen.
The same way that they enforce other crimes.
Murdering someone is illegal. Murdering someone while being involved in a gang is extra illegal and affects sentencing for example.
Caught with possession of a “ghost” gun? Insta-jail. Or maybe increase the charge to terrorism.
The legal system has tons of options at their disposal. Going after filament manufacturers is like going after black powder suppliers.
The legal system has tons of options at their disposal. Going after filament manufacturers is like going after black powder suppliers.
Nor arguing that this isn’t removed.
The same way that they enforce other crimes.
Yeah and the point was that there is no practical way to do that. It’s much harder to control these things than just regular stolen, misplaced or otherwise illegally acquired guns. You cant use deterrence when you are speaking about a tool that you are just going to use to commit crimes that are are going the be more severe that just an illegal firearms possession. Ofc everybody who are above board and law abiding will stop even thinking about 3d printer firearms. However if somebody is considering murder you think they care if they potentially get +5 years added to their sentence if they do it with self printed weapon instead of regular firearm?
If it’s so unenforceable, why isn’t it an issue in other countries? Even ones that have nearly the same number of guns as America? 🤔
You still have to buy bullets.
Yes, that’s how the system works today. Your sentencing is affected by specifics of your crime.
It’s not really a deterrent. Murderers are gonna murder. I lived above one and they murdered with a pillow and telephone cable. I also sat on a trial that put a murderer away. Their circumstances affected their sentencing drastically.
Sue the steel mills for guns too while you’re at it.
Hol up, those guns are made by corporations. What are you thinking?
Anyone with machining knowledge can turn a block of metal into a working gun part
So education is destroyed and all machines sold to China.
As an old toolmaker, that’s not as true as you think. It requires a lot of other knowledge besides running a lathe or mill. I speak from experience, having had to learn how to make repair parts for antique and collectable firearms at times.
If your goal is to make a working gun, it’s pretty achievable, repairing or restoring existing one is obviously quite a bit harder.
Seems the safe option for others is to cease all shipments and sales of printers and filament to California.
What about bullets?
Gonna have to stop all sales of lead and brass in any form (don’t want to have access for people to melt things down). Gunpowder of course, including all the elements needed to make gunpowder. You know, just to cover all the bases. /s
Hmm… You’re right. That’s a big job and I’m only paid to do it.
Okay, let’s blame the 3D printer people.
more /ssssssss
I print my own bullets /s
Oh my God! America could end up having a real problem with gun violence…
Was it ever about the children? It’s not about the gun violence either
Maybe they should sue steel manufacturers too since that’s the main material used for most fire arms.
Weird how shit like this always is an issue in the USA and basically nowhere else. Must be the lack of freedom or sth., we’re just too suppressed in commie Europe to have these issues, can’t even buy 9mm rounds in the supermarket. Shame.
under the second amendment, and under the ATF’s ruling, citizens are allowed to manufacture their own firearms. this is getting struck down… if it were in Texas and not the gun-stealing California. I hope to the gods it gets struck down, because this would be a travesty for all my brothers, sisters and non binary pals in California… my heart goes out to y’all.
2A is already abused to hell, but I see no way to make an argument to say it protects manufacturing a firearm. It, at best, protects possession. There are other reasons this is illegal, but please read the second amendment before you say dumb shit about it.
This is a direct quote from the ATF Director, Rob Cekada:
https://youtu.be/1h_wRotsHTw?t=390
The interview starts at 390 seconds.
the voice-to-text transcription wasn’t entirely accurate, but it should be good enough to get the point across.
Yeah, I think uh again, as long as folks are in compliance with their state laws, they’re in good shape. Uh the only thing that people need to remember uh even even prior to uh this uh guidance coming out uh as an American citizen if you weren’t prohibited and there was no state laws uh that prevented you from doing so [music] you were allowed to build your own firearm
That transcript says that, if it isn’t illegal to build a firearm, then it’s legal to build a firearm. No shit. Obviously. It says nothing about 2A protections.
Also, he is not a lawyer. Do you think everything the director of ICE says is supported by the law?
Again, read the second amendment. Please. It’s very short.
…Have you ever thought critically about what “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” actually means…?
It’s not a plaintext right to manufacture firearms, yes. It is, however, an --implied-- right. In order to keep and bear arms, citizens must also obviously have the right to -make- their own arms.
In fact, there have already been court cases on this very issue in other states.
Defense Distributed v. Blanche, comes to mind, though there may have been others.Dude, yes, I have. Have you?
How did most nations at the time defend themselves? It wasn’t standing armies. Only the richest nations could afford those, and the US was not one of them. It was expected that militias would be risen when a threat appeared.
Ok, now how did those militias operate? Did they store weapons in their homes? Did they manufacture them? No, to both of these. Weapons were kept in armories, and the militias drilled with them. They were well regulated, not just random people with guns calling themselves a militia. They were actual organizations trained and prepared for an attack, and their weapons and ammunition were organized in armories, where you had to go to muster.
Ok, now how does any of this imply the right to manufacture? You have a right to obtain at best, though ideally, in those early days, your militia organization would be obtaining them, not you as an individual.
Please, critically read it and think about it for yourself. What does the text actually say, and what were the customs of the time?
I’m all for people having the rights to weapons. Hell, I’d even agree the right to manufacture is held, to a limited extent, by the people. However, the 2nd Amendment does not provide this. The 9th does. I’m tired of the 2nd being used by people to try to cover everything. It’s made weaker by this. The 9th does cover everything though.
States are allowed to add some restrictions to gun laws. So the new ATF rules likely won’t be decisive in this case.
If this goes up to the federal court level, it’s almost certainly getting struck down. It’s a pretty clear infringement upon the 2nd amendment.
It’s a miracle that the CA gun laws haven’t been struck down at the federal level yet… By the gods, I hope they do. The situation in CA is utterly miserable for y’all.
Here’s another article with a bit more information: https://www.3dprintingjournal.com/p/san-diego-county-sues-polymaker-over
So it seems the legal question is “was polymaker advertising their filament specifically for printing working firearms?”
Them having a couple military style colors for printing toy guns seems pretty far from a specific gun use filament. I was expecting a specific blend of herbs and spices specifically for withstanding the rigors of shooting real ammo or something, not a fucking color that is “military”.
Also, good luck trying to probe that they used specific advertising channels to market directly to the ghost gun groups. Flimsy reasoning at best.
Jfc these people are out of their minds
Good thing this is the only problem we have in the world
huh. who knew the answer to gun violence in the US was to regulate 3D printers!
