DOJ, SAF REACH SETTLEMENT IN DEFENSE DISTRIBUTED LAWSUIT

A few years ago, “Defense Distributed” got in trouble with the Department of Justice. What DD did was to make available online 3D CAD files that would allow you to manufacture your own AR-15 receivers (the part of the firearm that is actually considered, from a legal standpoint, the “firearm”). The DoJ smacked DD around, accused them of violating ITAR rules, because obviously the enemies of the United States are too Teh Dum to know how to make their own AR-15s. Well, the case has finally wrapped up, and from all appearances, the DoJ has been told to stop being Teh Dum.

DD was represented in court by the Second Amendment Foundation (I guess the ACLU was busy that day).

the government has agreed to waive its prior restraint against the plaintiffs, allowing them to freely publish the 3-D files and other information at issue. The government has also agreed to pay a significant portion of the plaintiffs’ attorney’s fees, and to return $10,000 in State Department registration dues paid by Defense Distributed as a result of the prior restraint.

Significantly, the government expressly acknowledges that non-automatic firearms up to .50-caliber – including modern semi-auto sporting rifles such as the popular AR-15 and similar firearms – are not inherently military.

What this means:

1. You can distributed 3D files without fear of the government coming around and smacking you around
2. ITAR rules are to be changed to get rid of “prior restraint,” which is a form of censorship the US government is *supposed* to not engage in. CAD data is now “speech.”
3. The government has apparently recognized that semi-automatic rifles like the AR-15 are *not* “inherently military,” and thus the next time you see some anti-gun nut screeching that AR-15s are “weapons of war,” you go right ahead and call him a liar.

This all sounds good. However, *strictly* *speaking,* #3 there should 8not8 be considered spectacular news for fans of the Second Amendment. Why? the 1938 USSC decision “US vs. Miller” was the ruling that set the precedent that it is ok for laws to ban sawed-off shotguns. Why was it ok to ban sawed-off shotguns? Because sawed-off shotguns were considered to *not* be militarily useful, and the 2nd Amendment protected the right of the People to keep and bear arms useful for the militia. Thus, but that ruling, the guns people should be clearly allowed are those that *are* inherently military. Of course, the ruling was pretty schizophrenic, since the National firearms Act of 1934 that banned sawed-off shotguns also banned the Tommygun, which *was* most assuredly a military weapon.

Still, this new development is pretty good news, if just to nail down the fact that Americans have the right to have and distribute manufacturing data without the government swooping in and telling them that they can’t. This will help open the door, and jam it open, for the easy and ready manufacturing of firearms in home 3D printers and CNC mills.