Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

DIY Arms: The Weapons Revolution Is Finally Here!

page: 2
6
<< 1   >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 13 2012 @ 11:04 PM
link   
reply to post by hawkiye
 


I believe you're mistaken - anything that is covered by the NFA (SBS rifles, short shotguns, suppressors, full-auto, grenade launchers, etc.) are still restricted by the NFA.

Ares makes "80%" kits for DIY and has some postings on the topic. Ares also makes great gear in general BTW.

www.aresarmor.com...

So you can make a "black rifle", handgun, etc. but anything that would hit the NFA normally still is restricted.

With that said, and I certainly don't condone trying it, I know some people sell oil can "adaptors" for help "cleaning" handguns and people try that tact but I'm fairly certain that would fail in just about any court should it come down to it.

-Mags




posted on Oct, 13 2012 @ 11:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by niceguybob
reply to post by benrl
 


Intellectual property has nothing to do with this topic. You can create and design anything you want anywhere anytime.
If you have an idea and want to take it to market, you can buy a $10,000 patent attorney to do a patent search, or pay someone to go into the Vault to do your own check.
www.uspto.gov...

It's totally irrelevant.
The question here is can you build a piece of equipment that will discharge a "spark" large enough to produce a trajectory item to move, or make an explosion that can cause damage, just because you can build the parts without using a gunsmith? 3d imaging has nothing to do with it. Lathes work just fine. 3d designing is an imagery formatted to get a real 3d prototype part. It will NOT give you a form fit and function like a real gun.

I believe there are already laws in place where there are regulations for anything to do with explosives of any type. Fireworks come to mind.

Let me know when you have the 3d drawings for a Smith and Wesson that can shoot live ammo. Could be interesting. Don't bank on it. Smith and Wesson WILL be all over you for intellectual property infingement not to mention Alcohol,Tobacco and Firearms Department.

Just sayin.


You're just a little behind the curve there friend. An AR15 lower has already been printed and fired successfully over 200 times! www.ar15.com...

This is a viable technology and some manufacturers already use 3d printers to prototype their weapons. Also it is perfectly legal to manufacture weapns in your home.



posted on Oct, 13 2012 @ 11:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by Insurrection
reply to post by hawkiye
 


I believe you're mistaken - anything that is covered by the NFA (SBS rifles, short shotguns, suppressors, full-auto, grenade launchers, etc.) are still restricted by the NFA.

Ares makes "80%" kits for DIY and has some postings on the topic. Ares also makes great gear in general BTW.

www.aresarmor.com...

So you can make a "black rifle", handgun, etc. but anything that would hit the NFA normally still is restricted.

With that said, and I certainly don't condone trying it, I know some people sell oil can "adaptors" for help "cleaning" handguns and people try that tact but I'm fairly certain that would fail in just about any court should it come down to it.

-Mags



UNITED STATES v. STEWART
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Robert Wilson STEWART, Jr., Defendant-Appellant.

No. 02-10318.

"We reverse Stewart's conviction for machinegun possession under section 922(o) as an unlawful extension of Congress's commerce power and affirm his conviction for possession of firearms by a felon."
caselaw.findlaw.com...
edit on 13-10-2012 by hawkiye because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 13 2012 @ 11:51 PM
link   
reply to post by hawkiye
 


US vs. Stewart is the case that re-affirmed the NFA still applies.

The Ninth Circuit reconsidered the case as directed and on June 30, 2006, reversed its decision and found in favor of the United States. In its opinion, the court wrote:

"We therefore hold that Congress had a rational basis for concluding that in the aggregate, possession of homemade machineguns could substantially affect interstate commerce in machineguns."


The same logic for marijuana is used so many believe if that's overrule that the NRA-ILA will open this back up too. The ATF used to have a FAQ with the whole what does Stewart mean to you but I can't find that anymore.

So I still respectfully disagree, -Mags



posted on Oct, 14 2012 @ 12:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by Insurrection
reply to post by hawkiye
 


US vs. Stewart is the case that re-affirmed the NFA still applies.

The Ninth Circuit reconsidered the case as directed and on June 30, 2006, reversed its decision and found in favor of the United States. In its opinion, the court wrote:

"We therefore hold that Congress had a rational basis for concluding that in the aggregate, possession of homemade machineguns could substantially affect interstate commerce in machineguns."


The same logic for marijuana is used so many believe if that's overrule that the NRA-ILA will open this back up too. The ATF used to have a FAQ with the whole what does Stewart mean to you but I can't find that anymore.

So I still respectfully disagree, -Mags


I was not aware of this reversal...Sigh! So I read the ruling and these idiots are really reaching.


And the Court made clear that courts are not to scrutinize Congress's conclusions closely.   “We need not determine whether [Raich's] activities, taken in the aggregate, substantially affect interstate commerce in fact, but only whether a ‘rational basis' exists for so concluding.” 7  Id....

  Raich stands for the proposition that Congress can ban possession of an object where it has a rational basis for concluding that object might bleed into the interstate market and affect supply and demand, especially in an area where Congress regulates comprehensively...

We therefore hold that Congress had a rational basis for concluding that in the aggregate, possession of homemade machineguns could substantially affect interstate commerce in machineguns.   Homemade guns, even those with a unique design, can enter the interstate market and affect supply and demand.   Having reached that conclusion, we need not inquire into the specifics of Stewart's possession:  “[W]hen ‘a general regulatory statute bears a substantial relation to commerce, the de minimis character of individual instances arising under that statute is of no consequence.”’ Raich, 125 S.Ct. at 2206 (quoting Lopez, 514 U.S. at 558, 115 S.Ct. 1624).  Section 922(o) can constitutionally be applied to Stewart's possession of homemade machineguns.
caselaw.findlaw.com...

Here they are granting federal jurisdiction for merely supposing that these could "bleed" into commerce... They based this on an SC opinion in another case. But I am not surprised, they opened the door in their previous ruling but probably got slapped by their masters and had to shut the door quick. They are all corrupt to the core, enemies of freedom, and need to be removed!

edit on 14-10-2012 by hawkiye because: (no reason given)





new topics

top topics
 
6
<< 1   >>

log in

join