You Can't Print a Gun If You Have No 3D Printer

FatLittleMonkey writes "You may recall Cody Wilson's project to create a 3D printed gun, mentioned previously on Slashdot. Well, the Defense Distributed project has suffered a decidedly non-technical setback, with printer manufacturer Stratasys revoking the lease and repossessing the printer (presumably prying it from plastic models of Cory's cold dead hands). According to New Scientist, the manufacturer cited his lack of a federal firearms manufacturer's license as their reason for the repossession, adding that it does not knowingly allow its printers to be used for illegal purposes." Homemade firearms are not (in the U.S.) per se illegal on a federal basis, though states have varying degrees of regulation. It would be helpful if anyone more conversant with firearms law than me can point out what law or laws this project might be breaking.

Comments

the message is clear:

[Anonymous Coward]

if you're going to print gray-area items, print them quietly, and announce after your beta is complete.

Re:the message is clear:

[newcastlejon]

If you're going to print something illicit, do it quietly and own the printer you're using.

Re:the message is clear:

[interkin3tic]

I'm guessing this was done because the printer manufacturer is worried about the press that would hurt their buisiness, not because it's "illicit" or anything like that.

"Coming up on your shitty cable news program, TERRORIST PEDOPHILES can print out NEARLY ANY AUTOMATIC DEATH WEAPON AT HOME! Some experts (on making ridiculous statements) suggest they could print a NUCLEAR BOMB!!! Are YOUR children safe? NO THEY'RE FUCKING NOT BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE ANY LAWS AGAINST IT AND PEOPLE ARE ALREADY PRINTING OFF GUNS (sorta)"

Which, they probably have legitimate reason to be concerned about that. Those stories will pop up, and people will write their congressmen who will suggest we need government regulation over what 3D things you can print off. And there are industries who have interests in people not being able to easily print off their own potentially copyright-infringing items. And it's too much to hope that such people won't be selfish and won't use such FUD to kill 3D printing before it gets off the ground.

Still, I'd prefer people to deal head on with stupid bullshit FUD when it comes up rather than punishing individual customers who are driving the field forward.

Re:the message is clear:

[Nethemas the Great]

It isn't illicit. A manufacture's license is only required if you "sell" your product. The only problem would have been if the gun was illegal in that jurisdiction in the first place. Since Cody is a student of law in Texas. So, since it's Texas there's almost certainly no legal issue here and since he's a law student he'd stand a pretty good chance of knowing one way or another anyway. This has nothing to do with illegality and everything to do with Stratasys being fearful of getting a bad reputation as an enabler of terrorist groups and crazies.

Politics

[onyxruby]

What's next, refusing to sell printers to people because their for / against gay marriage? This is a tool and he was using it for legal purposes. What the manufacturer did was no different than any other kind of censorship. Deplorable.

Re:Politics

[mapsjanhere]

Your username says it all... For the record, as long as you obey rules on minimal length, maximal caliber and marking it you can make your own firearms all day long (from a Federal point of view at least). You cannot legally SELL or TRADE them, but making is legal. You can even buy 80% kits that are mostly machined for you and come with guides on where to drill the remaining holes, and you're still, under Federal law, legally making your own gun. And you don't have to register it with the federal government either. The only question in this case was the invisible weapons rule which makes it illegal to manufacture a weapon for the purpose of avoiding metal detectors which an all-printed gun might trigger.

Re:Politics

[91degrees]

Thing is, when you have to be this specific, the analogy no longer has any purpose, and you might as well describe the situation.

Re:the message is clear: MAKE IT !!!

[jythie]

I think the idea wasn't just to print a gun, but to test the limits of a particular emergent technology and how it can be applied to the specific domain.

If the goal was just to get guns, there are shops all over the place.