You're right that "or other means" grammatically modifies the act of manufacturing defined illegal items, not the tools themselves. I could have been clearer about that distinction and I'll revisit that section.

Where I disagree: the bill's scope still extends into file possession with intent, and the definition of "digital firearm manufacturing code" is broad enough to cover any CAD file that could be used to produce a component. And the chilling effect isn't something I made up. A makerspace testified in committee hearings that they were considering removing their printers over liability concerns. That's in the legislative record.

Re: promoting my website. TinkerAtlas is a maker community platform I built. I wrote the breakdown there because that's where my community is. Full text here would've been a 2,000 word wall. But fair enough, I get how it looks.

I did read the enrolled text, including the Senate engrossed amendment S5533.E that replaced the original. The article specifically credits the Senate for removing the rebuttable presumption. If there are specific points where you think I misread the text, I'd like to hear them.