Angry Minnesotans Take 3D Printer Away From Gunmaker
- Thread starter Karloff
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I'm pretty sure the more readily available you make guns, the more they will be used by BOTH sides. I fail to see how this would solve the issue of oppressive regimes.
The world by Dead Rising logic. A truly scary future awaits humanity.NightHawk21 said:
Really? Interesting. One of the tell-tell signs of coming from a country with very strict gun control. These things, I just dont' know.Binnsyboy said:
But yes when it comes to man's ability to conveniently kill his fellow man, science will find the way. Ah, science...
captcha: time will tell
That seems rather ominous...
Unless this is the functional plastic gun they're talking about, I'm not sure why this is news on a video game site.
So it begins.
One of the greatest potential inventions mankind will ever create, castrated and impeded by the moral and ethical implications of how we will inevitably use it to more efficiently do unspeakable evil to each other.
Eventually technology will give each one of us the means to effortlessly destroy our entire species, and we won't get a month before someone pulls the trigger.
One of the greatest potential inventions mankind will ever create, castrated and impeded by the moral and ethical implications of how we will inevitably use it to more efficiently do unspeakable evil to each other.
Eventually technology will give each one of us the means to effortlessly destroy our entire species, and we won't get a month before someone pulls the trigger.
LoL, love the politically charged nature of these discussions:
"Guns aren't necessary and the world would be a better place without them"
"But they help law abiding citizens defend against armed criminals"
"But if there were no guns, then that wouldn't be necessary"
"But blah"
"But blah blah"
When push comes to shove, there is no actual harm in them producing plastic guns with actual functional working parts, these actually exist already. Guns that fire with minimum metal parts still have metal parts. You would never be able to create a firing pin out of plastic that could in fact fire a bullet, for example. It's kind of paranoid that they even pull the printer based on the mere mention of plastic guns with functional parts for the reason I stated above.
That said, the people at at the gunmaker leased a product and didn't buy, meaning that paranoia aside, the actual owners of the printer can take it away at their leisure for whatever reason they choose.
This shouldn't erupt into a debate about guns as this is not actually a good forum for such discussions, as we have learned in the past here.
"Guns aren't necessary and the world would be a better place without them"
"But they help law abiding citizens defend against armed criminals"
"But if there were no guns, then that wouldn't be necessary"
"But blah"
"But blah blah"
When push comes to shove, there is no actual harm in them producing plastic guns with actual functional working parts, these actually exist already. Guns that fire with minimum metal parts still have metal parts. You would never be able to create a firing pin out of plastic that could in fact fire a bullet, for example. It's kind of paranoid that they even pull the printer based on the mere mention of plastic guns with functional parts for the reason I stated above.
That said, the people at at the gunmaker leased a product and didn't buy, meaning that paranoia aside, the actual owners of the printer can take it away at their leisure for whatever reason they choose.
This shouldn't erupt into a debate about guns as this is not actually a good forum for such discussions, as we have learned in the past here.
I don't want to get into the broader gun debate, but... He does realise that if something is a human right, then literally every human gets it? Including children and the mentally ill?
Though to be fair to him it's hard to find a phrase to describe Rights that apply to everyone apart from those who are incapable of benefiting from them.
Haha, I enjoyed your rant until the end. Being harmless and uninteresting does not secure survival. That is only taking into account one situation, not both or all.Rainforce said:
The debate itself is interesting though. The only way to defend against people with guns is to have your own gun. The fact that so many guns exist in the world is already fact. The thing that I find a lot of people miss is that it only matters on a case to case basis. People who don't live in the same areas as other people, who don't have the same environment aren't fit to dictate what people in that situation would/could/should do. That applies to for both sides. People who are pro-gun think more people should own them, people who are anti-gun think everyone should give them up.
Defense Distributed's mind set scares me. I would not feel comfortable at all if people were able to just print out a gun whenever they wanted. Walking around in a world like that, I'd be afraid any time I went out into public.
Will the angry Minnisoteans be accosting the home depot next?
Home made guns are hardly a new things.
Maybe we should arrest people who are carrying flashlights
The real problem here is that the "angry Minnisoteans" don't understand where to direct their vitriol. They want to slap the hands of anyone who is thinking about making something that might possibly be used for nefarious purposes. That's 3-generation missing the point.
How about we teach our kids that it's not OK to shoot someone, instead of trying to control every avenue by which someone can be shot.
Home made guns are hardly a new things.
Maybe we should arrest people who are carrying flashlights
The real problem here is that the "angry Minnisoteans" don't understand where to direct their vitriol. They want to slap the hands of anyone who is thinking about making something that might possibly be used for nefarious purposes. That's 3-generation missing the point.
How about we teach our kids that it's not OK to shoot someone, instead of trying to control every avenue by which someone can be shot.
Don't worry I was thoroughly confused by it too. And then I saw the guy on the right who I thought have smeared his face in blue paint, and immediately then thought of Tobias from Arrested Development.DugMachine said:Okay do I have to be the one to point out the wedding dress. LolwatThe Plunk said:
Perfect! I'll get the "massager" launcher ready!Frontastic said:
Perhaps they can make me a fuck to give to the people who are pro gun. I don't have any you see.
Well said. I pray for the day that Americans can, once again, follow their dreams without having too jump through legal hoops.ravenshrike said:
I mean, it would be one thing if what they were doing was illegal, But its not. As much as some on this site might claim otherwise. It is really not illegal, I could do it today, if it was not for the fact that I prefer too buy my firearms from people that know more about engineering then me.
I feel like I am pointing out the obvious but, the bigger picture is the right to defend one's self. He is focusing on guns to accomplish that, and his statement wasn't exclusionary of children or the mentally ill. That is where all gun debates seem to break down is not understanding this very basic principle. Guns are about the broader spectrum ability to defend yourself, mostly against people with guns.Geo Da Sponge said:
I find the most interesting aspect to be the attention subjects like this actually get.. I mean, you take the death by gun rate in a country like America, and it's not a small number. But it pales into insignificance compared to auto accidents, work place deaths, and so on. It's from what is called an availability cascade. A thread like this produces a lot of statistics (some good and some not so good), and it creates a set of events where people end up with recall and discussion of things that is central to their thoughts. You get the same thing with the war on terror.
As a side note, I am just making observations about this subject. I have no interest what so ever in picking a side because at the end, neither side is explicitly right or wrong.
Many of the parts of the Glock are made of a plastic polymer, but I'm not sure if that counts.Frontastic said:
It does.Saucycarpdog said:
It may come as a shock to many (at least 1/3 of the commenters on this tread) 3D printers can do other materials that cheap plastic.
Right now i am actually consulting a small 3D print company, and altough they mainly work in hardened plastics (a bit tougher than the stuff lego uses) they can produce in a wide variety of materials.
Some of those materials include metals for tools, moulding and machine parts.
Basicly, if the material can be melts, it can be made in a 3D printer, so making a functioning gun would not be a problem at all.
And yes i know those printers are too exspencive for the avarage consumer to buy, but so was the plastic printer not 5 years ago.