Is the right to the privacy of your communications on your cell phone covered or not by the framing document HA? Technology doesn't limit the right in any circumstance, guns included. 3D printing is just a more modern form of manufacturing, like cell phones are a more modern form of communication. What the Constitution protects, not establishes as a right, but protects as an existing, fundamental, right, in the instance of the cell phone is your 4th Amendment right to be secure in your person, home, papers, and effects. How a gun is manufactured is of little consequence, individuals have been allowed to manufacture their own firearms for their own use since before the Constitution was penned, and how it is manufactured now matters not in the least, just as the means of your communications matters not in the least.
Unintended consequences? There were 400,000 thousand assault rifles in civilian hands before Clinton's Assault Weapons Ban. Now there are 20 to 40 million.
Tell an American something is banned and they just want it more.
Even goes back to Tipper Gore's PMRC, they labeled offensive albums that only increased sales for those artists.
Thomas Sowell: There are no solutions, just trade-offs.
It is, perhaps, the most versatile rifle out there outside of a 30.06. Low recoil, easy to handle for anyone, good power for a medium cartridge, useful for hunting anything from a mountain lion to a prairie dog . . . it really is a very good sporting rifle, not to mention a very effective home defense weapon given the round won't stabilize at close distance and is therefore less of a danger to penetrate room to room than even a 9mm handgun round would be.
Yeah, I think Democrats did us all a huge favor by showing us that they were indeed hostile to gun ownership regardless of their attempts to show they were "tough on crime" before Clinton's first mid-term election. That one bill did more to ensure that Democrats lost seats in legislatures all across the US than any other action.
