From: nanoflower@notforg.m.a.i.l.com   
      
   On Wed, 11 Feb 2026 06:39:41 -0000 (UTC), "Adam H. Kerman"   
    wrote:   
      
   >shawn   wrote:   
   >>On Wed, 11 Feb 2026 06:11:56 -0000 (UTC), "Adam H. Kerman"   
   >> wrote:   
   >>   
   >>>shawn   wrote:   
   >>>>On Wed, 11 Feb 2026 05:46:11 -0000 (UTC), "Adam H. Kerman"   
   >>>> wrote:   
   >>>>   
   >>>>>BTR1701  wrote:   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>>Gavin Newsom's Mini-Me, Attorney General Rob Bonta, has filed   
   >>lawsuits against   
   >>>>>>several out-of-state companies and individuals for daring to exercise   
   their   
   >>>>>>1st and 2nd Amendment rights by hosting 3d-print files for gun parts   
   >>on their   
   >>>>>>websites. This violates a California law (which itself is being   
   >>challenged for   
   >>>>>>violating the Constitution) prohibiting the possession and distribution   
   of   
   >>>>>>digital files that can be used to produce "ghost guns". Bonta's exciting   
   new   
   >>>>>>legal theory is that if California makes a thing illegal, no citizen of   
   any   
   >>>>>>other state can legally do that thing if it allows Californians to skirt   
   >>>>>>California law.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>>Not only does this violate the 1st and 2nd Amendments, it's   
   >>unenforceable as a   
   >>>>>>practical matter, because the internet is worldwide. Even if California   
   >>>>>>somehow manages to reach its tentacles into other states, it can't   
   >>reach into   
   >>>>>>other countries, so these digital files can be distributed around the   
   world   
   >>>>>>with impunity and Rob Bonta can't do anything about it. A website in   
   Romania   
   >>>>>>can host "ghost gun" 3d-print files and anyone in California can access   
   them   
   >>>>>>and Mini-Newsom, has no power to stop it.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>It occurs to me that the federal law shielding gun manufacturers from   
   >>>>>P.I. and class action lawsuits for injury and death from use of guns in   
   >>>>>a shooting if they can prove no manufacturing defects shouldn't shield   
   >>>>>the manufacture of 3D-printed guns, all of which are defective.   
   >>>>   
   >>>>Except that they just made the original design. They didn't make/print   
   >>>>the gun. They didn't choose the material that went into the making of   
   >>>>the gun. So it seems like the responsibility lies with the person who   
   >>>>actually made/printed the gun and not the designer.   
   >>>   
   >>>What are you talking about? These are designs for 3D printing at home.   
   >>>The raw material for such 3D printers is known. The designer and the   
   >>>person operating the printer were both integral parts of the   
   >>>manufacturing process. When the gun fails, they both get to defend the   
   >>>lawsuit.   
   >>   
   >>There are many options when printing out something on a 3D printer.   
   >>Some plastics are great for something soft and pliable, other plastics   
   >>are stiffer. So the person printing out the weapon can choose what   
   >>type of plastic they want to use. Hell, it may even be possible to use   
   >>one of the very expensive printers that allows the user to print using   
   >>metal.   
   >   
   >I don't understand your position, "They didn't choose the material that   
   >went into the making of the gun." The designer does indeed choose the   
   >material from raw materials available for the specific type of printer   
   >he has in mind. It's called a specification. Is there a plastic that can   
   >withstand the heat and explosive force of firing ammunition? I have no   
   >idea, but unless the designer so specifies, he gets to defend the   
   >lawsuit as well.   
      
   My position is the end user chose the material they actually used to   
   print the gun. It may be what the creator of the weapon chose or it   
   could be something entirely different. Which is why I pointed out   
   there are many options for materials used in 3D printing, each of   
   which has different characteristics and advised use. If I printing a   
   gun I would advise using metal, but that is going to be expensive and   
   (if being used by a criminal) is subject to being detected by any   
   metal detector.   
      
      
   As for whether there is a plastic that can withstand the heat and   
   explosive force, the answer is most definitely yes. As shown by many   
   Youtube videos, but those same videos also show that the plastics used   
   won't hold up to numerous shots. So it's more of a one gun, one shot   
   usage. Any more has a risk of the gun exploding.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)