3D-Printed Gun May Be Unveiled Soon

colinneagle writes "A 3D-printed gun capable of firing multiple rounds may be unveiled soon. Cody Wilson, the 25-year-old founder and director of nonprofit organization Defense Distributed, recently told Mashable that the end product of Wiki Weapon, the initiative to create an operational 3D-printed gun, may soon be ready to unveil to the public. In a March interview with CNN, Wilson said he hoped to have a printable gun ready by the end of April, so his most recent comments suggest that he may fulfill that promise. While Wilson was sparse with details, he did tell Mashable that the prototype would be a handgun consisting of 12 parts made out of ABS+ thermoplastic, which is known for its durability and is commonly used in industrial settings. The firing pin would be the only steel component of the 3D-printed gun, which will be able to withstand a few shots before melting or breaking. Wilson reportedly anticipates making an official announcement soon."

Comments

Re:Barrel and slide/bolt too?

[Anonymous Coward]

Like what was done in WWII?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sten

This 3D printing hype is tiresome. Go ahead, get excited over blobs of plastic and twisting words to fit a bizarre notion that you can "3D print" the same items as mass manufacturing technology.

Re:Supply and demand.

[zbobet2012]

Increasing supply does not necessarily increase demand. It depends whether the good has a fixed demand (is price inelastic). Murder is mostly price inelastic just like gasoline. When gasoline gets more expensive only a small amount less is used.

Re:then he's going to get sued to oblivion

[Kawahee]

...unless he possesses a Type 7 FFL...

One quick Google search later:

On Saturday, Defense Distributed—America’s best-known group of 3D gunsmiths—announced on Facebook that its founder, Cody Wilson, is now a federally licensed gun manufacturer and dealer. The group published a picture of the Type 7 federal firearms license (FFL) to prove it.

“The big thing it allows me to do is that it makes me [a manufacturer] under the law—everything that manufacturers are allowed to do,” he told Ars. “I can sell some of the pieces that we've been making. I can do firearms transactions and transport.”

Re:then he's going to get sued to oblivion

[O('_')O_Bush]

No, making guns for sale requires you have a license. Making guns for personal use only requires no licenses at all, as long as they fall under ATF guidelines for weapons that don't need to be registered with the ATF (no assault rifles or SBRs).

Re:Supply and demand.

[zbobet2012]

Except banning guns in two cultures very similar to ours has had no effect on either of those from an empirical perspective. You are basically plato reasoning about the five elements right now. No matter how well you construct your thought process the empirical, statistical evidence disagrees with your result. I have linked you to the associated articles on the effects of the gun ban in Australia, please take the time to read them.

Re:Barrel and slide/bolt too?

[Anonymous Coward]

There's actually a fairly good bit of difference between the commercially available AR-15's and fully automatic versions. Different Bolt Carrier design, different trigger group, additional boring out of the receiver, and a part that does not exist at all in the semi-automatic AR-15. Conversion is nowhere near as easy as your congress critter or the media would have you believe. Sure, it can be done, but it's a LOT of work.

Re:Barrel and slide/bolt too?

[realityimpaired]

By the standards of pretty much every other country in the G20 (including Russia), Obama is a conservative. He only appears a liberal when compared against your own right-wing.

Re:Barrel and slide/bolt too?

[CanHasDIY]

I've said it before and i'll say it again. The point of an armed populace isn't to fight an army at full strength. It's to be able to escalate domestic oppression to levels which make the government think twice, rather than sitting around and letting the secret police disappear people one at a time.

It is a commonplace that the history of civilisation is largely the history of weapons. In particular, the connection between the discovery of gunpowder and the overthrow of feudalism by the bourgeoisie has been pointed out over and over again. And though I have no doubt exceptions can be brought forward, I think the following rule would be found generally true: that ages in which the dominant weapon is expensive or difficult to make will tend to be ages of despotism, whereas when the dominant weapon is cheap and simple, the common people have a chance. Thus, for example, tanks, battleships and bombing planes are inherently tyrannical weapons, while rifles, muskets, long-bows and hand-grenades are inherently democratic weapons. A complex weapon makes the strong stronger, while a simple weapon--so long as there is no answer to it--gives claws to the weak.

-- George Orwell, The Atomic Bomb and You