Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by Fnord666 on Friday February 17 2017, @11:19PM   Printer-friendly
from the courts-aren't-buying-it dept.

It's still illegal to manufacture firearms for others without a license.

A Sacramento, California man was sentenced Thursday to over three years in prison for unlawful manufacture of a firearm and one count of dealing firearms.

Last year, Daniel Crownshield, pleaded guilty to those counts in exchange for federal prosecutors dropping other charges. According to investigators, Crowninshield, known online as "Dr. Death," would sell unfinished AR-15 lower receivers, which customers would then pay for him to transform into fully machined lower receivers using a computer numerically controlled (CNC) mill. (In October 2014, Cody Wilson, of Austin, Texas, who has pioneered 3D-printed guns, began selling a CNC mill called "Ghost Gunner," designed to work specifically on the AR-15 lower.)

"In order to create the pretext that the individual in such a scenario was building his or her own firearm, the skilled machinist would often have the individual press a button or put his or her hands on a piece of machinery so that the individual could claim that the individual, rather than the machinist, made the firearm," the government claimed in its April 14 plea agreement.

So, if he taught a class in how to do it would he also then be a criminal?


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2, Troll) by aristarchus on Saturday February 18 2017, @11:12PM

    by aristarchus (2645) on Saturday February 18 2017, @11:12PM (#468760) Journal

    So-called social scientists simply haven't been able to define or measure that causation.

    That is because there isn't one. So-called gun lovers like so-called Runaway1956 seem to want to assume that loser gun laws reduce crime rates, so they can carry around compensation for their cowardice, but there is no such recurring correlation, and definitely no causation.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   0  
       Troll=1, Insightful=1, Total=2
    Extra 'Troll' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 2, Offtopic) by mhajicek on Sunday February 19 2017, @12:07AM

    by mhajicek (51) on Sunday February 19 2017, @12:07AM (#468770)

    False. The US cities with the most violent crime are those with the most stringent gun laws, such as Chicago. You obviously haven't actually done the research. I have.

    --
    The spacelike surfaces of time foliations can have a cusp at the surface of discontinuity. - P. Hajicek
    • (Score: 1, Troll) by aristarchus on Sunday February 19 2017, @12:29AM

      by aristarchus (2645) on Sunday February 19 2017, @12:29AM (#468777) Journal

      The US cities with the most violent crime are those with the most stringent gun laws, such as Chicago.

      True? But obviously you need a rebuttal, and the obvious rebuttal is that that is not why. Besides, you are not very wise in the way of reason. Even if your false, or at the very least unsubstantiated, correlation was true, just because strict gun laws correlate with higher crime, that does not means that loser gun laws would correlate with reduced crime. I seriously doubt you have done any research, beyond reading NRA child-killer propaganda. Citations needed! And are you talking about all violent crimes? Or just fatalities, or ones involving firearms? And did it ever occur to you that Chicago is not isolated from the rest of gun-crazy ammosexual death-eating Trump-pumping America? Or that it could be that the true causes of crime are poor moral compasses, racism, poverty, and ignorance such as you yourself exhibit. No, you obviously just love your weepons, and are not too smart. Best to just be honest about that, like Runaway is.

      • (Score: 2, Flamebait) by Runaway1956 on Sunday February 19 2017, @01:18AM

        by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Sunday February 19 2017, @01:18AM (#468804) Journal

        "the obvious rebuttal is that that is not why"

        Find some proof to support your "obvious" rebuttal.

        "Besides, you are not very wise"

        Assuming the name of a well known philosopher doesn't make you wise, nor does it qualify you to judge other people's wisdom.

        There IS one obvious correlation that holds true across America: The lowest crime statistics are found in those areas with the most lenient gun laws, and the highest crime statistics are found in those areas with the strictest gun control laws. The correlation is much to strong to shrug off. You might explain it away in a number of ways. Here, let me help you: "Most criminals hear the news of strict gun laws, so they move to the cities with the strictest gun laws to avoid being shot while they commit crimes." Of course, there is nothing to support that idea, but it does explain high crime rates in strict gun control cities. Your turn - you offer us some other nonsense explanation for the statistics.

        --
        We've finally beat Medicare! - Houseplant in Chief
        • (Score: 1, Insightful) by aristarchus on Sunday February 19 2017, @01:31AM

          by aristarchus (2645) on Sunday February 19 2017, @01:31AM (#468808) Journal

          More hillbilly logic, Runaway? Seriously?

          The lowest crime statistics are found in those areas with the most lenient gun laws, and the highest crime statistics are found in those areas with the strictest gun control laws.

          The highest crime rates are found in the areas with the highest rates of higher education! Colleges cause crime! Lower crime rates are found in areas with higher populations of livestock! See, all we need to do is move some sheep and pigs and turkeys into those "carnage" places, and crime will go down! See, it has nothing to do with guns, nothing to do with your mirroring of the criminal mind (though it is curious how easily you do so. . . ), and nothing to do with gun laws. Crime has fallen dramatically in the US since the sixties. You should read a book, or get someone to read it to you, The Better Angels of Our Nature: Why Violence Has Declined [wikipedia.org]. Has actual facts and stuff, not just a presumption based on paranoia.

          Even wonder why the places with the loserest gun laws also have the lowest population? Is there something about rural places that only correlates with guns, but is not actually an effect of guns? Could you be committing a "false cause" fallacy, like the well known "Texas Marksman" fallacy? Or maybe it is because there are so many guns that there are so few people? Correlation that strong strongly suggest a causal relation! Just how many Hatfields and McCoys are left, anyway?

          • (Score: 2, Offtopic) by Runaway1956 on Sunday February 19 2017, @01:54AM

            by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Sunday February 19 2017, @01:54AM (#468821) Journal

            Please, try to familiarize yourself with rational thought. It isn't necessary that you make contact with reality, but you could get close enough to have a shouting match with those of us who live in reality.

            --
            We've finally beat Medicare! - Houseplant in Chief
            • (Score: 2, Funny) by aristarchus on Sunday February 19 2017, @07:28PM

              by aristarchus (2645) on Sunday February 19 2017, @07:28PM (#469039) Journal

              When some realize that they have lost an argument on the internets, they go Godwin. Runaway appeals to reason and facts.