[Tam says, "No, that's not what I said." She sees a fight coming, though, and you should read her blog for her take on it.]
Certainly DD and many bloggers see this as a First Amendment thing, same as EFF and three lines of encryption software.
Me, not so much. ITAR comes spilling into my world at lot more over electronics issues than guns, things like microwave components and equipment. RADAR. You go to buy a traveling-wave tube or some damn thing and you have to swear six was from Sunday you're not a furriner, not acting on a furriner's behalf and not gonna sell the thing you buy to furriners, not nohow ever -- and then you still have to trot out your bona fides and references before they'll talk you you about anything but the weather. Then, once you get the thing, if you let a furriner look at the documentation? It's a crime!
Sometimes this gets challenged and in general, the courts look at it, see "Arms" and next thing you know, it's not strict scrutiny as a First Amendment case, nooope, it's that icky Second Amendment, and you're arguing under "rational basis" evaluation. Not always; but when there's a real gun-type gun involved? Ouch.
It's not unwinnable but it's not a slam-dunk, either. They're going to need a good lawyer -- or several -- and deep pockets. Remember that when they start passing the hat. Can't win at all if you're not in the fight.
Just remember, it's a fight with the ITAR baby and there's no briar patch handy.
Yep, same issues I deal with... and it IS a true PITA!
ReplyDeleteThere was a long issue over whether cryptographic software could be ITAR'ed as "arms".
ReplyDeleteThat one got caught under "strict scrutiny", I think.
I don't know how software instructions for running a CNC to produce gun parts would go; this 3D-printed-gun design is not much different in essence from said data.
But since it's new-and-scary, there will be lots of effort to distinguish them. Or to forget the first example.
Out of curiosity, has there been any ITAR focus on the instruction set for turning a set of spare parts into an AK? It's not like that information isn't already available from outside-the-US-sources, but ITAR may still be in place.
UP UNTIL THE 1970 S THE MAGNETRON TUBE FOR SURFACE SEARCH RADAR WAS ON THE "RESTRICTED" LIST AND HAD TO BE WORKED ON BY "SPARKS" WHO NEEDED A RADAR ENDORSEMENT ON THEIR LICENSE THE "Z CARD" (MERCHANT MARINERS DOCUMENT) HAD TO BE ENDORSED BY THE
ReplyDeleteCOAST GUARD AS "VALIDATED FOR EMERGENCY SERVICE" STAMPED ON THE DOCUMENT IN MAGENTA INK WHICH THE COASTIES SAID WAS EQUAL TO A SECRET CLEARANCE SPARKS ALSO HAD A 1942 DOCUMENT FROM THE FCC RATED HE WAS CLEARED FOR SECRET WHICH THEY NEVER REVOKED GO FIGURE?
CURIOUS IS THE ITAR BABY PROGRAM
ReplyDeleteADMINISTERED BY WASHINGTON FELLOWCRAT
BY THE NAME OF REMUS BY THE WAY ?
Of course, one thing that this does prove is that this Regime has the Response Time of a Snail carrying a Fire Extinguisher.
ReplyDeleteBut what do expect from an Administration who has to take a Poll on what the Public Response would be to announcing what the President had for Breakfast?
100,000+ Downloads World-Wide?
And NOW they try to Stop the Signal?
Another example of "Your Federal Tax Dollars at Work."
The 3D/CAD software is available worldwide. So are the printers. So one particular wireframe model is banned from export from the US, the government expects they can stop people from printing guns?
ReplyDeleteThey REALLY need to share the dope they're smoking. Must be some really good shit.
M
They REALLY need to share the dope they're smoking. Must be some really good shit.
ReplyDeleteYou know, I think we've been reading it wrong all the time. It's really "War, on drugs!"