Encryption and the 2nd Amendment

[Timothy C. May]

[A comment: I will _not_ be drawn into a general Second Amendment
discussion here, for several reasons. This note is only to respond to the
first comments I've seen on my post...if a lot more people get into the
act, I'll just let others fight it out and ignore the thread. Crypto = Guns
has been debated many times in many places. I won't debate gun control,
which I'm against, nor will I get into debates about how a ban on
biological warfare research would be unenforceable, would interfere with
bread-making and wine-making research, blah blah. This is a kind of
nit-picking that echoes the libertarian disease.]

At 7:23 PM 1/20/96, Alan Horowitz wrote:
>> After all, it is well-established--whether we like it or not--that the
>> government can regulate and control access to  [...]
>
>
>       I *think* the only thing that's been affirmed, is that the feds
>can *tax*  weapons transfers.     I think the one particular case is
>called "Rock Island" or something like that. The defendant was
>*acquitted* of possessing an un-registered machine gun, because the
>authority to tax transfers of newly-manufactured machine guns, no longer
>exists. This is an over-simplifaction. Anyway, the point is, the
>defendant was acquitted right there in district court.

And what about the Assault Weapons laws? Bush signed one, limiting
transfers of certain types of assault rifles, assault pistols, etc. (their
choice of terms, not mine). Without getting into specifics of which models
were banned for import and banned for transfer to private parties, this is
a very real law. Taxes have almost nothing to do with it.

That some defendants were acquitted in some jurisdictions on some charges
says little about the more general laws.

Likewise, there are specific laws on the books banning the private
possession of chemical and biological warfare agents. (This was discussed
on the list a couple of years ago--a specific law was passed outlawing
private research into biological warfare agents unless authorized to do so
by the governemnt.)

Without spending a lot of time searching for the specific laws, I recall
that the Atomic Energy Act placed stringent restrictions on the
dissemination of nuclear materials. One can argue that these laws are not
"weapons" laws per se, but the effect is the same.

Anyone possessing a nuclear warhead in the U.S. would be subject to many
laws, ranging from national security laws to public endangerment laws to
hazardous materials laws.

--Tim May


Boycott espionage-enabled software!
We got computers, we're tapping phone lines, we know that that ain't allowed.
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
Timothy C. May              | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money,
tcmay at got.net  408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero
W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA  | knowledge, reputations, information markets,
Higher Power: 2^756839 - 1  | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."