-
If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership The benefits pay for the membership many times over.
Net Neutrality in use
- Thread starter copterdoctor
- Start date
the_shootist
Banned
Does anyone think "contacting your state politician" is going to make ANY difference now? This train is going at full speed and to quote Scotty..."nothing in the universe can stop it"
Yeah because a bunch of laws stopped music and movie pirating. If they think this will stop people from sharing 3d printer data, reloading data, or any other data related to firearms they are dreaming.
Rob Boudrie
NES Member
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2005
- Messages
- 48,439
- Likes
- 35,583
The 2af has already filed a federal suit over the ITAR gag order on the 3D printer plans.
This is just an attempt to stack the deck, and also give the govt another avenue to issue a gag order if the court rules in favor of the plaintiff.
This is just an attempt to stack the deck, and also give the govt another avenue to issue a gag order if the court rules in favor of the plaintiff.
- Joined
- Nov 16, 2014
- Messages
- 28,103
- Likes
- 36,772
Why would they complain about reloading. I can see the appeal about not wanting guns off a 3d printer. (Can see their point don't agree with it,but can at least see where their heads at) But reloading is a huge hobby looking something up online is about as natural as searching car stuff out.
Rob Boudrie
NES Member
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2005
- Messages
- 48,439
- Likes
- 35,583
It is doubtful they will. Depending on the point of view, the concept of a ban on reloading talk is either hyperbole or a possible unintended consequence.
The real issue is what level of technical information can be banned from the internet.
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/n...tened-by-new-obama-regulation/article/2565762
Commonly used and unregulated internet discussions and videos about guns and ammo could be closed down under rules proposed by the State Department, amounting to a "gag order on firearm-related speech," the National Rifle Association is warning.
In updating regulations governing international arms sales, State is demanding that anyone who puts technical details about arms and ammo on the web first get the OK from the federal government — or face a fine of up to $1 million and 20 years in jail.
Commonly used and unregulated internet discussions and videos about guns and ammo could be closed down under rules proposed by the State Department, amounting to a "gag order on firearm-related speech," the National Rifle Association is warning.
In updating regulations governing international arms sales, State is demanding that anyone who puts technical details about arms and ammo on the web first get the OK from the federal government — or face a fine of up to $1 million and 20 years in jail.
First off, this is definitley worth writing your rep over as it tramples your free speech rights at the very least. Second, as someone said it really depends on what they are calling "technical information". It's not like a firearm is a very complicated device to begin with so the language could very well become a major problem. Any decent firearm manual has a complete schematic and breakdown of the whole gun so you can repair or service it. Is that technical info? Who knows.
In in the end I think this goes nowhere but I would not just sit around and take it for granted. We are all tired of writing pols to defend out rights, but if you want to keep those rights keep writing. Hopefully we get a 2A friendly president and get to take a break for awhile, assuming we have any 2A left when Obama leaves office.
![[rolleyes]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/042.gif "Roll Eyes [rolleyes]")
What does this have to do with "Net Neutrality"?
What does this have to do with "Net Neutrality"? ITAR predates the Internet, had previously been enforced against net activity almost since the beginning of the internet (e.g. Phil Zimmerman in 1993), would apply with or without "neutrality". And I have my doubts that this ITAR "clarification" is half as bad as the NRA-ILA claims.
Also, [thread=283809]Dupity[/thread] dupey [thread=283800]do[/thread].
What does this have to do with "Net Neutrality"? ITAR predates the Internet, had previously been enforced against net activity almost since the beginning of the internet (e.g. Phil Zimmerman in 1993), would apply with or without "neutrality". And I have my doubts that this ITAR "clarification" is half as bad as the NRA-ILA claims.
Also, [thread=283809]Dupity[/thread] dupey [thread=283800]do[/thread].
Last edited:
Fox just posted the story on their website:
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...eb-forums-threatened-by-new-obama-regulation/
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...eb-forums-threatened-by-new-obama-regulation/
Based on how ITAR is written right now, it seems to me that it would be easy for the state department to decide that reloaders are manufacturers with a registration requirement.
Horrible
NES Member
ITAR, in of itself, is so broad and open to interpretation, you could ask two experts a question and they would give you completely different advice on how to handle something.
I am sure that the freindly goverment will only ban internet discusions on military grade weapon systems that we dont want the terrorists to see... though since only the military should have any guns, all guns are military grade, and since tea partyiers are really terrorists, they cant be allowed to access the internet....
[/sarcasm off]
[/sarcasm off]
