Man 3D prints dart gun to protest weapon blueprint law

Engadget ^ | 7/13/2015 | Steve Dent

[Voice of Reason1]

Peter Alaric built a 3D-printed dart gun to make a point about proposed State Department laws banning weapon blueprints on the internet. Calling President Obama "our Fuehrer," he said "this gesture of protest further proves the obvious futility of attempting to regulate speech and ban simple mechanical objects." His creation fires 40mm blowgun darts via a piston and rubber bands, and can even hold accessories like laser sights.

He claims that thanks to an air-gun exemption, his weapon is legal, though it's hardly as dangerous as a real 3D-printed gun (especially to the user). Nevertheless, it could still be lethal, so it seems that Alaric's point is that the rules will arbitrarily ban certain weapon designs and not others. He believes that gun designs are a form of speech protected by the constitution, a similar argument made by infamous 3D pistol creator Cody Wilson. However, opponents of weapon blueprints believe they're "functional things," not speech, and therefore subject to regulation.

As it happens, US judges and lawmakers could soon decide who's right. The State Department recently said that it plans to require prior approval for internet publication of any "technical data" that could help someone build a weapon, 3D-printed or otherwise. It said that such documents constitute, in effect, the illegal export of weapons, and not free speech. Because of that stance, Wilson's company Defense Distributed recently filed a lawsuit against the State Department. The judge's decision in that case could give us the constitutional status of 3D-printed weapon designs, once and for all.

[Voice of Reason1]

Video Link:

3D printed poison dart pistol, .40 caliber https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=khM2VqmEhL8

Published on Jul 9, 2015

inspired by President Obama's proposed ban on sharing firearm drawings on the internet, this 3D printed poison dart pistol is invisible to metal detectors and can be manufactured by anyone in the comfort of home. http://www.PeterAlaric.com

[apillar]

The State Department law is pointless and completely unenforceable anyway. All it takes is for one person to post the blueprints on the Internet and they will forever after always be available no matter how many websites the Feds try to threaten or shutdown for violating the regulations, just ask the music and motion picture industry how it’s worked out for them, shut down one site and 10 more pop up the next day.

[Scrambler Bob]

any “technical data” that could help someone build a weapon —

Pretty inclusive.

knife, frying pan, rock in a sock.

Not to mention bio weapons. Unprotected AIDS sex.

[Voice of Reason1]

Yes, considering that definition of the word weapon: a thing designed or used for inflicting bodily harm or physical damage Old English wǣp(e)n, of Germanic origin; related to Dutch wapen and German Waffe Remember that weapon and the related word weaponry are spelled with an a after the e. definition of the word weapon a thing designed or used for inflicting bodily harm or physical damage Old English wǣp(e)n, of Germanic origin; related to Dutch wapen and German Waffe Remember that weapon and the related word weaponry are spelled with an a after the e. http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/us/definition/american_english/weapon? Could be pretty much anything.

[expat2]

It might be useful to be able to fire the darts that are used by biologists to knock out wild animals for inspection/treatment. Silent and deadly.

[Boogieman]

“However, opponents of weapon blueprints believe they’re “functional things,” not speech, and therefore subject to regulation.”

Sorry, if it can be represented by ones and zeroes in digital form, it’s speech. You could try to ban it, but you’ll never succeed, so what is the point?

[Boogieman]

There are plenty of novels which describe the process of the protagonist constructing some kind of improvised weapon, sometimes in great detail. Those would be just as much “technical data” as a blueprint, wouldn’t they?

I can even think of an infamous Star Trek episode that taught most laymen a basic recipe for black powder.

[Voice of Reason1]

Yes, but consider what is taking place currently over the Confederate battle flag and other discussions.

They most certainly are going after free-speech, they are just attacking the low hanging fruit first, the rest will come later.

[Scrambler Bob]

My Dad’a Boy Scout Manual, circa 1925 had details on how to make bow and arrows.

EEK

[MrB]

That last one could be termed
“a rock WITHOUT a sock”

[marktwain]

The State Department proposed regulations are a direct attack on free speech.

They can be used to shut down just about any pro-gun site on the internet. I do not think it is coincidence that one of the biggest thorns in President Obama’s plans for more control and bigger government are pro-gun sites on the Internet.

[Voice of Reason1]

Of that I have no doubt.

Consider that he was on top of the world back in Jan 2013 - Sandy hook had just taken place, and he was in perfect position to finally take out one of the people’s biggest civil rights - the right to self defense.. and he wasn’t able to do it.