Pennsylvania Attorney General and Governor Set Themselves Up to be Sued

Today, if I go to Defense Distributed’s CAD files, I get this:

Defense Distributed Shut Down in PA

Our AG and Governor are the reason why. Can you articulate where in Pennsylvania law it says I can’t build my own firearm? You can’t, because it doesn’t exist. So what is the legal basis for shutting off access to a website? This is thuggish behavior, and the Governor and AG ought to be rightly sued over it under Section 1983 the the Civil Rights Act. And the best part is I get to pay for it! This has no basis in law. The issue here is that the AG and Governor don’t like something, and have chosen to unlawfully censor it.

It only took me 2 minutes to get around it with Tor. Can’t stop the signal.

34 thoughts on “Pennsylvania Attorney General and Governor Set Themselves Up to be Sued”

  1. Just curious but on a technical note, does anyone know whether the states who are doing this blocking the web page themselves? Or is this Defense Distributed playing nice until the lawyers get it resolved?

    1. It’s DD playing nice until this gets sorted out. They are querying addresses against one of the geolocation DBs and checking against HTTP header info to throw up a “451” (HAH! GET IT?) based on physical presence, though even those databases aren’t kept up to date. There is no infrastructure in place (in the US at least) to have a centralized government filter.

      Hint: If you are running IPv6 like you should (though unfortunately Verizon is slow to adopt this on the FiOS network so it wouldn’t help Sebastian) you can still access this site without the use of a proxy.

      1. Yep, IPv6 works for me.

        This suit is so dumb, because its SO easy to get around, and there is NO basis for it in law.

  2. Wouldn’t multiple victories against such action set precedent for greater protection for gun-related information? In which case, you’d have to wonder why they’d even try.

    Or perhaps they just can’t help themselves.

  3. Tor works and is free, both great points, but a little overkill for this purpose. VPN services, such as PIA, are so cheap these days and faster than Tor, that I recommend people adopt them. You can change your originating IP to another state or country and suffer a minimum of latency. It doesn’t replace Tor, but for this purpose is probably a better solution.

  4. This is so dumb, though if it brings a lawsuit, good.

    Speaking of browsers, I see right now I’m communicating from the Netherlands, but next time it could be France, or somewhere in the U.S.

    Once I’ve downloaded the files, I can email them to almost anybody, or even put them up on my own website. So in practical terms, what do the PA governor and AG think they’re doing other than pissing off gun owners even more, in time for election day in November?

    And if they’re virtue-signaling to their base, it’s a base that doesn’t need encouragement. Bad political calculation, all around.

  5. I want to bring up things like first amendment and prior restraint… but then I realized that our masters no longer care what the constitution or laws say, they are above them.

    1. Very simply, the Tor browser was/is an open source project using peer-to-peer networks to anonymize source and destinations on the web, with the intention of evading censorious firewalling by oppressive governments. By routing all requests through an encrypted worldwide network of personal computers/servers/whatever, the host nation doesn’t know exactly where your final destination on the web is. The final destination also doesn’t know where the client is. While not foolproof, it can be an important part of a multi-layered strategy to anonymizing your Internet activity. If you don’t fear reprisal for your surfing behavior (e.g. you live in the US and are trying to access Cody’s website from a state that bans it, or you want access to BBC content) a far simpler and lower-latency solution is to use a private VPN service like PIA (Private Internet Anywhere), which lets you pick an alternate location you want your web requests to appear to be originating from. These are very user-friendly to set up, but by themselves they don’t offer the level of anonymization that may motivate one to use Tor. Again, surfing the web anonymously really requires a combination of these and other tools.

  6. Well, since you live there and are affected by this illegal prior restraint, YOU have standing to sue. Know any lawyers in your gun club? Sounds like a nice way to make a few bucks.

    1. Are…. are these State AG’s just grandstanding? Do they know what kind of a trap they could cause by this?

      Do they not care?

      Or do they think they’ll /win/ and get courts to agree that these files can be banned.

      1. They have no idea about firearm manufacturers or the law on that.

        They have no idea how easy it is to make a firearm out of stamped metal and pipes.

        They have no idea how 3D printed guns are probably worse than home made guns.

        They have no idea that its legal to make a firearm for personal use.

        They have no idea.

        1. “They have no idea.”

          It depends on who “they” are.

          Never, ever underestimate your opponent. Just because you can’t see an underlying strategy, doesn’t mean there isn’t one on someone’s part. Ninety-nine percent of your opponents may be ignoramuses, but the one percent who aren’t can kill you.

          That is totally independent of ideology.

          Always entertain that it’s you who have no idea. Keep thinking.

          1. Yes. Bloomberg didn’t earn that money being an idiot. He’s succeeded in putting together a far more potent organization than other groups, and they are doing all the right things, given their goals.

  7. Umm its already federally illegal to manufacture a firearm without doing to paperwork, in MOST states under MOST circumstances. If you disagree with state laws, vote or move. I moved, from one of the most restrictive states, to one of the least. Gun rights was not my top reason but it was up there.

    1. So “tony” please cite the “federal laws” that make it illegal to “manufacture” a firearm for your own use or admit you are pulling this out of your ass.

    2. Oh and “tony”, federal laws apply to all of Obama’s 57 states, so moving from one to the other won’t make any difference in fed law. What did you do? Move from Kalipornia to New Germany?

    3. Umm its already federally illegal to manufacture a firearm without doing to paperwork, in MOST states under MOST circumstances.

      That’s only true if you intend to sell it. If you intend to keep it for your own collection, you don’t need a license, nor do you need to fill out any paperwork.

      1. Under certain circumstances, it’s even legal to sell a weapon you made — so long as it’s clear that you originally made the weapon for personal use.

        It’s the kind of thing that you should consult a lawyer first, though, so as to avoid hot water….

  8. Just because….

    Here is a link to a cad file for my “improved” bolt together AR lower. It’s based on a design by someone else, with minor changes made by me. The changes are…

    Uses a standard AR selector switch instead of a custom one.
    Removed all external sharp edges.
    Buffer tube mount bolts on instead of using captive rods.
    Removed unnecessary bolt holes.

    The advantage of this design over a standard AR lower is that it’s easier to CNC machine, especially when starting from scratch. It can be done on a machine with a smaller work volume, and doesn’t require any crazy long mills/drills.

  9. The local news last night framed this as “How the PA governor and AG are keeping us safe and keeping dangerous printed guns from flooding our streets.” Because, of course.

  10. A Federal judge in Seattle has just issued an injunction against the release of these files. I suspect this is a nationwide injunction (why a district judge can do this bests me, but they did so in the various ‘Muslim travel van’ cases.)

    1. Why can’t we ever get a nationwide injunction against anti-2A laws?

      Make them play by their own rules

      Congress & SCotUS really need to make it clear that district judges DO NOT have jurisdiction beyond their district

    2. A Clinton appointee, of course. Grandstanding, pearl clutching, whatever it is because GUNS. He also made personal prejudicial remarks in the record deriding the defendant as an evil anarchist. That will go over pretty well with SCOTUS on review.

      Is it just me, or has anyone noticed more fatigue with the endless crying wolf of the antis?

      1. Those remarks will hurt him greatly especially since similar remarks are what got Masterpiece Cakeshop overturned at SCOTUS

  11. is a publicly-available Web site for truthful, non-misleading, non-commercial speech and information that is protected under the United States Constitution. The purpose of this project is to allow people to share knowledge and empower them to exercise their fundamental, individual rights. is a project of Firearms Policy Coalition, Firearms Policy Foundation, The Calguns Foundation, California Association of Federal Firearms Licensees, and a number of individuals who are passionate about the Constitution and individual liberties. We wish to thank Cody Wilson and Defense Distributed for their courage, passion, innovation, and inspiration.

Comments are closed.