There was the RSA t-shirt which supposedly could be classified as a munition because the source code on the shirt would provide a high enough level of encryption:

http://www.cypherspace.org/adam/shirt/uk-shirt.html

PGP released a really nicely bound version of their source code typeset in an OCR font that they exported because a book would theoretically fall under the First Amendment:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pretty_Good_Privacy#Criminal_in...

Instructions to produce a nuclear bomb also fall under the First Amendment.

There was a contradiction in the laws. That's hardly novel or unprecedented. The higher courts pretty much spend all day dealing with contradictions in laws.

The design is not the hard part. Obtaining the proper fissiles is.

Cryptography is a defensive weapon. Zero-days on the other hand, are an offensive weapon. There are distinctions between helmets and clubs, you know, and the law should recognize these.

There are also laws against defensive items being owned by civilians as well. I disagree with them, but when I had an officer friend tell me my dragon skin armor I bought and used in Iraq was technically illegal now that I am a "civilian", that was one of the moments when I realized how much damage the national security state has done to the constitution.

I expect incoming comments about the LA bank robbery in 3, 2, 1...

(Assuming it works) is ballistic missile defense not a war technology?

The intended use might be defensive, but ballistic missile can be used for offense.

I think danielweber is referring to systems designed to intercept and destroy ballistic missiles, not to ballistic missiles used for defensive purposes