Did you purchase an "Auto Key Card"?

Apparently bold print, when used to emphasize a point (especially a different opinion), or note someone else's words, "offends" certain forum members. I humbly apologize if I Triggered anyone. I forget how sensitive some people are. This forum should be a safe space for all. :rolleyes:

There, I went back and changed his quote to italics, no bold print. ;)
 
Last edited:
what some people see as shouting (in text) is someone else's way of emphasizing a point. I don't see where a persons choice of style is something to be concerned about.
 
Does anyone have a link to the actual case? This seems like a 1A slam-dunk, providing he actually pays for decent lawyers. Printing something, even on metal, seems squarely protected.
 
Printing something, even on metal, seems squarely protected.
Click to expand...

I think we have laws against printing certain things, despite our 1st amendment freedoms.

I don't see how a drawing of a part that isn't the actual part could fall into one of those groups, but but someone does or there wouldn't be charges brought.

Whether those people are right or not is the court's decision.
 
There is no wisdom in the referenced post.
Nor is Matlock going to be helpful here.
So, I would argue that marginalizing is justifiable.

In general,
The youngest generation (~18-25 y/o), in particular, feel like they live in a world created solely to benefit baby boomers, with no hope for the future until that generation dies. They feel repressed, unrepresented, and ignored. From their perspective: When they try to solve a problem, baby boomers always dog-pile on the subject, ruin any reasonable discussion, and take actions that only protect themselves, rather that trying to help fix things for future generations.
For the most part, I agree with their assessment.

Take the Auto Key Cards (a drawing on metal) and files for 3D printed lightning links for example.
These young kids generally don't intend to use the things. And don't make the things, even when they did intend to do so initially. They see these things as a way to point out just how ridiculous and insane the laws and regulations are in this country, in order to try to set the stage for ATF bureau, FOPA, GCA, and NFA reform when we have supportive representation in power.

The traditional approach (Boomers especially) has always been, "Don't mess with it. Don't change the status-quo. It will just show them what we want, and then they'll target it later."
But the status-quo is erosion of all of our rights. It is a net-negative. --Now, especially, since they aren't holding back. Our enemies want everything, and they have made it know.
Much of the time, the justifications given for taking no action are not even based on fact - it is purely Fuddlore and misunderstanding (or no understanding) of the actual laws and regulations.

The younger kids don't see the massive obstacles ahead as an unclimbable hill that is not worth trying to climb. They see it as a mountain that they must climb.

It is very similar to the resentment of grandfather clauses in AWBs. The people that have them generally put up no fight.
The Haves turn their backs, because "Well, I've got mine." While the Have-nots are left out in the rain, because they were not born early enough or did not make enough money early enough, even though the added influence of the Haves might have changed the outcome.

When the wisdom is to roll over and take it, or to run away because you can at least hold on to what you've got, I'd say it is reasonable to marginalize that "wisdom".


And that's the tip of the iceberg for these kids.
Look at the examples given to them for fighting for our rights in the courts. It is baby boomers and Gen-X chest thumping about how great the NRA is, and how much they've done for gun owners. But they haven't. These kids know it better than any generation before them. The NRA has been one of the greatest enemies to gun freedom. The have compromised. They have settled. They have ignored important cases. They have made backroom deals to "pretend" nothing is going on.
And, most importantly, they have not actually fought an important case in quite some time.

The NRA won't take a case unless they think it has already been won. At best, most of the time, they go for nothing more than amicus briefs; but then claim it as *their* victory.

The greatest progress made for gun rights in the last decade has come from state level gun rights groups, 2AF, and the FPC. But every one of those cases was claimed by the NRA as their own victory - while the board of directors was pouring money into their own accounts, buying luxury condos, furnishing their homes with $75,000 couches, and putting on parties that cost hundreds of thousands of dollars.
Meanwhile, Manuel and Garcia are sitting in prison, because they had one round of 9mm ammo under the floor mat in their car, when they were racially profiled and pulled over in D.C.

I have disliked the NRA for at least a decade, and it has only gotten worse. These kids have always hated it. Boomers' undying devotion to such an ineffective, inept, arrogant*, and corrupt organization has really spoiled the water.

If boomers are not going to fight, then they should be marginalized.



*"Let's sell a product that requires special licensing and bonds, in one of the most over-regulated states in the country, but not get a license or put up the bonds. No one will notice. It'll be super cool."
Click to expand...

Wow... very well thought out and a message that I hope was read by many and taken to heart. I’m middle aged, so I can relate to baby boomers AND 20 somethings. I don’t agree with every point... but the message as a whole contains a lot of wisdom.
 
KyJim, I'm responding to your post because I found it interesting, but
my practice isn't criminal, so there's a lot I don't know about this area.

KyJim said:
An argument could be made that sellers of the card offer them for sale with the knowledge they can and will be used to convert guns to full auto.
Click to expand...

Does the seller know whether the buyer has any rifles that even could be converted to fully automatic fire if the pattern on the card were manufactured?

KyJim said:
Thus, there is an agreement to violate a federal criminal statute (conversion to full auto) and a step taken to complete the act of conversion. That would arguably be a criminal conspiracy.
Click to expand...

Recognizing that you are setting forth a possible argument and not arguing the validity of the argument, do you think the reasoning underlying that argument is narrow enough not to include other legal transactions?*

If I sell a copy of the Anarchists' Cookbook to someone, I know they could use it to break a federal law, but would I have conspired to break all the federal laws they could have broken? Someone sold the fertilizer from the Oklahoma City bombing, and that was a crime actually committed. Was the fertilizer vendor a conspirator?

___________________________________
* The genuinely wretched use of the reasoning would be against firearms manufacturers. They know what they sell can be converted to fully automatic use, and that some scofflaws will do just that. In participating in a commercial chain with putative violators of the NFA, they become conspirators.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top