UK Police Seize Suspected 3D Printed Firearm Parts In Raid

[Zykon TheLich_v1legacy]

The Challenger raids are Greater Manchester's response to the murders of PCs Fiona Bone and Nichola Hughes, in September 2013.

Just a minor correction, that happened last year, not this year.

 

[Karloff]

The Challenger raids are Greater Manchester's response to the murders of PCs Fiona Bone and Nichola Hughes, in September 2013.

Just a minor correction, that happened last year, not this year.

Nuts. My error. Adjusted. Thanks!

 

[UNHchabo]

The UK has has 0.4 gun homicides per 100000 and the US has 3.6. The fact that the UK has 900% lower number of gun homicides is clearly to do with the fact the guns are very tightly controlled.

First, I disagree with the idea of using "gun homicides" to measure whether gun control works. How about using the overall homicide rate?

Second, the numbers reported by the US and UK governments are not comparable, largely because of this: (source [http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm199900/cmselect/cmhaff/95/95ap25.htm])

Since 1967, homicide figures for England and Wales have been adjusted to exclude any cases which do not result in conviction, or where the person is not prosecuted on grounds of self defence or otherwise.

According to crime statistician John Lott [http://johnrlott.blogspot.com/2013/10/warning-about-how-homicides-and-crime.html], if the US used the same method of counting homicides, our rate would be about 30% higher than that of the UK, instead of 400% higher.

Not to mention the UK police being pressured to keep reported crime rates low [http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/10052668/Police-ordered-to-slant-crime-data.html]...

 

[Thaluikhain]

It's just proof that gun laws don't stop people from getting guns no matter how strict they are.

They can make it hard enough that many won't, though.

Which only will affect people who follow the law.

Which includes people who are forced to follow the law by law enforcement. The UK law enforcement is pretty good (not perfect, though) at stopping illegal weapons use (with the notable exception of Northern Ireland).

 

[GoaThief]

Well that's because they actually take care of each other over there so fewer people are driven to violent crime in the first place.

So in essence, what you're saying is that strict gun control makes little to no difference and the way to combat violent crime, especially those that involve firearms, is to address inequality and provide decent care/quality of life for your citizens who in turn will be happier and less prone to turning to crime? I totally agree.

 

[GoaThief]

Well that's because they actually take care of each other over there so fewer people are driven to violent crime in the first place.

So in essence, what you're saying is that strict gun control makes little to no difference and the way to combat violent crime, especially those that involve firearms, is to address inequality and provide decent care/quality of life for your citizens who in turn will be happier and less prone to turning to crime? I totally agree.

But guns it a hell of a lot easier to commit those crimes.

The UK has has 0.4 gun homicides per 100000 and the US has 3.6. The fact that the UK has 900% lower number of gun homicides is clearly to do with the fact the guns are very tightly controlled.

The UK is more the size and nature of a state, however - have you got the figures for those? On mobile at the moment so it's awkward. Sources would be good too.

What about comparing it to Norway, Sweden and another EU country such as Switzerland?

 

[Slash2x]

It's just proof that gun laws don't stop people from getting guns no matter how strict they are.

The UK has has 0.4 gun homicides per 100000 and the US has 3.6. The fact that the UK has 900% lower number of gun homicides is clearly to do with the fact the guns are very tightly controlled.

Either that or we have shit aim.

As evidence by the fact it took 30 rounds and a FUCKING grenade to kill 2 people... In the US that would have been a whole gang of people at a *insert latest location of random act of violence*. Damn brits need to spend some time at the firing range.

 

[frobalt]

I heard about this on the radio earlier. It's a bit unnerving to me since it's very close to where I work. The part of Manchester this is in is called 'Baguley' (silent 'u') which is where I work.

I've heard a few things on the radio happening around there recently as well!


Edit:

I believe the radio report on the story did mention that it turned out not to be gun parts but, I think, parts for models. Or something like that.

 

[Scarim Coral]

... that's a gun?

Is my paperclip a part of a more complex home made gun too? Maybe its part of a multi-platform super weapon floating in space, waiting to strike with laser-based fury.

Hell, isn't the reciever the thing that's legally a gun?

The image in the news is the trigger componment (saw the news this morning and they explain what that image is).

Either way the new development in firearm would mean the authority should now start thinking of a new way to counteract it since one of the benefit of a plastic gun is that it will avoid metal detection (if the bullet is plastic too). Sure you could say they could make a device to melt it but something tell me it will take alot of heat to melt that.

 

[The Lugz]

... that's a gun?

Is my paperclip a part of a more complex home made gun too? Maybe its part of a multi-platform super weapon floating in space, waiting to strike with laser-based fury.

Hell, isn't the reciever the thing that's legally a gun?

The image in the news is the trigger componment (saw the news this morning and they explain what that image is).

Either way the new development in firearm would mean the authority should now start thinking of a new way to counteract it since one of the benefit of a plastic gun is that it will avoid metal detection (if the bullet is plastic too). Sure you could say they could make a device to melt it but something tell me it will take alot of heat to melt that.

you can avoid metal detection fairly easily, and it's not really an issue when we can detect plastic just as well these days, a modern scanner is a fairly scary thing:

Spoiler: Yikes!

won't be long before these things can be used as an all in one check-up as you pass security..

 

[Someone Depressing]

As someone who lives in Britain, and thus my bloodsteam is 50% grease and cigarrete ash, I can testify that the guns laws over here and viciously strict.

So the fact that this has been done only tells me that the society I've grown up in and learned to feel safe in isn't all that great.

But: Doesn't 3d printing use resin, a kind of heavily compacted plastic/hemp? With the heat and power behind a gun, could it really stand the challenge?

 

[UltraPic]

I believe the radio report on the story did mention that it turned out not to be gun parts but, I think, parts for models. Or something like that.

It's a mod for the 3d printer put out by the company that makes them.
Another story, but with a few quotes from the dood who got busted http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-24669969

 

[Daverson]

It's just proof that gun laws don't stop people from getting guns no matter how strict they are.

Erm...

So let me get this straight: You feel that a news story about how a law against the unauthorized manufacturing of firearms has successfully prevented the unauthorized manufacturing of firearms is proof that laws against the unauthorized manufacturing of firearms don't work?

You do realize that's like pointing at a duck and saying "This is clear proof that ducks do not exist!"

Or is your point simply that some people break laws? In which case, one could just as easily say "Welp, laws against murder aren't doing anything to stem the tide of murders, might as well legalize murder". I'd strongly recommend against that line of thought, because frankly, that's just dumb.

... that's a gun?

Looks like a sear, part of the trigger assembly. [http://www.samachine.com/images/Sear%20Nose%20Bad%201.jpg] (Sorry for the large picture, it's the best one I could find. It's a slightly different design, but you can clearly see both the mounting hole and the nodule for the trigger spring. Admittedly, not necessarily part of a firearm, but if you find something like this and gunpowder in the same box, it's a reasonable guess it's not just part of a glue gun)

 

[jackpipsam]

Hopefully the Australian police will crack down on this as soon as this stuff comes into Australia.

 

[Adeptus Aspartem]

Granted, as long as agencies are proactive in law enforcement instead of just saying "these weapons are now illegal, now don't have one. we are just going to turn our backs to you now" will decrease crime considerably. However, even in places where firearms restrictions are so, well, strict crimes that would of been committed with a firearm are shifted to other weapons.

For example in China where a man wielding a butcher knife, which you can buy in any half decent supermarket or store, killed several children in school.

Akin to the Sandy Hook Shooting, he only killed I believe seven to eleven children instead of the twenty-eight or thirty that the Sandy Hook shooter killed, but it remains that if he had a firearm, he would of used one. He didn't, so he used the next best thing.


But using the guy as an example who killed the two police officers in the UK, he wasn't following the law. He didn't care about laws, legalities of firearms, or explosives for that matter [which by the way, was it an actual fragmentation grenade? that's beyond crazy. Here in the US we have people that will use pipebombs or such other homemade devices, but not a fricking M67, or the UK equivalent]. He set out to do one thing, and circumvented laws regarding firearm purchases and restrictions.


I'm not going to say owning a firearm will make you safer than someone who doesn't, but where I live it takes the Sheriff's Department a good ten to fifteen minutes to arrive. A lot can happen in just five minutes, and to protect myself until law enforcement arrive, I will more than likely have to use my rifle.

Saying [not you, but a majority of gun control advocates in the US] that I shouldn't be allowed to defend myself with my rifle because:

A: it holds more than 10 rounds in a magazine

B: has a pistol grip [which makes it more deadly than the exact same rifle with a traditional rifle grip]

C: can fold up [but not be fired] into a size less than 16 inches


is beyond stupid.

I would even say it's retarded.





I will even say this. Plastic isn't as strong as metal, while eventually 3d printed firearms might be a cause for concern, right now you might just get calls from annoyed corner store clerks who are reporting for the fifth time this week someone tried to rob them and the weapon exploded in their hand and if they could send an ambulance because there is a line forming behind the dumbass.

By that logic: Why do we use locks for houses and cars?

You know, people following the law will not steal your stuff and those who want to steal your stuff won't get stopped by a lock anyway, so just remove them. They're unnecessary.

 

[Daverson]

A few raids doesn't mean its stopped.

America raids drug caches every day. yet there are always more.

We also raid pedophile sites, but those are still around.

We raid a lot of things, but they still exist and grow exponentially.

There comes a point when crime escalates beyond what we are able to to counter. Drugs in America meant there was no way in hell we can counter any gang because of how much money they can throw around.

How can you stop gangs that pay our under paid soldiers thousands just for a rifle and a few mags? Not that thousands are hard to come by with drug money. With the military accepting more and more gang members its getting even easier.

Just because you are raiding things doesn't mean it won't over power you or grow. America learned that the hard way with booze, and drugs.

I'll agree, a few raids don't mean that all gun crime has stopped, permanently, forever. But that hardly means the whole thing is a pointless waste of money. At the end of the day, guns and drugs are out of the hands of people who, let's face it, don't exactly have them for educational purposes. That is, in my mind, lives saved. Which I'm sure you'll agree, is hardly a waste of anything.

(Also, soldiers selling guns to gangs? That sounds made-up, did you read it in the Sun? I don't mean to tell you your business, but perpetuating slander about the British army isn't a good way to make a point.)

 

[IceForce]

It's just proof that gun laws don't stop people from getting guns no matter how strict they are.

Failed logic is fail.

Also, you have a rather strange understanding of what "proof" means.

There will only be "proof" of this, after stricter gun laws are actually tried out, and (ultimately) fail.
THEN you can say that it didn't work. THEN you can say that it "didn't stop people".

 

[Imperioratorex Caprae]

You obviously haven't been listening to republicans claiming obamacare is an abject failure and is destroying this nations economy for years, even though sign-up just started earlier this month...

Bad example. Obamacare is a failure because it doesn't do what the proponents of the bill say it was going to do. People are being dropped from coverage due to the AHCA, losing their chosen doctor, their plan. The people it was supposed to help are actually not qualifying for it, or if they do the pricing is much higher than their income can afford even WITH subsidies. The website was barely beta-tested and rolled out with major traffic issues, let alone the cost of the website was enormous (more than any website on the web today).
I don't know if you've paid attention to the crap EA and Blizzard got when both SimCity and Diablo 3 rolled out with massive online issues that made it unplayable, but the same standard and beyond should be applied to a Government funded (which is a fancy name for TAXPAYER backed) project such as healthcare.gov.
An idea on paper isn't easy to implement, but when the idea isn't just on a piece, two or ten pieces of paper but over 20,000 pages of regulations and couched in legalese then the idea is just too big to implement. Especially when none of the folks who actually wrote the bill at inception could tell the American public what exactly the bill said "until it is passed".
Thats dodgy as fuck, and I wouldn't care either way what side passed it, I'd be saying the same damn thing. I have no respect for any politician who pulls crap like that.
But my original point is this: Centralized government becomes too much bureaucracy and red-tape to function correctly, as the debacle surrounding this healthcare website has shown. They had 3 years to get it ready and they failed horribly on all fronts and wasted between $70mill and $600mill of taxpayer dollars. Why I gave it that range? Because there's not enough transparency in the Government to know exactly how much it cost.
More or less the only reason this passed was so the left could say "We did it!" without actually knowing what the fuck they did or how to make it work. And now we're seeing the results of 3 years worth of preparation time. From what I can see, this isn't making it easier for anyone to get healthcare, another broken promise.
*sigh*
On gun laws, stricter laws don't prevent criminals from doing criminal things. The law is ALREADY there for them to be considered criminal, and since they don't mind breaking laws already whats one more going to prove? That a minority of a population is so destructive that the rest of the population has to abide by stricter laws that don't stop criminals from committing crimes. I think the fact that the education in the US is so poor that we end up with more criminals due to a lack of real education instilling a sense of self-worth in children.

 

[schrodinger]

Spoiler

Gun discussion. In the News Room. Gods help us all.

So that's the 'gun' they found? I guess if you hit someone with the 'gun' it might hurt, but beyond that...meh. I would need to see a video or something of this thing firing before i can classify this thing as a gun.

 

[Plucky]

I really don't see why people are making guns with 3d printers anyway, sure it might have made people create potentially easy and disposable weapons, but plastic fragments easily, chances are it'll either split, melt, or even possibly explode on the wielder.

Why not just add restrictions on flammable materials, gunpowder and bullets? maybe even possibly make the sale of bullets a universal thing, limited to people who actually still has their gun and a license. would reduce how many people and bullets moving around in circulation, it weeds out people buying bullets for others, whilst also leaving stock for people who's occupations might actually justify guns such as farmers, hunters and pest control.