3D Printing

Cody Wilson Sues State Department Over Threats About Spreading Digital Gun-Making Files

Free Speech and Right to Bear Arms Both Violated by Keeping Him From Spreading Software that Helps People Make Guns At Home, Wilson insists.


Can a country with a First Amendment and a Second Amendment forbid someone from spreading communication regarding how to make a gun? (And can a country with a Fifth Amendment guarantee of due process of law do so essentially through a vague threat without ever officially telling you whether you are even actually breaking the law?)

Cody Wilson of Defense Distributed, along with the Second Amendment Foundation, filed a federal lawsuit in Texas yesterday trying to answer that question with a resounding "no"!

The suit is against the State Department and various of its officials, including Secretary of State John Kerry. Why? Because an official of the Department sent Wilson and his company a threatening letter in May 2013, implying that hosting and spreading digital files that could instruct a 3D printer to make the plastic gun Wilson dubbed "The Liberator" might violate federal law.

I detailed the original State Department move against Wilson at issue in this suit as it happened and in this December 2013 profile of Wilson in which I described it like this:

a letter was sent from the federal government addressed to Wilson and Defense Distributed, the name under which he and his associates design and produce 3D weapons. It was signed by Glenn Smith, chief of enforcement for the State Department's Bureau of Political-Military Affairs, Office of Defense Trade Control Compliance.

Smith warned Wilson that the technical specs he made publicly available may be "ITAR-controlled technical data" released "without the required prior authorization" from the State Department. ITAR stands for International Traffic in Arms Regulations, which are the U.S. government's set of rules controlling the import and export of munitions.

In other words, by releasing CAD (computer-aided design) files allowing anyone with access to a 3D printer to make a somewhat fragile plastic pistol, Wilson may have become an illegal arms trafficker. The State Department didn't say for sure that this information (some might call it speech) fell under its jurisdiction. But while regulators pondered the question-and four months later, at press time, they were still pondering-they demanded that Wilson "treat the above technical data as ITAR-controlled," meaning that "all such data should be removed from public access immediately."

Wilson complied. As the lawsuit relates, Wilson is still waiting for the State Department to tell him whether this thing he wants to do—this act which he sees as protected by both the First Amendment, since it involves expression of written information, and the Second, since it allows people to make a homemade weapon of the sort that should be protected by the 2008 Heller decision—is legal or not. 

Wilson and his legal team see the threat from the State Department via ITAR as essentially prior restraint on expression, generally considered constitutionally dubious. The suit declares that this:

 censorship of Plaintiffs' speech, and the ad hoc, informal and arbitrary manner in which that scheme is applied, violate the First, Second, and Fifth Amendments to the United States Constitution. Plaintiffs are entitled to declaratory and injunctive relief barring any further application of this prior restraint scheme, and to recover money damages to compensate for the harm such application has already caused.

The lawsuit insists that:

The scope of technical data subject to ITAR control, as described on the U.S.Munitions List ("USML")….is vague, ambiguous, and complex. Defendants constantly change, without notice, their views of what this scope entails

And that:

Beginning in 1978, the U.S. Department of Justice's Office of Legal Counsel issued a series of written opinions advising Congress, the White House, and the Department of State that the use of the ITAR to impose a prior restraint on publications of privately generated unclassified information into the public domain violated the First Amendment of United States Constitution….

Wilson has tried to keep on the right side of ITAR law. He's asked them in at least 10 separate official requests to tell him if his original Liberator plans actually fall under its jurisdiction. He's also inquired if if his current main project, the "Ghost Gunner," a home CNC mill which allows individuals to make metal AR-15 lower receivers at home without serial numbers, falls under ITAR. (Such a request is known as a "commodity jurisdiction" request.)

Their answer, if I'm reading the suit correctly, is that the hardware does not but that software does. The suit details at length a confusing series of bureaucratic buck-passing from the ITAR people that makes it very hard for Wilson and Defense Distributed to know whether their planned activities will bring criminal punishment down on them.

Wilson said in a phone interview this morning that he's trying to get all Ghost Gunner customers to affirm that they are U.S. citizens, since he fears if he sells one to a non-citizen (which could constitute "export") he just might run afoul of ITAR.

The injury to Wilson and his company happened years ago, but Wilson explains that for a long time they were prepared for actual enforcement action from the government, so were prepared to be in a "defensive" mode on the legal questions surrounding ITAR's letter to him.

Years went by, and he realized "their intention is not to ever move and hope this all goes away." That's when he decided to take matters into his own hand and go on the offense and sue them.

Wilson, who tends to see himself as, and to act as, a disruptive force for radical liberty of both information and action, wonders if "the ultimate outcome will be anything any of us desire; I don't think there's reason for more than a sliver of optimism." But he holds out hope for the "possibility of an injunction" on the government that would liberate the legal ability to spread gunmaking information at least for a while.

The suit punctiliously notes that "Infringing upon the creation and acquisition of arms of the kind in common use for traditional lawful purposes violates the Second Amendment." Wilson, whose vision of the Second Amendment is wider and wilder than the specific holding in Heller, says that he hopes the case can be settled on the very clear First Amendment argument, recognizing the Second Amendment one might be "much stickier." From his own perspective, he believes the Second Amendment is meant to apply to citizens' rights to "any article of military utility" and he's aware courts tend not to be too comfortable with that.

The lawyer handling the Second Amendment part of Wilson's case is Second Amendment superstar Alan Gura. Gura already has an amazing track record of precedent-setting Second Amendment victories, including two at the Supreme Court, in the Heller and McDonald cases which vindicated the Second Amendment as actually protecting an individual right for commonly owned weapons in the home.

Gura is sure of the Second Amendment element of the case, as specifically argued in the suit, he tells me. The suit mentions another case Gura recently won in federal district court, Mance v. Holder. That case declared the federal interstate handgun transfer ban unconstitutional. The principle behind that, Gura says, is that the Second Amendment is meaningless if it does not also apply in some respect to the ability to obtain or make weapons, without which the right to keep and bear them is nugatory.

In this case, Gura says, "if you have the right to keep arms, you should be able to make" arms. And "if you have the right to make firearms, you have the right to acquire information useful to you in doing that," the sort of information the government is threatening Wilson for providing.

Wired and The New York Times have more details. Wired quoted Gura thusly:

"The internet is available worldwide, so posting something on the internet is deemed an export, and to [the State Department] this justifies imposing a prior restraint on internet speech," says Alan Gura, the lawyer leading the lawsuit, using the legal term "prior restraint" to mean censorship of speech before it's published. "That's a vast, unchecked seizure of power over speech that's…not authorized by our constitution."

The suit does give the eventual judge the option of accepting, Gura told me, "the argument we are making is that this is simply not authorized by Congress, that the State Department is acting beyond its delegated authority" under existing arms control export law with these ITAR threats. "It's possible we don't get to the constitutional issues."

Wilson explained in today's interview that in a previous case of ITAR being used to quash speech, involving cryptography, the Bernstein case, ITAR slipped out of any authoritative higher court determination that they were out of line (after two different losses for the government) by removing cryptography from under its legal aegis, though at least one judge declared in that case that indeed, code is protected speech. If that doctrine were widely accepted, Wilson's victory should be assured.

The analogies between Bernstein and Wilson's case are not perfect. Cryptography is actually not a munition. But the information Wilson wants to spread (and that of course is already spread all over the world even without him doing it directly, making the government's efforts against him achieve the hat trick of "futile," "pointless waste of time," and "unconstitutional") is literally about making a munition. Wilson expects a variety of feints and tricks from the government to not have to quickly and directly come to grips with the legal issues raised as the case proceeds, which could take an unpredictably long time.

NEXT: New Study of Obamacare Coverage Suggests What the Health Law Is—and Maybe Isn't—Doing

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. It’s rumored George Galloway may have lost his seat in West Bradford.

    That would be awesome and I hope that SOB is out.

    Other notably vile human being Sally Kohn is also totally supporting those brave, brave conservatives who refused to say it was okay for Pamela Geller to draw pictures of Mohammad.

    Sally KohnVerified account
    Good on ya @IngrahamAngle ? plus six other conservatives who refused to defend #PamelaGeller

    DERP. Particularly wonderful given some things Kohn’s had to say about Christianity, like the time she said Christian wedding chapels shouldn’t be allowed to not serve gay weddings.

    Got that? Drawing pictures of Mohammad = grave offense and you deserve to get shot at. Forcing Christians to perform ceremonies to which they are opposed = righteous and utterly noble.

    1. In the contest between Eric Liu and Dean Obeidallah as to which one is the more insufferable prick, I don’t even acknowledge Kohn as she is an insufferable prick at such a greater scale of magnitude than those two men that any such comparisons would be meaningless.

    2. If it weren’t for double standards they’d have no standards at all.

    3. Ace of Spades gives an epic rant about the Geller issue. He absolutely nails why I can’t stand so many writers on the Right.

      This is about class. This is all about class.

      This is about, specifically, the careerist, cowardly, go-along-to-get-along mores of the Upper Middle Class, the class of people whose parents were all college educated, and of course are college educated themselves; the class that dominates our thought-transmitting institutions (because non-college educated people are more of less shut out of this industry).

      It is a class which is deathly afraid of social stigma, and lives in class-based fear being grouped with the wrong people, and which is more interested in Career, quite frankly, than in the actual tradecraft of that Career, which is clarity of thought and clarity of expression.

      Thus, our institutions of thought propagation are dominated by the very people who can be easily cowed by the Social Justice Warriors, and who will, therefore, adjust their speech in order to not run afoul of the thoughtless — and frequently lunatic — thugs of the censorious left.


    4. He goes on

      I am so disgusted by how so many alleged thinkers seem to care more about social positioning than actual thought.

      I should not advertise any hostility I may have towards Ms. Gellar to prove I’m “among the acceptable ones.”

      Acceptable to whom? Who is making this list?

      Perhaps I am like Ms. Gellar in this respect: I have long ago decided that I do not wish to be on the list of the Acceptable Ones, and will take no action whatsoever to secure my place upon it. Maybe I have an advantage here: I do not seek the approval of those who bestow Respectability, as I simply do not respect them.

      People who make their trade by writing and, one should hope, thinking about ideas should perhaps follow Ms. Gellar’s example, not on the particular positions she stakes out, but her example as to her complete indifference as to how any statement will advance or retard her position in the hierarchy of the stultifying, deliberately-obscuring vagueries of Upper Middle Class Consensus of Respectability.

      1. People who make their living by thinking pay no price for being wrong, just for being unpopular. Is it really surprising that eventually, they all devolve into junior high navel gazing contests?

        1. Um… supposed to be a response to Irish below. Fucking squirrels.

          1. But it applies to my link just as well.

            1. True.

        2. That is an excellent point. I had never thought about it that way but you are absolutely right.

    5. Related: Associated Press shits all over itself.

      Does Pamela Geller regret organizing the Prophet Muhammad cartoon contest that ended in gunfire?

      How dare she not regret being the victim of an attempted assassination? The bitch.

      A master of rhetoric and clearly comfortable in the spotlight, the 56-year-old former media executive shifts easily from charming to combative. Her critics have called the cartoon contest needlessly provocative, practically an invitation for violence. But Geller argued that any blame should be focused on extremists who can’t be criticized or lampooned without resorting to violence.


      In an editorial Thursday, The New York Times said Geller “has a long history of declarations and actions motivated purely by hatred for Muslims” and called the Garland event “an exercise in bigotry and hatred posing as a blow for freedom. … To pretend it was motivated by anything other than hate is simply hogwash.”

      “Hey, let’s quote that earlier article where the New York Times said something really stupid that they should regret for the rest of their lives.”

      1. No. to pretend that it matters that it was motivated by hate is hogwash. Who gives a shit if it was motivated by love? Would the resulting murder not been really murder then?

        The bottom line is that the NYT thinks it is okay for Muslims to murder people who draw Muhammad. They the NRA and the Tea party. Does anyone here think the NYT would think an NRA member or Tea Party member would be justified if they showed up and murdered 12 people at the Times offices? The times did publish a lot of things that were motivated by hate after all.

        These people hate other Americans more than they hate the Islamists.

        1. What you notice about a lot of these people too is that they’ll spend literally 1000 words attacking Geller without once defending her right to free speech or taking any time to, you know, criticize the people who tried to murder her, but then if you dare mention that it sure sounds like they wish the Islamists had succeeded they get really angry and tell you ‘of course it’s not justified to shoot someone!’

          Well, you assholes sure could have fooled me. You’d think that if you thought it was wrong to shoot someone you’d talk more about that than about your disagreements with Pamela Geller. I wonder what would have happened if Geller had actually died. I’m convinced the narrative would have been largely the same and they would have acted like she kind of had it coming.

          1. It is all about deniable violence. The Times loves the idea of using violence to silence their enemies. They just don’t want to get their hands dirty or be associated with the violence. So the radical Muslims are a perfect ally for them. On the one hand they are so counter to everything the country and the civilization stands for, the Times has no worries of ever being associated with their violence. One the other hand the Times’ domestic political enemies are the only ones willing to publicly stand up to them. So Islamic violence is a perfect political tool for the left.

            1. I believe you are overestimating the Times. Their stance has been formulated according to the same moral rubric that Gary Trudeau used: “root for the [perceived] underdog”. That is the entirety of their ethical code, and they believe themselves to be righteous because of it.

              1. No. If the Muslims murdered some gay Broadway producer, the Times would decide free speech was really important.

                1. I’m not so sure…then again, I don’t pay attention to the grievance ticker tape.

        2. Yet more whiny shitheads who would rather spend time attacking Geller than her attempted assassins.

          This is funny because it’s Larry Wilmore being the pussy in this case, and his audience doesn’t seem to actually want to laugh at his jokes. They kind of chuckle in the way a studio audience does when something isn’t funny and they don’t know how to react.

          I would have preferred if they booed, but at least they don’t seem to be on Wilmore’s side.

          Larry Wilmore is also a painfully unfunny host if this is any indication. Either that or his writers are atrocious.

      2. “has a long history of declarations and actions motivated purely by hatred for Muslims”

        So? The fucking Illinois Nazis won a great victory for freedom by pressing their right to march. So what if they’re assholes? So what if they did it for the worst of reasons?

        1. Social signaling, Warty. Social signaling. What matters most is making SURE that the more…shall we say zealous…enforcers of “proper thought” (meaning SJWs at this point) don’t decide you aren’t right-thinking enough. They need to prostrate themselves before the priests of Pure Thought and make their proper obeisance before they can say anything else on the subject, and even then they still have to be wary.

          It’s tough being a pussy who is afraid that the bien pensants might get mad at you. Really tough!


          1. See the Ace of Spades rant above.

            It is a class which is deathly afraid of social stigma, and lives in class-based fear being grouped with the wrong people, and which is more interested in Career, quite frankly, than in the actual tradecraft of that Career, which is clarity of thought and clarity of expression.

            That absolutely nails these people, left and right.

            1. Some of them are also just really stupid. Greta Van Susteren argued that Pamela Geller was wrong because she put cop’s lives in danger.

              Got that? If someone wants to murder you because of your free speech rights and you attempt to show them you’re not afraid, it’s your fault if a cop gets wounded when psychopaths try to murder you.

              This is such a ridiculous argument that you have to be an utter incompetent moron to make it.

              1. I’m also watching that ludicrous Megan Kelly video with Richard Fowler, and at one point Fowler refers to Geller as ‘Gallagher.’

                Good to see these anti-free speech idiots spend so much time researching the people they’re talking about before running their mouths – it would be awfully embarrassing if they couldn’t even remember their names.

                1. Oh God, Kelly starts quoting case law regarding the Westboro Baptist Church to prove that Fowler’s argument that you can’t insult Islam is wrong, and Fowler gets this smug, shit-eating smirk on his face.

                  Why are these people who are so wrong about everything also so smug? Is it because you have to be smug in order to be this wrong while never finding time to question your arguments?

                  1. Why are these people who are so wrong about everything also so smug? Is it because you have to be smug in order to be this wrong while never finding time to question your arguments?

                    Oh my yes. They’re delusional. Think of Tulpa and his arguments, and how equally smug and delusional they are. It goes hand in hand. You have to actually be so ironclad in your belief that you are always smarter than everyone else that nothing can penetrate. It’s like it’s Smugtanium Armor or something.

                    1. Dunning?Kruger ain’t just a river in Germany.

                    2. Three words Episiarch, Joe from Lowell.

                    3. Yes, joe is another perfect example. It’s clearly a desperate ego defense mechanism, but man, it requires serious delusion. That takes work.

                    4. Epsiarch, it is because they get their entire sense of personal worth from their politics. That is nuts I know but that is what they do. I am sure you are the same way I am in that life is not about politics. If for some reason it was apparent to you that you were wrong about government and you really changed your mind, you would change it and not give a fuck or think worse about yourself. These people are not like that. They think they are superior because they have the right politics. So admitting their politics are wrong is admitting they suck. It is a sick way to be but that is how they are.

                    5. Oh, I know John. It’s very weird to me, but I realize that’s a large part of what is going on. But it also disgusts me. It’s such an…inhuman…way to live.

                    6. it is because they get their entire sense of personal worth from their politics

                      It is their religion. Of course they know they’re right, their “god” said so.

                      So, they defend their religion like I defend Christianity; except that my God claims to have died to save me and their “god” will remind me that it will kill me in order to save itself.

                    7. Ah. The Dead God. Osiris has precedence.

                2. Again, Irish, they’re not anti-free-speech, they are anti whoever they are supposed to be anti. The free speech consideration doesn’t even really fall on their radar. Seriously, they’re far too morally and intellectually depraved to even be thinking about that. All they care about is making sure they are seen denouncing the correct person (or praising them) at every opportunity. Because it’s social signaling. They’re not even thinking about free speech. They don’t give the slightest shit about stuff like that unless signaling is involved.

              2. What they seem to forget is that wanting to kill someone from drawing a cartoon is insane. Yeah, if I went around and went into bars and called people’s wives and girlfriend’s whores and someone finally snapped and shot me, yeah you could say that I was asking for it at some level and certainly the fact that I was calling random women whores had something to do with my being shot.

                One the other hand, if some group decided that anyone wearing a Mets Jersey was secretly communicating with the alien invasion force and tried to shoot up a Mets game, no one would mention the fact that the victims were wearing Mets’ jerseys as some kind of mitigation.

                This is like the Mets’ jerseys not me calling women whores. Yet they act like it is not. They act like it is totally reasonable to want to murder someone for drawing a cartoon.

                1. They also ignore a more fundamental issue which is that the Jihadists don’t only want to stop us from speaking IN THIS INSTANCE. It’s not just about Mohammad drawings – this just happens to be the current battleline. If you give up on this fight, then the Jihadists are just going to decide ‘Oh, now we’re going to just murder anyone who criticizes Islam. Or we’re going to kill anyone we think is dressed provocatively. Or we’re going to kill gay people.’

                  That is why we cannot cede this issue and that is why, in this instance, I have no compunctions about calling Pamela Geller a hero for refusing to cede ground that cannot be ceded. The day people stop drawing pictures of Mohammad is the day the Jihadists start putting out hit lists for even lesser supposed ‘offenses’ and what are we going to do then? Decide that now we shouldn’t ‘provoke’ them by criticizing their religion’s misogyny? Decide that we shouldn’t ‘provoke’ them by allowing our women to wear bikinis?

                  You cannot yield to violent provocation because when you do they will assume you’ll yield again and again and again and they will never stop pushing for further concessions. To cede ground here is to allow them to attack us even deeper in our own territory and that cannot be allowed to happen.

                  1. They always think they are smarter than everyone else. They always think everyone can be reasoned with if only a smart person like them is reasoning with them. It never occurs to them that some people might not give a fuck and can’t be reasoned with.

                  2. But yielding to vehement provocation is what they do. After all, that’s how they police their own. The SJWs are nothing if not the left’s brownshirt squad keeping everyone in line. So this is 100% normal for them. Backing down when someone complains loud enough, as long as the complainants have the right identity, is basically their entire MO.

              3. That’s funny on another level when you think about how much the cops working to protect the mohamed drawing contest would probably have wanted a chance to participate.

            2. It is a class which is deathly afraid of social stigma, and lives in class-based fear being grouped with the wrong people, and which is more interested in Career, quite frankly, than in the actual tradecraft of that Career, which is clarity of thought and clarity of expression.

              agree with John that this nails it.

              I don’t even think they actually are rooting for the jihadists or anything. I think they are just so bent over backwards trying to be one of the good white people that they can’t help but spout stupid shit when confronted with these mentally dissonant situations.

              1. plus they are mostly stupid. that helps too.

    6. Exit polls point to a stronger than expected showing by Cameron’s Conservatives, not that he doesn’t totally suck.

  2. The absurdity of a significant portion of the content aside, is not The Anarchist Cookbook not legal to own? I’ve long been under the assumption that it is. Hell, I’ve met people who claimed to have purchased the book on Amazon.com during the early 00’s.

    If such a publishing can legally be obtained, how does the information the plantiff wishes to distribute differ? I’m far from a legal scholar and I’m aware a few of you floating about are. Please explain, if you, can, in layman’s terms. Thanks.

    1. It is legal. I am not sure how a book where every single explosives’ recipe doesn’t work is very relevant to the discussion. 😉

      1. Fair point. Thus my reference to the absurd content. What I’m getting at is the majority of the book was written solely for the purpose of altering the mind and inflicting bodily harm on others. What Mr. Wilson is trying to do is basically the same, minus the shitty LSD recipes. I think he has the right to do so.

        It seems akin to the pornography/prostitution paradox. Two equal activities with equal desired outcomes, yet different legal standings.

        1. I agree. I was just being a smart ass.

          1. Gotcha’. It’s hard to tell with you. You’re not known for your humor. A solid mind, yes. Humor, not so much. At least, that’s my take when lurking.

            1. John is a fucking riot. He can go off the rails occasionally, but his conments are must read. If there is a commenter on HyR I’d like to have a drink with, it’s that guy.

              1. You must have thought Frank Burns from MASH was a riot too.

                1. If John is Frank Burns, I suppose that would make you… Major Houlihan?

    2. The Fight Club novel actually has workable instructions in how to build a bomb. By this logic, the US government should be allowed to censor that section.

    3. Hell, I’ve met people who claimed to have purchased the book on Amazon.com during the early 00’s.

      I bought it in my college bookstore! Still it’s nothing compared to the Poor Man’s James Bond and shit like that. The Anarchist Cookbook is good as a history piece but don’t try any of the shit Powell talks about. Most of it is either outdated or wrong.

      1. I bought both of those by mail in the 8th grade in 1983.

      2. Poor Man’s James Bond.


      3. I believe my friends older brother had a copy when i was in junior high. We attempted to follow instructions on how to get high by smoking banana peels.

        Needless to say, it worked amazingly well and we got really high. And totally didn’t feel stupid afterward.

    4. It’s still available. In fact, if you search for it on Amazon.com, you’re offered a whole bunch of other titles which look more useful and workable. 😉

      1. Nah, I’m not in the market. I prefer my Glock 17.

        1. Ooo – me, too! I think that the only thing that will still run after the Rapture will be cockroaches….and Glocks…:) #Perfection

          1. Glocks, Cockroaches and Tribulation Saints. The saints will run more sporadically than the prior examples given, ensuring their demise before the others.

      2. I read blogs nowadays. I do keep a few books in the library, as you never know when the lights will go out, but if you haven’t practiced what you’ve learned before then, it’s not going to help you much.

  3. Print the code for Ghost Gunner software and put it in book form. Viola! You now have protected speech since the export of books has first amendment protection. This is how Phil Zimmermann who invented PGP was able to challenge charges of export violations prior to ITAR.

    1. ever try typing in all that code from a book? with no errors?
      for files that are several Megs of data,that’s a LOT of typing. now if you can scan it in and use OCR or the book has some sort of PC readable media included,then you’ve got something.

  4. I have met a couple of ATF guys. Fucking retards that have no idea about really dangerous people. They shit their pants over some kid making firecrackers and think that is bomb making. It is a testament to the good character of people in general that such things don’t happen, well, hardly ever. Even a half competent person could sow some serious mayhem with almost no effort at all if they were determined. Most of the people we see causing trouble are batshit crazy and hopelessly incompetent thus allowing the halfwits in law enforcement to keep their jobs.

    1. Or have popular support. That is what makes a terrorist; popular support such that they can hide from law enforcement without being ratted out. Jesse James was nothing but a terrorist still fighting the civil war. That was all fun ad games as long as he was running around Missouri where most of the population supported him. When he went up to Minnesota and tried to rob a bank in a town full of Union veterans, there was nothing left of him and his gang but a greasy spot. And when the people in Missouri got tired of fighting the war, someone shot him and took the reward.

      Contrast that to Bill Ayers. Bill Ayers was a failure as a terrorist because this country didn’t support communists. So he was totally screwed and had to run and hide. If we ever get a no shit popular rebellion, the law enforcement in this country is fucked. They are just too stupid to know it.

      1. What about your terrorist pal Eric Rudolf? Was he a success?

        1. You mean that atheist guy who blew up the Olympics? That guy? I know you are fucking retarded but, you need to try harder to troll than that son.

  5. And Fast and Furious was obviously in full compliace with ITAR. Benghazi, too.


      *eye makeup runs from crying*

  6. I’m surprised Wilson hasn’t been demonized by the government.

    I thought he was gonna get the Swartz/Ulbricht/Snowden treatment.

    Maybe Obama hasn’t read about Wilson in the newspaper yet?

    1. My first thought reading this was that he was viewed by the government as a harmless minor nuisance, but if he keeps this up I’m pretty sure he’s going to get a really hard smackdown. I assume he knows what he’s in for. The government knows they can’t do diddly to stop this kind of research but they sure as hell won’t tolerate being seen losing face.

  7. Who’s in charge of the State Department?

    1. Master Blaster?

      1. Master Blaster



  8. I’m sure Hillary will put a stop to that nonsense.

    1. Cody Wilson and a bunch of his friends inexplicably kill themselves?

      1. “The fact that Cody Wilson was able to shoot himself in the head five times just goes to show how dangerous 3d printed weapons really are.”

  9. makes it very hard for Wilson and Defense Distributed to know whether their planned activities will bring criminal punishment down on them

    That’s not a bug it’s a feature. /govt lawyer

    1. Whatever’s not explicitly permitted is prohibited – isn’t that how the law works? Wilson can’t do anything until the government tells him it’s okay, if they don’t tell him it’s okay then it’s not okay.
      /shaking the tree over here, boss.

  10. Two college golfers charged with “felony video voyeurism”.

    FAYETTEVILLE, Ark. (AP) ? Arkansas golfers Taylor Moore and Nicolas Echavarria have been suspended indefinitely from competition following their arrests for allegedly taking sexually explicit photos of an intoxicated woman.

    Moore and Echavarria were arrested by Fayetteville police Wednesday and charged with felony video voyeurism.

    According to a preliminary police report, the woman said she went to Moore’s house on April 11 to sleep following a night of drinking. She recalled seeing flashes of light and suspected Moore had taken pictures of her.


    That makes me a felon several times over.


  11. http://cdn.pjmedia.com/instapu……25-PM.png

    AP does its best to chase peek derp. “Ends in two deaths”. Unfucking believable.

    1. I still think that ludicrous NYT article is the dumbest article yet.

      But it is equally clear that the Muhammad Art Exhibit and Contest in Garland, Tex., was not really about free speech. It was an exercise in bigotry and hatred posing as a blow for freedom.

      That’s pretty stupid, but then there’s this:

      Some of those who draw cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad may earnestly believe that they are striking a blow for freedom of expression, though it is hard to see how that goal is advanced by inflicting deliberate anguish on millions of devout Muslims who have nothing to do with terrorism. As for the Garland event, to pretend that it was motivated by anything other than hate is simply hogwash.


      Deliberate anguish? Let me play you the world’s smallest sintir, Achmed.

      Honestly, if you’re ‘anguished’ by a private organization criticizing or mocking your beliefs, then go fuck yourself, you lack the emotional maturity to leave your house every morning and contend with this cold, frightening world of ours.

      Also, why is it that only religions are supposed to be given this ludicrous deference? I am an atheist, so I have no religious beliefs. I do have political beliefs, and they’re frequently insulted. Why is it horrible to mock religions, but all other ideologies are fair game?

      1. Fucking all of Islam is a cesspool of insanity. Why even discuss it?

        Let’s drag all religions into the argument and we will be getting somewhere.

        1. Go fuck yourself retard. How about we talk about the lunatics who are murdering people over cartoons and the leftist retards like you who are excusing them.

          1. I’m excusing your Islamist conservative brethren? You are full of shit. I hate them like I hate all backward-ass conservatives.

            I am a Sam Harris liberal. You can stick that is your uptight ass and smoke it.

            1. Yes you are. You are on here trolling and shitting on every thread because we are saying bad things about them and your lefty retard friends who defend them.

              Everyone here sees who you are. Go do the gene pool a favor and die.

        2. The reason it’s more important to discuss Islam is because no one died because of this cartoon.

          1. Yes. Islam is easily the worst. No doubt.

            Christianity is second worst. Christians are partly enlightened but have a long way to go.

            1. You are the dumbest most hate filled creature on earth. Go fuck yourself and let the human beings talk for a while.

            2. Please, PLEASE give me a reason to bring out my statistic on total murders by member of all religions Atheism included.

              Yeah, I didn’t think so.

  12. Every day, I breathe a sigh a relief over the stupidity of politicians, bureaucrats, and voters. If they had any idea of how easy it is to make a bomb, free speech would be gone in a heartbeat.

    People who want to censor stuff make me laugh. It’s like looking at one of those old timey maps where the continents are all wrong and there are sea monsters. Here be dragons!

    In other news, I’ve been watching a lot of Thom Hartmann. He blames almost everything on Reagan and Republicans. I’m tempted to call in and ask if there is any problem in the US he does not blame on Republicans.

  13. Umm, ok… I um… I’ll just leave this here:

    A federal judge has thrown out a lawsuit targeting parts of Washington state’s new expanded gun-background checks.

    A federal judge on Thursday threw out a lawsuit challenging parts of Washington state’s new law expanding background checks on gun transfers, saying gun-rights activists couldn’t challenge it because they aren’t being prosecuted for violating it.


    1. “Come back when you’re in handcuffs!”

      1. After the cops shoot you up, your corpses will totally have standing!

  14. I think it’s funny that the government (and all the people who give it their undying, unconditional devotion) think that it’s even remotely possible to stop a computer file from proliferating in the year 2015. Even in North Korea, where the government has absolute power and a strong will to stamp out any “outside” information, there’s a thriving black market in food, clothing, movies, and music from other countries. If a repressive dictatorship can’t even get that done, how in the hell do people expect the US government to put even the smallest dent in the spread of that file?

  15. Well it’s official George Galloway has lost. Labour has lost huge in Scotland and the Liberal Democrats have lost hugely as well. The Conservatives are making some minor gains but the disaster in Scotland is wiping out any Labour gains in England.

    1. Galloway, fan of Assad:

      I was very impressed by his knowledge, by his sharpness, by his flexible mind. I was very, very impressed. ? Syria is lucky to have Bashar al-Assad as her President.

    2. Seems the BBC is predicting the Conservatives to get exactly half of the seats in Parliament. And since Sinn Fein abstains this would give them a small 4-seat majority.

    3. Excellent.

    4. Miliband’s campaign manager and Shadow Cabinet member lost to a 20 year SNP girl.

  16. you can buy all sorts of books on how to make guns so why is spreading the same information on the internet illegal. of course we all know the answer FYTW and control.

  17. My Aunty Kayla recently got a stunning green Dodge Caliber Wagon just by working online with a pc.
    look at this site ????????????? http://www.jobsfish.com

  18. I make up to $90 an hour working from my home. My story is that I quit working at Walmart to work online and with a little effort I easily bring in around $40h to $86h? Someone was good to me by sharing this link with me, so now i am hoping i could help someone else out there by sharing this link… Try it, you won’t regret it!……

  19. Google pay 97$ per hour my last pay check was $8500 working 1o hours a week online. My younger brother friend has been averaging 12k for months now and he works about 22 hours a week. I cant believe how easy it was once I tried it out.
    This is wha- I do…… ?????? http://www.netjob80.com

  20. Google pay 97$ per hour my last pay check was $8500 working 1o hours a week online. My younger brother friend has been averaging 12k for months now and he works about 22 hours a week. I cant believe how easy it was once I tried it out.
    This is wha- I do…… ?????? http://www.incomejoin70.com

  21. Google pay 97$ per hour my last pay check was $8500 working 1o hours a week online. My younger brother friend has been averaging 12k for months now and he works about 22 hours a week. I cant believe how easy it was once I tried it out.
    This is wha- I do…… ?????? http://www.incomejoin70.com

  22. Nathaniel . although Stephanie `s rep0rt is super… I just bought a top of the range Mercedes sincee geting a check for $4416 this last four weeks and would you believe, ten/k last-month . no-doubt about it, this really is the best-job I’ve ever done . I actually started seven months/ago and almost straight away started making a nice over $79.. p/h….. ?????? http://www.Jobs-Cash.com

  23. Nathaniel . although Stephanie `s rep0rt is super… I just bought a top of the range Mercedes sincee geting a check for $4416 this last four weeks and would you believe, ten/k last-month . no-doubt about it, this really is the best-job I’ve ever done . I actually started seven months/ago and almost straight away started making a nice over $79.. p/h….. ?????? http://www.Jobs-Cash.com

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.