Results 1 to 12 of 12

Thread: State Dept. to require written permission before posting firearms data

  1. #1

    Exclamation State Dept. to require written permission before posting firearms data

    Regulation without Representation.



    NRA: Gun blogs, videos, web forums threatened by new Obama regulation

    http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/nr...rticle/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.

    According to the NRA, that would include blogs and web forums discussing technical details of common guns and ammunition, the type of info gun owners and ammo reloaders trade all the time.

    "Gunsmiths, manufacturers, reloaders, and do-it-yourselfers could all find themselves muzzled under the rule and unable to distribute or obtain the information they rely on to conduct these activities," said the NRA in a blog posting.

    "This latest regulatory assault, published in the June 3 issue of the Federal Register, is as much an affront to the First Amendment as it is to the Second," warned the NRA's lobbying shop. "Your action is urgently needed to ensure that online blogs, videos, and web forums devoted to the technical aspects of firearms and ammunition do not become subject to prior review by State Department bureaucrats before they can be published," it added.

    At issue is the internet. State is updating International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR), which implement the federal Arms Export Control Act (AECA). The rules govern everything from guns to strategic bombers.

    The NRA said that the rules predate the internet, and now the federal government wants to regulate technical arms discussions on on the internationally available web.

    State's proposal is highly technical. It took 14 pages in the Federal Register to explain. But the NRA boiled it down for gun owners with this warning:

    "In their current form, the ITAR do not (as a rule) regulate technical data that are in what the regulations call the 'public domain.' Essentially, this means data 'which is published and which is generally accessible or available to the public' through a variety of specified means. These include 'at libraries open to the public or from which the public can obtain documents.' Many have read this provision to include material that is posted on publicly available websites, since most public libraries these days make Internet access available to their patrons.

    "The ITAR, however, were originally promulgated in the days before the Internet. Some State Department officials now insist that anything published online in a generally-accessible location has essentially been 'exported,' as it would be accessible to foreign nationals both in the U.S. and overseas.

    "With the new proposal published on June 3, the State Department claims to be 'clarifying' the rules concerning 'technical data' posted online or otherwise 'released' into the 'public domain.' To the contrary, however, the proposal would institute a massive new prior restraint on free speech. This is because all such releases would require the 'authorization' of the government before they occurred. The cumbersome and time-consuming process of obtaining such authorizations, moreover, would make online communication about certain technical aspects of firearms and ammunition essentially impossible."


    Below are the State changes drawing the NRA fire:

    Paragraph (b) of the revised definition explicitly sets forth the Department's requirement of authorization to release information into the ''public domain.'' Prior to making available ''technical data'' or software subject to the ITAR, the U.S. government must approve the release through one of the following: (1) The Department; (2) the Department of Defense's Office of Security Review; (3) a relevant U.S. government contracting authority with authority to allow the ''technical data'' or software to be made available to the public, if one exists; or (4) another U.S. government official with authority to allow the ''technical data'' or software to be made available to the public.

    The requirements of paragraph (b) are not new. Rather, they are a more explicit statement of the ITAR's requirement that one must seek and receive a license or other authorization from the Department or other cognizant U.S. government authority to release ITAR controlled ''technical data,'' as defined in § 120.10. A release of ''technical data'' may occur by disseminating ''technical data'' at a public conference or trade show, publishing ''technical data'' in a book or journal article, or posting ''technical data'' to the Internet.

    This proposed provision will enhance compliance with the ITAR by clarifying that ''technical data'' may not be made available to the public without authorization. Persons who intend to discuss ''technical data'' at a conference or trade show, or to publish it, must ensure that they obtain the appropriate authorization.



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #2

    Default

    Well, I see their point. We certainly wouldn't want all of this highly technical arms specifications that are available currently on the internet, in the hands of terrorists, because then they might be able to manufacture firearms.
    It's all about taking action and not being lazy. So you do the work, whether it's fitness or whatever. It's about getting up, motivating yourself and just doing it.
    - Kim Kardashian

    Donald Trump / Rand Paul (Vice Pres) 2016!!!!

  4. #3

  5. #4

    Default

    State's proposal is highly technical...


    Persons who intend to discuss ''technical data'' at a conference or trade show, or to publish it, must ensure that they obtain the appropriate authorization.
    "State"?

    Who in the Sam Hell is "State"?

    More tricky wording trying to hide the offenders identity and home address.

    These government functionaries must be accessible to the people they want to regulate!

  6. #5

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tod evans View Post
    "State"?

    Who in the Sam Hell is "State"?

    More tricky wording trying to hide the offenders identity and home address.

    These government functionaries must be accessible to the people they want to regulate!
    We need a "@soandso tried to rep you but couldn't, they agreed with what you had to say, and sometimes here's what they had to say about your particular comment" type thing for when we're out of rep for a poster.
    Last edited by ClydeCoulter; 06-09-2015 at 08:37 AM.
    "When a portion of wealth is transferred from the person who owns it—without his consent and without compensation, and whether by force or by fraud—to anyone who does not own it, then I say that property is violated; that an act of plunder is committed." - Bastiat : The Law

    "nothing evil grows in alcohol" ~ @presence

    "I mean can you imagine what it would be like if firemen acted like police officers? They would only go into a burning house only if there's a 100% chance they won't get any burns. I mean, you've got to fully protect thy self first." ~ juleswin

  7. #6

    Default

    The reason...

    US Government Proposes ITAR Amendments to Choke off Distribution of 3D Printable Gun Models

    Early last month we covered a story which could ultimately have major implications for those living here in the US. Cody Wilson and his company Defense Distributed filed a suit against the US State Department alleging that Wilson’s First, Second, and Fifth Amendment Rights were violated upon the government’s request for immediate removal of the files for his Liberator 3D printable gun from the internet two years ago.

    Since then we’ve spoken with several attorneys, many who believe that Wilson has a strong, but likely tough and drawn out case ahead of him, and Wilson himself agrees that it will be a long road ahead. Well that road may be about to get a little bumpier if President Barack Obama and the Department of State have their way.

    Last week as part of the President’s Export Control Reform (ECR) initiative, the Department of State issued a notice in the Federal Register expressing their desire to make changes to the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR). These changes, we believe, would not only hurt Wilson’s future aspirations to distribute files online for both new and old 3D printable gun designs, but would likely choke off any other individual or group’s ability to share most gun-related design files online without fear of legal repercussions.

    The President is looking to update many key definitions within ITAR, namely for the terms ‘technical data,’ ‘required,’ ‘public domain,’ ‘export,’ and ‘reexport or retransfer,’ among others. Additionally, “The Department proposes to create new sections detailing the scope of licenses, unauthorized releases of information, and the ‘release’ of secured information, and revises the sections on ‘exports’ of ‘’technical data’’ to US persons abroad.”

    From Wilson’s standpoint, the most interesting changes come by way of the new revised definition the government proposes for ‘technical data,’ which is outlined in the following passage of the proposal:

    “Paragraph (a)(1) also sets forth a broader range of examples of formats that ‘technical data’ may take, such as diagrams, models, formulae, tables, engineering designs and specifications, computer-aided design files, manuals or documentation, or electronic media, that may constitute ‘technical data.’”

    Additionally, a revision to the definition of the term ‘required’ in ITAR would basically make any export of information regarding the construction of a particular weapon as serious a crime as actually exporting the weapon itself. For example a 3D model of a gun, or thec1 instructions to build it, would be illegal to make available on the internet via forums, YouTube, social media, or any other method. Software would also now be considered a ‘defense article,’ meaning that the distribution of 3D models would be regulated under the new proposed ITAR amendment.
    More to read....http://3dprint.com/71532/itar-3d-print-guns/
    Theye have refused their Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.

    Theye have erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people and eat out their substance.

    Theye kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies

    Theye have combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution,

    For protecting them, by a mock Trial from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:

    For cutting off our Trade with parts of the world:

    For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:

    For depriving us in many cases, of the benefit of Trial by Jury:

    Theye plundered and destroyed the lives of our people.

    Theye are at this time transporting Armies of Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation, and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & Perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy of a civilized nation.

  8. #7

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by phill4paul View Post
    The reason...



    More to read....http://3dprint.com/71532/itar-3d-print-guns/
    No ex post facto

    edit: ie, he still has a case.
    "When a portion of wealth is transferred from the person who owns it—without his consent and without compensation, and whether by force or by fraud—to anyone who does not own it, then I say that property is violated; that an act of plunder is committed." - Bastiat : The Law

    "nothing evil grows in alcohol" ~ @presence

    "I mean can you imagine what it would be like if firemen acted like police officers? They would only go into a burning house only if there's a 100% chance they won't get any burns. I mean, you've got to fully protect thy self first." ~ juleswin

  9. #8

    Default

    President Barack Obama
    Well there's one government functionaries name and his current address is well known...

    Problem is Joe Sixpack can't go knock on his door at 7PM tonight and try and talk sense to him.....

    Not now, not ever....



  10. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  11. #9

    Default The State Department’s Dangerous New Proposal to Regulate Gun Enthusiasts’ Internet Speech

    The State Department’s Dangerous New Proposal to Regulate Gun Enthusiasts’ Internet Speech
    by Charles C. W. Cooke - June 9, 2015

    Over the last couple of decades, Edmund Burke’s plucky “little platoons” have found a thousand homes in the quiet recesses of the Internet. Day in and day out, online forums buzz and crackle with the untrammeled energy of volunteers, hobbyists, collaborators, dilettantes, antiquarians, and enthusiastic abecedarians of all stripes. Perhaps you are struggling with a broken garage door? Perhaps your computer is crashing frequently? Perhaps your homeschooled children are not taking to this year’s curriculum? Whatever your trouble, be still thy shredded nerves. Somewhere out there someone will have an answer. Ask, and ye shall receive.

    Alas, if the Obama administration gets its way, this may be about to change for at least one group: firearms enthusiasts. Last week, the U.S. Department of State published an alarming notice in the Federal Register, which, if transmuted into regulatory action, could prove downright disastrous to the nation’s rapidly multiplying gun fora. “In updating regulations governing international arms sales,” Paul Bedard recorded at the Washington Examiner, the State Department is effectively “demanding that anyone who puts technical details about arms and ammo on the web first get the OK from the federal government.” And if they do not? They could “face a fine of up to $1 million and 20 years in jail.”
    ...
    As for what is “subject to the ITAR” . . . well, that would change too. Per Daniel Terrill over at Guns.com, State is hoping to “revise the definition within the context of ITAR of several keywords including public domain, technical data, defense article, defense services, export, and reexport or retransfer.” As the National Rifle Association observes, the potential upshot of this would be that “gunsmiths, manufacturers, reloaders, and do-it-yourselfers could all find themselves muzzled under the rule and unable to distribute or obtain the information they rely on to conduct these activities.” Moreover, depending on how administrators elected to interpret the rules, the amended provisions could be used to outlaw detailed reviews of new firearms, in-depth technical discussions involving recently patented parts, amateur repair- and upgrade-manuals, 3D-printing schematics, and even self-defense programs. Most worrying of all, perhaps, the proposal does not appear to distinguish between the intellectual and the physical — that is, it draws no distinction between exporting a physical firearm and publishing technical details about it to the Internet. “If I sent someone the technical drawings for an AR-15 bolt carrier,” Nick Leghorn contends, “that would be equivalent in the eyes of the government to me having exported an actual bolt carrier.”

    If these are indeed to be our standards, it is difficult to imagine how any firearms website would be able to survive the regulators’ caprice. Those lads over at AR15.com discussing innovative rifle-hand guards in detail? Sorry chaps. The gentlemen at the National Gun Forum sharing gunsmithing tips and uploading manuals? Serial violators. 3D-printing enthusiasts building themselves a new trigger for a recently designed shotgun? Criminals who didn’t request the King’s seal of approval.
    ...
    More: http://www.nationalreview.com/articl...nternet-speech
    Twitter: B4Liberty@USAB4L
    "Foreign aid is taking money from the poor people of a rich country, and giving it to the rich people of a poor country." - Ron Paul
    "Beware the Military-Industrial-Financial-Corporate-Media-Government Complex." - B4L update of General Dwight D. Eisenhower
    "Debt is the drug, Wall St. Banksters are the dealers, and politicians are the addicts." - B4L
    "Totally free immigration? I've never taken that position. I believe in national sovereignty." - Ron Paul


    The views and opinions expressed here are solely my own, and do not represent this forum or any other entities or persons.

  12. #10

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bxm042 View Post
    Well, I see their point. We certainly wouldn't want all of this highly technical arms specifications that are available currently on the internet, in the hands of terrorists, because then they might be able to manufacture firearms.
    Lol, What does that matter? If they wait long enough, our government will give them the guns. ISIS didn't make those M4 Carbines you see them wielding.

  13. #11

    Default

    Proposed regulation could keep 3D-printed gun blueprints offline for good

    http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2015/07/...ntcmp=features

    Those handy digital blueprints that enable anyone to 3D print gun parts or even a weapon from scratch could be under threat thanks to a new proposal from the State Department.

    A notice posted on June 3rd in a recent Federal Register show that some changes are being made to the International Traffic in Arms (ITAR) regulations. Hidden within the proposal, which restricts what gear, technology, and info can and cannot be exported out of the US, is a ban on posting schematics for 3D printed gun parts online. The ruling comes just a month after Cody Wilson and, his group Defense Distributed filed a lawsuit against the federal government for forcing them to remove blueprints of the “Liberator” 3D-printed gun of off their website. Wilson described the move as a violation of First Amendment Rights and believes that the new mandate is a direct response to his lawsuit.

    “This is a direct action on behalf of the Obama administration to control public speech about guns on the Internet,” Wilson told FoxNews.com. “They cynically redefine any posting of any technical data to be an ‘export,’ and thereby claim that it isn't speech. It's surreal and they're getting away with it.”

    “It's speech control to regulate the gun culture. It's not coming, like some are suggesting. It is here and I've been threatened with it and complete ruin for over two years.”

    - Cody Wilson, Defense Distributed
    In the public notice, the State Department revises the definition of export in an attempt to “remove activities associated with a defense article’s further movement or release outside the United States.”

    Included in the new provision is “technical data” posted on the Internet.

    “By putting up a digital file, that constitutes an export of the data,” a senior State Department official told FoxNews.com. “If it’s an executable digital file, any foreign interests can get a hold of it.

    Cody Wilson claims the federal government violated his rights under the First, Second and Fifth amendments when it prosecuted him for publishing plans for 3D printed guns. (Courtesy: Cody Wilson)
    “These proposed definition changes are part of our broader effort to streamline and modernize a Cold War era regulatory system to better safeguard against illicit attempts to procure sensitive U.S. defense technologies under Export Control Reform.”

    The official added that the proposed definition changes have been in the works for several years, ever since President Obama announced his Export Control Initiative in 2009 and that these changes in definition seek to account for technologies not foreseen - like 3D-printing -- when these regulations were initially developed.

    A portion of a downloadable blueprint that a 3D printer can use to build a gun.
    However, Wilson says that it’s a back door way to ramp up gun control stateside.

    “It's speech control to regulate the gun culture,” he told FoxNews.com. “It's not coming, like some are suggesting. It is here and I've been threatened with it and complete ruin for over two years.”

    Public comments will be taken and considered by both the departments of State and Commerce regarding the Export Control Reform Initiative until August 3rd.

    Wilson hoped to share his ballistic blueprint for free on the web. (Courtesy: Cody Wilson)
    Defense Distributed is a not-for-profit group founded by Wilson, a former law student at the University of Texas who came into the public eye after creating the world’s first 3D-printed gun from scratch. He has said in the past that the “Liberator” project was intended to highlight how technology can render laws and governments all but irrelevant.

    His publishing of the printable blueprints online instantly sparked outrage in the U.S. with several politicians calling for national legislation for an outright ban on 3D-printed guns.

    "Security checkpoints, background checks and gun regulations will do little good if criminals can print plastic firearms at home and bring those firearms through metal detectors with no one the wiser," Congressman Steve Israel said in May 2013.

    "When I started talking about the issue of plastic firearms months ago, I was told the idea of a plastic gun is science-fiction," he added. "Now that this technology is proven, we need to act now to extend the ban on plastic firearms."

    Wilson was ordered soon after to remove the liberator digital designs from the Defense Distributed website, prompting him and his group to file a lawsuit against the Federal Government.

    The 3D gunsmith and his supporters have maintained that he has complied with laws and feel that the request from the Defense Trade Controls agency, a branch of the Department of State, may be politically motivated.

    “Defense Distributed is being penalized for trying to educate the public about 3-D guns,” Alan Gottlieb, founder of the Washington-based Second Amendment Foundation, whose organization is backing Defense Distributed in a court action told FoxNews.com when word of the lawsuit was made public last May.

  14. #12

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tod evans View Post
    Proposed regulation could keep 3D-printed gun blueprints offline for good

    Gulag Chief:
    "Article 58-1a, twenty five years... What did you get it for?"
    Gulag Prisoner: "For nothing at all."
    Gulag Chief: "You're lying... The sentence for nothing at all is 10 years"





Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-10-2016, 04:00 PM
  2. Viagra Prescriptions to Require Wife's Permission
    By presence in forum Personal Health & Well-Being
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 02-17-2016, 12:36 AM
  3. Replies: 6
    Last Post: 04-03-2015, 02:26 PM
  4. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 11-05-2013, 06:45 PM
  5. Airlines to Require More Passenger Data
    By IPSecure in forum Privacy & Data Security
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 10-02-2009, 03:17 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •