r/gunpolitics • u/bigbigdummie • Sep 13 '26

Third Circuit case rules on rights implied by 2A, specifically the right to acquire!

https://www.ammoland.com/2026/09/delaware-homemade-firearm-ban-struck-down/
203 Upvotes

99% Upvoted

15 comments sorted by

53

u/bigbigdummie Sep 13 '26

Implied rights includes buy, sell, rent, trade, lend, borrow, create, modify, and destroy.

38

u/bmoarpirate 29d ago

Pretty insane that the file ban survived, but its likely due to the plaintiffs doing a shit job

Plaintiffs offered only general citations that “source code is speech” and never identified what ideas the CAD files communicate

I'd argue the distribution of files is inherently a first amendment act as it communicates ones rights under the second amendment itself: you can make this, and here's how.

11

u/OnlyLosersBlock 29d ago

That would be the FPC, right?

7

u/DBDude 28d ago

There was a case with the FPC not long ago over the files, and they explicitly brought up and defended the 1A claim, but the court said they didn't so dismissed that part. It seems courts really don't want to touch the 1A on this.

4

u/mecks0 29d ago

Oddly enough they’d have no problem saying it’s protected speech if the stp file said “I hate [Sherrill | Platkin]”

5

u/bmoarpirate 29d ago

Place political statements in all parts, smaller than can be visibly printed. Problem solved

4

u/mecks0 29d ago

Ehh, I’d say the problem is the 3CA decision treats the 1A completely differently in a 2A context than it does any other time.

3

u/bigbigdummie 29d ago

The function is the expression. And it’s definitely political in nature.

26

u/ktmrider119z 29d ago

If i have the right to keep and bear something, i must also, therefore, have the right to acquire it whether through purchase or fabricating.

It really is that fucking simple.

7

u/Stack_Silver 28d ago

Following the Third Circuit’s 2026 decision in Defense Distributed v. Attorney General of New Jersey, computer code is not automatically protected speech.

Does that mean in Delaware all elecronically distributed material, such as judge's advertisements for re-election, are not protected by the First Amendment?

5

u/bigbigdummie 28d ago

1A protection is kinda like copyright, only expressive content is protected, meaning that purely functional expression is not.

My view is that the function is the expression. The political idea expressed is “make your own firearm”.

4

u/Stack_Silver 28d ago

I see your point and agree.

Example: A person makes a work of art that others deem to be "adult content".

1) The art is expressive content.

2) The function is to start conversations and possibly offend sensibilities.

In a similar manner, how is 3D printing a gun component not expressive content and functional content?

4

u/bigbigdummie 28d ago

The judge seemed fine to rule that 3d printer files for firearms are protected but the plaintiffs simply didn’t provide an argument.

Of course, encouraging firearms ownership is expressive conduct. They just thought it was so obvious, they didn’t bother to explain why.

2

u/Stack_Silver 28d ago

I found another function for a 3D printed lower:

https://www.reddit.com/r/ar15/s/2XdWQ2bOda

2

u/_kilogram_ 27d ago

Ah okay but AI CP gets a pass. Got it