Slashdot Mirror
Should We Print Guns? Cody R. Wilson Says "Yes" (Video)
The Wiki Weapon Project and its idea of making guns with 3D printers has already been mentioned on Slashdot. It has also been written up on Forbes.com and a lot of other geek and non-geek sites. Note that when some Wiki Weapon proponents talk about making "guns" with 3D printers, they may be talking only about lower receivers or other static parts, not barrels, firing pins or other parts that must be machined to close tolerances and are subjected to a lot of stress when the gun fires. But low-cost 3D printing and low-cost CNC machining technologies are both advancing at a rapid rate, so thinking about the intersection of firearm manufacturing and open source is both worthwhile and timely. There's been a strong debate about this topic on Eric S. Raymond's Armed and Dangerous blog that's worth reading. Also recommended: The Home Gunsmith.com and CNC Gunsmithing. Astute Slashdot readers will, no doubt, recommend many more. Meanwhile, this video is about licensing, distribution, and legal matters, not the actual manufacture of firearms. There's a transcript (we're finally doing transcripts of selected videos) below the video for those who prefer to read instead of watch.
Police are going to have a field day with printed guns, which by nature won't have/need serial numbers or registration (except possibly for conceal and carry)
Life also gets interesting when we can print keys. To your house, your car, your safe deposit box....
Then only outlaws will have printed guns.
The Chinese were so ignorant they thought gunpowder was useful for making delightful colors in the sky to amuse people. It took a genius to see the killer app, making round metal balls that fly through people. I guess that's literally a killer app. Go technology.
Which isn't to say you shouldn't be able to, but that you shouldn't do it because it will be misused and serves no practical purpose. Also, why is it we ask "how can we shoot things or blow things up with this" every time a new technology comes to the market?
"Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
There's a transcript (we're finally doing transcripts of selected videos) below the video for those who prefer to read instead of watch.
What is this reading you're talking about?
Shai Schticks:"You don't make peace with friends, you make peace with enemies"
Transcripts!
"Kill 'em all and let Root sort 'em out"
I predict that there will be laws (actually, already are) for this, but that as the industry becomes more mature there are going to be soft-safeguards in the commercial printers which actively discourage the fabrication of the most critical gun-like parts (ex: printers will not print cylindroidal parts with inner diameter ranges that match common ammunition).
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
...regulating this behavior. The rules of what you can create and can't are pleasantly explicit in the US. There may be a few new edge cases, but on the whole this won't be anything new to the ATF. Simply, with modern tools, zip guns are no longer hard to make.
Where these people will run into trouble is the attitude ~5:30 minutes into the video, the statement "Fuck your laws." Does not show the kind of safe-and-sane experimenter spirit to which the courts are often forgiving. It's more of a "make an example of me" invitation.
I hope everyone inspired to experiment with these toys takes the opposite approach. Last I read about them, the jail sentences that come with full-auto weapons manufacture were 10 years per gun.
The ATF has no problem with good amateur gunsmithing, nor experimenting with new technologies to make better guns. Kel-Tec is a great example. My first Kel-Tec (the Grendel) was painful to shoot, but cheap and reliable, and now they are a thriving business.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kel-Tec
Eventually you'll be able to print the whole thing, and synthesize the charge/primer too. The same equipment will be able to make food and medicine. Who do you want controlling that?
Excuse me while I print out a 3D hand and a 3D head so I can facepalm without injury to myself.
What do I know, I'm just an idiot, right?
I'll admit that I know very little of the gun side of the CFR, but I suspect that these guys will find their downfall in the sale of these items. It's one thing to play around with 3D printing, but the temptation (especially for the young entrepreneur) is to start selling to friends. Once those personal hobby items go commercial, that's when you can plan on a ton of bricks for a hat.
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
I have heard that at least some copiers had built in block for reproduction of banknotes. If this is true, it is probably result of some regulation.
I wonder if something similar will be done for the 3D printers.
I do not believe in karma. "Funny"=-6. Do good and forbid evil. Yours, Oft-Offtopic Flamebaiting Troll.
In quite a few states, possibly all of them, you need some sort of certification or registration or permit to create a gun from scratch. So it's not really an opinion at this point. It was decided decades ago and is already law.
is this dude someone famous that I've never heard of before? I'm just wondering why I should care what he thinks about printing guns at home. TFS doesn't even mention him other than in the title...
He's running Defense Distributed's "3D Printed Gun Contest" the article is about, so yea, probably bears mentioning.
An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
to actually print a key, you still need to need the original to copy.
For typical residential-grade locks, does one need an original key for any length of time or just a photo of an original?
3D printing technology is moving into realms that many of us would have overlooked. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z8MaVaqNr3U documents using a "sand printer" to make very precise molds for sand casting. Precision castings reduce the amount of finish work required on the casting. Many of the parts used in a gun could be cast using such a technique, finished, tempered where necessary. (Ruger casts a lot of frames, At one time Springfield used cast bolts in the M1A until enough of them broke that they started forging bolts.) MIM is already widely used in the firearms industry for parts like hammers, triggers and grip safeties. The only parts I can think of that couldn't be made using 3D printing or the above technology are springs which can be bought in bulk, and the barrel, which has to be ordinance grade steel and rifled unless you're shooting a smoothbore with shot or a fin stabilized projectile.
people already change the stocks and receivers of their guns, you can buy them legally. there is a serial number on the barrel. by the way, people also change barrels legally, and so the serial number changes.
do you imagine that forensics retrieves a bullet from a body, and says "oh, we need to find gun with serial number xxxxxx?" no, they don't. they look for a barrel that produces "matching" lands and grooves on bullet if from a rifled barrel firearm.
Outlaw what people _do_ with guns, which has plenty of room for some re-work. Simply making one, whether printing it, or otherwise, should be perfectly legal. Otherwise, you may as well outlaw making knives, screwdrivers, hammers, rope and anything else which could be used to do something illegal.
Join the Slashcott! Feb 10 thru Feb 17!
Which is basically a nothing organization...so its a fair question.
Support more choices in goverment-Vote 3rd party.
...appreciate the transcript posted on the bottom. I hope this will be a new standard feature!
The guy mentions "armed men are free men"... it's a good sound bite, but it really doesn't mean anything. You can have a kitchen knife, and you will be considered armed... it's is not going to help defend you against someone with a gun.
Even the best fully automatic firearm you can print is nothing but a kitchen knife compared to the destructive power a modern military has at its disposal. You don't have tanks, planes, bombs, rockets, missiles, artillery, drones, gunships, submarines, helicopters, radars etc. In the grand scheme of things you might as well be considered unarmed even if you're holding an AK-47 in each arm.
An ad which ran in the National Rifleman prior to the U.S. entry into World War II:
SEND A GUN TO DEFEND A BRITISH HOME ...
British civilians faced with threat of invasion, desperately need arms for the defense of their homes.
THE AMERICAN COMMITTEE FOR DEFENSE OF BRITISH HOMES
has organized to collect gifts of
PISTOLS --- RIFLES --- REVOLVERS --- SHOTGUNS --- BINOCULARS
from American civilians who wish to answer the call and aid in defense of British homes.
These arms are being shipped, with the consent of the British Government to
CIVILIAN COMMITTEE FOR PROTECTION OF HOMES
BIRMINGHAM, ENGLAND
--- from http://www.twinbuttebunch.org/index.php?fuseaction=misc.sendguns
Churchill had a very nice writeup of the weapons arriving in his memoirs.
William
Sphinx of black quartz, judge my vow.
I'm getting worried his old one might be wearing out.
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
Control of guns is required for public safety. Giving government an excuse to license replicators is bad. Couldn't we work on humanoid robots instead?
I keep hearing about low cost, etc. I can go out for about $100 and get a mass produced actual gun, that fires real bullets, using real gun powder, and is made out of actual metal. How much do these things really cost to produce? I have a hard time believing that people at home will be able to print their way to cheaper than mass production for most things.
Some people can still only achieve happiness with a warm gun. And others could only be happy in a post-apocalyptic world.
I have always said: "If I can't trust you with a machine-gun, then why in the hell are you still at large?"
They feared that it could be used to suppress protest or support unpopular rule.
Indeed, American Rifleman had a pretty interesting story about one such rifle sent to Britian in last month's edition. I'm not sure I'd send my prized match winning rifle, but it's pretty inspiring that Hession did. Here's the article on the web
Constitutional rights may be respected, repealed, or modified; but they must never be ignored.
Dont you watch movies??
Sometimes I do. Sometimes I realize that they over-dramatize things in the movies to make them look cooler. And sometimes I get the urge to dream up engineering solutions that are even more efficient than those seen in the movies.
There are 3D printers under $500, though most of them aren't big enough to make the bigger gun parts, they're mostly designed for hobbyists who might very well modify them to print bigger things. Or you can join TechShop for about $100/month, and take classes on using their 3D scanner and 3D printers instead of buying your own. The material used to be expensive, but these days you can use ABS or other cheap plastics, and free CAD programs while you're at it.
Remember, the "Print Your Own Gun" folks are saying that they're not printing the barrel or firing pin or a couple of other parts that need to be really precise - most of it's just fine with the 0.2mm printer resolution, and it's not like real-world AK47s were machined more precisely than that. And since this whole thing is really more of a political statement than a practical exercise, remember that a lot of state assault weapon bans haven't just been about how many bullets get fired how fast when you pull the trigger, they're also about how long the barrel is and how scary-looking the stock and attachments are.
And I bet there'll be CAD models for converting your rifle or shotgun into a Zombie Defense Weapon floating around the internet by the end of the year.
Bill Stewart
New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
All these "OMG print gunz!" types seem to think that it is some amazing tech where you'll be able to stamp out a whole gun in your house. Ummm, no. What has been printed is a lower receiver of an AR-15. Now while that is legally the "gun" part, it is also by far the simplest part, and also one of the few that doesn't take a lot of stress and thus can be plastic. This is not printing a fully functional weapon, barrel, chamber, firing pin, and all.
For a functional firearm, you are going to need a metal barrel, and a strong one at that. For example take .45 ACP ammunition, one of the weaker rounds pressure wise. It still can generate pressures of 21,000 PSI in its regular (non +P) variety. 5.56 NATO ammo (the stuff ARs shoot)? 63,000 PSI.
If you have a 3D printer and want to use it to make low stress parts of your guns, like grips, certain kinds of receivers, etc go for it. Just check on the ATF's rules. Most are pretty simple. However don't delude yourself in to thinking you can just go and print out all the parts of a gun. Much of the gun is going to need to be metal and the barrel in particular takes some serious metalworking equipment and skill to make right.
Male citizens of certain age were required to have a firearm and ammo, powder,etc, but they were not registered. Guns did not have serial numbers until much later and that would be necessary for registration as we presently know it.
You may need to pay the tax, but that doesn't mean they'll actually let you. It was originally enacted in the 1930s as a side-door way to ban machine guns, and the Supreme Court upheld it as a tax (even though it would have otherwise potentially violated that Second Amendment.) After that succeeded, the Prohibitionists got Congress to pass a similar tax on Marihuana, that evil weed that causes Reefer Madness, but just because there was a tax didn't mean that you could actually pay it and get permission to use the marijuana. And once they got away with that, we've moved on to the War On Drugs.
Bill Stewart
New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
With a sufficient application of violence you will see no more violence from the aggressor.
I don't think there is any way they would be able to twist the existing law to ban the personal manufacture of firearms. I'm not saying they won't try to manipulate the code to do it but it would get challenged in court and they would probably lose or congress would slap them down.
You can sell a personally manufactured firearm, but you are not allowed to make it with the intention to sell. Some have been posting that you have to add a serial number but i don't think that is the case either. I think there are ATF letters addressing that issue (for what they are worth.)
Good luck finding good mil surplus 7.62 mm ammo for a decent price. The prices have come down from their highs but it's still pretty expensive (all ammo, not just 7.62)
If you can build an AR15/M16 lower you can make it full auto (mechanically, but not legally of course.) All you need to do is add the one hole for the disconnector and then install the correct fire control parts (which are easily available and unregulated in the US.) It's no different than it is for converting an existing (aluminum) receiver.
The definition of "arms" may have shifted somewhat, but a modern combat rifle still bears a much closer relation to a musket than to a pot plant. If I get your meaning right, you're saying that because modern firearms are more effective than their predecessors that they shouldn't be afforded the same protection under the constitution? Let's explore that a bit.
At the time of the U.S. Revolution it was common for private vessels to have cannons mounted for defense against would-be boarders. They were expensive, but not out of reach for large corporations or wealthy individuals. The British East India Company famously owned ships capable of repelling attacks from contemporary war ships. The term "Privateer" referred to privately owned vessels given permission to legally attack warships. Presumably, absent a letter of marque, these same ships could sail peacefully about their own business while still fully armed.
In light of this I find it hard to believe that the Founding Fathers would disqualify a modern firearm from constitutional protection simply because it's "too effective". Those arguing that the Constitution should be interpreted as a static doctrine should more fairly be also arguing that Donald Trump should be able to mount deck guns on the Princess and rent it out as protection against pirates for merchant vessels.
If we want to be honest about changing and adapting the document to modern culture, though, let's consider the minuteman militia. They carried into battle their own personal firearms, some of which (rifles) were the most advanced firearms presently available. They were a match for the best military equipment of the time. If these were the "arms" which the "People" would carry in a "militia", then extending it to modern times it would be reasonable to allow private citizens to own whichever firearm they could afford or build themselves. It would also be reasonable for the government to call on private citizens to defend the Nation against hostile forces marching on our soil, with the expectation that they'd be a match for whatever the enemy brought.
In Iron Man 2 Tony Stark asserts that he's privatized national defense. If my reading of this history books is correct, he wouldn't have been the first; instead, he'd have been continuing a long and noble tradition. And Cody R. Wilson with his "Defense Distributed" project? He sounds quite philosophically close to the minutemen.
"Space Exploration is not endless circles in low earth orbit." -Buzz Aldrin
It most certainly had been, or do you think those 100,000+ combatant battles were armed by 10 expert metalworkers fashioning them piece by piece.
Actually, yes. Well, perhaps made by thousands of 10-man teams, but still, yes. The technology for making anything, let alone weapons, with interchangeable parts was in its infancy at the time of the American Revolution. Eli Whitney's 1801 demonstration to the U.S. Congress was impressive, but post-revolution and still required that the parts be "handmade by skilled workmen". The initial benefit was being able to do field repairs on the rifle instead of needing to have it sent to a gunsmith. In both cases expert metalworkers were still involved.
Armory/production IDs, though, are another story; I have no idea whether they were in use or not. I'd be surprised if there weren't stamps available for making such marks, but their use or not would be dictated by manufacturing and purchasing culture of the time. It would make a fun research project if I ever went back to school for a History degree =)
"Space Exploration is not endless circles in low earth orbit." -Buzz Aldrin
I'm going to stay out of the discussion about personal gun ownership. What occurs to me is how this technology could be used by poor countries with limited resources to produce weapons. If you can print guns, you can print all sorts of weapons. No need to do business with arms dealers or countries that traditionally produce arms. No need for expertise in machining and manufacture.
Lots of things to think about.
Proverbs 21:19
Yes. To replace some part, I often just need a file, a vice, and a drill. Just designing it would take longer. But a few other useful applications for printing come to mind: 1.Printing positives for die casting (very fast design to small scale production). 2. One of a kind items on a scale or with materials where building-up is more practical than removal of material (glass, pottery, houses) Other than that, I agree. Even custom-fitted toilet seats could be done easier than on a printer...
It reminds me of similar fabs like routing circuit boards (also a useful thing but not one that will replace etching) or cutting plywood with a laser printer. It is the lack of "knowledge of machine tools" as you stated for sure, but also the lack of confidence in your own manual skills and the appeal of playing around in a virtual 3d world and then have some machine make it for you.
I can't think of any plastics that are strong enough to be of any use in making a firearm
I'm not a firearm person, but you would be surprised what modern plastics can withstand.
a very common industrial one: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polyoxymethylene
and for the extremes: http://www2.dupont.com/Plastics/en_US/Products/Zytel_HTN/htn92/series.html
cute info graph: http://www2.dupont.com/Plastics/en_US/assets/images/Product/PLS_Stress_Retention_230C521x365.jpg
while i'm sure it's not a durable as carbon steel, my bet is that it could be usable for more than single shot, and if you could print your on replacement parts it might be very feasible for initial prototyping.
'...if only "Jumping to a Conclusion" was an event in the Olympics.'
There is a reason no US President ever refused to step down at the end of their term, because we're armed to the teeth. Might be a key reason so many Russians like this project.
(If at first you don't succeed, do it different next time!)
But, if you are caught carrying a gun without a license you go to jail for a very, very long time.
If you commit and are convicted of a crime more serious than a minor traffic violation while carrying a gun (even if you don't use it), you go to jail for a very, very long time.
If your gun kills someone else, you should be tried for murder, and allowed to plead self-defense, but even obvious cases of self-defense must go to trial to avoid things like the Trayvon Martin case. If your gun kills someone by accident (such as a child who finds it and uses it) you should be charged with negligent homicide.
Free up space by letting people who committed non-violent crimes (read: drug users) out and legalize drugs. Save a bunch of money.
Wanna carry a gun? Then you had damn well better be extremely responsible when you do so or you will very likely end up going to jail for a very, very long time.
Most gun owners are very responsible people, so they shouldn't have any problem avoiding penalties, while the people who are the problem - irresponsible gun owners and criminals - will wind up going away.
I think of our gun policy as similar to DRM: Currently it's a trivial obstacle to those who want to pirate while it's a huge pain in the ass to legit users. Let's make it easy for legit users to do what they want, but absolutely crucify those who abuse that right by behaving irresponsibly.
Since I can't tell them apart, I treat all ACs as the same person.
i wonder what they would have to say?
other than, you know, the stuff people put on bumper stickers or on posters in their dorm rooms.
they're a gun industry lobby. That's the part you're missing. They exist to promote the sale of guns for profit. The whole gun rights thing is just to add legitimacy to what is really just an industry lobby.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
there isn't any good reason to belong to one anymore. A modern military can easily and effortlessly put down any resistance a Militia cares to offer. They have training and weapons that are simply out of reach of most of us. If you want to protect your country you either join the main force or take up politics. Anything else is just ignoring reality, which by definition makes you a kook. Sorry.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
Maybe the sane people in the US now have some useful ammo to tell the RKBA nutcases where to go - your 2nd amendment grants the right to keep and bear arms. It says nothing about any right to buy or sell or trade them.
(BTW, your constitution also says your federal government also has the power to regulate interstate commerce so inter-state arms trafficking could have been shut down years ago).
Subject line says it all.
Leslie Satenstein Montreal Quebec Canada
seems to have become a bottleneck in innovative use of 3D printers ... should we? who cares, you can print a brick and smash someone's head in. Will we? yea, those who will will, can we?
apparently
so, what else could you do with it? something to solve the overpopulation (guns dont seem to work for that) or maybe something to solve the energy crisis? a warp drive?
terraforming mass drivers ?
?
Free speech was meant to be free for all... how can anyone grow up in a nanny state ?