New ban

[shooterdownunder]

In this weeks episode of what will they think of next, the NSW parliment has banned drawings of guns. The possession of a digital blueprint will now be punished by up to 14 years in prison.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-11-1...-trade/6950044

New laws targeting the illegal gun trade have passed through the New South Wales Parliament.

The laws create a new offence for possessing a stolen gun, which carries a maximum penalty of 14 years in jail.

Deputy Premier and Police and Justice Minister Troy Grant said the act would deliver on a commitment by the NSW Government to crack down on those who endangered the community.

"These laws have a clear focus of hitting the illegal firearms trade because it's clear the illegal gun market presents the threat to the community," Mr Grant said.

Parliament has also put in place 14-year jail sentences for range of other offences, including use, supply, or acquisition of prohibited firearms.

The laws also ban the possession of digital blueprints that could help someone make a firearm with a 3D printer.

And what is the definition of a digital blueprint? Under the act
http://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/prod/parlment/nswbills.nsf/0/db59405bb0f2f006ca257eeb00194514/$FILE/b2015-090-d23-House.pdf

In this section:
digital blueprint means any type of digital (or electronic) reproduction of a
technical drawing of the design of an object

I really hope this gets challenged by someone.

[kilimanjaro]

I think that definition covers a lot of things, but not a CNC machine shop disc of instructions. So a digital photograph of a schematic diagram on a wall poster will get you 14 years, eh?

[shooterdownunder]

That's the contradictory part.
part of the act says it's only digital blueprints for a 3d printer or milling machine, later it says any electronic technical drawing which as you say covers a lot of things.

[Aguila Blanca]

Originally Posted by shootingdownunder

That's the contradictory part.
part of the act says it's only digital blueprints for a 3d printer or milling machine, later it says any electronic technical drawing which as you say covers a lot of things.

Not according to your quote, two posts above:

In this section:
digital blueprint means any type of digital (or electronic) reproduction of a
technical drawing of the design of an object

I'm an architect and I have also worked in graphic design and a bit of industrial design. If words have meanings in NSW (which, I admit, is always a question when dealing with governments and bureaucrats), then the thing being prohibited is not the technical drawing at all. For example, there are copies of the U.S. Ordinance Department blueprints for the M1911A1 available on the Internet. They are scans of real, actual blueprint drawings. According to the law as you quoted it, the original technical drawing ( the blueprint) is not prohibited. What is prohibited is "any type of digital (or electronic) reproduction" of the blueprint.

So the blueprints in The Sight site are in electronic format. They are also on a server in another country, so NSW can't touch them.

It would appear that this new law would prohibit you from downloading the scans and storing them as JPEG files on your computer. But a paper blueprint is neither digital nor electronic, so just fire up the printer and print away. Presto -- hard copy blueprints, and not a bit or a byte anywhere to be found.

What am I missing?

[44 AMP]

What you are missing is the hysteria of "its a gun!! its BAAD!!..oh wait, its a picture of gun! ITs BAADD!! and you can't have it!..wait, its not a picture of a gun, its worse! ITs instructions how to make one!! BAAD! you can't have it!!"

Better take the beer advertisements off the soccer stadiums too, after all they might cause drunk driving...

Some people still amaze me, despite the fact I should know better by now...

[Armed_Chicagoan]

"It would appear that this new law would prohibit you from downloading the scans and storing them as JPEG files on your computer. But a paper blueprint is neither digital nor electronic, so just fire up the printer and print away. Presto -- hard copy blueprints, and not a bit or a byte anywhere to be found.

What am I missing?"

You can't print without first electronically copying.

[Aguila Blanca]

You can't print without first electronically copying.

Not true.

They still make film for cameras, and they make engineering copiers that work by feeding in an original drawing (which can still be drawn with pens, pencils, straightedges and a compass) and spitting out a blueprint (or a blackline print, depending on the machine). Nobody ever possesses a digital or electronic copy.

And what about the scans of the 1911 blueprints on the Internet? If I log onto The Sight, call up their blueprint scan, and click "File - Print," I never "possess" a digital or electronic copy. The digital copy is on The Sight's server, wherever that is, and I don't possess anything until a paper copy comes out of my printer.

[carguychris]

Originally Posted by Aguila Blanca

They still make film for cameras, and they make engineering copiers that work by feeding in an original drawing... and spitting out a blueprint...

+1 – FWIW old-fashioned blueline printers work by shining ultraviolet light through a translucent original onto a sheet of specially treated paper, which is then exposed to ammonia vapor to develop the image. There's absolutely nothing electronic about the process unless you count the fluorescent light bulb and the little fan that blows the ammonia, and plenty of engineering and architectural firms still have the machines (although most are gathering dust today).

[NJgunowner]

Aguila Blanca You've kind of hit a fine point of possession. In order for you to print something out at your local printer, it must first be downloaded into a temporary file on your pc, which then sends it to the printer. So you ARE in possession, at least temporarily for a few seconds, of the file. It's kind of the constructive possession argument I guess.

[Aguila Blanca]

Aguila Blanca You've kind of hit a fine point of possession. In order for you to print something out at your local printer, it must first be downloaded into a temporary file on your pc, which then sends it to the printer. So you ARE in possession, at least temporarily for a few seconds, of the file. It's kind of the constructive possession argument I guess.

I'm not that up to speed on how computer printing works. I guess the entire file does have to be collected either on your computer or in your printer long enough to transfer the bits and bytes to the imaging device.

Or does it? Does an inkjet printer download the entire file at once, or only enough data for the next pass of the printhead? And If I'm printing directly from an Internet site to the printer, and not saving the file, does that constitute possession of the electronic file? I don't know.

But, as carguychris confirmed, there are older blueprinting (and blackline) technologies that are entirely mechanical/chemical -- no electronic or digital image ever exists, at any point in the process. And with modern engineering copiers, most folks don't own a copier with a 48-inch bed. I don't. When I need to copy an engineering-size drawing, I take it to FedEx Office and pay them to do it. I never possess anything digital -- I walk in with one piece of paper, and I walk out with two (or theee or four) pieces of paper.

And you don't need a CNC machine to make a 1911 or an AR-15. A small milling machine will do just fine. Heck, there's that gunrunners' city in the mountains of Pakistan where they make functional copies of a variety of firearms entirely by hand.

[barnbwt]

And this, my friends, is how a Lost Technology is born. Soon, anyone who proclaims know about guns that isn't a state organ will be metaphorically (or literally?) burned at the stake for dabbling in the dark arts until driven underground. Very worrisome precedent, the outright banning of 'dangerous information.' Since "personal protection is no reason to own a gun," I suppose personal freedom is no reason to know about them (or anything else the State deems dangerous)

"As the Americans learned so painfully in Earth's final century,
free flow of information is the only safeguard against tyranny.
The once-chained people whose leaders at last lose their grip on
information flow will soon burst with freedom and vitality, but
the free nation gradually constricting its grip on public discourse
has begun its rapid slide into despotism. Beware of he who would
deny you access to information, for in his heart he dreams himself
your master."
--a video game that should substitute for what they call 'civics class' in middle schools

It's exactly the same logic behind the Taliban forbidding all music and shrouding their women; it was for rape prevention.

TCB

[barnbwt]

"I'm not that up to speed on how computer printing works. I guess the entire file does have to be collected either on your computer or in your printer long enough to transfer the bits and bytes to the imaging device."
It's called a print spooler. Nothing runs directly on 'machine code' anymore (like punch cards), since it is too unreliable. Instead, the whole file (or chunks) are downloaded & verified for accuracy at each step. Otherwise your print job turns into gibberish once the first 0 gets misread as a 1 by accident

It's much more like burning a CD (in the case of SLA printing, almost exactly like it) in that the whole job is cached ahead of time, then parsed into exact instructions sent to a robot arm/print head. I do wonder if the Aussie law only applies to the actual print-file instructions, which are themselves basically useless to all but the machine they were developed for (print settings must be calibrated for each machine for good results), or for the STL solid-body files that are used to create those instructions, or for the SLA compiler program that chops the STL solid-bodies into layers & sorts them for printing, or the CAD software used to develop the STL solid body in the first place. Though highly automated, the distance from CAD to finished product is philosophically (and I would think therefore, legally) tremendous.

If this stands, blueprints, technical manuals, informational books, and classes are next. If it stands, I'd be seriously thinking of getting out of Australia If I were a gun owner, before things turn very ugly (more quickly than we ever expect). This is going beyond even England's insane attempt to register mills and lathes.

TCB

[44 AMP]

In this section:
digital blueprint means any type of digital (or electronic) reproduction of a
technical drawing of the design of an object

While I understand the definition, I fail to see the sanity involved in the law. If the original object (a tech drawing, NOT a gun) is legal, but an electronic picture of the drawing is not???

A printed copy is legal, but the digital file is not???

Oh, I understand what your government thinks it is doing, but what they are actually doing is NOT what they think they are doing, which is "cracking down on those who endanger the community"...

It would appear (and please, correct me if I'm wrong) that under this law a would be mass killer could not download digital or electronic tech drawings to plug into his 3D printer and make entire full auto firearms in 20 minutes or less...and the ammo, of course, entirely out of thin air, thanks to the magic box. (deliberate sarcasm)

Yet that same would be killer/terrorist could use snail mail, and legally obtain the same drawing, in a hardcopy form, which would take him how much longer??? A week?? Two??

SO, done in two minutes electronically, gets you how long in jail?? Years?? But the SAME information, done on traditional PAPER is entirely legal, and the government can't touch you for having it??? Is that right??

One more example of lawmakers creating laws that affect our rights, properties and liberties, based on their incomplete and inadequate understanding of what they are making law about!!

(as an actual serious question) What about books that contain "technical drawings"? Many firearms books have a page or two that is a picture of a tech drawing, or a patent, etc. Legal as bound hardcopy, but what about the same book on a CD??

Isn't that "digital" or "electronic"?

I understand that freedom of speech in Commonwealth nations is NOT identical with the US 1st amendment, but this seems beyond the pale, even for the Crown.

[kilimanjaro]

There must have been dozens or even hundreds of 3D weapons being recovered at crime scenes in New South Wales to require passage of this law. Thank the heavens your elected elites have solved this major societal need.

Can someone cite the numbers of homicides and robberies that occurred due to this technology?

[JimPage]

"Can someone cite the numbers of homicides and robberies that occurred due to this technology? "

I am confident that the anti gun crowd can present (invent) some statistics. They seem to have them handy for any event or product

[kilimanjaro]

It would be interesting to see how the value Zero could be cited as a positive integer.

I've always been baffled how Political Science could even be allowed to use the term 'Science' in it's nomenclature.

[Aguila Blanca]

Originally Posted by barnbwt

This is going beyond even England's insane attempt to register mills and lathes.

I haven't heard about this? Is this something recent, or some time ago? Did it go anywhere?

[kilimanjaro]

The UK just topped themselves, now they are doing a 'gun amnesty' to collect privately held arms as an internal response to the Paris attacks.

So theoretically, a member of a radical cell could turn in a gun, and no questions asked, beyond perhaps forensic examination of the gun some time later.

I guess it's true that the insane don't know just how nuts they really are.

[44 AMP]

The UK just topped themselves, now they are doing a 'gun amnesty' to collect privately held arms as an internal response to the Paris attacks.

would this be like the so called "Buy Back" programs in the US, only being too cheap to actually PAY the pittance cash or gift card amount the US programs do?

The guns are turned in, "no questions asked", so there is no record of who turned in what, and therefore no prosecution is possible. While I'm sure the noble idea is to get guns "off the street", one effect is that they are a virtually perfect way for a criminal to dispose of a crime gun, one that cannot be linked back to them.

I'm not surprised to hear Britain wants to register mills and lathes. It is actually sensible, if you understand the viewpoint. Means of Production. Having a list of who, in your country, can make what, could be a useful thing, in the event of war, and it also fits in well with the socialist and communist ideal of managing all resources for the common good.

IF Britain were to go through the early 1940s AGAIN, having such a list might help....

However I think the potential for abuse FAR OUTWEIGHS any possible benefits.

[KyJim]

I'm not surprised to hear Britain wants to register mills and lathes. It is actually sensible, if you understand the viewpoint. Means of Production. Having a list of who, in your country, can make what, could be a useful thing, in the event of war, and it also fits in well with the socialist and communist ideal of managing all resources for the common good.

Keep in mind that the English licensed printing presses as a form of control. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Licens...Press_Act_1662. Remember that this was the sort of thing that led to the Revolution.

[Aguila Blanca]

Originally Posted by KyJim

Keep in mind that the English licensed printing presses as a form of control. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Licens...Press_Act_1662. Remember that this was the sort of thing that led to the Revolution.

So you're suggesting that registering the machinery of industry might lead to an industrial revolution ... ?







[Exit, stage left]

[barnbwt]

"The UK just topped themselves, now they are doing a 'gun amnesty' to collect privately held arms as an internal response to the Paris attacks."

The implication, of course, that not-yet-radicalized 'youths' will turn in their guns (which they have ahead of time, why?), thereby mooting future attempts to attack with guns (which they couldn't obtain once more, why?), upon becoming radicalized

Insanity isn't the half of it.

I'm trying to find a reference for the machine tool registering; I've seen offhand references to it by Brits numerous times, but I think I'm using bad keywords or something. I understand it was in the '80's or something, after Britain had gone totally mad with regards to firearms.

"I'm not surprised to hear Britain wants to register mills and lathes. It is actually sensible, if you understand the viewpoint. Means of Production. Having a list of who, in your country, can make what, could be a useful thing, in the event of war, and it also fits in well with the socialist and communist ideal of managing all resources for the common good."
I'd say it's a guarantee they have a list of who's using the most power in their nation, and that's just about as good, considering a 100watt PC power supply is the beefiest hardware most households run outside the kitchen (I'd say the US likely does, as well).

"IF Britain were to go through the early 1940s AGAIN..."
They'd better not ask for our damn civilian guns AGAIN.

Aguila,
I've been trying for a while to mash up the Wendell Phillips quote "what gunpowder did for war, the printing press had done for the mind."

'What gunpowder does to minds, the 3D printer will do for war' --too violent
'What guns do to antis' sensibilities, the 3D printer will do to politicians'' -too clunky
'What the slavish press does for war, 3D printing will do for guns' -eh, maybe.

I do like this one, though;
'CAD and 3D printing lend dignity to an otherwise vulgar Bubba's-garage hack-job'

I need more inspiration.

Oh, one other thing; printed repeating rimfire revovlers are coming on the scene. Double action and everything. About the size/look of a NERF gun. I suspect true cartridge-extracting arms will come due in a years' time or less at this pace of development, at which point magazine fed autoloaders and lever guns are a possibility. The plastic will always be more clunky than metal frames, but if you don't need a honkin' chamber sleeve for every round, you rapidly trend toward a more practical device. Especially if people take notice from the designers who had no choice but to work with brass and iron way back when, and simply down-load their ammo to what works with their materials in a practical-size frame (I think rimfire is a very good idea)

TCB

[ATN082268]

Originally Posted by 44 AMP

The guns are turned in, "no questions asked", so there is no record of who turned in what, and therefore no prosecution is possible. While I'm sure the noble idea is to get guns "off the street", one effect is that they are a virtually perfect way for a criminal to dispose of a crime gun, one that cannot be linked back to them.

I'm not sure of how perfect a "no questions asked" gun turn in would be for criminals disposing of their weapon they used in a crime.

First, the gun couldn't be linked/ traced back to the criminal in any way, including things like fingerprints, DNA, or through their criminal friends.

Second, at least in large U.S. cities, there are a number of cameras (government and private sector) which can take the picture of people coming and going from a gun turn in. Based on the time a picture was taken and the time a certain gun was turned in, you might be able to narrow down or identify who turned in a particular gun.

It probably boils down to what kind of history a particular weapon has regarding how much hair splitting law enforcement will apply to a "no questions asked" policy for a gun turn in.

[44 AMP]

It probably boils down to what kind of history a particular weapon has regarding how much hair splitting law enforcement will apply to a "no questions asked" policy for a gun turn in.

Yes, there would be some things they could try, if they were willing to break their word, to track who turned in what, BUT first they would have to have tied that gun to a specific crime.

And what generally happens to the guns turned in is the meltdown box. I would hope, after at least a serial number check against reported stolen guns, but they may not even do that.

The point of this (organizers view) is to get guns off the street. Period. Any guns, all guns, don't care about anything else, DELIBERATELY not looking for prosecutions to encourage turn ins.

Once the turned in guns are destroyed (to make us all safer), the police do not have a gun to test for anything. Nothing to link to a specific crime, let alone the person who turned it in.

They can't, and simply don't test every gun turned in against every open crime it might possibly "fit". Unless there is something unique about a gun that makes it stand out as a strong possibility for a specific crime, AND someone recognizes that, before it is melted down, evidence, possibly critical evidence is lost, forever.

Tossing a murder gun in the river means it probably won't be found. Tossing it into the buy back meltdown means it soon will cease to exist. No questions asked.

[Brit]

Not to surprising what they do in the UK, don't forget most of the "Bobbies"
threatened to Quit if they went to all Police carrying Pistols.

The Aussies? Same, even though their Cops are armed.