jump to last post 1-3 of 3 discussions (23 posts)

Department of State seizes 3D model file

  1. profile image0
    JaxsonRaineposted 4 years ago

    The DoS has "claimed control" of the 3D cad files related to the 3D printed pistol that came out last week.

    A blatant infringement on our basic rights. I'm sure people will applaud big brother though...

    1. John Holden profile image61
      John Holdenposted 4 years agoin reply to this

      Where in your basic rights is the right to a totally undetectable gun?

      1. profile image0
        JaxsonRaineposted 4 years agoin reply to this

        This falls under freedom of speech and private property, just as any other creative work. 3D models are no different from blueprints are from a book of instructions are from photographs.

        You can legally make a gun at home, there are no laws against it. You can make a gun out of some metal pipe if you want.

        1. John Holden profile image61
          John Holdenposted 4 years agoin reply to this

          But I still don't see why blocking a gun that needs a £5000 bit of machinery to make it is infringing on your right to own a gun.

          It seems to be far more about export controls than owning a gun.

          1. profile image0
            JaxsonRaineposted 4 years agoin reply to this

            It's not infringing on your right to own a gun. It's infringing on the right of the owner of a creative work to own that creative work. A 3D model is not an object. It is not a weapon. It cannot be exported. It is creative information owned by an individual.

            The Department of State stole that information and is stifling it.

            But heaven forbid you read what I post, instead of going off-topic. I didn't say it was a 2nd amendment issue, now did I? But you make it like I said that. Reading is hard, I guess.

            1. John Holden profile image61
              John Holdenposted 4 years agoin reply to this

              Then what did you mean by "A blatant infringement on our basic rights."?

              1. profile image0
                JaxsonRaineposted 4 years agoin reply to this

                Can you read? I already explained that.

                1. John Holden profile image61
                  John Holdenposted 4 years agoin reply to this

                  Touchy!

                  1. profile image0
                    JaxsonRaineposted 4 years agoin reply to this

                    Learn to read, and don't make up Aunt Sally arguments, and I won't be so touchy.

                    Sorry if it offends you, but I expect someone who wants to debate politics to be, at a minimum, capable of basic reading and reasoning.

  2. profile image0
    JaxsonRaineposted 4 years ago
  3. profile image0
    JaxsonRaineposted 4 years ago

    Of course, what do I expect from someone, who on multiple occasions, has responded to posts where I quoted him saying something, and outright lie claiming he never said that, even though the quote and link were right there in black and white?

    1. John Holden profile image61
      John Holdenposted 4 years agoin reply to this

      Touchy touchy! Got out of the wrong side of bed today?

      1. profile image0
        JaxsonRaineposted 4 years agoin reply to this

        Nope, just wondering what I honestly expect, since you have shown a willingness to ignore blatant fact on multiple occasions.

        1. John Holden profile image61
          John Holdenposted 4 years agoin reply to this

          Sorry, but as I said I could only go on what you had written in your OP, I'm not a mind reader.

          Oh, and a few less of the insults would do you good, you rather defeat yourself with all that.

          1. profile image0
            JaxsonRaineposted 4 years agoin reply to this

            You can't go on what I posted in my reply to you? Why is that?

            I'm not insulting you. I'm stating facts. If that insults you, then that's your problem, not mine.

            1. John Holden profile image61
              John Holdenposted 4 years agoin reply to this

              The OP is not your reply.

              Opinions are not facts.

              1. profile image0
                JaxsonRaineposted 4 years agoin reply to this

                You had my reply available to you when you claimed that you didn't know what the point was.

                When I quoted the reply, you acted like that cleared things up for you.

                So why didn't it clear things up the first time you read it?


                And no opinion. Fact. Several times I quoted what you had said, and even linked to the post, and you claimed you didn't say it. That's not opinion, that's pure fact.

                1. John Holden profile image61
                  John Holdenposted 4 years agoin reply to this

                  Maybe you don't read too well either.

                  Good night.

                  1. profile image0
                    JaxsonRaineposted 4 years agoin reply to this

                    Lol, yeah I don't read too well. That's why I'm the one who claimed that something wasn't clear, until a certain phrase cleared it up, after that certain phrase was already posted!

 
working