Slashdot Mirror
The World's First 3D-Printed Gun
MrSeb writes "An American gunsmith has become the first person to construct and shoot a pistol partly made out of plastic, 3D-printed parts. The creator, who goes by the name HaveBlue and is an AR-15/M16 enthusiast, has reportedly fired 200 rounds with his part-plastic pistol without any sign of wear and tear. HaveBlue's custom creation is a .22-caliber pistol, formed from a 3D-printed AR-15 (M16) lower receiver, and a normal, commercial upper. In other words, the main body of the gun is plastic, while the chamber — where the bullets are actually struck — is solid metal. ... While this pistol obviously wasn't created from scratch using a 3D printer, the interesting thing is that the lower receiver — in a legal sense at least — is what actually constitutes a firearm. This means that people without gun licenses — or people who have had their licenses revoked — could print their own lower receiver and build a complete, off-the-books gun." Here come the illegal shapes. Note that the legal fiction of receiver-as-firearm is true in the U.S., but may not be in other jurisdictions, and that no gun license is required in most of the U.S. to purchase or possess a semi-automatic weapon.
Who will they blame when some nut-job goes postal with one of these illegal shapes?
Will they ban 3D Printers?
WTF! the page showed about google talk being down when I clicked post it got attached to this. what?
Paul: Father... father, the sleeper has awakened! - Dune
It's no less illegal than making one out of metal the old fashion way, it just might be easier, assuming you have access to a 3D printer.
You think this is the first 3D printed product? Is this your first day on the internet?
Most certainly not the first printed product by a long shot. Check google - the only thing new here is the application to a gun.
While the lower receiver is legally considered to be the serialized firearm it is fairly simple part. Folks have been making them on CNC machines for years. The metal upper receiver is much more difficult to manufacture and required precision metal machining. You need both to have a functional weapon. Without the upper, the lower is completely and utterly useless.
Eagles may soar, but weasels don't get sucked into jet engines.
I was wondering how long until someone could circumvent the law with a 3-D printer.
21st Century Renaissance Man
Micro-manufacturing will revolutionize the world just like digital, zero-cost copying. I'd guess it's not going to die, even if they declare it illegal.
The apparent amazement about the "plastic" pistol is a bit baffling. I mean come on.
And as far as concern over someone who can not lawfully own a gun using a 3d printer to manufacture a weapon, really? For a very small amount of money pretty much anyone who wants can go buy a gun on the street. For slightly more money they can purchase a totally legal gun through the classifieds or a gun show.
This is a long, long way from being the very first thing an American has used a 3d printer for. As for whether or not this is the first thing this particular guy printed, it doesn't say. However, he is a gunsmith so it does make sense that he would try printing a gun.
It'd be like saying "World's first 3d printed tea cup is made by housewares company in Britain... how British!" or "World's first 3d printed dildo with tentacles made by adult toy store in Japan... how Japanese"
Exactly. Anyone with access to milling equipment could mill their own lower reciever, assuming they knew the plans. Then they would still have to purchase the upper, the trigger assembly, and other parts. It's not really any different, and with the ability to mill a real receiver, they could make a firearm that can actuall handle .223/.308 rounds.
Or, you know, they could save themselves all of this time and trouble and just go to one of the myriad of websites that allow people to get in touch with others looking to buy or sell firearms. I visit one myself regularly that is part of the forums of an outdoor website dedicatedto my state, and I have even sold a firearm through it. All perfectly legal, with no documentation of transfer of ownership. And on this website alone there are often several AR- and AK- type rifles for sale, anywhere from $400-$1000. This development adds nothing to the equation.
The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
No gun license required? Why would anyone need a license to exercise a right guaranteed by the law of the land? Do you need a license to vote? Do you need a license to be safe from being enslaved? Do you need a license to own a printing press and open a newspaper? I'm totally lost here. What sort of brain structure causes this mental vomit to occur?
Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
That's just an illegal custom firearm. The AR-15 has a split receiver design and the lower is serialized and constitutes the firearm. By fabricating the lower receiver this gunsmith just made a new custom firearm (legal), but did not serialize it (illegal). Also a crappy plastic gun.
A synthetic AR-15 lower receiver is nothing new, printing one yourself is however. Is it dangerous? Yeah kinda, unless you a printing with a rather high strength polymer. Is it illegal? Not if you follow the BATF guidelines. Hobby machinists have been milling them from aluminum for ages. You can buy all sorts of jigs and receiver blanks. If you were to say start manufacturing lower receivers, or do not qualify to legally own them and get caught the penalties are very severe. Also as anyone who builds their own AR-15s will tell you, certain parts are in very high demand, you may wait weeks to months for something simple to complete your build. So I wouldn't worry about somebody building a ton of "off books" rifles any time soon.
You can now literally download them and "print" the parts. (Or the local black market dealer can do it.) Outlawing guns is now more pointless than outlawing weed or cocaine, and will fail harder.
My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
I can make a gun with a wide range of tools. How is this fundamentally different then a CNC mill?
"Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
the accomplishment from an engineering viewpoint (everyone working with 3D printing materials knows what I'm talking about), there is two things that came to my mind when reading these news: 1. What makes self-made weapons made with 3D printer more dangerous than those made will e.g. a CNC machine and 2. The last thing that we need is another way to make more guns..
Funny thing is he didn't seem to make a gun anyway. Just pieces of one.
This was done on Sons of Guns a bit ago already.
I'd like to be the first to say:
Way to fuck it up for the rest of us.
you might not understand it but all the parts needed for building guns are freely for sale without restrictions and the stock metal is available as well.
there's something called common sense still in effect in most of the world, that's why pipes and fertilizer are still available for sale in most of the world.
world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
put this in the moive
Cost.
3d printers can cost a LOT less than a CNC, both for purchase and continued operation.
When you live in a sick society, just about everything you do is wrong.
Haha, that happened to me as well, two or three times, I guess. Yay for slashcode. ;)
Ezekiel 23:20
Yawn, about as exciting as hearing somebody 3d-printed some handgrips. Wake me when they can print a sold steel barrel and bolt at a negligible cost and then maybe people should get, ahem, up in arms about 3d printed guns.
3D printing? Wanking? Hmmm...I sense a business opportunity.
Shit, yo, why we gotta turn everything into weapons, huh? wouldn't we be more civilized without weapons?
Let q be a radix > 1. I am in ur base-q, killing 10 d00ds.
NOT. An individual can legally manufacture a gun. It can never be sold or given to any one else though without having the appropriate permits and paperwork.
This actually could be a good thing. Right now, the public mentality is that gun owner = nut job. Unless Congress is willing to criminalize owning a 3D printer, it might actually force people think about the current state of laws and actually make sensible gun laws.
We don't live in Shouldland.
It's going to get real interesting when somebody uploads a file for a complete printed zip gun. Since people already build them out of pvc pipe, it may be possible to build a usable weapon with extruded ABS plastic.
Toss these 3D printing folks in prison. Then ban guns altogether. There are way too many people defending themselves from spree shooters and psychopaths.
If you ban guns, criminals won't be able to buy them anymore. Remember when they had a war on drugs, and now we don't have drugs anymore??
Not really. I can build a CNC machine for about $600 in parts. I can build a 3d printer for about the same.
Making your own firearms is a well-established hobby in the U.S. Lots of people do it. There are forums devoted to it. Federal law specifically provides for it. It's nothing new. Nor is composite as a material for AR lowers; youtube has plenty of videos of people shooting "Plum Crazy"-based AR rifles. And 3D printing has been around a while.
What's newsworthy here? I don't get it.
IIRC, The Red Jacket .22 zombie gun used a 3D printed body on a metal receiver.
http://www.gunsandammo.com/2012/04/19/the-ultimate-zombie-gun-red-jacket-zk-22-bullpup-rifle/
I just saw a TED talk in which the presenter asked this very question.
"and that no gun license is required in most of the U.S. to purchase or possess a semi-automatic weapon."
While true for most people, felony convicts universally aren't allowed to own guns, and even people convicted of misdemeanor domestic abuse. Same for people with drug addictions, I believe.
Note, that applies to OWNING a firearm... nevermind open carry.
But that's the thing, 3D printing is energy and materials intensive in the way that copying files isn't. 3D printing is like carpentry in the 1950s and 1960s. I don't know if you are familiar with the magazines of the era, but they were filled with plans and designs for furniture and what not. Everyone had tools and a space it seems. How many people you know these days that build their own furniture? How many people make their own clothes? In the same amount as you think people will embrace 3D printing? This 3D printing fad just reflects our rotten value system as a society ("ooh making objects at home is what life is all about".) Would you wear clothes you made yourself?
How much work do you think this gunsmith had to do to the part before it was usable? How many prototypes did he try? It's a hobby, and anyone who wants a receiver will simply buy one.
Basically mass production beats 3D printing, and most people simply don't have the time, patience, resources or skills to dick around for weeks to get poorly aligned slobs of smelly expensive plastics to show their friends.
The same way mass-produced furniture beats dicking around the garage to end up with an inferior, more expensive product. It's that simple. Time will tell, and I'm sure I'm right. 3D printing will revolutionize nothing, since this is a hobby that comes from established industrial techniques, not the other way around. The world is *already* "revolutionized", you just have an expensive hobby.
Then you should know the entire slide assembly of the glock is made of steel. The mags are lined with steel inside of the plastic. Glock was one of the first, but almost every handgun manufacturer makes at least one model like that now. One of the side effects is an increased chance of of the empty cartridge failing to eject completely. Not usually an issue with someone who has practiced and has a firm grip. (look for a video of a limp-wrist fire test of a glock, it will jam every single time, again, this isn't typical usage but its worthy of note) Cause: body of gun is light, by itself it offers little recoil resistance against the slide spring
They don't have an adapter that small; they'll have to custom fabricate it for you.
Why would the method of construction matter as to what the actual end result is. Even if it's made in the digestive channel of a rhinoceros, if it is able to fire bullets it's a firearm and should be regarded as such by regulations.
I was promised a flying car. Where is my flying car?
no ceramic or plastic can withstand the stresses of being fired through or repeatedly compressed
What if you don't need to fire repeatedly, only a few times... like in the Clint Eastwood movie where John Malkovich is the assassin, and he builds a polymer gun to sneak it past the metal detector and kill the president?
Lots of silly information here. "Glock 17 Parabellum"? Seriously? Hammer Spring? On a striker-fired pistol?
(You may "handle firearms on a daily basis", but I'm a Glock Armorer.)
(In The Line Of Fire, as a reminder): that was a one-shot deal. Custom built prop for the movie that fired blanks. The assembled prop was a one-piece mould, since the assembled kit form would have exploded even with a half-load blank.
Operation Guillotine is in effect.
Incorrect. All the parts _except the lower receiver_ are freely for sale without restrictions. In the US, at least, the lower receiver is the part that makes it a gun. That's the thing that needs BG checks and a license to purchase.
You are my favorite person for this week.
Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
Look at the ``Lightning Link'' graphic here:
http://www.atf.gov/firearms/guides/identification-of-nfa-firearms.html
http://www.atf.gov/graphics/firearms/weapons/fullsize/conversion-part-lightning-link.jpg
Technical details here for the morbidly curious, though there's some questioning the legality of this classification.
Sphinx of black quartz, judge my vow.
Cost. 3d printers can cost a LOT less than a CNC, both for purchase and continued operation.
And skill. Even if you have the CAD files or G-Code, a CNC mill requires a lot of skill to set up and run. With a 3D printer, you just push the "start" button.
My kids use a 3D printer to make toys and doll furniture. But they are not allowed to touch the Sherline CNC mill in the garage unless I am with them. It is dangerous and they don't have the skill to operate it.
While one can't print it, it's fairly simple to make a gun barrel from a used truck axle --- that's actually a preferred source of steel since it's already stress-relieved:
http://riflemansjournal.blogspot.com/2009/08/history-harry-pope.html
Sphinx of black quartz, judge my vow.
Heh. One thing to realize is that the NRA is a bit like the ACLU. It's actually considered 'not extreme enough' and 'too willing to bend' by some, there are more extreme organizations out there like the 'Gun Owners of America'.
But I'll agree, the NRA does have some kooks in it, but mostly they're there because they recognize the NRA as the '800 pound gorilla', so they throw some support to it, while also supporting the 300 pound gorilla who is, theoretically speaking, mauling some of the anti-gun gorillas around the corner, so the big guy gets even more done. /Lifetime member of NRA AND GOA.
I don't read AC A human right
Polymer and composite firearm construction was pioneered by Heckler & Koch in the 1970s and they have continuously produced lightweight composite firearms since that time. Glock is popular because it offered good price performance, not because it was particularly innovative. The construction, action, etc were copied from old firearm designs.
It is possible to build non-metallic firearms but the manufacturing would be exotic and extremely expensive.
What a douchebag.
There is a reason why firearm manufacturers create parts out of single bar stock aluminum or steel metal pieces and machine them out, that is to maintain durability during firing process of the gun so it doesn't explode in your hands and injure you or worse and that it will last over repeated uses.
The most difficult part of creating the gun is the creation of the barrel with a chamber that can withstand pressures of 22,000 to 55,000 pounds-per-inch and not explode into shrapnel hurting you badly. Barrel creation is difficult and taken very seriously with many manufacturers using a magnetic particle inspection process to ensure that there are no metal weak points or fractures inside the walls of the barrels to prevent them from exploding.
Until these low priced home 3D printing machines can print out of aluminum, steel, or other metals to maintain some kind of rigidity on the parts these printed firearm pieces will just be an exercise in computer aided design and prototyping. Many of the pistols now use plastic frames
As far as legality of manufacturing your own firearm by people who are somehow restricted by law from owning one, well it's the possession and ownership that is restricted, not the creation so all possession restrictions still apply.
You can create your own firearms according to the Gun Control Act of 1968 for personal usage just not sale or distribution. If you decide to make these 3D printed firearm receivers you would have to apply for a Federal Firearms License type 7 or 10 and register your business then put serial numbers on these parts.
Just an aside. I was once denigrating clothing designers and was challenged to 'design something'. So I designed a bikini for my GF. She refused to even try it on. Didn't like my material choices (clear plastic wrap, dental floss and scotch tape).
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
Hanging my post off yours.
There's a guy, he has his own website called "Orion's Hammer" that details how he made an AR15 lower receiver out of a blue plastic cutting board he bought from Target/Walmart that had been laminated and heat welded using a heat gun, then hand-machined in his garage. This was more of a "hey, they machine these out of solid blocks of aluminum, but it doesn't actually take much stress, I wonder if...." kind of situation. Full write up is on his website, which you can google for.
Video of him firing the gun with plastic receiver: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3chSzLxPuzU
moox. for a new generation.
Lots of silly information here. "Glock 17 Parabellum"? Seriously? Hammer Spring? On a striker-fired pistol?
(You may "handle firearms on a daily basis", but I'm a Glock Armorer.)
Oh, come on, I couldn't stop laughing over the "tenifer steel" compression ability. I wasn't aware that a metal treatment mere microns thick had that kind of power. Impressive.
There is no such thing as a Glock 17 "Parabellum". "Parabellum" is a reference to the 9x19mm round (typically simply referred to as a 9mm).
You could call any gun that chambers a 9mm round a "Parabellum". But you don't.
Fun fact: "Parabellum" is the concatenation of "para bellum" which is Latin for "Prepare for war" as in the Latin phrase "Si vis pacem, para bellum" ("If you seek peace, prepare for war").
Remington 1959, actually. Frame made of doped nylon.
Operation Guillotine is in effect.
Zip guns like that are movie fiction short of using a .22 LR round !!for now!!. The walls of the barrel would based on the material need to be about 4 inches thick, minimum. That would make his zip gun roughly the size of a bowling ball if he was using a 9mm round. Otherwise it would just explode in his hand since the pressure from the cartridge wouldn't be contained in the polymer barrel. Toyota is working on high-heat\high-pressure ceramics for engines and I tell you this: weapon manufacturers are looking at those materials for military equipment.
-=[ Who Is John Galt? ]=-
Actually the first printed part was much more utilitarian and non-controversial. The day before the printer was completed, a storm had knocked down a few of the trees on the property of the inventor, and instead of heading to the hardware store for the parts to repair his fence, he decided to build the parts needed. The horizontal rails were too large for the printer, so a replacement vertical piece was constructed. This 'first post' is still proudly displayed on the property.
I honestly don't think I'd trust anything over .22 made from plastic. My Mosin Nagant fires 7.62x54R and that thing packs a WALLOP.
Everyone knows the NRA's agenda. "Don't take away our guns! The Second Amendment says we can have 'em."
Actually, you don't learn their real agenda until you've 33rd degree OT XV NRAman.
the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
It's always been easy enough to make AK type guns by hand without needing a 3d printer. I own a home-made AK that I built over a weekend with the help of a friend.
The internet's going insane today.
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
Yeah, I know, in Die Hard 2 they mention the "glock 7", an all plastic and ceramic weapon that can get through a metal detector. After the movie came out, I witnessed several incidents of people going into gun shops or wandering gun shows asking about the infamous "glock 7". Sigh.
It doesn't exist. In fact, there is no all plastic and ceramic pistol (at least yet). The Glock 17, if you have ever seen one, has a plastic handle but the slide, barrel, bolt face and trigger mechanism (except the trigger itself) is all metal.
I know this is about what you said, but I wanted to make clear that there are no ceramic guns out there. But I'd be surprised if someone in the government isn't researching it.
Awhile back there was a short media uproar about "plastic guns" and some manufacturers had to list press releases that they were putting enough metal in the frame so that the gun outline would be distinctly visible. But fact is, they always have been.
Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
Actually, I know that one dildo manufacturer already uses 3d printing in their R&D. Although the final product is cast in silicone, the prototyping was done with 3d printing. An American company.
And they do indeed do a tentacle themed toy: http://bad-dragon.com/products/tentacle (HIGHLY NSFW!).
How many people you know these days that build their own furniture?
I shop at IKEA you insensitive clod!
RUGBYRUGBYRUGBY
The NRA is 4.3 million Americans who care enough about their rights to put their hard-earned money to work (via dues) protecting those rights.
No, money is not the key to the NRA's success. Its success is due to the fact that its members are highly likely to vote.
The true currency of politics is votes. Money is just a tool to attempt to persuade voters.
I think you are confusing a vocal minority for the public mentality.
There's a reason why they call it "fiction". Lots of things happen in movies that couldn't possibly happen in real life. With polymers as we know them today, such a weapon wouldn't last a single shot. The chamber pressure of a .380 (the round in the movie) is beyond any plastic technology we have at present.
Besides, polymers are perfectly viewable via x-ray, and although I don't have direct experience with this, I believe a big lump of polymer would trip a metal detector, as the material contains some amount of metal.
Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
I still wonder if a plastic gun molded (or printed) in one piece could survive a single shot. Could be an assassin's or terrorist's dream tool, and maybe those silly old multi-barrel designs could make themselves useful for once by effectively packing many single-shot guns into one.
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
Motor matic Injeksi Irit Harga murah
I'm sure that most of us are aware that plenty of normal people own guns. The public image is gun-fetishist = nut job.
Would it be possible to print a "selectable fire" receiver, in the event of the 1934 firearms act suddenly becoming unenforceable?
Its the media hype in high gear. Oh we're going to be beating this horse so hard...
They really are comming for our guns. (over the next decade)
We're gonna end up with new laws on sale/trade of guns. And ohhhh this 3d printer stuff that could disrupt alot of companies profits.... We'll get that banned too because you can make a 'weapon'.
Everyones happy. Except the end consumer... But really, fuck those guys.
By pushing their extremist view of the constitution, ...
That is a very close minded and telling statement.
Not really. "Military Grade" is a political fiction, the civilian AR-15 is functionally identical to popular hunting rifles. It's "military" only in a cosmetic sense, black plastic instead of wood, same sights and controls as the M-16/M-4. In operation it functions like many hunting rifles, semi-automatic only (one shot per trigger squeeze), it leaves the factory with a 5 round magazine just like the hunting rifles, it uses the same ammunition, etc. The NRA opposes (in part) an assault rifle ban because they understand the functional definition of a rifle like the AR-15 (detachable magazine, semi-automatic, ...) would apply to many hunting rifles as well.
They think it's an infringement of their 'rights' to even be required to be trained to use the weapons they are buying.
The NRA is the largest firearms safety training organization in the world. They got into the political debate only because well meaning but ill-informed politicians were going down the path to outlaw (sometimes unintentionally) traditional hunting and target shooting firearms.
... not to build guns out of everything? Or is that hardwired at birth when you are an american?
Actually that isnt true as an individual is free to manufacture a lower if they wish. Thats why they have a thing called an 80% lower or a AK flat receiver. So you are wrong.
If your saying a .22 isn't lethal enough, a .22 mercury filled bullet is capable of doing simply amazing damage. It explodes, the mercury travels along the long bones of the body then punches through sharp turns. A shot in the arm, could explode the heart or blow a hole in the skull and disrupt the brain. It can sever limbs and cause hyrdrostatic shock causing instant concussion death. That and there's nothing left to do ballistics on. So it completely depends on the .22 my son. But for the most part, I fear you're right, most fire arms are a vain effort to compensate for lack of meatier bits... get a sports car instead, at least you can enjoy the wind in what remains of your hair.
While it's cool to see 3D printers becoming more and more advanced, the "Gun" part of the article feels like hype and buzzwords to help increase clicks.
People have been mass-producing AK-47s in countries that can't keep cars running. They're about as low-tech as possible. Being able to use a high-tech device like a 3D printer to construct one small section of a rifle pales in comparison, when looking at the possible legal ramifications.
This signature is false.
And they do indeed do a tentacle themed toy: http://bad-dragon.com/products/tentacle (HIGHLY NSFW!).
Considering the subject, nay, the composition of that sentence, do you really think the NSFW disclaimer is necessary?
An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
I don't know where you've got your info on firearms, but you are wildly inaccurate.
1. There are no ceramic parts in a Glock 17.
2. The Glock 17 is not called a "parabellum". The 9mmx19 round is often called "9mm parabellum" or "9mm luger", and the Glock 17 is chambered in "9mm parabellum". However, "parabellum" is not a common nickname for the Glock 17 itself.
3. Tenifer is a surface treatment to protect the steel from wear and corrosion. It has no effect of the compressibility of the steel as a whole. Please read more here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tenifer
multifariam.net -- yet another nerd blog
A reporter under the delusion that a "bulletproof vest" would make bullets bounce off him like he was Superman puts it to the test on camera.
And this looks like it was just a .38.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i8hHkNPmqCk
"""
people who have had their licenses revoked
"""
If a person is disqualified from firearm ownership, constructing one with a 3D printer or a block of wood with a rasp or sheet metal with a riveter are still in violation of federal law.
Dude goes nuts in a theater, kills 12 people, and everybody is all freaked about about the inanimate objects that the whacko used.
Next day, 14 people are killed in a car crash when a heavily overloaded pickup goes out of control and hits a tree. Nobody gives a shit, despite the driver being clearly at fault.
What's the difference?
Nobody is blaming the truck in the crash...
Sensible gun laws? Like what?
How about remove all gun laws except two.
1. No one is allowed to sell/purchase/trade any firearms at all in the US.
2. You may build whatever you want without restriction.
This way, if your mad, at least it will take a good bit of work to pull off your maniacal plan.
All points of time and space are connected.
Guns are irrelevant in the case of the Aurora shooter. He possessed enough intelligence to booby-trap his apartment. If guns were illegal, he could have done the same or greater damage with IEDs. If the materials to form IEDs were illegal, he could have done a lot of damage with acid the way the crazies in Afghanistan do.
In other words, you cannot totally prevent this sort of thing by any measure tolerable by a free society. This will always be the case until you tie every citizen's hands behind his back and only allow him to move them under closely monitored cases. Even then, the intelligent ones will find a way.
Let me suggest something controversial--let's correct the gross and systemic inequality, in material terms, of our society. That eliminates an entire swath of economic-based grievances. Let's also address the endemic prejudice of society against intelligent kids in favor of physical kids; this has been salient since Columbine, but no one in America has done anything meaningful against it except to further stigmatize intelligent kids.
I know, this is crazy talk. Let's all double-down on the status quo instead. Let's criminalize everything we possibly can, flying in the face of the constant march of technology. Nevermind that soon everyone will have the ability to manufacture their own guns and worse in defiance of all prohibitions. Nevermind that it will soon be possible for an enterprising, but disgruntled, teen-ager to manufacture his own variant of Ebola. Nevermind that it will soon be possible to enterprising nerds to mastermind the mass-execution of the 1% via swarm-controlled bots.
No, let's continue to plug our fingers in our ears and pretend that the status quo is fine. Remember, I said it here first.
If not us, who? If not now, when?
Considering the subject, nay, the composition of that sentence, do you really think the NSFW disclaimer is necessary?
In light of the fact that I just opened up a box of computer equipment and the silica packet inside says "Do Not Eat" on it... yeah, better to play it safe.
Most historical assassinations which involved shooting were actually carried out with rifles not handguns unlike you see on TV.
As an NRA member I'll add that my experience is that nearly all members I've met think that requiring a safety class before buying that first firearm is a good idea. Just like requiring a hunter safety class before getting that first hunting license. Note, a hunter safety class is mostly general firearms safety, not really hunting specific, so the necessary infrastructure already exists.
That said, despite its draconian slippery-slope attitude, the NRA will still get our support as long a there are well meaning but uninformed (in a technical sense with respect to the operation of firearms) politicians who will outlaw legitimate hunting and sporting rifles in so called "assault weapons" bans. "Assault Weapon", "Military Grade Weapon" are political fictions. To avoid redundancy see: http://hardware.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3007097&cid=40780589
I've killed coyotes with a .22. Not my most honored moment as it took a few shots, but it got the job done. .
If you're into the funny/weird/strange check out the designs the OSS (CIA world war 2 forerunner) came up with. The cigarette "gun" from jame bond is real, they made it.
Here's a starting point: http://gizmodo.com/392406/resistance-isnt-futile-explosive-edible-flour-cigarette-guns-and-other-wwii-oss-tricks
The guy who said the election was rigged won the presidency with the second-most votes.
There is a great photo of Bill Clinton going duck hunting with a assault weapon (shotgun, not riffle) –IIRC – right after he banned their sale as president (ban has since expired). In this day and age a pistol grip is considered more intuitive. It is a style thing - how you hold your weapon.
Were you a customer or a contractor? :)
You need a mercury-tipped .22 to do any damage? You must have terrible aim. Defective genes, I see. Are those the same defects that cause you to smell like shit?
Geeks are so full of shit that "beating the crap out of them" takes a whole new meaning.
22LR is a relatively powerful round. For zip guns use a 22 short or a 25.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
Yup, because the lower on an AR-15 (which is considered the "firearm" by the BATFE) isn't a structural part - it simply keeps all the other parts in appropriate alignment.
And, perfectly legal to make your own firearm, as long as it isn't for commercial purposes (sale), and as long as you follow all NFA rules. You can make a SBR, AOW, etc. as long as you get the proper tax stamp first.... Only thing you can't make is a full auto since the NFA registry for FA/select fire stuff was closed in May 1986. Of course, if you have your FFL and SOT for NFA manufacture, you can still make FA/select fire items *with* the appropriate request for demo unit from a law enforcement agency or military.
Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos
What happens if some point in the future people can manufacture Bazookas using 3d printers. Won't the world get a lot more dangerous?
SELF reported poll shows 47% of Americans are willing to tell the government they have guns, Tell me how comfortable are you telling a stranger you own a gun?
ATF NCIS and NRA data shows there are about 9 guns for every 10 Americans, expect that number to be higher due to citizens uncomfortable telling big brother they have guns as well.
First, it is still SIGNIFICANTLY easier to get a real gun versus printing your own gun.
Second, even if it is impossible to buy real guns and everyone resorts to printing their own guns, people will ALWAYS find a way to kill each other. Ban all guns and all ways to make a gun, people are going to sharpen down their toothbrushes to do the trick.
There is a fundamental failing in society that results in people not valuing other people's lives.
The ways people kill each other is moot and yet so much energy is spent debating and complaining about the availability of weapons. The WHYS people kill each other is more important and should be the focal point of effort to correct.
I haven't thought of anything clever to put here, but then again most of you haven't either.
Don't forget the Plumb Crazy line of PLASTIC Lower receivers.
I'm too lazy to compose a creative sig.
Here's the actual link for the search
I know of them by reputation. Most of their products are really intended as novelty decorations, and are far too large for practical use.
Nothing worse that letting everybody know how this can be done.
It would certainly cut down on the massacres, hunting accidents and domestic fatalities. Is that a bad thing? For us Europeans it doesn't look like it.
A hypocrite is someone who tells people to act one way, and then acts another.
Supporting one position, but not supporting another position (even if similar, related, or compatible), does not make one a hypocrite. Neither does supporting two contradictory positions.
"Contradictory" is not the same as "hypocritical."
"Military Grade" is a political fiction, the civilian AR-15 is functionally identical to popular hunting rifles.
Except he managed to shoot 79 people within the span of a couple minutes. Do you think that is even remotely possible with a regular hunting rifle?
The AR-15 is functionally equivalent to many hunting rifles with detachable magazines and that are semiautomatic in operation. Many hunters have taken such hunting rifles to an appropriate location, dropped out the 5 round hunting magazine and popped in a 20 round target shooting magazine to punch holes in pieces or paper (an Olympic sport by the way), knock over metal plates (some shaped line the animals they will hunt), etc. Such a rifle is virtually identical in capability to the M-14s and original M-16s used in Vietnam, differing only in having no full-auto option. So yes, the same thing could have been done with popular hunting rifles.
More importantly I believe the AR-15 that the nut was using jammed and he switched to a Remington 870 shotgun. The 870 is very popular with hunters and it is also used by the military. Plus a 12 gauge shotgun is deadlier than an M-16 at close range. Note that during the 1st gulf war of the 1990s Marines traded in their M-16s for 12 gauge Mossberg 500 shotguns (also quite popular with hunters) when they planned to enter Iraqi trenches and command bunkers.
The term "Assault Rifle" actually applies only to rifles capable of full-auto operation. When the rifle is semi-automatic only "Military Grade" is a fiction, relying only on cosmetic appearance not actual functionality or capability.
I've built several of my pieces of furniture. My wife even likes them and is asking me to build more. There are several reasons I build instead of buy, greatest of which are cost and customization.
The great thing about 3D printing is that it really isn't time and energy intensive. The machine does the work for you. I'm a CNC programmer, and yes, for long runs, hard materials, and tight tolerances machining blows 3D printing away. But Machining takes not only some rather expensive equipment, but a lot of setup time, programming, and figuring out methodology. With a 3D printer you basically just load a model and hit a button. So what if it takes a day to print out, that's unattended time. And as far as materials go, there are people working on a device to recycle plastic bottles into filament that can be used in a 3D printer. Get one of those and your material is free.
In the USA, this can only be a good thing.
What this enables is the possible production of millions and millions of more guns, which is perfect for fixing the out of control gun culture in the USA.
Remember, the *only* right solution to lots of guns is.....more guns! amiright?
Nobody will ever take away the Americans GOD given right to shoot lots of people to death. Its the only answer to everything.
Cost....And skill.
Indeed. I'm a CNC programmer in a machine shop. Besides the cost of machines and tooling there is significant skill and work needed to set a mill up to make something. With a 3D printer it's "push button receive bacon."
Well, I guess the Second Amendment has to be rewritten: Everybody has the right to print arms.
I was going to print some plastic knuckles on my 3d printer for fun but after looking for some designs, I stumbled onto the government website that brass knuckles or any similar device is a prohibited weapon. It is kind of scary to think If I get a virus on my computer and it prints an illegal object, I would be subject to prosecution under the criminal code. I don't think I will attempt printing a handgun.
Mass manufacturing has economies of scale that small scale manufacturing can't touch. 3D printing is the long tail of manufacturing. Need a replacement part for your car that Toyota stopped making 10 years ago? No problem.
And what happens if we remove instances of deaths where the police are involved? It's important to remember that US police forces are heavily armed and frequently use aggressive tactics, whereas UK police are rarely armed. This isn't merely a difference in armament, but also corruption, training, and tactics.
In a world in which natural, common plants are illegal, it doesn't seem unusual that shapes might be as well.
Do you know, I think you're right.
And I don't suppose paper document printers will take off either - I mean, how many of us have time to write a book? Until we have the ability to transfer the work of one person to the printer of another - some kind of futuristic "file transfer" system - this stuff is purely an expesive hobby.
Especially as there is no possibility that these things will ever actually be any good. There has been no development of them whatever in the last decade or more. And even if they were any use at all, I don't suppose anyone believes that there is any power conferred in the ownership of the "means of production" (I just invented that phrase - rather catchy).
I'm sure you're sure you're right.
I keep hearing that, yet that's such a contrived example. I'd like to
1) See that, I've never seen or heard of anyone actually doing it
2) How much time and money did it take?
3) And what part are talking about here? A handle for the ashtray or a mechanical part under the hood? I really doubt you'll ever go beyond the former.
Time will tell. Tell you what, give it ten years, and 3D printing will be as forgotten as "virtual reality" is today. Remember VR? Remember all the delirious hype?
No doubt, I was thinking the same thing.
TBH, printing your own isn't a problem at all. They still won't have any ammunition. I think the fear people have with "he printed a gun, oh noes!" is that people assume that a printed gun somehow implies one that comes with ammunition, which I would argue is harder to acquire than the actual gun itself.
Are you kidding me? Travels along the long bones? Instant concussion death? Sever limbs? Do you have any evidence of this beyond wives tales and urban legend? Blow a hole in the skull and disrupt the brain? You've been watching too many kids movies.
Mercury becomes a vapor under pressure. It carries significant mass, and will probably make a serious change to firing pressures. The load will need to be adjusted. Look at the safe load differences between a 90-ish gr, 115-ish gr and then 147gr 9mm. As the weight increases, muzzle energy goes down. Using the same powder loads behind the heavier bullet makes a significantly higher pressure.
Beyond that change, show me any gelatin test or even animal carcass test showing the significance of mercury in a bullet.
The simple fact of firearms is newton's third law. The shooter will absorb as much energy as the target. For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction. .22's just don't have the oomph to do all of the things you're talking about. Grow up, read up, whatever it takes. Without serious evidence, your words ring of conjecture and wild exaggeration.
While this is most likely a poor attempt at irony, some people might read this and actually believe it, so here's a warning: .22 Long Rifle may be considered a weak-powered cartridge, but it's plenty strong enough to wound or kill a person, even at fairly large distances. One guy had tried penetration testing on a frozen turkey wrapped into a T-shirt and jeans, and .22 LR bullets were consistently penetrating the front layer of clothing and the entire turkey at 250 yards, despite considerable bullet drop at that distance. So treat any .22 rifle with full respect that a firearm deserves - it's just as potentially dangerous and lethal as any other gun, and all the usual safety rules fully apply when handling it.
How is "...no gun license is required in most of the U.S. to purchase or possess a semi-automatic weapon" relevant?
Keep the politics out of it and the tech in.
You think that the having of guns causes the massacres? And that taking them away will suddenly stop people from killing each other?
People who want to massacre will either obtain a gun illegally, or will use something other than a gun.
So, getting rid of the guns does not make us safer, it just removes our ability to shoot back when the criminals come.
Your fear robs you of your rationality.
Re:
"Note that the legal fiction of receiver-as-firearm is true in the U.S"
Since not all parts of a firearm should logically be CONTROLLED as a "firearm" (screws, rivets, stocks, barrels) it is necessary to have a workable legal definition of "firearm".
Controlling receivers is logical, as is controlling the SPECIFIC parts of fully automatic weapons which make them "full auto".
"This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
The first to blog about it, you mean. I strongly suspect completely plastic single-use firearms have been 3D printed for some time.
I can't believe that anyone could think that the US would be a better place if crazy people couldn't get their hands on high end body armor and automatic weapons. If people couldn't get weapons just because they were "crazy" who would protect us from the liberals? ~
Apologies to Poe
Right, because the cheap plastic parts that are used for everything nowadays never break...
And perhaps you haven't heard of it because you're either A) not paying attention and B) 3D printing hasn't hit the mainstream.
So, if it's so obvious, please provide a link of someone printing a part, how much it cost, and how long it lasted? Show me! You 3D printer guys always fail there.
You don't need to have plastic strong enough to withstand dozens or hundreds of firings, you need plastic strong enough to withstand one firing.
I can imagine 3D printing a shape with multiple one-shot barrels, adding some propellant, electrical detonator and a projectile to each barrel, then mounting the assembly on some kind of (probably 3D printed) grip. When all the barrels have been discharged, throw them away and mount another on the grip.
which I would argue is harder to acquire than the actual gun itself.
Going to Walmart is harder than printing something with a 3D printer, mail ordering an upper receiver for it, and then putting it all together?
You're an idiot.
yeah so the Aurora incident would have been solved with a lot less hassle, death and injury with dozens of scared, disorientated people indiscriminately firing at an unknown target in the darkness
are endless. Imagine you could 3D prints brains out. Then you can have a perfect government, great spouse, a gem of a boss and so on. Could you do 3D printing on genome level ? hmm..
I come to Slashdot only to read sigs. One you are reading is mine.
As far as firearms go, anything you can legally possess you can also legally build. This is no exception. Besides, how many violent criminals do you think have their own 3d printers? The effort involved in acquiring the knowledge and ability to print a receiver is more than most would be willing to put in when it's easier and cheaper to steal a gun or buy a stolen gun.
this has been done before on the tv show sons of guns for a zombie killing episode.
http://www.gunsandammo.com/2012/04/19/the-ultimate-zombie-gun-red-jacket-zk-22-bullpup-rifle/
So today's Saturday, is today when the UN is the Global Conspiracy of the New World Order? Is it on Tuesday that the UN is the Gang that Can't Shoot Straight?
Ooh, moderator points! Five more idjits go to Minus One Hell!
Delendae sunt RIAA, MPAA et Windoze
England != UK fucknuts.
They are different.
Choose which one you mean and stick to it.
This is an important point: Why should "arms" just be firearms? Why can you get a license to carry a concealed body-hole-puncher, but not a concealed rapier or even dagger? Heck, a carpenter with a hammer in his belt is carrying just as lethal a weapon...
I am building a rifle in my garage. This is perfectly legal in the USA as long as I am allowed to own that rifle. I could build a rifle that had illegal features, but I choose not to.
3D printing is just a new and interesting way to make parts for a gun. It doesn't magically give anyone the ability to do illegal things that they couldn't have done before.
What is illegal is making certain parts out of a material that has a low melting temperature. This would allow the gun to be easily destroyed after a crime was committed. I don't remember the details, so do your legal research before you start printing.
The new 3D part of the pistol functions, and explain in detail.
Line replica watches, through continuous development and constant research,
The NRA is actually an extremist organisation that does NOT represent its membership. Look up their actual positions. Most gun owners/advocates favour responsible gun ownership whereas the NRA advocates a dangerous free-for-all approach that encourages more violent weapons and makes responsible use (like hunting) less practical. Gun owners need to start an new organisation that is not bought and sold big brother corporation owned.
Stupidity is its own reward.
There is a lot of rose tinted glasses and not seeing the sheep for the wolf clothing with the NRA. The NRA is very extreme and surveys of NRA members always result in much more moderate and responsible ideas of gun use than the NRA actually advocates. Just because YOU don't support shooting people/stand-your-ground etc doesn't mean the NRA backs you. Most members have a very distant idea of the policies the NRA puts into law and if they knew it better they would quit their membership!
Stupidity is its own reward.