Anonymous #1 2w

Why would the FBI care

1

Anonymous OP 2w

the part about illegal weapons

1

Anonymous #1 2w

Not illegal liberal its my constitutional right to make ar15s for personal use without serial numbers

1

Anonymous OP 2w

I’m assuming the QR code leads to a source for making these parts. Providing material for the distribution of these weapons is also federally legal from my understanding. Aside from that, you’re right the feds might care less but a lot states have outright bans on ghost weapons

1

Anonymous #1 2w

1) I live in a free state 2) Sharing the files is protected by the 1st amendment, but thats just a link to the CTRL Pew website

1

Anonymous OP 2w

If sharing files were protected by the first amendment it’d be legal to send images of epsteins parties

1

Anonymous #1 2w

That's clearly not what I was referring to lol

1

Anonymous #1 2w

"The files" meaning 3d models of firearms

1

Anonymous OP 2w

I mean I might be fundamentally misunderstanding smn but what legally separates those files as 1st amendment free speech and other files deemed illegal to distribute?

1

Anonymous #1 2w

They are a form of self expression, and are never explicitly stated to be illegal.

1

Anonymous OP 2w

It is explicitly illegal in many cases, such as under export control laws where sharing them with individuals from outside the country (such as a public website where foreign nationals can access information) is illegal

1

Anonymous #1 2w

So countries that don't have free speech don't protect free speech? Not exactly shocked

1

Anonymous #1 2w

It's still completely legal within the US though

1

Anonymous #1 2w

And from my understanding, it would be up to the person in the other country to not click the link if I had shared one

1

Anonymous OP 2w

Courts have found that posting that stuff online where foreign nationals have the ability to access it is violating US export control laws

1

Anonymous #1 2w

They've found that to be true in specific cases where the person posting the links intended to subvert ITAR, but it's not a legal precedent because it cannot be facially applied

1

Anonymous #1 2w

Also AFAIK, this issue has never reached SCOTUS, so even if it were able to be facially applied, it would only serve as precedent in the district it was ruled in.

1