Yeah the plastic 3d printer gun plans are just a distraction mostly for people with irrational fears and little knowledge of guns. The gun parts schematics for receivers and the precedents are more interesting. That a AR is defined by the lower unit and everything else is considered a gun accessory and thus production and distribution is not regulated in the US; this leaves the possibility of lowering the bar for a reliable high rate of fire ghost gun may soon be down to a design where you can pickup a few unregulated parts, print a receiver (that probably doesn't look at all like a weapon) at the local libraries 3d printer and snap together a legal near military grade weapon in a afternoon (and perhaps even allow a auto fire modification, that is mostly illegal today, with no tools.)

As a lower receiver that holds together a metal barrel and firing pin, etc; theoretically would have no requirement to be stronger than what a 3d printer is capable of printing in plastic.

I am in a strong military family, I know if a drive by happens to my family, I will choose them as they are worth the risk of desertion.

If military force is illegally used inside the states to suppress civilian dissent, I predict every soldier with a family will be at home protecting them and their possessions from mobs within days.

Their is a reason military overthrows always happen in countries with a strong class structure. Putin can kill because he doesn't have family or friends outside of his class so he only has to protect/worry about those in that class. It is a well drawn line that everyone knows, and the oppressed classes don't have weapons or free association with other classes. US you cannot divide that as long as we prevent that class structure from taking hold, which cannot be easily drawn, because when you get a large class and suppress them, they will break that with force, and guns are the force multiplier that helps prevent that from forming. A group of 300 armed is as strong as a group of 30,000 unarmed. So a armed populace is 100* less likely to become a oppressed population than a unarmed population.

> Those GI peeps got jets, drones, real guns, bombs, aircraft carriers and the solid right to use them .

Where do those GI's friends, parents, kids, grandparents, other family members live where they can all be protected from all handguns wielded by over 100 million Americans? Will a aircraft carrier, or any other one of those be able to stop everyone with a gun from crossing a street? let alone stop every bullet from crossing the street.

Or do you think the families of those who are getting killed by bombs dropped by their neighbors will just decide that it would be unfair to target the politicians and military families while their own families are being slaughtered by them?

I think the closest is going to be the Volley Gun I would guess a Nock gun firing 17 barrels at once would be close to automatic, but useless anywhere but on a ship. 90 years later before the first Gatling gun, so probably not something the founders would very easily imagine.

>To change this shit you must first get an Amendment passed or call a Constitutional Convention. There's no other legal avenue.

Or a few more states pass the popular vote compact

Most right to repair laws state OEM's must be able to supply the same tools, information, schematics, parts... to 3rd parties as to their dealers.

Now, how many Tesla dealers are their again?

If Tesla goes bankrupt, how much value will these cars have, without any authorized repairs, updates, new parts, or warranty providers?

Russia did a active transmitter with no internal power device in 1945 also disguised as a gift. So it is possible.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

Obviously, would require no drivers license, passport, no voter ID card... one of those would make the social media posts meaningless after handing over a HQ photo and SSN.

incorrect,

he is continuing to investigate the president but does not consider him a "criminal target" at this point.

> The fact that the Uber car didn't respond to a major obstacle in front of it seems like there wasn't a lot of testing of any form done.

Just shows a lack of regression testing. I guarantee it stopped for people walking in front of it before placing the car into street testing. They changed object identification, almost certainly without repeating those tests. This is why you want simulated testing, when you change any software, you can re-run hundreds of hours of tests in minutes, without wasting any fuel or having tons of hardware. You then run a few important scenarios on real hardware before pushing out to the real world.

Uber clearly missed regression testing that with the death. Tesla clearly missed the real hardware regression testing when their software changes added 20 feet to their stopping distance.

Problem with the floor value, is that Bitcoin (and derivatives) are susceptible to 51% mining attacks. If you have bitcoin, and can double the processing (or take over some of it) current to bitcoin, you can double or tripple spend their coins. So if mining drops significantly, Bitcoin cannot then be trusted for any high value transaction that has any anonymity to it, unless some regulatory and authority comes into bitcoin.

If bitcoin ever drops from being the top coin, it's value quickly goes to 0. If you can build and sustain a profitable network mining the other coins, then anytime you want to steel some bitcoin switch all of the machines over for a few hours and clean out an exchanges, repeat later.

Only if Bitcoin is regulated could it survive then.

I don't see a problem with the act, but the how is clearly suspect. This is not the type of thing the president should be involved in, especially one who's adviser and daughter just got preferential treatment, and lawyer just took a bunch of money from China, and who's family business just got millions of investment from a Chinese government run business.

When it is out of character (Publicly trump as been very anti china not enforcing sanctions. Very anti Chinese business.) and does a sudden 180 turn. Decides to intervene in something he should not, and while receiving business favors at the same time. And then you see the false propaganda start from his usual sources, it all adds up to the biggest growth of the government Swamp ever.

ZTE illegally sold US-made goods in Iran and North Korea, making hundreds of millions from Iran alone. ZTE then promised to punish 7 people caught directly violating these US laws, instead it gave them bonuses.

The espionage claims resulted in US government employees being prevented from using their phones, and is completely separate from these actions.

> The government has infinite resources

You say that like the government in the US is a single entity. I know the local DA where I lived on average had less than a hour, to prosecute.

This made it very difficult on things like Drunk Driving, spousal abuse... Anyone who could spend $1000 on a defense was virtually guaranteed no, or at worst a plea with little punishment (other than the money spent.) Also makes it very difficult on the victims to get any relief if they didn't have the same resources as the charged, as they would then be limited (by resources) to the evidence presented by the prosecution.

So this plan would kill smaller courts, as the tables turn for the wealthy, as they would face no punishment (not even $$$ to respond ) and give incentive for the court to not pursue any case against them, as the financial burden would be too great to the court.

But I do agree similar resources should be made available to defendants. Currently the less educated and poorer people are easily walked on, as judges really suck in most places. It should be their job to insure a fair trial. But often they have incentive to make sure sufficient money is collected to be comfortable at work. And to take care of officers and the DA, as those are the people they repeatedly deal with at work and outside work, not the defendants.

In the US, your silence can be used against when under oath, sometimes, but not usually otherwise. IE if you take the witness stand, you cannot just answer the defenses questions, once you answer questions about an event, generally you have to answer all questions about that event, or your silence can be used to weigh your other testimony. But since testimony given to a police... is not "on the record" and it cannot be brought up in your defense, you can go silent at anytime. I think because the prosecution can choose to drop all of it at anytime, they don't have to have a way to counter claims you made then.