Angry Minnesotans Take 3D Printer Away From Gunmaker

[Mr F.]

To anyone who is claiming that pouring more guns into unstable countries could stabilize them: Are you fucking mental?

No, fucking seriously, are you fucking mental?

It seriously boggles the mind. Guns do not make unstable countries stable, Government does. In places like the DRC there is not a popular revolution going on (Nothing like Syria, nothing like Libya.) but a bunch of warlords who go around raping and killing because the country essentially has no central government.

Anarchy can not be stabilized through access to more guns.

Finally, even though your arguments are "Theoretical", how exactly is an impoverished village in the DRC (for example) supposed to get hold of a 3D printer, access to the internet, electricity... You are talking about villages without wells, without access to sanitation, education, anything really.

OT: This sounds like one of the most fucking dumb ideas in history. The Libertarian movement never ceases to amaze me. Like Republicans all they serve to do is give people a bad name.

 

[KingHodor]

OP:I'd say that plastic guns should be outlawed, given their undetectability.

I'd say plastic guns don't need to be outlawed, given their un-feasibility.

Anyone here remember the XM-8 program?
The Army wanted a new assault rifle, but one of the reasons they stuck with the old M4/M16 was that the large amounts of plastic used in its construction were prone to warping when exposed to the heat generated by the barrel during sustained automatic fire.
Now, in this case the plastic was on the *outside* of the gun. Could you imagine what would happen to a plastic barrel if you had a dozen bullets passing through it every second (ignoring the question how plastic rifling could spin a metal bullet, or how a plastic bullet could carry enough kinetic energy), or the little plastic gas tube with all the hot propellant gases flowing through it?

In the Riverworld novels, people are forced to resort to whole-plastic firearms due to an almost complete lack of metal in their world - however, they are vastly inferior to the metal-based guns they used to be familiar with, being nothing more than inaccurate single-shot smoothbore muzzleloaders with massively oversized bores to compensate for the low density of the plastic bullets.

 

[DugMachine]

Okay do I have to be the one to point out the wedding dress. Lolwat

 

[Seventh Actuality]

"Imagine if your biggest part in the human drama was to stand in the way of an innovation,"

"It's what this old world of legal hierarchy requires," said Cody Wilson of Defense Distributed. "I have to go through a legal process just to try something."

"I think it shows they really believe in a future where the gun is inalienable," said Wilson at the time, "a kind of faith in American individualism, the sovereignty of the individual."

Ahahaha are these people capable of saying a single goddamned thing that doesn't make them sound like massive cunts? They sound like they couldn't order a takeaway without bringing Ayn Rand into it.

 

[Tiger Sora]

Sounds like if they were able to make the guns, than start distributing/selling the plans. It would just "blow back" in the companies faces with all the lawsuits over so many people getting filled with plastic shrapnel when the gun exploded.

Bad idea from the start.

 

[thenumberthirteen]

Hang on. I thought plastic or ceramic guns are Illegal as they can be used to bypass metal detectors.

 

[Karadalis]

Gun rights are human rights? WTF?

So that means since i live in germany my human rights are being surpressed and i shoul print a gun to fight my goverment because they are infringing on my god given right to carry a firearm wherever i want?

Cool story bro....

 

[Something Amyss]

How would a printed gun be at all safe? I'm sure a homemade gun made of lego (the same material at least) totally won't explode in your hand on its first use.

I'm seriously hoping you're saying that more for the lulz than seriousness. It's nice to make jokes about these being comparable to LEGO, but you do know there are far tougher plastics out there, right?

Like the ones GLOCK uses?

 

[tangoprime]

In America there are various forms you have to send to the ATF before you can make some kinds of firearm

Sorry Adam, but this is very, very wrong. Unless it is an NFA weapon or a full auto, no paperwork is needed. And for NFA weapons you just fill out the Form 1 on the BATFE's site and 200 dollars later you can make one. Can't make full-auto's though.

In any case, a single shot .22lr pistol, what they were trying to make, needs no paperwork. The fun part is gonna be when Cody Wilson sues that pants off of Stratasys for violating the terms of the lease.

Do you have anything to back that up, just out of curiosity? From my understanding, you need a license (or maybe it was just the tax stamp) to "manufacture" a weapon. For example, I have one of these:

Spoiler: GSG 522 PK

And it is illegal for me to put a vertical grip on it without getting a tax stamp since it is manufacturing a weapon.

You would need a Form 4 tax stamp to do that, as by adding a grip or stock you'd be turning a pistol into a Short Barreled Rifle (SBR) which is an NFA weapon. So in essence, you'd be manufacturing an NFA regulated weapon where there was none before.

In the case of creating non-federally regulated weapon, as long as you're not intending to sell them, there's no paperwork required.

 

[major_chaos]

Even as someone who is strongly for the (regulated)freedom to own a gun, I think the idea of easy to make, disposable, undetectable guns is a terrible idea, the good new is I can't see it working so there is no real danger of someone using this idea for crime.

 

[WanderingFool]

As awful as their idea and plans may have been, I can't help but admire their simplistic approach. Plastic guns that have all the working parts of a regular gun? Would be an interesting experiment. I can't imagine such an item would be very durable, what with the heat and forces involved, but still. It might be functional for a couple of shots, I suppose.

think there are already plastic guns, they just cant be reloaded.

But please tell me im not paranoid about the idea of being able to print out a firearm being a bad idea...

 

[Lucane]

The company that wants to use the printer to make gun parts is already making guns via other methods as well, right?

The point of Distributed Defense was not to make guns. It was to create what were effectively open source blueprints for guns, that anyone could use with a high enough quality 3d printer. If you live in the US it's MUCH cheaper to buy the barrel, metal stock, and time on a CNC machine than to even try to make a crappy plastic gun.

So they want to make it easier for anyone to make the things needed to make the "real" guns by anyone with a high end printer? to then be able to make any number of real guns?

That was the ultimate goal. This specific project was meant as more of a proof of concept. After all, if they could do it at all, then they could see what exactly needed to be improved and how the printer and it's material might need to change. Not to mention 3d home printing is just starting to hit it's stride. Who knows what's going to be possible in a decade.

Sorry but I can only think of negative implications of being able to reproduce guns in this regard for illegal purposes in black markets or personal crime/criminal groups.

The positives are great but they're already working on that before Defense Distributed wanted to get involved.

 

[maninahat]

While the implications & dangers associated with such a project are obvious, they have a definite point here. Imagine what it would be like if oppressed & impoverished parts of the world could cheaply & quickly develop the means to defend themselves. I can't help but wonder if such technology wouldn't help balance the scales in countries like Iran, Libya, Sudan, The Republic of The Congo

That's naive thinking for a number of reasons; assuming the public in oppressive, developing nations could even afford 3D printers in the first place, that only means the regime can also print them too. Plus, as useful as a printed gun might end up being to an insurgent, it won't be stopping any regime tanks or jets, or indeed, the guns given to loyalists. As a means of manufacturing guns, its probably less practical and efficient than the methods we use now - the only advantage this printer provides is letting anyone have a gun - including people who really shouldn't, and would have normally been prevented by regulations, bakground checks etc. That looks more like a liability than a benefit.

"Imagine if your biggest part in the human drama was to stand in the way of an innovation."

I hate them for that remark. It's like someone tapped all of the irresponsibility and self-importance out of the collected works of Ayn Rand, and melted it down into the tacky neon slogan. These people seem utterly oblivious to the huge responsibility their scheme places upon them. Even if they might be right about printable guns and technology being the way forward, at least spend some time considering the possible consequences of your actions.

 

[Prosis]

People should be allowed to own guns. I think there is a definite arguement for that, and its a right that should be protected.

That being said, a printable gun is a horrendous idea. While I may approve of gun ownership, guns must be regulated. This allows for guns and other simple weaponry to be constructed simply and in secret. There's already enough illegal guns floating around. We certainly don't need people being able to print guns. That would wreck society.

While the implications & dangers associated with such a project are obvious, they have a definite point here. Imagine what it would be like if oppressed & impoverished parts of the world could cheaply & quickly develop the means to defend themselves. I can't help but wonder if such technology wouldn't help balance the scales in countries like Iran, Libya, Sudan, The Republic of The Congo

I disagree. The opposing side can produce firearms just as quickly and easily (even faster, since they have more money). I think it would only increase the number of fire fights.

Also, think about countries in the Middle East, where many of the wars and hatreds are practically tradition, and who is "good" and who is "bad" has long been lost. Or in Africa, which has been passed from warlord to warlord for decades, and the true leader is whoever can amass the most fear. It would be massive bloodshed.

 

[theheroofaction]

Okay, I was going to make a joke, but I want to make a point here first.

There's really only one thing that's really been proven to reduce crimes.

These guys

ahem, now onto what I was originally going to say.

Anyway, 5 months from now, Glock will issue a complaint that piracy is killing the gun industry.

 

[Jabberwock xeno]

Meh.

For the amount of money you'd be spending to get materials that the printer uses, and would function properly (They make metal ones, too, not just plastic), you'd probably be spending just as much as you would on buying a weapon, and it'd probably take about the same amount of time to assemble it as doing paperwork to be able to own such a weapon.

 

[Zombie_Moogle]

While the implications & dangers associated with such a project are obvious, they have a definite point here. Imagine what it would be like if oppressed & impoverished parts of the world could cheaply & quickly develop the means to defend themselves. I can't help but wonder if such technology wouldn't help balance the scales in countries like Iran, Libya, Sudan, The Republic of The Congo

That's naive thinking for a number of reasons; assuming the public in oppressive, developing nations could even afford 3D printers in the first place, that only means the regime can also print them too. Plus, as useful as a printed gun might end up being to an insurgent, it won't be stopping any regime tanks or jets, or indeed, the guns given to loyalists. As a means of manufacturing guns, its probably less practical and efficient than the methods we use now - the only advantage this printer provides is letting anyone have a gun - including people who really shouldn't, and would have normally been prevented by regulations, bakground checks etc. That looks more like a liability than a benefit.

"Imagine if your biggest part in the human drama was to stand in the way of an innovation."

I hate them for that remark. It's like someone tapped all of the irresponsibility and self-importance out of the collected works of Ayn Rand, and melted it down into the tacky neon slogan. These people seem utterly oblivious to the huge responsibility their scheme places upon them. Even if they might be right about printable guns and technology being the way forward, at least spend some time considering the possible consequences of your actions.

"Is a man not entitled to the sweat of his brow?"

 

[Burst6]

The idea itself is pretty stupid. 3d printed plastic guns would be 1-shots at most. It is however a forbearer of what's to come. 3d printers at some point will be able to make anything. The problem isn't printed guns, the problem is adjusting laws for it. You see how many freedom-removing laws corporations like the RIAA are trying to push? Imagine it when every single company out there tries to do that.

Capitalism will take a massive hit from this.