Ahahaha  Stealing is wrong no matter who does it, but would t be considered stealing if it was the law?

I love when criminals get shot by people protecting themselves. Like that restaurant manager this week, killed one of three robbers. So I'm all for guns, the problem is that for every story like that, there are more people who kill someone accidentally, or because of a fit or rage that would have just simply passed by. Other than that, we still need it for those who did end up protecting themselves.

Gold is an investment that withstood test of time but storage wise is a real concern. Are we supposed to keep it in a safe at home or rent a vault with the bank? These are additional upkeeps and concerns.

For bitcoins, we just need a 10 buck thumbdrive!

The first two protections in the U.S. Bill of Rights guarantee freedom of speech and a right to bear arms, respectively. But what about when those collide?

The founders who wrote it likely never imagined a world where that freedom of speech would apply to electronically encoded files on computers, nor could they have pictured a day when those same files could be used to tell a machine to print, on demand, a pistol. (The Founders also, likely, didn't foresee militia systems falling out of use).

Yet we now live in a world where the files to print a gun exist, and people have indeed printed guns. Is this an activity the constitution protects?

Decidedly no, according to a ruling handed down earlier this week from the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals. The case, Defense Distributed v. United States Department of State, goes back to the creation of the first 3D printing of a gun, by the activist group Defense Distributed, in May, 2013.

The Liberator pistol is not, by any metric, a good gun.

The original design is single-shot, and while almost all of the gun is printed, it still uses a cheap nail as a firing pin.

As part of the broader aim of a gun that exists outside government control, Defense Distributed made the plans for the gun available online. That's when they ran into trouble with the State Department, which told Defense Distributed to take down the gun plans.

The State Department was the federal agency that acted in this case, and not the more obvious Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms (ATF), because by the nature of the internet, the 3D-printed gun files can cross international borders. The State Department seized on this fact to say that transferring technical data like this counted as an export.

Shortly afterwards, Defense Distributed took down the files and then reached out to the Electronic Frontier Foundation to see if they could help with this as a free speech fight.

Last December, the EFF filed a brief in support of Defense Distributed, arguing that the State Department's enforcement of arms regulations this broadly was in fact a threat to free speech.

So is hosting files for printing a gun protected under the 1st Amendment? Not if there's national security at stake, ruled the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals.

Ordinarily, of course, the protection of constitutional rights would be the highest public interest at issue in a case. That is not necessarily true here, however, because the State Department has asserted a very strong public interest in national defense and national security. Indeed, the State Department's stated interest in preventing foreign nationals—including all manner of enemies of this country—from obtaining technical data on how to produce weapons and weapon parts is not merely tangentially related to national defense and national security; it lies squarely within that interest.

That's weird as heck! The ruling goes on to note that "The fact that national security might be permanently harmed while Plaintiffs-Appellants' constitutional rights might be temporarily harmed strongly supports our conclusion that the district court did not abuse its discretion in weighing the balance in favor of national defense and national security."

As Ars Technica notes, the opinion of the dissenting judge finds instead a complete lack of concern for free speech from the State Department, is using such a broad interpretation of the law to stop the sharing of these specific files online.

Unless Defense Distributed appeals the ruling, it looks like files for printing guns aren't protected by both the 1st and 2nd Amendments, but are instead protected by neither.

Show how you feel with the "2016 Trump Dollar" that expresses the distrust of politicians and the corrupt U.S. political process that is reflected by TRUMP THE GOVERNMENT on the obverse and reinforced with VOTE NON POLITICIAN on the reverse of the commemorative coin.

Those sentiments are echoed by Forbes magazine editor-in-chief Steve Forbes, himself a two-time presidential candidate, about the current political environment: "What it demonstrates is the intense, deep voter dissatisfaction with where the country is, and fears about the future... so people are looking for an outsider for a fresh perspective."

The "2016 Trump Dollar" is a clear call for freedom of political speech and an expression of distrust of the entrenched political class. It was created to recognize Donald Trump's heroic presidential candidacy and popularize it with collectors and sound-money supporters. It was designed by Bernard von NotHaus, the monetary architect of the Liberty Dollar.

5% of all net sales will be donated to the Special Operations Warrior Foundation, which provides assistance to severely wounded and hospitalized warriors.



First Day of Issue

The special "First Day of Issue" of the Trump Dollar – with a hand stamped hallmark – was issued on April 27 in New York City for $35. It is now only available on the after market for $55. This unique sought after issue will continue to appreciate due to the very few limited First Day of Issue that were personally hallmarked by Bernard von NotHaus the monetary architect of the Trump Dollar.

The criminal neoconservatives must immediately be removed from power in Washington before the insane fools start World War 3. The CIA and the Pentagon must be put under tight constraints. And Donald Trump needs a massive trustworthy security guard. The European governments need to immediately disband the NATO alliance. Life on the planet is at stake.
No more provocations from Washington. Period. The insanity must stop. Now.

except that its never us who get ourselves in this situation, but always africans and muslims

Yes if you are looking for safe and stable investment then gold will best suit you, as we can never expect price stability in bitcoins it will be always fluctuating.

It's you that's claiming the Earth is a spinning ball without evidence that's not hoaxed by NASA or a misleading interpretation of the Coriolis effect. I can prove Earth is not spinning with a gyroscope, I can prove Earth is not spinning with a water filled telescope, I can prove Earth is not spinning with a Michelson interferometer and I can prove Earth is not spinning with a sundial.


I've got a mountain of empirical proof that the Earth is not spinning or moving. All you've got is a fucking lie that tries to hide the existence of a creator and more.


People should ask, why would you go around claiming the praises of God in one breath then deny proof of his existence and his creation in another?

Indeed.  Everything around us was designed intricately.  Everything around us were unique on its way.  Plants, birds, animals, insects, and humans.  The air, sun, stars, oceans, water are interconnected.  One cannot function without the other.  God is such an Ultimate Creator.  He create everything with His wisdom.  Everyone have a unique thumbmark and to think that there are millions to billions people here on Earth.  No one could do that excepts God who is Supreme.