Word Up! You must login or signup first!

Donald J. Trump e @realDonaldTrump I am looking into 3-D Plastic Guns being sold to the public. Already spoke to NRA, doesn't seem to make much sense!

-1

Donald Trump tweet


Uploaded by Don Aug 02, 2018 at 12:40PM EDT

Share Pin Download More

Origin Entry: Liberator / 3D-Printed Gun

File type: jpg

Resolution: (650px x 204px)

File size: 29.5 KB


Strelok 07/31/18 (Tue) 22:24:36 ID: eaf887 No.598334 598362 598388 File (hide): 9e1d580d10ca149...jpg (244.26 KB, 1500x1150, 30:23, ge1d580d 10ca149c586dbdde3d...pg) (h) (u) >Seems more like a 1st amendment issue IMO that's where the really scary implications are, much more than the 2A. Banning these would mean you have a legal environment where there is such thing as forbdden knowledge Even in the case of secrets kept confidential for reasons of national security, once they are out they are out. You don't get charged for copyi established as physical truth, it may be downplayed and buried, but it is no longer forcibly concealed This is not even the suppression of facts per se, as would be the case for banning e.g. a video proving a chemical weapons attack to have been perpetrated by a US ally rather than the enemy America had bombed using the attack as justification. Banning these would be a more subtle suppression of physical reality. Not "what happened", but "what is". The former is rule by deception; the latter is rule by state-mandated ignorance. It is the difference between "that rebellion never happened" and "rebellion does not exist". ing the text of a WikiL eaks article and emailing it to someone even if the person responsible for it being there is in jail. Once it is And what could possibly be the end of it? If you decide that banning a blueprint is permissible, then what constitutes a blueprint? Anyone could construct a basic slamfire shotgun based solely on a photograph of its components. I don't even consider that a legal trick or a stretch; it's such a simple device that a depiction of it really is equivalent to instructions on making it. Even a slightly more complex device, such as pic related. You might not be able to recreate exactly the same device in terms of dimensions, but it without question contains everything you need to attempt a version of your own. So it directly follows that if blueprints can be banned, so MUST certain depictions be bannable. The mere act of showing something to exist has become subject to legal restrictions. And really, even the simple knowledge of the mechanism is, in some cases, enough. If you understand how a blowback action works, or even just the physical principles behind it without necessarily knowing about guns, you can probably put one together given time and motivation. So what is the line between discussion and instruction? This applies to chemistry too, with explosives and propellants, and also drugs This is why forbidden knowledge is such a horrifying thing to have permitted in your legal structure. These are not interpretations, or messages, or memories, which are solitary pieces of information which if sufficiently suppressed can be lost forever. If you ban blueprints with the goal of preventing people rom knowing how to build what hey describe then you must confront he act that the exact same principles that led to he design in the first place can be discovered interpreted, and implemented in exactly he same way by anyone, ever. This 1s 100% unavoidable, by virtue of the fact that it necessarily has already been done for the blueprints to exist. And banning the blueprint cannot mean anything but trying to hide those physical principles, when not doing so inherently removes all justification for the ban in the first place
View All 10 Images

Load 1 Comment

More:


+ Add a Comment

Comments (1)


Display Comments

Add a Comment


+ Add an Image

Image Details

135 views (6 from today)

Uploaded Aug 02, 2018 at 12:40PM EDT

Origin Entry

Liberator / 3D-Printed Gun

Source

Twitter

Tags

donald trump, tweet, twitter, nra

Claim Authorship Edit History
Textile Embed