Actually it does. The carrier is not liable for what it carries if the product is not a hazardous material restricted from transport or requiring special handling. The carrier can't be held liable if the Ginsu knives you orders are then used to butcher your family. Similarly nobody went after the company that delivered the fertilizer Tim McVeigh used to the stores he bought it from. They didn't even go after Ryder Trucks for renting him a truck. The person who planned and or carried out the crime is the one held liable.

As to printing, I ignored that because it's a small irrelevant part of this discussion. We are not talking about a 3-D printer here. This topic is about Cody trying to ship a small CNC mill, something used in workshops and factories around the world every day to produce all kinds of stuff. Yes one that comes pre-programmed for a specific design, but still no different in capabilities (and possibly even reprogrammable for other purposes) than any other CNC Mill of similar size.

And the fact stands that pertinent to the goals of Distributed Defense and Cody Wilson the desires of the Mexican government or any other foreign government are irrelevant at this point. In the future that may change but for now he wants to sell and distribute within the boundaries of this country. And thus that is the shipping requirements he needs to meet.

Actually according to the laws of this land at least the receiver is the firearm. The rest of it is just finishing touches and are not tracked. And that is what I said in my post, you can build a receiver out of a shovel. So my point stands, in the eyes of the government you can build a firearm (the receiver) out of a shovel.

The part that the government cares about and tracks can be and occasionally is blacksmithed out of a shovel. The barrels and other components are not tracked. The government has no idea how many of the other parts anyone has or where they keep, bought or shipped them. The receiver is the key component that you must go through an FFL to buy new. Or to buy across state lines. But the receiver is so simple to build that it can easily be made without any government knowledge of it's existence. The other stuff they don't track so build it your self (with a machine shop) buy it at the local gun shop or order online they don't track the components as they are not considered the firearm.

The response is that the Supreme Court has ruled that the right is reserved to the people not to the states. The Bill of Rights applies to the people, only in the 10th does the rights of the States come into play. The 1st applies to the people, the 2nd to the people, the third to the people, the fourth to the people the 5th to the people, get the drift?

The right protected in the 2nd is the inalienable right of the people to keep and bear arms just as the freedom of speech and religion is the freedom of the people. It's not a conditional clause, it's an introductory clause explaining why the right of the people must be protected.

Guiliani isn't exactly the biggest friend of the 2nd Amendment either. Nor is Chris Christie who still thinks he has a shot at the R Nomination (he doesn't).

Google it on Youtube (I don't have access at work) the Receiver for an AK-47 can be made out of a shovel with simple blacksmithing skills, videos exist. Search for shovel ak-47. The trigger assembly and chamber and barrel are purchased but the part that is officially the gun is the receiver.

Yet they do collect the stats. And publish them annually. And So does the FBI who also publishes the stats annually for all to find via google.

Your claim is false. Collecting stats is different from studying.

Fine they can have the entire firearm that they are aware of. But since none of the rest of the components require any registration or serialization, I can have a ready stockpile of spare parts. I mill a new lower, put it all together and thus I'm still armed.

Actually it is merely an introductory clause, the second clause does not require any of the first and can stand alone. The first clause establishes one reason for the second and strengthens it but the first clause is not essential to the meaning of the second clause.

To further break it down, regulated has also changed in meaning since the Bill of Rights was drafted. It's meaning back then was to be working or functional. So "A well regulated (meaning functional (or working)) militia (the citizens of the community who respond with their own privately owned arms) being necessary to the security of a free state, the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. If the people are disarmed the militia becomes non-functional, thus the need to protect the right of the people to keep and bear arms.

Your example is a failure. Explosives are hazardous materials restricted by law, requiring special handling to ship. The parcel companies are required by law to refuse to ship explosives.

A CNC mill does not fall under any level of hazardous materials. The fact that it can be used to legally complete a legal manufacturing process means they have no grounds to refuse it. They do not as a practice open or inventory packages. If a foreign government bans it, then it gets stopped because it must be identified on the customs shipping label. Still not grounds for a blanket refusal to carry a 100% legal device within this country.

And if someone wants to manufacture guns in a foreign country they'll probably go for the much easier to make AK style weapons (someone with basic blacksmithing skills can build the receiver out of a shovel.)

But ultimately what the rest of the world thinks is irrelevant as he's seeing to ship within the borders of this country, and UPS and FedEx have zero grounds to refuse his shipment of these mills. Of course he can just get around their decision by using a different company name and not mentioning the purpose of the machines being shipped.

One name: Bloomberg!

Very good point. I try and try and try to get this message out to many of my fellow gun owners. Liberal does not mean gun hater, and conservative does not mean gun lover. Yes the majorities of those two groups are found within the respective political persuasions. But exceptions to the rule are easily found. Bloomberg is or was supposedly a Republican, meanwhile Liberal Vermont just slapped down attempts to impose tighter restrictions and are one of the first constitutional carry states.

Anti-gun folks are found on both sides.
Pro-gun folks are found on both sides.

For those that support the right to keep and bear arms we need to keep this in mind and not attack our allies. Without the Liberals who love guns our rights would be at a much greater risk. Thanks from this conservative.

Great points, and as demonstrated in Australia after their firearm ban and confiscation, removing firearms does not remove suicides. After the ban yes firearm suicides nearly vanished. But the overall suicide rate did not drop. In fact it spiked significantly the two years immediately following but then returned to the exact same level and gradual downward trend it had been running at in the years prior to the ban. But now suicide by firearm was a fraction of the occurrence that it had been before the ban and confiscation of most handguns and many rifles.

Guns do not cause suicide. They are a convenient method when available, but if not available those determined to exit this sphere of existence will find a way to do so.

And the even bigger concern that an independent Kurdistan would also include a sizeable chunk of NATO ally Turkey? That is a bigger concern than Iraq. I'd bet we would have carved out an independent Kurdistan in a heartbeat if not for Turkey.

That was still an improvement over Microsoft Guns ME. Where the chamber would overpressure on every fifth shot, destroying the barrel (but not the chamber or trigger mechanism.

Maxim 29: The enemy of my enemy is my enemy's enemy, no more, no less. (Schlock Mercenary)