FedEx Won't Ship DIY Gunsmithing Machine 320
An anonymous reader writes Last fall, Defense Distributed — the company created by Cody Wilson of 3D-printed gun fame — announced a DIY gunsmithing machine called the Ghost Gunner. Now, FedEx is refusing to ship the device, saying there are laws or regulations that would prohibit them from shipment. A FedEx spokesperson said, "This device is capable of manufacturing firearms, and potentially by private individuals. We are uncertain at this time whether this device is a regulated commodity by local, state or federal governments. As such, to ensure we comply with the applicable law and regulations, FedEx declined to ship this device until we know more about how it will be regulated." Wilson argues, "They’re acting like this is legal when in fact it’s the expression of a political preference. The artifact that they’re shipping is a CNC mill. There’s nothing about it that is specifically related to firearms except the hocus pocus of the marketing."
Oh bullshit! (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Wonder what the Justice Department has to hold over their heads.
How soon before they find something to hold over the heads of UPS?
Re:Oh bullshit! (Score:4, Insightful)
Wonder what the Justice Department has to hold over their heads.
The same thing they have to hold over everyone's heads: a large number of lawyers looking to right the wrongs their employer tells them to. Also the IRS. They don't need any actual wrongdoing, just the lawyers.
Re:Oh bullshit! (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Oh bullshit! (Score:5, Insightful)
UPS recently paid $40 million dollars because they shipped fake drugs.
They didn't ship fake drugs. They shipped real drugs: prescription drugs from Canada.
Like they were supposed to open all the packages and verify the contents?
They didn't need to open the packages. They already knew what was in them.
If the government did not stop this activity, our health would have been at risk of deteriorating to Canadian levels.
Re:Oh bullshit! (Score:5, Insightful)
UPS recently paid $40 million dollars because they shipped fake drugs.
They didn't ship fake drugs. They shipped real drugs: prescription drugs from Canada.
Like they were supposed to open all the packages and verify the contents?
They didn't need to open the packages. They already knew what was in them.
If the government did not stop this activity, our health would have been at risk of deteriorating to Canadian levels.
No, our health costs were at risk of deteriorating to Canadian levels.
Re: (Score:2)
You mean Democrats, the New GOP, right? A more pro-war, pro-surveillance, pro-wall-street group of assholes could only be found ... nowhere. The difference between the Old GOP and the New GOP can be summed up in total over the issues of abortion and gay marriage. Other than that, the two groups are entirely fungible.
Seriously, Democrats today are to the right of Nixon and do everything he loved to do (war and surveil) and one thing he couldn't do (Nixon Care, conveniently relabeled Obama Care).
So get ove
Re: (Score:2)
yes they are, companies do that, ass covering is often an important thing to do - FEDEX doesn't have to carry anything they don't want to, especially something that might put them in a legal liability situation
Re:legal liability situation (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
And yet Cody Wilson and his ilk, some of the world's biggest libertarians, are upset that a private company like FedEx refuses to carry their packages? Yawn. Come back to me when the USPS refuses (and then we'll talk about how they are semi-private as well thanks to previous tax-cutting and libertarian action).
Re: (Score:2)
This is nothing but targeted discrimination. where is the ACLU???
Re:Oh bullshit! (Score:5, Interesting)
I've heard of similar things. For example, this guy [typepad.com] sending air, water, and sugar.
As long as you have the right safety labels, there shouldn't be a problem. The guy in the above link screwed up with the "Rocket Fuel" label.
If they were sending a mill, why did they say "It's a machine for making guns"? IT could have been labeled as coming from "GG Machine Works", and if they needed a declaration of contents it's just "a CNC machine."
I can't even think of the countless things I've shipped. Usually I'm only asked on International shipments for the customs declaration. If I explain what's in them, it's too complicated, so they just put "computer parts" or "tools".
I've received some things that surprised people, like ammunition (legally marked and shipped as such, handled by UPS), a truck front axle, and all kinds of weird smaller things.
Re: Oh bullshit! (Score:2, Insightful)
Anybody had enough of things getting regulated or hated on because of what people call them? Call something an attack tool and everybody goes bananas. Call it a "security auditing tool" and it's magically ok (especially if it costs way too much). This is the same thing.
Oh, yeah: unabashed liberal here and FedEx can go to hell over this one because trampling on ANY freedom is bad. This is exactly why we should never have a private-only delivery and mail system in the US as well.
Re: (Score:2)
Marketing. A lot of people really like guns - selling your product as a gun-making machine can lead to increased sales, and allow you to charge a higher price.
Re: (Score:2)
This is nothing but targeted discrimination. where is the ACLU???
The ACLU doesn't believe in the right to bear arms. It's the American Civil Liberties Except-for-Firearms Union, but ACLEFU just doesn't flow
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Oh bullshit! (Score:5, Insightful)
You don't seem to understand libertarianism. Libertarians believe that private actions should be legal. Libertarians do not believe that you should not complain about private actions.
Furthermore, in this case, if FedEx really is afraid of legal liability, or if the government is in other ways putting pressure on them, it's not a private action anyway. Government involvement is inherently not private.
Re:Oh bullshit! (Score:4, Insightful)
Neo-Cons posing as Libertarians don't understand Libertarianism. The rest of us actually do.
As for the right to complain, yes, we embrace it, but in addition his points seem salient to me. If the actions of FedEx are truly motivated by fear of governmental retribution then we should fix the government. If instead, FedEx is simply stating that they are feeling anti-gun today, we can both complain about their private actions (e.g. boycott their service) and consider introducing laws to further protect our civil liberties.
The current (and I would argue just) rule is that if you offer a service like wedding cakes to a hetero couple, you must offer it to gay couples as well. If you offer to ship machinery that's useless for making guns, then you should offer it for machines useful for making guns.
Re:Oh bullshit! (Score:4, Insightful)
Change "guns" to flowers and Customer type from "gun loving" to Gay and see if you have a change it attitude.
FedEx refused to ship flowers to a gay man
You see, there is NOTHING "immoral" or "illegal" about either flowers, gunsmithing equipment, being a gun lover or lover of men. In fact, there is nothing different here except POPULAR OPINION.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Change "guns" to flowers and Customer type from "gun loving" to Gay and see if you have a change it attitude.
FedEx refused to ship flowers to a gay man
You see, there is NOTHING "immoral" or "illegal" about either flowers, gunsmithing equipment, being a gun lover or lover of men. In fact, there is nothing different here except POPULAR OPINION.
except you're adding unnecessarily to the hypothetical
"FedEx refuses to ship flowers." is DRASTICALLY different than "FedEx refuses to ship flowers to Alpha because of who Alpha is."
FedEx is refusing to ship a specific product, not refusing to deliver products to people because of their identity. The situations are entirely different.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
Re: (Score:2)
there is nothing different here except POPULAR OPINION
Actually despite many corporations anti-gun views, and the media and governemnt's anti-gun views, the actual "Popular Opinion" on guns is either slanted Pro, or at the very least, neutral. It's just the groups with the loudest mouths and most money and power that are the majority of 'anti-' gun, so it only seems that it is the popular opinion.
Re: (Score:2)
well then i suppose Hemlock Belladonna Fox Glove and Monkshood are not flowers then
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Probably reliability and accuracy. Its likely easier to either alter tracable identifyers, destroy the weapon, or sell it tp some thug to take the heat and buy/steal new guns than to master reliability and accuracy and put it into production undetected.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
49 U.S. Code section 14101 [cornell.edu]
Re: (Score:2)
Who knows what weird law they will hit them with? The government can more or less do whatever they want including things extra-judicial.
But I am glad you have us covered with your decade of research...
BTW: This is the system working as "intended".
Re: (Score:2)
There are no laws that would restrict shipment of this equipment, and it is stupid of them to make that claim, and must be assuming people are stupid enough to believe that excuse. There are also no laws making it illegal to manufacturer your own firearm (so long as your legally allowed to own one otherwise).
Re: (Score:2)
Can a baker, florist or photographer put forth a set of terms and conditions with regards to what kind of events they will provide services for?
The courts have been saying no for a while now in the case of some events they may disagree with: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/... [huffingtonpost.com].
http://www.washingtonpost.com/... [washingtonpost.com]
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/... [huffingtonpost.com]
It is an interesting world where some people/companies are compelled to provide services equal
political preference? (Score:5, Insightful)
I have worked for fedex for 15 years. I assure you this is not a hippie liberal company.
Corporations are naturally risk adverse. And it doesn't matter if it's a marketed mill... we can't ship a ball bearing certain places if you tell us it can be used on a tank. Regulations are what they are.
Re: (Score:2)
I have worked for fedex for 15 years. I assure you this is not a hippie liberal company.
Corporations are naturally risk adverse. And it doesn't matter if it's a marketed mill... we can't ship a ball bearing certain places if you tell us it can be used on a tank. Regulations are what they are.
AC tries using a ball bearing on a tank, it has no effect.
Re:political preference? (Score:5, Insightful)
If you say it is "X", FedEx has to treat it like "X". It you say it is not X, you (the liar) will bear the liability. So FedEx doesn't care. If you say it is "X" when it is "not X", why would FedEx risk it?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Look, this guy isn't complaining because he can't ship what he wants, he's complaining because it's good business. More complains = more news coverage = more sales. Everyone here is making some good points, and the libertarian thing is kind of funny, but the more a story is made out of this, the more he wins. He's getting free advertising right here.
Re:political preference? (Score:4, Insightful)
If you say it is "X", FedEx has to treat it like "X". It you say it is not X, you (the liar) will bear the liability. So FedEx doesn't care. If you say it is "X" when it is "not X", why would FedEx risk it?
It is "X". It is also "Y" and "Z" along with "L", "M", "N", "O", and "P". CNC Mills can be used to make damn near anything. I am officially notifying FEDEX that any CNC Mill can be used for gunsmithing. Also, Lab equipment / chemicals can be used for making drugs and bombs. Plane parts can be used to assemble planes a terrorist could use to crash into a building, and car parts can be used to facilitate both murder and drug smuggling. Camera and video equipment can be used by pedophiles, as can computers and networking gear (do I really need to keep going?). I expect them to step up and stop shipping these things at once.
Re: (Score:2)
A friend of mine once got killed by a truck. He got better after a while, but still. I demand that FedEx stops using trucks at once!
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
AC tries using a ball bearing on a tank, it has no effect.
you need a much bigger ball bearing to do mega damage. you could bounce that off the paint all day and not leave a scratch.
Re: (Score:2)
AC tries using a ball bearing on a tank, it has no effect.
you need a much bigger ball bearing to do mega damage. you could bounce that off the paint all day and not leave a scratch.
That depends on how fast it's moving.
Re: (Score:2)
FedEx is a private business, isn't it? (Score:2, Insightful)
Can't they refuse to ship anything on whatever grounds they want, or are they mandated to carry anything that they aren't banned from shipping?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Cody Wilson, self-avowed libertarian and near anarchist, is upset that a private company refuses to do business with him. News at 11.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
You don't seem to understand libertarianism. Libertarians believe that private actions should be legal. Libertarians do not believe that you should not complain about private actions.
Furthermore, in this case, if FedEx really is afraid of legal liability, or if the government is in other ways putting pressure on them, it's not a private action anyway. Government involvement is inherently not private.
But then I already said this.
Not at all. Actions have consequences. (Score:2)
When libertarians expound that businesses should be able to deny service to any one for any reason, they also say "but then they can expect to be held up o public ridicule for it." So a baker has a right to refuse to sell a wedding cake to a gay couple, but can expect protests on his doorstep.
Same thing here: FedEx can refuse to do their services for any reason they care to spout (or to keep secret if they wish) as is their right (or at least it ought to be).
Two things though. One is the concomitant public
Re: (Score:2)
No no no no no. What is right (or right, acceptable) isn't the same as what is condoned, or a good idea. The liberal (libertarian) position is "I'm not going to force them to stop." You know, keep your nose in your own business. Formally, this is called the non-aggression principle.
Now, FedEx is declining to ship the product because they're being spineless and afraid of legal action. (Or at least this employee, corporations tend to be less consistent about this stuff than the language would lead you to beli
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
All of fed ex that ships anything is required to have an ICC number and therefore a common carrier unless they registered as not for hire and only transport their own goods to their own points of market.
How do they feel about all the other CNC machines? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If that's all it is, then there's not much of a problem. People can just order one of the other CNC machines.
Re: (Score:2)
I wonder if Grizzly Industrial runs into trouble with this; they explicitly advertise how you can use their machine tools to make guns, and in fact some SKUs are labelled as "gunsmithing lathes".
RE: expression of a political preference (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: expression of a political preference (Score:5, Insightful)
It's almost like he was more interested in publicity than in actually shipping a product.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
It's like telling police officers you smoke weed.
No... but it is like labeling the pipes your store sells as "hash pipes". Some stores (possibly only in certain states, especially now that pot is legalized in some states) will happily sell you bongs and small glass pipes and bubblers and one hitters etc etc etc so long as you do not refer to them by any of their cannabis-associated names. Some go a step further, and will ask you to leave the store if you do refer to them by those names, pretending that "they are not in the business of selling paraphernali
lawyers are not geeks; geeks are not lawyers. (Score:2)
Intent matters. You sell a bong as for tobacco and you're fine - you sell it as "FOR GETTING HIGH ON MARIJUANA" and you're in the shit. Argue with the law if you want (although the law makes a lot more sense than geeks like to think), but don't argue from a position of ignorance.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Which state is that? Seems insane to me.
Re: (Score:2)
Not in my home state. A bong is classified as 'drug paraphenalia' whether you smoke tobacco or no.
probably not, because that would eliminate all water filters. usually it's only once it's got residue on it that it becomes drug paraphenalia.
Re: (Score:2)
Argue with the law if you want (although the law makes a lot more sense than geeks like to think), but don't argue from a position of ignorance.
the problem is you are correct. but it is fedex who is the one arguing from the position of ignorance. There is nothing wrong with a CNC machine, in fact, that is the argument everyone loves to bring up when pointing out that 3d printing is not going to change things because people could ALWAYS do it on their own.
Irony (Score:5, Insightful)
So here's a guy who calls himself a "libertarian", declaring that it's not legal for a private entity to refuse to do business with him based on their political views.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
fed ex is claiming that it might be illegal to do so (which is wrong), has nothing to do with political views.
In fact, if fedex came out and claimed it was their views, im sure cody would simply say ok, and use UPS without much of an issue
Re: (Score:3)
Where does he declare that it's illegal for FedEx to refuse his business?
"Defense Distributed's founder Cody Wilson argues that rather than a legal ambiguity, FedEx is instead facing up to the political gray area of enabling the sale of new, easily accessible tools that can make anything -- including deadly weapons. 'They're acting like this i
There's still a legal problem (Score:3)
I am no fan of firearms and would take them out of your (not cold and dead) hands if I could. That said, isn't FedEx a common carrier? There are rules for such things.
Re: (Score:2)
There are rules for such things.
The rules say they can refuse a shipment that they believe to be illegal, and notify law enforcement, too.
Re: (Score:3)
Yes. The problem here is establishing when a tool is one for violating the law, and when is it just a tool. And courts can place much credence upon the creator's own explanation of the tool, which is damned incriminating, IMO.
So, what bothers me about this is the extent to which it impairs the transport of other similar tools, not this particular one.
Re: (Score:3)
Fortunately, it's not illegal to make a [legal] gun. Having made it, it's illegal to do many things with it without special dispensation or a special license, but as I'm sure you know that tends not to be the responsibility of the manufacturer so long as the device can successfully be shown to have "substantial non infringing use"- I believe the saying goes.
What it boils down to is that you shouldn't attempt to intentionally provoke people with fancy names unless you're looking for attention. Simply declari
But they ship firearms... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Scary stuff (Score:2)
Libertarian karma (Score:2)
Fedex is a for-profit corporation. It can refuse any customer it wants. That's the libertarian way, right? Private individuals and companies should only conduct business with mutual consent? Well, good. The libertarian behind "Defense Distributed" is getting what he asked for.
Can't blame them (Score:2)
What else can be used in the manufacture of guns? (Score:2)
What else can be used in the manufacture of firearms?
* die grinders
* drills
* welders
* Crucibles
* plaster (good for making casting molds)
* springs
* saws
* CNC mills from other vendors
and yet, they have no problem shipping any of that, right?
Don't need to read the article to understand why. (Score:2, Informative)
FedEx is probably playing CYA.
The problem is that DD's box is designed to machine "80% receivers" to completion. The reason FedEx is playing CYA is because an 80% receiver is legally a "non-gun" in the eyes of the BATFE (until the policy gets changed) and anyone - and I mean ANYONE - can buy an 80% receiver because it's just a lump of metal. It's the machining of a couple of holes, pockets, and chambers that convert an 80% receiver into a firearm. Yes, the BATFE pretty much defines a firearm as the part of
What happened to the free market? (Score:2)
Just use one of the many other CNC machines... (Score:2)
... to do the exact same thing.
Re:UPS - No Problem. (Score:4, Insightful)
The manufacturer has chosen to market this device specifically for the production of firearms. They do not appear to have marketed this as a general-purpose device. It's reasonable to expect that purchased units will be used for the purposes of producing firearms. It doesn't really matter much that the device is capable of producing other goods, that's not how it's being sold.
Mills, lathes, and other metalworking equipment sold as general-purpose machine-shop equipment don't have this problem because they're not being marketeted for this specific purpose.
This contrasts well with the situation of home recording because devices capable of making recordings but intended to be general-purpose machines (ie, tuning for live watching, playback of commercial tapes, etc) were marketed differently than devices sold specifically for duplication or mass recording.
FedEx is free to choose with whom they'll conduct business. If they feel they are taking-on risk by shipping these machines then they're free to not ship them, like how cutomers and businesses are free to use anyone else that will take them to do such shipping.
Re: (Score:2)
This is an obvious attempt to market a piece of machinery with an advertised single purpose... even though that may not accurately reflect the product.
Move along now... nothing here worth wadding up your undergarments.
Re: (Score:2)
Smithsonian Magazine has an article in their current issue about copiers. The Soviet Union controlled access to copiers initially.
I haven't read the article yet, but it sounds interesting (Smithsonian Magazine is a gem, the TV channel, a travesty):
http://www.smithsonianmag.com/... [smithsonianmag.com]
The topic at hand is a history chorus, and it's rhyming...
Re: (Score:2)
^ said anonymous poster
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Thats why i only post from stolen tablets on the free WIFI at various fast food places like McDonalds using VPN accounts purchased with stolen credit cards.
Oh, and i also wear a tin foil hat- not to be confused wiyh the cheap aluminum foil hats.
Re:So much for the 2nd Amendment (Score:4)
ones explicitly protected by the US Constitution are ignored?
You mean like how you're ignoring the First amendment? Assuming this actually is Fedex taking a political stance on your worst nightmare and not just risk aversion, where in the second amendment does if force private businesses to ship equipment designed for firearms manufacture?
In a related story, rest easy with that 45 under your pillow because you've won the war: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N... [wikipedia.org]
Now can we focus on real problems?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You're close. You don't have a legal right to receive their service, but they do have a legal obligation to provide the service, because they are a common carrier. In exchange for legal considerations that the government grants them, they agree to certain terms of the government's...like "serve everyone".
But yeah, they also have some severe restrictions on what they're not allowed to carry, and they err way on the side of caution. If you told them "this is a block of lead, and I plan to melt it for bulle
Re: (Score:3)
But yeah, they also have some severe restrictions on what they're not allowed to carry, and they err way on the side of caution. If you told them "this is a block of lead, and I plan to melt it for bullets", they may well refuse, and by some legal interpretations they might *have* to.
http://www.fedex.com/us/freigh... [fedex.com]
Item 780, section B-6:
Carrier will transport small-arms ammunition when packed and labeled in compliance with local, state and federal law, and the Hazardous Materials section of this Service Guide. Ammunition is an explosive and must be shipped separately as hazardous materials. You agree not to ship loaded firearms or firearms with ammunition in the same package.
So I'm damn sure the implied use for the lead wouldn't keep it from being shipped. There may be other reasons,
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Is the mill in question over $50/lb?
Re: (Score:2)
Is the mill in question over $50/lb?
Hehhehheh... I was wondering too, and how many other things qualify for that... I'm guessing quite a few. Of the top of my head:
* a pound of blue ray movies (or dvds, or cds, or vinyl)
* any tablet (kindle fire, ipad, galaxy pad, etc)
* any phone or ipod or wearable mp3 player
* headphones
* most laptops
* most musical instruments
* makeup/face creams/etc
* all bra's and panties, and most other articles of clothing
* bicycles that cost about $1000 or more (which is most decent ones)
Surprisingly, more expensive stuf
Re: (Score:2)
As for your stupidity regarding the second amendment: the second amendment was adopted to ensure that members of the state militias had weapons should they be called up.
As for your stupidity regarding the second amendment: it exists because the founders had just gone through a war where they found it convenient that the people had guns, and lived in a time when guns were a way of life and necessary for self-defense against not only criminals but wild beasts. They had just overthrown a repressive government and wanted to keep that option available for the new one they'd just fought to create, should it become necessary.
The "militia" clause is an explanatory clause, not a
Re: (Score:2)
You might want to actually read the Federalists papers before you spew this nonsense. The writers are quite explicit in the reasoning and intent. The comment you made is one bandied about by those wanting to misrepresent the truth.
Re: (Score:2)
The US Congress, using its powers under the Commerce Clause, has created laws covering Interstate Commerce. Among those laws are ones defining motor carriers (49 U.S. Code section 13501), and requiring them to provide transportation "on reasonable request" (section 14101) according to tariffs which include the "rules, and practices" (section 13710). There is nothing in FedEx Ground's tariff which allow it to exclude the pro
Re: (Score:2)
Just how safe are rights such as gay marriage when ones explicitly protected by the US Constitution are ignored?
Because the entire point of the 2nd Amendment was to make sure the government didn't outgun the population.
For obvious fucking reasons.
Note the word "explicitly" in his comment.
my response:
Which "explicitly protected" rights have been ignored here? Please cite the exact phrase in the Constitution/Bill of Rights that mandates Fed-Ex ship his packages.
Thank you for pointing out that i am correct.
As for the Motor Carrier Act of 1935, shipping something via Fed-Ex may, or may not, be covered under that (i would make the base assumption that a package sent strictly "fed-ex ground" probably is, but that gets into a lot of details that not only am i not privy too, but i imagine could change at any given time in the shipment of any given package); it may well be covered under the umbrella
Re:I don't get it. (Score:4, Insightful)
sex toy industry... It's not hard.
I see what you did there....
Re: (Score:2)
Bingo. Where I live, having more than four sex toys is an "obscenity" state jail felony as per Texas penal codes. So, they are sold as "teaching devices", "medical mockups", or other items.
This is a fight that doesn't need to be dealt with. Just call it a CNC mill, which is designed for fabricating automotive parts. Hoppes calls their #9 product, "lubricating oil", instead of "gun oil." Might as well not have to deal with a wedge issue when it comes to business if one doesn't have to.
Re: (Score:3)
Unless the whole point is to create publicity by deliberately creating wedge issues. In other words, it doesn't matter what FedEx said, because now I have a great advertising platform - buy my stuff!.
Like Apple d
Re: (Score:2)