Slashdot Mirror
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."
If the barrel and/or the slide is made of even the best plastic, I wouldn't trust it to take the 35ksi of a normal 9mm round even once. That application requires properly heat treated 4130 or 4140 steel (or 316 stainless).
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).
while(1) attack(People.Sandy);
Except I don't think murder is as price-inelastic as you think. Only a small fraction of gun murders in the US are in, e.g., carefully planned heists by criminal masterminds who will acquire guns regardless of cost for a pre-planned murder. Gun deaths overwhelmingly come from heat-of-the-moment domestic disputes, drug-addled petty criminals, super-depressed suicide victims, etc.: folks not utilizing near-unlimited resources and careful long-term planning skills. If a (cheap, ubiquitously available) gun is on hand at the minute of bad decision making, it gets used; otherwise not.
In crimes of passion almost any weapon will do. A gun being present generally only changes the cause of death. This is evidenced by the fact that in Britain and Australia gun bans have had no effect on either suicide or homicide rates when isolated against already prevailing national crime rates and trends. You are also incorrect about the nature of homicide in the US. 70-85% of those murdered the US every year have a criminal record. Most major cities track close to 80% of there homicides resulting from gang violence.
I should be clear, I am not a "gun rights" advocate, but from an economics perspective it is rather obvious that murder is price inelastic. The vast majority of murders are infact crime related. The remander are largely crimes of passion for which any serviceable weapon can and will do (suicide falls under this as well).
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.
No one needs the ability to exercise lethal force, much less the ability to casually produce the tools that do so.
This isn't about "need" this is about being inevitable. 3D-printed weapons are the inevitable result of improving 3D printer technology. No amount of idealism about what should and shouldn't happen will change that.
Everything in life is a trade-off. If we don't want 3D-printed weapons, the only way to effectively stop that is to ban 3D printers. Is that a price you are willing pay? There really is no other choice. You can outlaw 3D printed weapons but as long as the printers exist, people are going to be printing weapons.
Just look at how well the MAFIAA has done trying to stop piracy, it is basically the same set of trade-offs. If you want personal computers and an internet, piracy is going to happen. If you want good 3d printers and an internet, then most forms of physical contraband are going to be 3d printed. Weapons, bongs or whatever. You want 3D printers, that's the price.
When information is power, privacy is freedom.
Does GM feels threatened by people who build cars in their garage from kits?
A 3D printed pistol is a great novelty item, but what are you really going to use it for? In a self defense situation, are you going to trust a weapon that's never been fired before? I ran about 300 rounds through my new Sig P226 before I was comfortable believing that I could hit what I was aiming at.
Support microSD: in a post 9/11 world, it is unwise to carry your data on media that you cannot comfortably swallow.
If this gets 3D printing banned then it proves him right, and the government is tyrannical and does need to go.
I know what I'm thinking. "Did I fire six shots or only five?" Well, to tell you the truth, in all this excitement I kind of lost track myself. But being as this is plastic gun, and if it backfires it will likely blow my head clean off, I've got to ask myself one question: Do I feel lucky? Well, do I, moron?
Funny how there's never a massacre at a balloon factory as well, as though balloons somehow deter people from mass shootings. However I do seem to remember someone shooting themselves at a gun show recently, I assume from this that gun shows attract stupid people. More conclusions at 11.
If you think someone isn't free to have a different definition of "freedom" you may be a tyrant.