Company Sells 3D Printed Guns in Possible Violation of Court Order

Patrick Kissel, Reporter

Founder of Defence Distributed, Cody Wilson, has allegedly violated a court order, and began distributing the blueprints for 3D printed guns. This comes after a court in August ordered that he should stop the free distribution of these guns, called the “Liberator.”

“I feel like, if a person is in possession of them, they should have to have the same license and legislation to be able to own that gun,” English teacher Jeremy Boesch said.

This all began when, in 2013, Wilson began distributing the blueprints online. US district judge Robert Rasnik issued a restraining order, preventing Defence Distributed from being able to distribute the blueprints.

“I think a part of the executive branches responsibility in office is to help protect its citizens, and that may be a part of where they need to go, and help keep people safe,” Boesch said.

In July, Trump settled the case, allowing for the guns to be distributed starting August 1. It was on the day they would be open for distribution that multiple states sued Defence Distributed, and once again blocked the blueprints.

“The problem with that is the fact that you need,  with any kind of weapon like that you need to have background checks, and vetting to make sure they are not going into the wrong hands,” Boesch said.

The judge ruled in favor of the states, and in the decision, said that the blueprints should not be distributed for free. Wilson interpreted that as he could still sell the blueprint, and has since been giving the blueprint to anyone who asked, selling it at the price offered by the buyer.

“I would take this to mean that these blueprints cannot be distributed without regulation. Freely and free have two very separate meanings,” sophomore Zachary Moughamian said.

According to Wilson, this does not violate the court order because the order was specific in saying the free distribution, and not the selling of the blueprint.

“I think it really depends, like if the wording is very specific and says that you can’t distribute for free, and that’s obvious from the ruling, then [Wilson’s] right, but if it’s not like that, then he’s wrong,” government teacher Brad Schellert said.